(January 10, 2015 at 7:21 am)PhiloTech Wrote: That is not the point.
The point is that Buddhism is not compatible with naturalistic atheism and it is also no different than a religion like Islam for example. People think it is somehow exempt
Buddhism is quite different from theistic religions. Its defining trait is that it's an atheistic religion. No gods involved.
As for incompatibilities with "naturalistic atheism", I fail to see the problem. Two worldviews (while atheism in and of itself is not a worldview, the addition of the term "naturalistic" makes it so) being incompatible isn't an issue for either one.
You might want to complete your post. What do "people" think Buddhism is exempt from?
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
![[Image: LB_Header_Idea_A.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i280.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fkk172%2FBlaziken_rjcf%2FLB_Header_Idea_A.jpg)
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
