Ruth Newell

Ruth Newell is a Reader contributor. See staff page for published articles.

Comments by Roody2shoes

A Thank You To A Questioning Foot

*Sigh*
— January 18, 2013 8:08 p.m.

Side of Judgment

I'm a fan of yours, B, but stand opposed to you (and the Reader) on this one. Regardless of what my own personal beliefs may be, this IS a free country that legally supports freedom of speech AND religion. For that reason, our legal system struggles with cultism, i.e. psychological and sometimes physical shunning/disciplining of dissident noncomplying/assimilating members of a legally recognized church. But, that's not what your article is about. The conscious spiritual choices those in homespun baggy pants and kerchiefs make include some practiced by the Dali Lama. Wouldn't slam him, though, would you? Did you know, for instance, that when they join, they are given new names meant to serve as reminders of what they feel is their biggest lesson/challenge in life? No, because you didn't ask. They work aggressively on improving themselves in everything they do each and every day. They've chosen simple lives of servitude close to and in harmony with the land without many modern conveniences which they--and others not of their community-- see as distractions. They, like some of those closest to me, are believers in God who are not believers in The Church. But, that's not what this article's about either. It's not about the people or their choices. It's not even about the excellent wholesome food they grow/make/serve--their contributions to the communities in which they live. It's about judgement, as your title so aptly states. I understand that this article is in no way representative of investigative reporting, and that regrettably, the Tribes is only too accustomed to receiving negative press coverage such as this. Yet, in 30 years, it has never been my experience that any member of the Tribes judges or preaches to patrons (at any of their businesses) unless invited/asked to do so. Twelve Tribes is hardly the only corporation with such controversial views. It is our choice as consumers to support such enterprises or not to. To their credit, theses people do not vote, as other corporate leaders with similar views do. Sadly, you haven't written anything I haven't read before. PS--Question: If you know that the deli's are run by a religious sect in favor of modesty, then it is your conscious decision, is it not, to dress in a manner that they might consider immodest? Not that I have ever seen or experienced any kind of judgement from any of them based on how their patrons look. I mean, they are conscious of how THEY look, after all. Would you (B and Siobhan) go to --oh say--Saudi Arabia in a tank top and hoochi mama shorts without head cover knowing full well that if you did any man would be within his legal rights to slap you silly? PSS-- You do know, don't you, that there are happy and thriving minorities within the community who are not, by the way, enslaved?
— September 16, 2012 2:16 p.m.

Is it OK to eat at cultish places?

Nothing outdated about freedom of speech, Ian. And for that very reason, any group--religious, secular or communal--spouting their beliefs are entitled to do so. Which brings me to my point, Ed, that those serving folks at the Yellow Delis or Mate stands at local farmer's markets are *not* spouting their beliefs at the customers, are they? They are offering a community service which patrons are voluntarily opting to purchase and thereby support. If we as consumers don't like their beliefs, then it is our free chose to not frequent their establishments, is it not? It should be noted that they DO pay taxes but choose to NOT vote (an arrangement many are grateful for). This can't be said of other cult leaders and corporate CEO's with similar beliefs who actually finance political careers and are majority shareholders in major US media empires. May as well boycott all sushi restaurants as most are owned by messiah Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church. May as well never step foot into a Walmart again. We live in a country where mob hysteria can condemn companies like Chick-Fil-A as an "Anti-Gay" corporation based on it's owners religious beliefs (versus verifiable corporate exclusionary policies/practices), so you'd be in good company. While we're at it, I suppose we should all lose our Prius's because it's unpatriotic to buy foreign made products. Where does it end? This country was founded on the right to say and practice what we believe. It IS still the land of opportunity. We are all free to choose where to drop our hard earned dime. Funny that you brought up the mate, because it is KEY to their whole operation. 'Nough said. It's not their beliefs that make them a cult, by the way, or that they willingly follow a guy calling himself a messiah--cause, well, heck, they wouldn't be the first. They are a cult --technically--because they shun (and more) *members* who do or say anything counter to the 'doctrine'. Also, there have been communal --religious and secular--groups f-o-r-e-v-e-r. Would you say Satmars, for instance, are "out dated"?
— September 16, 2012 12:52 p.m.

The Jordan Sonnets

Quite touching.
— August 1, 2012 8:02 p.m.