Political Ethics for Taoists and Buddhists

[Owledge]

Personally, I don't think big government fits all that well with Taoist philosophy.

You're just saying that because your government is so small.

[Cat Pillar]

You're just saying that because your government is so small.

 

Can't help the way I was born.

 

Or should that be the where?

[Birch]

What I mean is that anyone serious enough to become a quality and good leader, will take this training into their own hands, and not rely on society/college/whatever to do it for him, which is what it seems your insinuating. That someone(society) is responsible for the training of leaders. When it is the individuals responsibility to train themselves to be a good leader.

 

Society has 'problems' (as defined by who?) but it always will. The individual is responsible for his beliefs and values, whether they are aware of them or not, and they have results.

 

All that aside, taoist and buddhist politics and ethics would be individual and what you decide for yourself.

 

John

 

 

Ok, I was insinuating that as a society we are rewarding certain aspects of our leaders and not others. In that respect, yes I find we are responsible.

 

"The individual is responsible for his beliefs and values, whether they are aware of them or not, and they have results."

 

I stuck on 'whether they are aware of them or not' part. And I reckon that certain types of training paths exist more especially to deal with "the whether they are aware of them or not" part.

 

I also suspect that this is why societies (despite all claims and practices to the contrary) allow a certain number of mystics/shaman/weirdos/nutcases/left-hand path folks/artists/scientists to exist amongst the 'normal' people, because they know the society will screw itself over and burn itself out without their presence and periodic action.

[Vmarco]

Edited May 24, 2012 by Vmarco

[paulno]

[Chang]

This nicely sums up the party system, the elected and the electorate.

 

[Vmarco]

[ralis]

There really is no argument for neither,...you're either Liberal or Illiberal. The argument for neither is among those who do not understand what a Liberal is. For example, IMO, in America, there is not a single Liberal US Senator.

 

Remember the definition (requoted below),...a Liberal is someone who cares about peoples Civil Liberties. Thus consider the May 2002, 9th District Court ruling on the "Pledge." They said that the "The Pledge, as currently codified, is an impermissible government endorsement of religion. " How did the US Senate respond? On the following day the on the following day approved a resolution "expressing support for the Pledge of Allegiance with the impermissible government endorsement of religion." The resolution passed 99-0.

 

Every US Senator is, according to the Constitution, in affect Illiberal and an anti-American.

 

Well said!

 

Conservative Tea Bagger Republicans have bought the false promises of a better tomorrow fed to them by their flawed Machiavellian handlers. Richard III a flawed man obsessed with the acquisition of power at any cost, best describes the modern right wing conservative.

 

Support of political movements which are Social Darwinist in nature, is antithetical to Taoism and Buddhism.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke5-SUDrHMU&feature=related

Edited May 25, 2012 by ralis

[paulno]

There really is no argument for neither,...you're either Liberal or Illiberal. The argument for neither is among those who do not understand what a Liberal is. For example, IMO, in America, there is not a single Liberal US Senator.

 

Remember the definition (requoted below),...a Liberal is someone who cares about peoples Civil Liberties. Thus consider the May 2002, 9th District Court ruling on the "Pledge." They said that the "The Pledge, as currently codified, is an impermissible government endorsement of religion. " How did the US Senate respond? On the following day the on the following day approved a resolution "expressing support for the Pledge of Allegiance with the impermissible government endorsement of religion." The resolution passed 99-0.

 

Every US Senator is, according to the Constitution, in affect Illiberal and an anti-American.

 

Jesus, even when I agree with this dude he's gotta come at me. Let me give you an example...Say you make a thread about all native people from Hawaii hate white people. Many would would say that's not liberal. Its very stereotypical. Some would say not a very liberal way to look at things. But, say you're for gay marriage. So, you have a liberal viewpoint and an illiberal viewpoint.

 

Some Buddhist Sects look down on homosexuality. Some don't. Can you say all of Buddhism is a liberal ideology?

[eye_of_the_storm]

would homosexuality be considered the natural way?

 

I think not

 

you may be interested to find BPA... a chemical in plastics of which a lot of our foods are stored... is a synthetic estrogen (leeches into our foods)... are peoples minds being externally, chemically altered?

 

in other words a distortion of the natural way?

 

but is anything not the "natural way" ?

 

who knows?

[Vmarco]

[Vmarco]

would homosexuality be considered the natural way?

 

I think not

 

you may be interested to find BPA... a chemical in plastics of which a lot of our foods are stored... is a synthetic estrogen (leeches into our foods)... are peoples minds being externally, chemically altered?

 

in other words a distortion of the natural way?

 

but is anything not the "natural way" ?

 

who knows?

 

For homosexuals, the only thing unnatural from my observations is their having to hide who they are. From all I've seen, they appear born attracted to the same sex,...it's not something taught. Just because I'm not into male-male sex,...nor have an aversion towards Georgia O'Keefe, doesn't mean that they should be denied love or art.

 

Estrogens and phytoestrogens in contempory food supply certainly appears unnatural,...instead of banning the natural state of homosexuals,...why not open a dialogue on the processed food industry,...especially the acidity, corn syrup, and soy in nearly everything off the shelf.

[Brian]

<snip>

 

America is one nation under a Constitution. Although the Constitution sets up a representative democracy, it specifically was amended with the Bill of Rights in 1791 to uphold individual and minority rights. On constitutional matters we do not have majority rule. The majority has no right to tyrannize the minority on matters such as race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation.

 

<snip>

 

Quoted for truth but put a period after "tyrannize" in the second sentence and change the phrase "uphold individual and minority rights" to the phrase "highlight particular individual rights" in the first sentence.

 

[eye_of_the_storm]

For homosexuals, the only thing unnatural from my observations is their having to hide who they are. From all I've seen, they appear born attracted to the same sex,...it's not something taught. Just because I'm not into male-male sex,...nor have an aversion towards Georgia O'Keefe, doesn't mean that they should be denied love or art.

 

Estrogens and phytoestrogens in contempory food supply certainly appears unnatural,...instead of banning the natural state of homosexuals,...why not open a dialogue on the processed food industry,...especially the acidity, corn syrup, and soy in nearly everything off the shelf.

 

true // I guess I am addressing... the manufacturing of homosexuality - perhaps the growing fetus was influenced by such chemicals?

 

and is there a hidden agenda?

 

the "elites" do HAARP on about population control

 

the findings on BPA etc are well documented /

[ralis]

true // I guess I am addressing... the manufacturing of homosexuality - perhaps the growing fetus was influenced by such chemicals?

 

and is there a hidden agenda?

 

the "elites" do HAARP on about population control

 

the findings on BPA etc are well documented /

 

Manufacturing of? That is merely speculation and is contrary to the facts of. What does this have to do with the OP?

[eye_of_the_storm]

Manufacturing of? That is merely speculation and is contrary to the facts of. What does this have to do with the OP?

 

the facts of what?

 

BPA(chemical) does not spontaneously arise it is manufactured

 

therefore if I manufacture a chemical knowing of its effects and distribute said chemical... // what if the effect is what one is creating? malfunction the resulting influence would be manufactured, synthetic, contrived etc / unnatural

 

relation is an evolution of the discussion in terms of liberalism

 

liberalism being the natural way? being discussed at present as the more true expression of Taoism and Buddhism if it was to have a position on politics

 

in terms of liberalism and Buddhism homosexuality was raised... in regard to some schools accepting it and some not

 

I raised the question is homosexuality natural

 

If we want a true depiction of the natural way I tend to take nature as an example

 

do animals engage knowingly in homosexuality?

 

do male butterflies have sex with male butterflies?

 

was Chuang Tzu dreaming he was homosexual butterfly

 

or was the homosexual butterfly dreaming he was Chuang Tzu?

[ralis]

the facts of what?

 

BPA(chemical) does not spontaneously arise it is manufactured

 

therefore if I manufacture a chemical knowing of its effects and distribute said chemical... // what if the effect is what one is creating? malfunction the resulting influence would be manufactured, synthetic, contrived etc / unnatural

 

relation is an evolution of the discussion in terms of liberalism

 

liberalism being the natural way? being discussed at present as the more true expression of Taoism and Buddhism if it was to have a position on politics

 

in terms of liberalism and Buddhism homosexuality was raised... in regard to some schools accepting it and some not

 

I raised the question is homosexuality natural

 

If we want a true depiction of the natural way I tend to take nature as an example

 

do animals engage knowingly in homosexuality?

 

do male butterflies have sex with male butterflies?

 

was Chuang Tzu dreaming he was homosexual butterfly

 

or was the homosexual butterfly dreaming he was Chuang Tzu?

 

Homosexuality has been happening for millions of years. That is a known fact. BPA is somehow a cause? Conspiracy? Are you in favor of protecting the rights of LGBT's?

Edited May 25, 2012 by ralis

[Vmarco]

 

BPA(chemical) does not spontaneously arise it is manufactured

 

liberalism being the natural way?

 

I raised the question is homosexuality natural

 

do animals engage knowingly in homosexuality?

 

 

I could agree with a connection between chemicals and increased occurrences of gynocomastia, low testosterone, cancer, etc,...but homosexuality has a pretty much established historical record.

 

Do animals engage in homosexual behavior,...all the time.

 

IMO what is clearly, and hideously unnatural, is the "binary view of gender"

 

Nature provides many variations within any given species. Science has frequently documented many exceptions to the male/female-only rule. Complete/Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia, Kleinfelter's Syndrome, hermaphroditism/intersexuality, genetic anomalies, gynecomastia, hypospodias, and numerous other anomalies; anomalies, it should be noted, which only address externally assessable anatomical development, and do not address the neurologic, neurophysical, psychiatric, and psychologic composition of the human brain.

Kate Bornstein, in her book Gender Outlaw, discusses how she has frequently asked the question, "What constitutes being male or female?" In response to this question, she has never received a definitive answer to the question -- for every answer, there is an instance that nullifies it.

 

As for Liberal being natural,...I'd say it's a natural inclination of self-actualized people. For those of Conservative/Illiberal persuasions, any hope for Self-Actualization without the recognition that Conservativism/Illiberalism is a mental affliction, seems nil.

 

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Society/Conservatives_Deconstruct.html

[Vmarco]

Edited May 25, 2012 by Vmarco

[eye_of_the_storm]

I could agree with a connection between chemicals and increased occurrences of gynocomastia, low testosterone, cancer, etc,...but homosexuality has a pretty much established historical record.

 

Do animals engage in homosexual behavior,...all the time.

 

IMO what is clearly, and hideously unnatural, is the "binary view of gender"

 

Nature provides many variations within any given species. Science has frequently documented many exceptions to the male/female-only rule. Complete/Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia, Kleinfelter's Syndrome, hermaphroditism/intersexuality, genetic anomalies, gynecomastia, hypospodias, and numerous other anomalies; anomalies, it should be noted, which only address externally assessable anatomical development, and do not address the neurologic, neurophysical, psychiatric, and psychologic composition of the human brain.

Kate Bornstein, in her book Gender Outlaw, discusses how she has frequently asked the question, "What constitutes being male or female?" In response to this question, she has never received a definitive answer to the question -- for every answer, there is an instance that nullifies it.

 

As for Liberal being natural,...I'd say it's a natural inclination of self-actualized people. For those of Conservative/Illiberal persuasions, any hope for Self-Actualization without the recognition that Conservativism/Illiberalism is a mental affliction, seems nil.

 

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Society/Conservatives_Deconstruct.html

 

Point taken though I don't know of any asexual humans with the ability to self replicate and so on / now that would be bizarre

 

@ Ralis

 

How does one protect rights? they are being incrementally taken away as you read this post... another conspiracy? perhaps you should do some research.

 

Everyone deserves humane rights

 

I would extend humane rights to the animal kingdom also

 

to the degree of which killing an animal would be equivalent to killing another human being

 

LIBERTY TO ALL!

 

Within the confines of free will

 

apart from that anything goes...

 

BPA does not constitute free will even if people deem it a conspiracy and still choose to consume it out of ignorance// just curious to the thoughts of others

Edited May 25, 2012 by White Wolf Running On Air

[Vmarco]

Point taken though I don't know of any asexual humans with the ability to self replicate and so on / now that would be bizarre

 

 

So, you're suggesting that natural sexuality is limited to replication? Don't tell the dolphins that.

[eye_of_the_storm]

So, you're suggesting that natural sexuality is limited to replication? Don't tell the dolphins that.

 

they won't mind - we get along pretty well

[Vmarco]

they won't mind - we get along pretty well

 

 

I'd say that the frolic-some bisexual dolphins would mind quite a bit,...also, no way I could tell this woman http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/man-admitted-hospital-kidney-stone-discovers-hes-woman-110057308--abc-news-health.html That "god" made a mistake, and that she really isn't natural

"So when he went to the emergency room five years ago, he wasn't too shocked when the nurse told him she found traits of both genders in his ultrasound results. He was intersex, meaning he had both male genitalia and internal female sex organs."

Edited May 25, 2012 by Vmarco

[Informer]

I think it is as simple as listening to your heart about each issue to determine the intention, if the intention is without love then disregard it, no need to label it or put it into a group. Then we inevitably arrive to the issue, "What is love really?". (Something to realize, or awaken to.)

 

A form of the formless form . . .

Edited May 26, 2012 by Informer

[paulno]