Lakota Nation files lawsuit against parties in sweat lodge incident

[G_j]

http://www.sedona.biz/lakota-tribe-files-lawsuit-sweat-lodge-incident-sedona111209a.php

Lakota Nation files lawsuit against parties in sweat lodge incident

by Nina Rehfeld

SEDONA, AZ (November 12, 2009) - In the aftermath of the tragedy at Angel Valley Retreat Center, where an incompetently conducted “sweat lodge” held by Californian self-help guru James Arthur Ray killed three participants, political steps are being taken by several native people across the United States. While local Indians from Arizona are forming a Council for Indigenous Traditional Healing to reclaim native ceremonies, the Lakota tribe of North and South Dakota has filed a lawsuit against the United States, the state of Arizona, James Arthur Ray and the Angel Valley Retreat Center.

<snip>

The lawsuit refers to the Treaty of Fort Laramie between the United States and the Lakota Nation from 1868, which states that “if bad men among the whites or other people subject to the authority of the United States shall commit any wrong upon the person or the property of the Indians, the United States will (...) proceed at once to cause the offender to be arrested and punished according to the laws of the United States, and also reimburse the injured person for the loss sustained.” The plaintiffs hold that James Arthur Ray and the Angel Valley Retreat Center have “violated the peace between the United States and the Lakota Nation” and have caused the “desecration of our Sacred Oinikiga by causing the death of Liz Neuman, Kirby Brown and James Shore”. The lawsuit further holds that James Arthur Ray and the Angel Valley Retreat Center have committed fraud by impersonating Indians and must be held responsible for causing the deaths of the victims and injuries of the survivors, and for the destruction of evidence through the dismantling of the sweat lodge.


Longblackcat, who spoke with the approval Lakota leaders, said the lawsuit is meant to reinstate the protection of the Lakota sacred way of life. “We Lakota people continue to fight for our way of life. The sweat lodge – we call it Oinikaga or Inipi – is a purification ceremony, to make life. Our sacred way of life was desecrated by a non-native man. This is our property, and there are laws in the United States and in the United Nations that state that these customs are ours and that they are to be protected.”

Also at the Phoenix press conference, Chief Anselmo Candelaria, Apache and Olone of Phoenix and Daniel Bejar, Mescalero Apache and Mexica Apache of Prescott, announced the formation of the Council of Indigenous Traditional Healers to “provide guidance and oversight in regards to sacred healing ceremonies.”

Bejar said that the purpose of the council is to “protect people, protect our ceremonies and see what can be done to keep this from happening again.” He also stressed that this is not an attack on the Sedona retreat industry. “We do not want to badger people or protest, we want to approach this in a good way. We want to check into the authenticity of people offering sweat lodges. We want to confront people who are doing these ceremonies about taking money for them and about not being properly trained. And we want to let people who come in seeking know that we have qualified water pourers.” The goal of the Council, Bejar said, is not to shut down non-native lodges. “My belief is that anyone is entitled to pray, no matter where they come from. But ceremonies like the sweat lodge have to be conducted by the appropriate people – and not for pay.” Current members of the Council are Chief Anselmo Candelaria, Daniel Bejar, Luis Viniegra, Juan Guevara, Pete Jackson as well as two more, and others, including people from the Yavapai Apache tribe, will be approached, said Bejar. “We want to take ownership and responsibility for our region.” The Council can be contacted via [e-mail] or 928-776-8692.

..more..

[marybourg]

1. Dismiss. Failure to state a cause of action for which relief may be

granted. Lack of standing also.

[WeDidIt]

3. Nope, can't do that with this argument. They are seaking prosecution, not money

and we are into treaty law, not civil liability law.

They definitely have a case. The United States government may have no choice but to arrest the offending parties and put them on trial.

Read the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868. This is the binding law of the land according to the constitution.

[Thothmes]

4. Was this the treaty that guaranteed the sanctity of the

Black Hills for ever.

[WeDidIt]

6. Yes, it was that treaty

which is also why the nations of the Sioux nations were awarded damages of $17.5 million plus interest of $105 million in United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians on June 30, 1980 in a SCOTUS decision which upheld the award.

Precedent upholds the terms of this treaty and again, they are asking for criminal prosecution of those who descrated their sacred rite for the harm caused to three individuals through their wrongful death.

[marybourg]

31. "committing a wrong on a person or property"

Emulating a ritual is "committing a wrong on a person or property"? We'd all be in a lot of trouble if that were true.

[marybourg]

37. "Seeking" prosecution is not prosecution. Prosecution can only

by done by the Justice Dept. "Seeking" prosecution is a civil case. And the wrong must be one that's contemplated by the Constitution. A treaty is a law; it's not a substitute for the Constitution. Nothing in the Constitution contemplates a "wrong to person or property" to include emulating a ritual.

[glinda]

74. good idea but now what to do with the Native Americans that hoodwink non-natives into

"ceremonies" and make money off of it. I have seen a few. Total embarrassment for their Tribes IMHO. I know of one who convinced a non-native person to basically let them use their property free range and convinced the person that they were "Native".

[imdjh]

70. My favorite Indian case is that the US Government violates the 1st Amendment through archeology

Some Indian-identified group tried to sue the US government, maintaining that SCIENCE was a violation of the separation of church and state. They claim that government scientists' work was challenging their folk history which said that they had been here forever.

[mix]

2. k&r nt

[vadawg]

5. dont know if im reading this right are they arguing that no one should be able to do sweat lodges

????? i didnt think these were particular to any one culture or region of the planet... or is it that only they can fo them on the reservation properties. :shrug:

[Bluenorthwest]

7. Clearly in the OP:

The goal of the Council, Bejar said, is not to shut down non-native lodges. “My belief is that anyone is entitled to pray, no matter where they come from. But ceremonies like the sweat lodge have to be conducted by the appropriate people – and not for pay.”

[vadawg]

9. whos the appropriate people???? and if soeone wants to charge for it then im cool

priority should be that no one dies, if someone wants to pay to attend a sweat lodge then they should be allowed to. hell just change the name to a steam lodge and you should be okay...

[WeDidIt]

8. Nope, that's not what they are arguing

They are arguing if somebody holds a sweat lodge for monetary gain and somebody is harmed by that action, they must be prosecuted under federal law for that harm.

In other words, to hold a "for profit" sweat lodge that results in the death of the individual is a federal crime under the terms of the Treaty of Fort Laramie from 1868.

And precedent has upheld the terms of this treaty under United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians. The SCOTUS upheld damages to the Sioux Nations for the wrongful loss of the Black Hills in that case under the terms of this treaty.

[vadawg]

11. seriously if someone dies then i dont care if its under local, state or federal statutes

as long as if there is any criminal action then the person is prosecuted...

[WeDidIt]

13. Currently, nobody is facing prosecution

but under the terms of the treaty, they must.

In fact, the defendent would ahve to weaqr the label of "bad man" in any court of the land under the terms of the treaty (seriously, that's the language) and no defense attorney could object to the defendent being labeled a "bad man".

[vadawg]

16. not sure i like the idea of someone must face prosecution, id rather that there had to be evidence

of criminal liability of some sort, wonder how the bad man thing would go down in front of a jury though, guess id laugh but find it offensive to the defendant...

[Sebastian Doyle]

28. Think of it like this

If these asshats in Sedona had done some Catholic ritual and had similar results, the Vatican would be all over their ass, or at least the local Archbishop.

The Lakota Elders take ceremony very seriously. They have even been known to question sweat lodge ceremonies that were done properly. I don't blame them at all for going after these fools, and I'm not at all surprised to hear this.

[WeDidIt]

10. They're going to win and the feds will have to prosecute James Arthur Ray

United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians set the precedent that the terms of this treaty is the law of the land.

[jberryhill]

73. Where does that case authorize a private right of action?

I hear the distant sound of Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992).

You can say "it's against the law" all you want. That doesn't provide non-government parties with a right of action.

The best they could do is file ex rel and see if the AG wants to pick it up.

[pipoman]

12. What constitutes a sweat lodge?

I have a sauna in my bathroom...tough sell that there is anything proprietary about a sweat.

[vadawg]

14. yeah i guess thats the main question i have as well, ive plans to build one on my property

would i have to call it something else...

[WeDidIt]

17. Sweat Lodges involve spritual ritual besides the sauna effect

Without the ritual, it's just a sauna.

And if you hold the rituals, but don't charge people to attend, then you would not be actionable under the terms of the treaty. If you did charge, you would only be criminally culpable if somebody is harmed.

[vadawg]

19. sounds okay then, but what if my rituals are just similar to the lakota

:) not sure if a bottle of vodka is part of their culture or not. :)

[WeDidIt]

20. Alcohol would definitely be offensive

Do you use sage smudge sticks?

[vadawg]

21. yup we do burn different grasses to cleanse, but i looked at the link for the ceremony

and theres probuably a case to be made for similarities, biggest difference is the lack of vodka...

[WeDidIt]

23. And the biggest question

Do you charge a huge fee to get into your lodge?

If not, you've no worries.

If you do, have people sign waivers that indicate they have no medical issues which could be problematic (such as high blood pressure).

Of course, nothing that shouldn't be done if you run a business where you have people sitting for about thirty minutes in a sauna. Of course, the asshole in Arizona pushed people to sit in the thing for hours, so he's definitely up for manslaughter charges.

[vadawg]

25. thanks for explaining what it means, i am not really up on the lakotas etc

always interesting to see anothers perspective on stuff..

[emcguffie]

85. A 'sweat lodge' is pretty specific, as a ceremony.

Has anyone that is commenting so negatively -- and by that I mean belittleing the ceremony -- attended one?

They can be physically "challenging". Sorry, I don't know how else to say it. The steam can be very, very intense, and it can become very difficult to breathe. For anyone with impaired breathing of any kind, it could be much more challenging, I would think. I have seen strong, grown men gasp and throw themselves out because they couldn't breathe. Now, this strong grown man had impaired lung function, and he really had no idea how hard it would be.

At the same time, those who conduct the sweat lodges do point out that as long as one can endure it, one should. THey don't want people hopping out and back in whenever it gets uncomfortable. It certainly gets extremely uncomfortable for me, and I think for most people. But that definitely doesn't mean to the point of injury or death.

That is why it's the kind of thing that should be conducted by folks who know what they're doing.

At the same time, I would hate to see religion or religious ceremonies being regulated by the government. But who would participate in a Sun Dance ceremony without qualified people conducting it? That seems like it might be quite dangerous. Are Sun Dance ceremonies regulated?



Maybe some kind of disclaimer should be required, such that people are informed about the physical challenges one might encounter in a sweat lodge. Honestly, I don't know. I know they are very difficult for some people, for most people, and that someone unqualified conducting one could certainly cause injury or, in extreme circumstances, death.

[WeDidIt]

15. Sauna /= Sweat Lodge

Different things. A Sauna requires no ritual. Sweat Lodges involve ritual and the offending event in Arizona used the rituals of the Lakota.

[vadawg]

18. okay so its only if you use the rituals of the lakota, i guess thats okay then

but not knowing their rituals i wonder how many they share with other cultures who also use sweat lodges/saunas..

[marybourg]

32. Maybe the Swedes can sue too. This is pure bullshit. and that's my legal

opinion.

[vadawg]

35. swedes would probuably be better as at least they would allow vodka

:)

[pipoman]

29. Interesting

I will try to follow this..it may be a very interesting case.

[imdjh]

71. This reminds me of a conversation I had with a young D.O. many years ago.

He apparently thought there was this huge difference between a DO and an MD. I clarified it for him.

[G_j]

30. It may come down to whether Lakota traditions were copied

Most sweat lodges that anyone has done in America are based on the Lakota traditions, though there are lodge/heat practices elsewhere, in other cultures.
Lakota language is often freely used, in "sweat lodges" done today. Theirs is the model.

Nobody really owns the stones, or the water, the earth, or the fire, or air, for that matter; the basic elements used in a sweat lodge.

[vadawg]

36. but even if they were copied, is there some sort of protections that disallow it

and what exactly is protected as you say the stones, earth etc dont really belong to anyone...

[G_j]

38. I would guess that if they used Lakota language, songs etc.

and/or specific parts of Lakota ceremony, that would be the 'evidence'.

[vadawg]

39. yeah but are the words copyrighted in some way, as i said i dont have an interest in the lakota cust

customs so this kinda intrigues me, are the words etc protected due to the treaties etc ...

[G_j]

40. no, and this is unique legal territory

And I haven't read the treaty, but,
I am just guessing that the clearest path for a lawyer would be to show that Lakota ceremony was being used/ co-opted in some way.

[paulsby]

49. they should try copyrighting their rituals

that's the scientology approach. :sarcasm:

[imdjh]

79. My mother's house on any given winter evening.

The woman keeps the place at 82ºF.

[Canuckistanian]

22. Could this be?

An actual court challenge of an Indian Treaty that BENEFITS Indians?

This I'll be watching.

[WeDidIt]

24. They've already set the precedent that this treaty is binding

under United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians.

[Canuckistanian]

27. Good

I was premature in my posting. I hadn't seen your earlier posts.

But I support this lawsuit.

Short of a trademark, people shouldn't be offering the advantages of a "sweatlodge", while intimating that it's the "real experience" while knowing nothing of the culture. Not to mention the proper safety practices. AND charging large amounts of money for it.

[sabrina 1]

45. Is it anything like an invention? If you get a patent on an

invention, no one else can profit from it. I know they don't have a patent, but is the treaty similar to that? Or, if someone used a Catholic Religious ceremony, like Mass eg, for profit, could the Catholic Church sue them?

Regardless of the legalities though, or whether they win or not, I like the fact that their lawsuit highlights the difference between genuine spirituality and for-profit 'spirituality' as practiced by people like Ray. I think he made a fortune that weekend. The least he could have done was to make sure people were safe. not really that hard, or costly to do.

I have an Indian friend who has built sweat lodges and invited people to participate in purification ceremonies with her. But she never asked for money. They are small, built with tree branches, and definitely never saw her use a tarp which they seem have done in the Sedona case.

[tekisui]

26. I support ANY Native American Action relying on Treaties.

Any toe in the door, any crack in the dam. We owe them a lot. More than any of us really can understand.

[glinda]

75. I second that

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[liberalhistorian]

34. Living in the heart of Lakota country as I do

I'm not surprised at all by this. And I fully understand exactly where they are coming from and support this. It's been a really hot topic around here.

[Withywindle]

41. I support this 100%

I don't see it as so much an issue of "intellectual property law." I see it as an issue of cultural theft and desecration.

Look at this way. Non-Catholics aren't supposed to take Catholic communion, right? Well, what if someone who claimed to have "spiritual insight" from Catholicism but wasn't a real priest started charging tens of thousands of dollars for anyone who could afford it to take communion for a weekend. And what if the communion wafers and wine were really poorly made and toxic, and the workshop had an aggressive type-A management-school culture of "being tough enough to take it," and the Eucharist was forced down the throats of people who were already visibly gagging and choking and having allergic reactions...

I know, it's not a perfect analogy. But it conveys SOME of the emotional impact. But now, those of us living in Western societies are used to the dominant spiritual paradigm being of universalist, evangelizing religions. But Lakota religion, from everything I've read, isn't like that. It's specific to a tribal group and a certain place. They do not seek converts. It just makes no sense to do so in their philosophy. And they get to decide who gets to participate, and how, and when. There are pretty strict rules about who gets to conduct their rituals, and how, and how much training they need. (A lot of the traditional rules exist for the health and safety of the participants of course--some of the results are tragically obvious when those rules aren't followed.)

I believe--and someone who knows more, please correct me if I'm wrong--that it's actively blasphemous to charge money for participating in sacred ceremonies in Lakota culture. It's highly offensive and just Not Done.

[vadawg]

42. good points but should we have to automatically have to respect their ceromonies and culture

if so does that mean that every culture and part of that culture should get the same protections. As i said i dont have a dog in this fight as the lakota are not a culture that i deal with,

[Withywindle]

44. I think we should, yes.

Lord knows, Native Americans have already had ENOUGH stolen, don't you think?


No, not every part of every culture should get the same protections. I don't give a flying fuck what militant Islamists claim their "culture" says about it being OK to mutilate, enslave, and murder women, for example.

But I do think we should take some time out to try to understand other peoples, learn about white privilege and cultural appropriation, and try to avoid doing things that are perfectly avoidable that offend others profoundly. That's a big part of what being a liberal/progressive means to me.

For that matter, who is "we" in your question? White people only? Non-Lakota or non-Indians only? And if so, who are you addressing the question to? There are quite a few Native people on this board, you know? I've got Indian blood, you probably do too. This isn't an "alien" "immigrant" culture we're talking about here!

[vadawg]

46. as i asked why should they get more protections, im fine with getting the same as other cultures

but if you start to give more then were does it end, i think we should be able to laugh at and admire all cultures and traditions equally. What you might find funny i may find offensive and vice versa but thats better than one of us getting to decide... As i said i dont have any connections to the lakota etc and i dont see them as any different than a 1000 other cultural groups whose traditions are parodied and copied across the globe...

[Withywindle]

48. I see your point, and I'll give you these reasons, as best I can.

(1) Because it's their land we live on.

(2) Because they asked respectfully. The cultural-appropriation argument has been going on a LONG time, this isn't the first time Native elders have spoken out against misappropriation of their religion. It's just that, IIRC, this is the first time that this cultural theft has actually led to DEATHS, so of course they have to speak out more emphatically than before.

(3) Because the request is reasonable. Really, it is. It's not that hard to observe some niceties. I'm not willing to commit to being a Catholic, so I won't take communion when I visit a Catholic church. I'm not Muslim, but I'll wear a headscarf when I visit a mosque. I'm not normally in the habit of taking my shoes off when I go into a building, but I will in a Buddhist temple. And I won't go to a Native American ceremony unless I'm invited by someone who actually has the position in that culture to do so. I certainly won't attend a ceremony held by a charlatan using the basic ideas without any notion of history or safety and charging lots of money for it.

I don't know where it ends. I'd say it ends when you're asked to do something that really compromises your OWN values. Those lines are different for everyone; for example, I will veil my hair but I won't hide my face. I will show respect for someone else's god but I will not disavow my own (and I'm Pagan, so I have LOTS of gods I won't diss. :D). I will show deference for greater learning and experience, but I will not show it on basis of gender, sexual orientation, or race.

We all have to give thought to these issues and figure out where our personal lines in the sand are, take it on a case-by-case basis, and live by our well-thought-out choices with honor. We CANNOT refuse to respect anyone based on the "slippery slope" fallacy.

[vadawg]

51. sorry you lost me at #1, hows it their land im living on

they may have owned it once, but who owned it before, and since. How far do we go back as every piece of land at one time or another was fought over. #2 and #3 i will agree to, but i still believe its ok for us to parody each other and generally take the piss out of each others beliefs,

[Withywindle]

54. Read the rest of the points and think about them.

If you reject them all, OK, but I still think they're worthy of long-term thought. They didn't originate with me.

[vadawg]

55. yup i read them and agree to an extent, but i still dont like giving any group more protections than

others, i personally give respect to others beliefs, but that dosent mean i think they are as viable as my own. :) though im stilll up for doing parody of everything..

[Withywindle]

57. what exactly are your beliefs?

You say they're not as viable as your own...to yourself of course, which is only natural.

But what is it in the Lakota elders' case (SPECIFICALLY) that you find so unworthy of protection?!?

(No slippery slope argument here - my whole point was that every case should be thought about individually!)

[vadawg]

58. i just dont think that there should be any more protection than any other beliefs get

whether thats baptist, catholic, jewish etc etc etc. i just dont think that they should be able to stop people from paroding and copying their beliefs the same as there are black masses and parodys of other religions and beliefs... For the record i am a catholic.

[paulsby]

50. we should but

that's a moral determination. legally speaking, one is free to ridicule, mock, scorn, deride, bastardize, etc. any religious ritual. ever heard of black mass? the whole intention was to PERVERT the "classic" (so to speak) mass. it's part of free speech and free expression. unlike many countries that either criminalize mocking religion, or are making legal strides towards this, that's not gonna fly in the US. which is a good thing.

[Withywindle]

56. True, but look at it this way.

haven't western white people been pissing on Native American land, society, and philosophy long enough? Isn't it time white people just shut up and listen and learn for a change?


I am actually all in favor of satirizing and dissing the faiths of the DOMINANT. The whole idea behind satire is that it's funny and important when the powerless use it to mock the powerful; when it's the reverse, it's just bullying.

Personally, for myself (going on that personal decision line-drawing I said to vadawg above), we all have to regard our choices in terms of our own personal values, and the most important thing is that we give it deep thought. I can mock Christianity all I want, because that is the dominant power structure that runs my country and makes too many of its citizens feel less-than. (As a queer woman, believe me, I've felt it).

I will not mock the spiritual beliefs of a cultural group that has already lost so much and is already a poor minority group with pretty much nothing left BUT their spirituality. Even if I don't agree or share the beliefs, I won't mock them. You know they have to be brave, dedicated, and scholarly to keep their culture alive this far against so much opposition.

[paulsby]

59. i agree

but we are talking two different things. morally? sure. i totally agree with you. i wouldn't mock native (any tribe's) religious tradition, but i wouldn't do that to any other religion either. it's just not my thing to make fun of people's sacred beliefs. i totally disagree with the notion that it's ok to diss the dominant but not ok to diss the others. i just totally disagree with that whole line of thinking, but i know many people think it's the way to go. it also creeps too close imo to the ridiculous noble savage mythology. native americans' culture varied tremendously. some were rapacious, murdering marauders much like the vikings, some were peaceful and more agrarian, etc. and plenty of native tribes fucked over other native tribes, just as we fucked all of them over. we had better weapons, and more people. iow, we had the means to fuck them over, so we did. to make it clear, i won't mock their religion or any other religion's sacred traditions. plenty of people here would never think of mocking native religions, but would mock mormon's (underwear comments), etc. that's a double standard i find unacceptable.

[vadawg]

61. fuck put much more eloqently than i could... been to long a night

and not a good one at that....

[paulsby]

62. hey, anybody that gives me "eloquent cred" is a-ok with me

but of course i already knew you were wicked smaht.

[vadawg]

63. lol dude, i was 12 hours ago, but im working on a neglect and abuse case just now

so im totally burned..... ready to go home, climb in the bath, and drink some shine....

[paulsby]

64. i can't WAIT to get back in the saddle

you know i've been off work for too long when i'd look forward to a neglect/abuse case.

[vadawg]

65. lol yup you need to get back to bumping heads, im ready for a vacation

but im afraid if i take one it will be disney world or something so ill just keep on working, but if off in a couple until friday night so ill get drunk to clear this case and catch up on my sleep....

[vadawg]

60. yup feel free to mock christianity, but you gotta expect to e mocked back

its not a one way street and it shouldnt be, it shouldnt matter to the elders if someone wants to copy their sweat lodges as long at it dosent interfere with them, same as someone going to another church from me dosent effect my faith.

[paulsby]

78. and when they start selling those cherokee hair tampons

then you know it's jumped the shark

[JoeyT]

67. The Black Mass

Was invented by the Catholic Church as a means to whip up a panic.

That said, I actually agree with your point. Freedom of Religion in the 1st Amendment will probably shut this case down fairly quickly.

Speaking as an NA, I'd prefer freedom of/from religion were the order of the day. We remember entirely too well what happens when it isn't.

[glinda]

76. wish the Christians would respect my beliefs....

[imdjh]

80. OK, I'll bite. ....... Which are?

[Flaneur]

43. I'm sympathetic, but this lawsuit can't possibly fly.

I understand Lakota frustration with the New Agey cultural rip-offs like James Arthur Ray, but how can they claim legal ownership of an activity or a ritual? Imagine the Catholic Church suing Andres Serrano for "Piss Christ."

To argue that Lakota religious beliefs are somehow more sacred or more deserving of protection than any other non-Native American religious beliefs seems somewhat akin to the same sort of Noble Savage exoticism that infests the New Age sweat lodgers, in my humble opinion.

The article mentions also the Council of Traditional Indigenous Healers. That's probably a more realistic route to actually reining in the charlatans.

I've done real Lakota sweat lodges with real Lakota medicine men. Grueling, but soul-cleansing...

[petronius]

47. It's a clever slap at the Sedona asshats, but I'll be shocked if it has a prayer in court

The suit seems to rely on the notion that ritualistic seat lodges are the intellectual property of the Lakota, and that poorly conducted sweats are a harm to Lakota persons or property - both of those notions seem difficult to support...

[imdjh]

72. I thought Sedona was pretty much as big a joke as it could get.

Maybe not as well known as Berkeley for its dope soaked burnouts, but definitely up there and with Taos apparently nipping at its heels. Meanwhile, Alachua flies under the radar because it's in the South.

[Hekate]

52. The "formation of the Council of Indigenous Traditional Healers" to provide guidance & oversight...

... sounds like an excellent idea, and about time. I applaud them for that.

I'm not sure the lawsuit has much chance in court, but it will be instructive in its own right.

Hekate

[vadawg]

53. yeah sounds like a good idea, but i dont see how that can stop john doe from running his own op

and it shouldnt be able to anyway, but it will be good for people wanting more info....

[imdjh]

82. Are you saying that a government should define and regulate religion?

[winyanstaz]

66. I am glad they are standing up and fighting for this.

It is the right thing to do for everyone. It will save lives as well.
I do not believe they are against anyone doing a sweat if they are so inclined as they know full well other cultures do sweats in their own ways.....but rather they should not be doing a sweat in the Lakota way and claiming they are natives when they are not.
I believe it is the fraud and false claims and harm to their religious ways along with the unnecessary deaths that bothers them the most.
This can be worked out with respect being given on both sides.

[imdjh]

68. Dear God, please let this case succeed, then the Jews can shut down the Christians and the Muslims

and hopefully some old Druids will show up to knock out these new age goddess twerps.

[marybourg]

86. I was thinking Jews could sue "Jews for Jesus" groups for imitating

*their* rituals!.

[ddeclue]

69. That's a ridiculous basis for a lawsuit.

[TwilightGardener]

77. Stupid. Lakota have more important and immediate things

to worry about than "unauthorized" idiots doing sweat lodges in other states--I used to live in western SD, I have seen the troubles they face, so I'm not unsympathetic. Unless what's-his-face-Ray advertised it as a real Lakota sweat lodge conducted by real Lakotas, there's no grounds for a suit.

[imdjh]

81. Even if they called it a real Lakota lodge run by real Lakotas.

Have you see what's passing for Indian these days? There are people out there with no proof whatsoever that they have any Indian ancestry, running off some family lore or physical appearance. If all the people who claimed to be Indian actually were, there wouldn't be room on the reservations.

[TwilightGardener]

83. I have met lots of people in my travels who claim to be

part Cherokee, specifically. I have no real reason to doubt it (physical appearance aside), but you may have a point with family lore being the only proof. I don't know whether it's good or bad for tribes to have lots of people dubiously claiming ancestry.

[imdjh]

84. It's easy enough to check for most people. My family had a similar story.

The census records are surprisingly detailed, but there is more to go on than that.

My grandfather claimed that his grandmother was "part Indian". Now mind you, this is on the east coast, so "part Indian" isn't exactly a claim that she was half. Indeed, her maiden name is common amongst the local tribe. And she did look the part- if Pocahontas were a southern belle she would be my great great grandmother. The problem is that in the 1900, 1880, 1870, 1860, and 1850 census records she is listed as "white". That means that five self important temporary government employees who took their job very seriously, and who knew everyone in town, believe her to be white. Moreover, the fact that my gggreat grandfather could marry her and remain in communion means that the community accepted her as white. Given her father's position, a judge, both he and his wife were assuredly white. None of which means that she wasn't "part Indian". It simply means that she was either Indian so far back that no one could remember, or she was Indian far enough back that it didn't matter. The miscegenation law of Virginia was specifically designed to protect the descendants of Pocahontas (not that my ancestor was) and would have protected anyone of the early colonial period's descendants.

In any event, even if my great great grandmother were proven to have been 1/8th Indian, I'm not going to change my name to Dances With Poodles and take up the cause of reclamation.