Disbelief in human evolution linked to racism & prejudice

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

[Ahriman]

[The Valkyrie]

I believe that on based on buddhists in the US.   Buddhism has no historic or cultural tradition in the US.  Those who self identify as buddhists who emigrate to the US are on average far more highly educated than the average buddhist in countries of their origin.   

I have some personal experience with buddhists from south east asia, particularly Malaysia, Nepal and Burma,  They seem typically vehemently, or as vehemently as buddhist continences allow, anti evolution. 

They confidently rebut evolution with the same things heard on US senatorial campaign circuit: “If monkeys became men, why are there still monkeys”.

(Bold mine)

That’s far too small a sample size to declare that ‘most’ Buddhists reject evolution. It’s like me claiming that, ‘Most Muslims make excellent coffee’ because I knew some Muslims in Belfast that did.

Boru

That's a given, since coffee is disgusting.

[Pat Mustard]

Not surprising really, disbelief in evolution is overwhelmingly based among those who believe in an exclusionary and discriminatory religion.

most buddhists don’t believe in evolution either. 

Some discriminatory minds embrace evolution because it appears to provide a naturalistic sounding justification for discrimination.

My point stands. Myanmar is a prime example of buddhisms exclusionary and discriminatory nature. Western conceptions of that religion are different from the reality of if.

[The Grand Nudger]

I believe that on based on buddhists in the US.   Buddhism has no historic or cultural tradition in the US.  Those who self identify as buddhists who emigrate to the US are on average far more highly educated than the average buddhist in countries of their origin.   

I have some personal experience with buddhists from south east asia, particularly Malaysia, Nepal and Burma,  They seem typically vehemently, or as vehemently as buddhist continences allow, anti evolution. 

They confidently rebut evolution with the same things heard on US senatorial campaign circuit: “If monkeys became men, why are there still monkeys”.

Well I think that's a valid criticism. Can anyone explain why there are still monkeys? Humans did not come from monkeys, not directly at least.

If apes came from other apes, and if birds came from other birds, then why are there still apes and birds? Both questions contain their answers in the question.

You'll have to up your bar for what it means for an utterance to be valid criticism - because, here, you're simply declaring yourself a simpleton - not offering any concern or criticism of modern synth.

Semantically- If apes came from apes, the reason that there are still apes, is because some apes came from apes. If they hadn't, there wouldn't be any apes. That's how sex works. You're welcome.

[Mister Agenda]

Well I think that's a valid criticism. Can anyone explain why there are still monkeys? Humans did not come from monkeys, not directly at least.

Some monkeys became apes. Some apes became humans (which taxonomically are a type of ape).

White people came from Europe, but there are still Europeans. Honey Nut Cheerios came from Cheerios, but there are still Cheerios.

Was that helpful?

[Ahriman]

What made the still-monkeys think being a monkey was better than being a human, that they "stayed behind" in evolution and didn't evolve into humans? How did monkeys magically become humans? Don't pretend like you know.

[Mister Agenda]

[Ahriman]

[The Grand Nudger]

OFC it doesn't, because they didn't. How hard do you plan to work at convincing everyone you're an idiot? How many hours, for how many days, are you willing to commit, and.....when you've succeeded...then what?