Woodland Indians Forum

sschkaak wrote:

You cannot create your own tribe.

Why not?  To me, it depends on whether or not the tribal members are Indians.  If they are--no problem.  If they aren't--problem!

What is one of the defining characteristics of a "tribe"? Continuous community

A group of people, no matter what their blood, cannot meet as adults and call themselves a tribe. There has been no continuous community. They have no history together. This would apply to FBI as well as *An ironic acronym used in another forum*.

sschkaak wrote:

lenape writes:

"...I do know that the "no bloods" are accepted as what they are and they do not overstep their "place"..."

Nice (I guess) that they're allowed to participlate, but this is something like being an African-American Mormon.  In other words, "what they are" (and always will be) are non-Indians participating in Indian culture.

I agree with you, there is no "infusion" ceremony, LOL!!  *I*, myself, and apparently others, don't see anything wrong with this.  This doesn't give these "non indians" any rights to anything, and they are only accepted by those communities that CHOOSE to accept them.  What *I* disagree with is when these folks take it on themselves to become something they are not!  As for "non-natives" participating in Native culture, and not the "Powwow, or paid event" culture, but community ceremonies, tribal ceremonies, ect..., this is part of "most" tribes culture, be it "adoption" or "Making Relations" or what ever else it is called.

  I believe that Indians can determine what makes a tribe or community, not the BIA!

  These are just my views, am sure many agree and many disagree that is one of the great things about being human, LOL