Here is an article from Pathos and The Friendly Atheist.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyath...in-prison/

Wow. That's surprising. Granted, I don't know much about Buddhism. I just figured they were a peaceful, turn the other cheek bunch. Blasphemy laws will be the end of humanity. How can free speech exist in the same room as blasphemy? I don't follow a single god damned religion, but each one has a law that they would kill me for breaking.

(January 10, 2015 at 7:48 am)Exian Wrote: Wow. That's surprising. Granted, I don't know much about Buddhism. I just figured they were a peaceful, turn the other cheek bunch. Blasphemy laws will be the end of humanity. How can free speech exist in the same room as blasphemy? I don't follow a single god damned religion, but each one has a law that they kill me for breaking.

Oh boy, no religion is ever completely peaceful . People in the west falsely think of Tibet and The Dali Lama today as the entirety of the Buddhist history in Asia and the Orient. China's and Japan are full of Buddhists and they have had a long history of being enemies.

Burma's Buddhists treat Muslims pretty shitty at this point in history.

If you do an extensive history study of any religion in human history you will find violence.

The bottom line is that religion does not give us morals, our evolution does. There is not one currently held religion or any religion of the past that was around 200,000 years ago. Not even the word "atheist" gives humans morals because words are not our DNA. Our species has always been capable of, and will always be capable of both cruelty and compassion.

I think we do need more of a push to start talking about labels in terms of positions instead of talking as if those labels are physical flesh. No label describes our physical attributes as humans, they merely describe our likes or our geographical place of birth. But our labels are not us. Only DNA and the word "human" describe the physical us.

I agree with you to an extent. Labels are probably cause for more bad than good. But I'm gonna want to know if a dude is a pedophile, sex offender, etc. Generally, you're right, they cause more separation and dehumanization than anything.

I wonder how for into our timeline of self-awareness we came up with religion? I'm assuming it was some loose form of animism. I wonder when religion turned violent and all the gods became gods of war? Since you mentioned the 200,000 year thing...

Anyone who can't take a joke about their religon needs to grow up. You can't expect everyone in the world to have the same beliefs as you, and being offended because things are "sacred" or "blasphemy" is just making life harder for yourself. Remember you're not the only religion out there. And religious rules, and what you get offended by, are entirely arbitrary. I can make a up a religion right now that gets offended by anything I like. Does that make it reasonable?

(January 10, 2015 at 8:16 am)Exian Wrote: I agree with you to an extent. Labels are probably cause for more bad than good. But I'm gonna want to know if a dude is a pedophile, sex offender, etc. Generally, you're right, they cause more separation and dehumanization than anything.

I wonder how for into our timeline of self-awareness we came up with religion? I'm assuming it was some loose form of animism. I wonder when religion turned violent and all the gods became gods of war? Since you mentioned the 200,000 year thing...

Um I forgot which ancient Greek said it but "If horses had gods, they would look like horses".

Religion has been around in our species long before the first standardized written language. You can find cave paintings of animals and evidence of rituals. It was a form of worship, basically an very early reflection of evolutionary gap filling in humans.

I can see that pattern seeking in my cat. I cant crawl into his brain, but he sees patterns too. He knows where his food dish is, but can go to the wrong spot if I decide to move the dish to a new location.

Considering how evolution played out, and the fact that religion is still around today, it was inevitable that it would arise, because our species was ignorant back then. Even today it is very easy to pump bad claims into a child and have them hold those claims their entire lives.

When religions are used in the process of state building, particularly transforming ethnic chiefdoms into multi-ethnic nation states, they get hijacked. The Buddha was aware of this and made some statements about it, but realized it was futile. There was no way to teach something as profound and important as he was teaching, at that time, without it being distorted and used for other means. In general, we call this 'the decay of the dharma'. He said his teaching would lose their freshness, be distorted and eventually become totally worthless, as a natural process that happens to all things.

I strongly agree with the point about jokes. That's one of my first tests for a believer - if they can't take a joke, they have nothing I want to hear. Everyone knows the joke about the Buddhist and the hotdog vendor - anyone know a good one about Islam?

"At a session devoted to bringing together different varieties of Buddhism, when it was the Zen master's time to speak, he grabbed an orange from the bowl jumped from person to person, demanding, "what IS this? what is it REALLY? what is its true NATURE?" The Tibetan whispered to his Theravada friend, "Don't they have oranges in his country?""

(January 10, 2015 at 10:05 am)tantric Wrote: When religions are used in the process of state building, particularly transforming ethnic chiefdoms into multi-ethnic nation states, they get hijacked. The Buddha was aware of this and made some statements about it, but realized it was futile. There was no way to teach something as profound and important as he was teaching, at that time, without it being distorted and used for other means. In general, we call this 'the decay of the dharma'. He said his teaching would lose their freshness, be distorted and eventually become totally worthless, as a natural process that happens to all things.

I strongly agree with the point about jokes. That's one of my first tests for a believer - if they can't take a joke, they have nothing I want to hear. Everyone knows the joke about the Buddhist and the hotdog vendor - anyone know a good one about Islam?

"At a session devoted to bringing together different varieties of Buddhism, when it was the Zen master's time to speak, he grabbed an orange from the bowl jumped from person to person, demanding, "what IS this? what is it REALLY? what is its true NATURE?" The Tibetan whispered to his Theravada friend, "Don't they have oranges in his country?""

ARRGGGGGGGGG!

I really hate this idea that people invent morality merely because they string words in a sentence in a different way and manage to popularize it.

Buddha did not say anything new that our species did not reflect prior.

Our species will either act out in violence or we will act out in compassion. How we describe those acts or the ornate justifications for using force or compassion have nothing to do with the reality that those things have always happened.

Buddha also did not invent human morality, no one owns a patent on it. It is in our genes, not our religions, political parties, nationalities, races, religions. It is in our evolution.

There is nothing new under the sun.

OOOkay - postmodernism is well and good, but there is a such thing as history. Ideas have origins. There was a first person who rubbed sticks together to make fire. I agree that altruism is in our genes, but people need *language* to hold onto ideas. A large part of the Buddha's teaching was about letting go of all the delusions and attachments we have built up, and seeing what is.

(January 10, 2015 at 8:21 am)robvalue Wrote: Anyone who can't take a joke about their religon needs to grow up. You can't expect everyone in the world to have the same beliefs as you, and being offended because things are "sacred" or "blasphemy" is just making life harder for yourself. Remember you're not the only religion out there. And religious rules, and what you get offended by, are entirely arbitrary. I can make a up a religion right now that gets offended by anything I like. Does that make it reasonable?

Even if it is not a joke, even when it is bigoted and insulting, it still does not give someone the right to murder you.

I have said things like "fuck Jesus" and "fuck Yahweh" and "fuck Mohammed" in two ways. 1 in the context of "that makes no sense" and 2. in the context of "Who do you think you are, you do not deserve a pedestal".

But as far as individuals in any religion, that is still a separate issue as how that person treats me. With Malala, or Keith Ellison for example, the worst they would get is "Why do you feel the need to believe" or "Allah doesn't exist" or "that makes no sense". I am quite sure that the worst they would do if they thought I was being insulting would be "You are being an asshole Brian". But I do that with everyone of all religions.

My blasphemy is more for the idea, and not the person. But it is aimed at any person of any religion who thinks bullying with violence will shut me up.

It is I think the reason why Froodo has not run screaming. I do think after all this time he knows or at least should know how to separate himself from the claims he makes.

I simply think the world goes about peace the wrong way. We far too much default to taboos as an easy fix, rather than to simply allow the bitching and accept even with that non violence should be the common law and in the end regardless we all are human beings.