Reading for the president

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 07 Nov 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Osher	07 Nov 2004
Something occured to me, with the thread on the readings for the election. Is it right to read the cards of Kerry and Bush, or their futures rather, without having asked them first? I'm not suggesting it's wrong, or that it's right, I'm just curious as where the line is drawn?

Diana	08 Nov 2004
Presidents and the such-like affect the life of common mortals daily. So reading about a man in a position of power such as Bush I think would not be considered unethical even by the most prudish of person as his decisions touch the lives of so many other billions of people. There is no line when in comes to the Tarot. It's a question of personal ethics and values. The line is individual. It's like with journalists and papazzaris.... some people think papazzaris are unethical and others think they aren't (as one can see from the sales of some magazines). I am curious Osher: Why do you think there is a line?

Osher	08 Nov 2004
Diana wrote: I am curious Osher: Why do you think there is a line? I've always been with the understanding that if you read for someone it must be with their consent.

jmd	08 Nov 2004
In my personal opinion, there is a world of difference between doing a reading about how someone may make decisions or set agendas in particular ways which will have quite extensive ramifications, and inquiring into a person's personal and private life. In the case of a major political figure, it is not his or her private and personal life which is being looked at - except in ways which may impact of the socio-political life of the community - but rather a person in terms of his or her engagement in the ways they will do and say what they are presumably elected to do: reflect and represent the views of the electorate.

Diana	08 Nov 2004
Osher wrote: I've always been with the understanding that if you read for someone it must be with their consent. Oh I see. Well, again, that depends on someone's personal ethics and values. (I would never probe into someone's private life without their consent - because my conscience dictates this, but I know there are lots of readers who have no qualms about doing this. I do not judge them for this.) But some public figures are not private because what happens to them, what they do, how they feel about things affects us so much. Of course, if let's say we heard that Mr. Shrub had a disease or something... or that his wife was having an affair with his Secretary of State or someone, then sure, I would do a reading on the evolution of the disease and/or his state of mind in order to evaluate somewhat how it would impact the world. I've read recently on Yasser Arafat's state of health for example... I did not feel like I was probing into his life. His life or death will change many things in the Middle East... and therefore in the world itself.

Vilyariel	08 Nov 2004
I don't think it is unethical to read about the president. Since the war on terror began, his actions influence almost all of the world. And because we live in the world, we have a right to know about it. Therefore we have a right to know about who is controlling the world and our lives. If we were enquiring about the president's relationship with his nephew or whether kerry thinks he might buy a new dog, then thats another matter. thats his own business and it does not influence our lives.

Osher	08 Nov 2004
So, it's OK to read about someone's external journey, i.e. their impact on others, enviroment, etc. However, the internal is prohibited without consent. Would this be a fair assesment?

Diana	08 Nov 2004
Osher wrote: So, it's OK to read about someone's external journey, i.e. their impact on others, enviroment, etc. However, the internal is prohibited without consent. Would this be a fair assesment? I don't think we could go as far as speaking of prohibition...

Osher	08 Nov 2004
Diana wrote: I don't think we could go as far as speaking of prohibition... How then would you put it? I'm quite curious as to this.

ambermoon	08 Nov 2004
I suppose we all set our boundaries a bit differently. I think there are both ethical and intent considerations. The main reason I read is to provide a querant with a set of possibilities--to help them decide what tools they need for the journey. Given that intent, it doesn't make sense to read for someone who will not hear my reading. [edited to say that the ability to read tarot is something i consider a gift from the divine ones, and as such, i feel i must not use it lightly]. On the ethical side, I would feel like an evesdropper to read for someone without their consent. JMO. That said, there are plenty of political themes that I can read on, because I can ask what I needed to know about [issue] and it's impact on [me/nation/world/etc] or ask what I need to know so that I can work toward the [failure/success] of [some policitical agenda]. I guess I follow the same self-imposed rules for public figures as I would for any third party. Their context is only how they relate to the querant, from the querant's viewpoint. ambermoon

Diana	08 Nov 2004
Osher wrote: How then would you put it? I'm quite curious as to this. Osher: I really think it's a question of personal ethics and values, like I said in my first post (I think!). For me, it's a no-no, because my conscience dictates this to me. But it's not a commandment that I think one can expect each and everyone to follow because we all have different values and ethics, depending on our history, culture, religion, etc. etc. etc. Someone would probably find it shocking that I did a health reading for Arafat (I did one also for Ben Laden when he was in hiding after the war in Afghanistan). But for me... this was not unethical. But I could understand it if someone thinks it was. I wouldn't agree.. but I would understand their point of view. Do you see what I mean?

shelikes2read	08 Nov 2004
I think that it's unethical to use Tarot (or any other gift) to try and probe into other people's personal matters without their consent. That would hold true whether the person is a public figure or a private citizen... to my mind, we have any gifts we have in order to use them for constructive reasons, not to pry where we'd have no business prying. But to do a reading on the PUBLIC aspects of a PUBLIC figure's life, to me, isn't unethical. Neither is doing readings on news stories (since that information is out there for the whole world to see) or for subjects like we've seen crop up on the Reading Exchange board from time to time, when people have asked for readings on a missing person or an unsolved crime. Really, the only sort of reading that I'd be uncomfortable with is the one that tries to use Tarot as the equivalent of peering into a person's front window without their consent. Deliberate violation of someone's privacy wouldn't be ethical no matter what method is used to do it. But viewing something that's on public display or is a matter of public record ISN'T wrong, no matter what method is used to observe it. If there's such a thing as a line, that's where my conscience draws it for me.

jmd	09 Nov 2004
The examplar analogy given by shelikes2read of peeking through another person's front window without their consent is wonderful to show why I do not favour deontological ('rule-based') ethics... the specific situation at hand needs to be considered, not the general case (from which general statements are usually made). If my neighbour is an elderly person living alone who is regularly in their front yard, and for a few days has not been seen, nor answers the door when knocked, I would have no hesitation to peek through their front (and side and back) window to see how they may fare. Likewise, there may be specific circumstances - and these would have to be looked at individually - in which a 'private' reading would, from my personal perspective, be quite reasonable and ethically correct, even though in most circumstances it would not be.

shelikes2read	10 Nov 2004
jmd wrote: The examplar analogy given by shelikes2read of peeking through another person's front window without their consent is wonderful to show why I do not favour deontological ('rule-based') ethics... the specific situation at hand needs to be considered, not the general case (from which general statements are usually made). If my neighbour is an elderly person living alone who is regularly in their front yard, and for a few days has not been seen, nor answers the door when knocked, I would have no hesitation to peek through their front (and side and back) window to see how they may fare. Likewise, there may be specific circumstances - and these would have to be looked at individually - in which a 'private' reading would, from my personal perspective, be quite reasonable and ethically correct, even though in most circumstances it would not be. For me, it's all about the intent. Looking in the window because you have valid reasons to be concerned about someone's welfare is one issue. No one in their right mind would object to it if they understand the motivation behind the action is not a selfish one. On the other hand, looking into somebody's window with intentions of seeing people, actions, or things that would fall into the "none of your business" category is committing a wrong against the occupant(s) of the home. Ditto with the cards... doing a "third party" reading like the ones I've seen on the Reading Exchange forum, when someone has requested help finding a missing person, is tremendously different from doing a "third party" reading for the purpose of prying into someone's personal business. Deep in our heart of hearts, if we're being honest with ourselves we KNOW what our motivation is for performing any given reading, whenever we pick up a tarot deck. The same way we know the difference between looking in a window out of concern for someone's health vs. looking in for purely selfish reasons. In my prior post, I wrote about "deliberate violation of someone's privacy" being wrong, regardless of the method that's being used. I stand by the example of looking in the window, inasmuch as if someone's motivation is to see if their neighbor is all right, they're not intending to violate anyone's privacy. It's all about the intent. IMO, even someone who INTENDS to act as a peeping tom but doesn't actually SEE anything when they look in, has wronged their neighbor. Ditto for someone who does a card reading for the same motivation, even if they get everything all wrong... if they MEANT to "spy" on someone, they did something unethical. That's in contrast to the topic of this thread, which is doing readings about public aspects of the lives of public figures. IMO, if they're public figures such as government officials, and what they do in public impacts many lives besides their own, it's not violating anyone's privacy to do readings about those public issues. And this, to me, includes issues such as the public person's health, since their well-being will also impact many lives along with their own. JMO, your mileage may vary, and all that good stuff. :)

jmd	10 Nov 2004
We seem to generally agree, shelikes2read, in that for any general rule that one may draw up, there will indeed likely be possible scenarios in which the situation at hand, and the intent in action, will determine its moral dimension. I should point out, in case it was read in a way that presumed I was negative towards shelikes2read's earlier post, that I in fact was not at all... but rather assumed that many (including shelikes2read) would agree with my example of acceptable peeking in specific circumstances on a particular neighbour. The whole issue does bring up various considerations as to what ethics is, and how one makes ethical determinations - two differing but related problems, of course, in which the latter is an epistemological issue (a question about how we know something, rather than what the thing actually is). When I also reflect on what occurs at the spiritual level, what strikes me is that - though we may be unaware of it - there are no secrets between us. It is more a question of radical acceptance of the other (including each of our incredible stupidity at times), and a trust that they, like each of us, actually desires what is best for each and everyone - even if some of us are incredibly misguided in numerous instances. Osher mentions an 'internal' and an 'external', with the latter being characterised as 'their impact on others, enviroment, etc.'. It may perhaps be important to reflect and consider what 'internal' action, thought, or feeling, does not have its 'external' repercutions. Personally, I consider it in some cases ethically fine to question and wonder about someone else's motives or ways of viewing the world... or even what they are going through. Again, however, the question that needs to be asked is not only 'what is the person doing/thinking/feeling?', but also 'why am I asking?'.

Fulgour	12 Nov 2004
I asked the cards beforehand, "How should I feel about this?" And after the viewing the debacle, saw my path shown free.

Lurea	14 Nov 2004
This is a very interesting discussion on the ethics of reading for a public figure! Given what everyone has said, how do you feel a spread like Teranar's "Checking up on Friends" fits in? Okay, if the intent is genuinely to help? Or would you say that since you (the querent) already has a relationship with the subject, that it would be okay?

shelikes2read	14 Nov 2004
Lurea_aure wrote: This is a very interesting discussion on the ethics of reading for a public figure! Given what everyone has said, how do you feel a spread like Teranar's "Checking up on Friends" fits in? Okay, if the intent is genuinely to help? Or would you say that since you (the querent) already has a relationship with the subject, that it would be okay? The closest I've come to doing this in recent memory was when I found out that someone I knew from an online message board was having some complications during their cancer treatment a few months ago. He was battling a staph infection because his immune system was weakened by chemotherapy, and he was in and out of the hospital over a period of a few weeks. I was worried about the person in question, as they were feeling poorly both physically and emotionally. But I couldn't bring myself to do a reading JUST on him and how he was doing. So I turned it into a question: "What do I need to know in order to help ___ work through this rough time?" And I got some insight that I think helped me do some constructive things. Mostly it was just sending IMs when I saw his screen name online... but thanks to the insight from the reading, I went into the conversations with an idea of what kind of encouragement might be needed most. Overall, I think that ANY kinds of conversation were probably a help, since at the time this person was pretty much quarantined in his own house thanks to his weakened immune system. And since I hadn't had IM conversations with the person prior to that (we knew one another from reading each other's posts on the board), I had to kind of "step out in faith", to borrow a phrase from prayer meetings, in order to just start IMing this person pretty much out of the blue. But on top of that, there were a few specific areas that, according to the reading I did, I suspected might be things he was concerned with most of all. And if those topics came up I had a little bit of forewarning as to what I might say that would provide some encouragement. BTW, I'm happy to report that he's currently in remission and returned to work a couple of weeks ago. :) So he DID work through that rough spot, thank God. Here's to many more years of good health for him, and his fiancee whom I also got to know thanks to initiating those IM conversations.

Kit	15 Nov 2004
Lurea_aure wrote: This is a very interesting discussion on the ethics of reading for a public figure! Given what everyone has said, how do you feel a spread like Teranar's "Checking up on Friends" fits in? Okay, if the intent is genuinely to help? Or would you say that since you (the querent) already has a relationship with the subject, that it would be okay? Oooh! I did something similar once...I hadn't seen a close friend for a while- she hadn't been coming to dance rehearsals- so I worried about the ethics of doing a reading about it. I came to the conclusion that it is alright so long as the reading is about the person in question in relation to yourself and how you can help them, rather than about their personal issues... I stopped myself from asking straight out why she wasn't coming, but asked instead what I and others in the group could do to help, and if we'd see her soon. She still hasn't returned, but I get the idea it was a work/exams-related-stress-issue-thing. There are too many of those in this world. As far as reading about president goes, their actions and lives do affect yours, so I see no problem with reading about them. I think it's perfectly ethical and morally correct to read about Bush and Kerry (though I don't find Bush very morally correct himself). Now when you start reading about movie stars, that's when it gets shallow and silly...:laugh: Raeven

The Reading for the president thread was originally posted on 07 Nov 2004 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.