Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00377)

Fasting is against my religion, but I will cheerfully overindulge as a  
protest.
 
Chuck the Heretic
 
 
In a message dated 10/15/2008 7:57:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
eletzerich@yahoo.com writes:

 
 
 
Open Letter to the Members of the General Council

Dear  friends,

After the disclosure of the amendment proposal, many members  worldwide
said they will leave the Theosophical Society if the changes to  rule
10 are approved. The statement of one of the General Secretaries  who
supports the amendment was "quoting the Masters: `as long as  three
members will still be ..., the Society will survive'."* We see a  total
lack of respect to the opinion of members expressed by this  General
Secretary in the above statement. Probably in his/her mind  currently
the only real theosophists are those in favor of such a  change.

Anand Gholap a member of the Indian Section proposed that we  should
fast as a form of protest against the changes to rule 10. Actually  the
idea of fasting is not a bad one, as many of us could lose  some
pounds. Though I think it should not be applied in the  present
situation. It might be worth fasting for the Freedom of Tibet;  still
one must know that probably would die of starvation, because  the
possibility of China to pay any attention for a protest like this is  zero.

Others suggested that we should inform as many members we can and  ask
them to express their views either writing to General Secretaries,  the
International Secretary or to the President. This is the most  logical
way, and Anand's example was just to show you how the proposal  has
really upset members worldwide.

Unfortunately it seems some  members of the GC are still planning to go
on with this  proposal.

Aye, we won't fast, but we do hope not to need to reach to  the point,
during the meeting of the General Council that will take place  in
December of 2009, to have to gather thousands members in front of  the
Headquarters building or outside Adyar campus in silent  protest
against the proposed changes to rule 10. This would hurt the  very
spirit of the Theosophical Society. We are not a political arena.  But
as the current proposal is already hurting this spirit, you should  not
expect members will be silent and not raise their voice against  this
proposal.

Mrs. Betty Bland in the blog of the American Section  wrote the
following: "Most of the proposals were agreeable to most people,  but
the one that many disagreed with was spread throughout the world as  a
diabolical attempt to usurp members' rights."** Who are the  most
people, half dozen of GC members? This is not a diabolical attempt  to
usurp member's rights; this is a clear attempt to do so. As you are  a
sister theosophist I believe this was not your intention and  probably
you did not see things at this level when you presented the  amendment.
But I am closing 20 years of membership, and always had the  right to
vote for International President. Won't this right be removed from  me
and from thousands members if the changes to rule 10 are approved?  So
we have reached a ridiculous point. We are supposed to be  defending
the rights of children or women etc, now we also have to defend  the
rights of the members of our Theosophical Society? This is  the
difficult situation in which the current proposal has placed  many
members of the Theosophical Society around the world. 

Recently  Mrs. Betty Bland also wrote: "Although the proposed Rule
change has been  called undemocratic, there is nothing undemocratic
about having a president  elected by elected representatives.about hav
all due respect I would  like to ask you Mrs. Betty Bland, have you
consulted the members of your  own Section? Have you sent a letter to
them inquiring if they are in favor  or against the amendment proposal
you are defending, more specifically to  the proposed changes to rule
10? If you did it before presenting the  amendment and got the approval
of the massive majority of members of your  own Section, so you are
acting on their behalf and under the principles of  democracy. If not,
I really wonder what kind of democracy is this one you  are talking
about. The one which will lead the GC to make arbitrary  decisions
without consulting members?

So I kindly request, please  remove the proposed change to rule 10 from
the amendment. I do not write  for me but for every member whose voice
cannot be heard and is against this  proposal. Do not allow such a
proposal to pass. This would cause an  unprecedented crisis in the
Theosophical Society and the consequences could  be catastrophic. I am
sure the member of the GC who are supporting the  changes to rule 10;
do not wish to be remembered in the history of the  Theosophical
Society, as the cause of one of the major crisis that ever  happened
since its foundation.

Friends please do read the article  Electing a President by Radha
Burnier, click the following link:
_http://eletzerich.http://elehttp://eletzehttp://eletzhttp://eletzer_ 
(http://eletzerich.wordpress.com/electing-a-president-radha-burnier/) 

Fraternally  yours,
Erica L. Georgiades

*See the link below, a post of Jacques  Mahnich, Once in a lifetime
opportunity, Fri Oct 10, 2008.
_http://groups.http://grohttp://grouphttp://groupshttp:_ 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/46346) 

**See  the link below, On Controversy by Betty Bland, October 14, 2008.
_http://theosophicalhttp://thehttp://theosophihttp://theohttp://theosop_ 
(http://theosophical.ning.com/forum/topicshow?id=2060685:Topic:3999) 

***See  International Voting Proposal, by Betty Bland in the following
link: _http://www.theosophhttp://wwhttp://www.thttp://www.theoshttp:_ 
(http://www.theosophical.org/events/news/InternationalVote.php) 


 

**************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.  
Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out 
(http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]