Political Ethics for Taoists and Buddhists

[Vmarco]

Off topic rant again. My point was, and is, I can see how a lot of people would say neither.

 

Some hold beliefs that may be out of the spectrum of both. I personally am pretty liberal on most topics. I pointed out beliefs you had in order for you to see what I'm saying. Don't think it worked, should've known better.

 

Thank you,..for if you ever feel that I'm expressing a beLIEf, that is, an unquestioning acceptence of something in the absense or reason,...then by all means, I'd love to hear it.

 

What I was suggesting, is that those who say neither, most likely do not understand what liberal points to,...but rather believe the term Liberal to have something to do with Left Wing social issues, or even the abolishing of the 2nd Amendment. The fact is however, that a Liberal would not be against any Amendments, like the Right to Bear Arms. Unlike the Tea Party who want to get rid of 4 or 5 or 6 Amendments,...a Liberal, as JFK's definition, desire to defend all the Constitution Amendments, and the Rights provided.

 

The World is in desparate need of Liberals, like Ralis,...and in desperarate need of less Illiberalism, which is the prevailing majority attitude today.

 

V

[Seth Ananda]

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?

 

What???

 

Its been happening since the dawn of time, and much of our great art, music and philosophy we owe to them!

 

Also have you ever had a prostate induced orgasm? Amazing! And simply amazing that nature 'chose' to put such a pleasurable gland in a mans unnatural anus.

Even weirder that the rectum is just about at the same positioning height wise, as the Vagina, and just happens to be just about the same size inside as an erect penis, much like the Vagina!

How unnatural!

 

Maybe it is your beliefs that are unnatural?

[Informer]

There is an obvious difference, which is there is not meiosis going on in your anus. The only purpose it seems to serve is pleasure. (And only in some cases.)

 

I don't think the positioning of the anus is anything more tan a place at the bottom of the torso, is we were to dump waste from anywhere else, the organs involved would likely unbalance us. Gravity plays a big part in that evolutionary trait imo. I doubt it is because "it is meant for sex", because who would be giving it that meaning? Pretty much all animals have the anus at the end of the torso to dispose of waste after the nutrients that are useable have been taken out, therefore it has to be at the end of the track.

 

(A basic biology class may help)

Edited May 27, 2012 by Informer

[Informer]

Furthermore: An animal that uses the anus for reproduction purposes is not going to reproduce to pass its genes on to the next generation. So you can say that Evolution through natural selection says that it is not a natural phenomena for animals to use the wrong holes for mating, because those animals would not pass on genes to play a part in the next generations gene pool and eventually those genes would die out in nature.

[Seth Ananda]

Furthermore: An animal that uses the anus for reproduction purposes is not going to reproduce to pass its genes on to the next generation. So you can say that Evolution through natural selection says that it is not a natural phenomena for animals to use the wrong holes for mating, because those animals would not pass on genes to play a part in the next generations gene pool and eventually those genes would die out in nature.

Yep, but animals still have anal sex

[Seth Ananda]

Lets not forget that some Women orgasm through anal sex.

 

Its a very erogenous zone, and most people are dead as an old piece of leather down there, and full of fear and anxiety!

 

Men who are uncomfortable about homosexuality have very fearfull anuses...

Its no wonder there is so much prostate trouble [lower in the gay community], bowl cancer...

 

We are all in the hangover of patriarchal societies, and its very stupid, warped ideas of what is natural, right, or Manly...

 

A whole system of sex morality from folks who believe dinosaurs were put here to test our faith, and even the so called western 'not Christians' still carry totally Christian attitudes towards their body's, nature, Women and the world...

 

"Not Natural" to me, seems to have subtle elements of "You'll Burn in Hell" hiding behind it!

Edited May 28, 2012 by Seth Ananda

[paulno]

Thank you,..for if you ever feel that I'm expressing a beLIEf, that is, an unquestioning acceptence of something in the absense or reason,...then by all means, I'd love to hear it.

 

What I was suggesting, is that those who say neither, most likely do not understand what liberal points to,...but rather believe the term Liberal to have something to do with Left Wing social issues, or even the abolishing of the 2nd Amendment. The fact is however, that a Liberal would not be against any Amendments, like the Right to Bear Arms. Unlike the Tea Party who want to get rid of 4 or 5 or 6 Amendments,...a Liberal, as JFK's definition, desire to defend all the Constitution Amendments, and the Rights provided.

 

The World is in desparate need of Liberals, like Ralis,...and in desperarate need of less Illiberalism, which is the prevailing majority attitude today.

 

V

 

Definitions shift and change. Its the nature of language. This was never about semantics. What I was saying is I can see how many would feel Taoist and/or Buddhist beliefs wouldn't fall under a Right or Left Wing Banner. Right and Left Wing as we understand them today. Must I be this explicit?

[Vmarco]

Definitions shift and change. Its the nature of language. This was never about semantics. What I was saying is I can see how many would feel Taoist and/or Buddhist beliefs wouldn't fall under a Right or Left Wing Banner. Right and Left Wing as we understand them today. Must I be this explicit?

 

Absolutely,...if you are interested in Heart-Mind, then semantics must be very explicit. I'm not speaking a anal-yzing, but developing and using a specific language that differentiates the head stuff from the Heart stuff.

 

I most certainly can see the point that an evolved Taoist or Buddhist would likely not be either Left or Right,...just as the proper view of Liberal is neither Left or Right. Thanks for articulating that,...it was quite helpful.

 

V

[paulno]

Absolutely,...if you are interested in Heart-Mind, then semantics must be very explicit. I'm not speaking a anal-yzing, but developing and using a specific language that differentiates the head stuff from the Heart stuff.

 

I most certainly can see the point that an evolved Taoist or Buddhist would likely not be either Left or Right,...just as the proper view of Liberal is neither Left or Right. Thanks for articulating that,...it was quite helpful.

 

V

 

I'm not speaking a anal-yzing...Seriously? Why not just say you agree if you see the point?

Edited May 28, 2012 by paulno

[Informer]

"Not Natural" to me, seems to have subtle elements of "You'll Burn in Hell" hiding behind it!

 

I don't feel biased in regards to ones sexual preference, for that would require to look at people as gay or straight and label them that, when we are all humans. I think spirituality is an equal opportunity employer, but at the same time I don't think it was "meant" to be, as if some purpose as you were describing in relative locations. Who or what would have "meant" it?

 

My choice is probably not in the realm of natural, as I'm happy without a mate.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Informer

[Seth Ananda]

And simply amazing that nature 'chose' to put such a pleasurable gland in a mans unnatural anus.

Informer, my chose here is meant a bit tounge in cheek. But who knows what mechanisms are behind how something evolves...?

[Informer]

Informer, my chose here is meant a bit tounge in cheek. But who knows what mechanisms are behind how something evolves...?

 

Evolutionary Biologists.

 

I don't know the answer to how it evolved, probably something to do with letting you know your full and its time to drop off the waste, a sort of warning.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Informer

[eye_of_the_storm]

this is hilarious

 

damn politics!

 

all these intolerant people are testing my tolerance

 

I demand they conform to my tolerance!

 

your intolerance is not acceptable

 

transcendental hypocrites

 

 

Edited May 28, 2012 by White Wolf Running On Air

[Kris]

 

How does one protect rights? they are being incrementally taken away as you read this post...

 

Everyone deserves humane rights

 

..................

 

LIBERTY TO ALL!

 

So how do we get from here to there?

 

The two largest problems the planet is facing are poverty and the environment. None of these are handled by the current politics. 60 million people die every year. About a third of those die from being poor. At the same time the industrialized nations are using the planets resources at an unsustainable level. An average American is spending about 8 times what the planet can sustain, an European about 4 or 5 times. This is unnatural and will come to an end one way or another. When that day comes most of us will have to come to terms with living on a dollar a day. This sounds extreme, but it's basically what the guy who harvested your tea makes and most of the poor majority of the world makes.

 

So how do we get liberty for all? It's mostly a question of who controls the infrastructure. You need to control you food supply, have access to your own clean drinking water, the resources needed to heat and cool you home, medicine/sanitation and security. Once that is taken care of nothing can kill you except old age. :-)

Once you have reached this point you are also free to teach how you did it to other people/ communities and give the State the finger with both hands. Call it liberty for all, human rights, the basis for anarchy or whatever. :-) I'm not calling for a revolution. What I'd like to see is an evolution towards an sustainable, free world where nobody dies of poverty.

 

So what I'm proposing here is a different perspective on politics and ethics. States are failing, just look at Greece and Spain. The international financial system is balancing on a fine edge. To me makes the left right bickering mostly irrelevant. The only party I see that has stepped of the left -right axis to talk about relevant issues is The Pirate Party. Other that that I don't see much use for party politics.

 

- Kris

[John Zen]

Libertarian. Autonomous and consenting adults should be free to do whatever they want (sex, smoke, engage in commerce) so long as it is not directly harming others.

 

Let it be. When I read the Tao te Ching, I find it to take a very libertarian tone when it offers advice on leading.

[eye_of_the_storm]

So how do we get from here to there?

 

The two largest problems the planet is facing are poverty and the environment. None of these are handled by the current politics. 60 million people die every year. About a third of those die from being poor. At the same time the industrialized nations are using the planets resources at an unsustainable level. An average American is spending about 8 times what the planet can sustain, an European about 4 or 5 times. This is unnatural and will come to an end one way or another. When that day comes most of us will have to come to terms with living on a dollar a day. This sounds extreme, but it's basically what the guy who harvested your tea makes and most of the poor majority of the world makes.

 

So how do we get liberty for all? It's mostly a question of who controls the infrastructure. You need to control you food supply, have access to your own clean drinking water, the resources needed to heat and cool you home, medicine/sanitation and security. Once that is taken care of nothing can kill you except old age. :-)

Once you have reached this point you are also free to teach how you did it to other people/ communities and give the State the finger with both hands. Call it liberty for all, human rights, the basis for anarchy or whatever. :-) I'm not calling for a revolution. What I'd like to see is an evolution towards an sustainable, free world where nobody dies of poverty.

 

So what I'm proposing here is a different perspective on politics and ethics. States are failing, just look at Greece and Spain. The international financial system is balancing on a fine edge. To me makes the left right bickering mostly irrelevant. The only party I see that has stepped of the left -right axis to talk about relevant issues is The Pirate Party. Other that that I don't see much use for party politics.

 

- Kris

 

Totally agree Kris

 

Becoming independent from the system and self sustaining is the goal

[Brian]

this is hilarious

 

damn politics!

 

all these intolerant people are testing my tolerance

 

I demand they conform to my tolerance!

 

your intolerance is not acceptable

 

transcendental hypocrites

 

 

 

What I found most amusing was the number of Bums who revealed themselves to be closeted Creationists in this thread without even realizing they were doing so. In fact, I suspect pointing it out to some of them would shock & horrify them!

[ralis]

What I found most amusing was the number of Bums who revealed themselves to be closeted Creationists in this thread without even realizing they were doing so. In fact, I suspect pointing it out to some of them would shock & horrify them!

 

Names?

[Brian]

Names?

 

Just scan back over the thread and look for people using words like "purpose" or "reason" when they think they are presenting an evolutionary position. It's a really common slip, of course, but one that indicates a deep-seated "design" bias. Evolution has no place for "purpose."

 

Now I'm not suggesting that all those posters have hidden diety fixations , only that a few may want to examine their own belief structures (as I try to do frequently). Word choices are often not accidental.

 

[Vmarco]

What I found most amusing was the number of Bums who revealed themselves to be closeted Creationists in this thread without even realizing they were doing so. In fact, I suspect pointing it out to some of them would shock & horrify them!

 

This could be very interesting,...how about listing the posts in this thread that reveal the closeted creationism.

[Vmarco]

Just scan back over the thread and look for people using words like "purpose" or "reason" when they think they are presenting an evolutionary position. It's a really common slip, of course, but one that indicates a deep-seated "design" bias. Evolution has no place for "purpose."

 

Now I'm not suggesting that all those posters have hidden diety fixations , only that a few may want to examine their own belief structures (as I try to do frequently). Word choices are often not accidental.

 

 

Very insightful. Would have been better if you left out the sentence: "Evolution has no place for "purpose."

[Vmarco]

Just scan back over the thread and look for people using words like "purpose" or "reason" when they think they are presenting an evolutionary position. It's a really common slip, of course, but one that indicates a deep-seated "design" bias.

 

 

The only person using the term purpose was "informer" in posts 55, 56, & 62,...but that is no surprise.

[eye_of_the_storm]

This could be very interesting,...how about listing the posts in this thread that reveal the closeted creationism.

 

I concur

 

OUT WITH THEM!

 

 

I would say that I am creationist // perhaps not entirely in the traditional sense

 

If little no-self here has a creative drive... where does that come from?

 

why does life aim seemly for higher coherence + intelligence

 

what made algae decide hmmm I wish for greater expression?

 

why did some algae stay algae?

 

I believe nothing being absolute creative potential

 

Edited May 29, 2012 by White Wolf Running On Air

[Brian]

Very insightful. Would have been better if you left out the sentence: "Evolution has no place for "purpose."

 

But it doesn't! (In all honesty, in scanning back over this thread, I think I conflated some posts from other threads in my mind, but it is something we see pretty frequently on this forum as in gerneral conversation.)

 

An evolutionary development, perhaps caused by an energetic DNA mutation, causes a random variation in the next generation. That variation may in some way increase or decrease probability of survival or breeding selection, or it may have no impact, or it may not matter (that new species of super-intelligent frog may get wiped out in a single gulp in the tadpole stage.) "Purpose" has nothing to do with it or we aren't talking about evolution anymore.

 

My liver, for instance, functions as a filtration system (among other things) but evolutionary theory doesn't support the idea that it has that "purpose" -- it just happened that way...

 

EDIT: FWIW, there are other sources for variation between specimens besides evolution, of course -- such as the already-pointed-out environmental influences during developmental stages, for instance.

Edited May 29, 2012 by A Seeker

[eye_of_the_storm]

But it doesn't! (In all honesty, in scanning back over this thread, I think I conflated some posts from other threads in my mind, but it is something we see pretty frequently on this forum as in gerneral conversation.)

 

An evolutionary development, perhaps caused by an energetic DNA mutation, causes a random variation in the next generation. That variation may in some way increase or decrease probability of survival or breeding selection, or it may have no impact, or it may not matter (that new species of super-intelligent frog may get wiped out in a single gulp in the tadpole stage.) "Purpose" has nothing to do with it or we aren't talking about evolution anymore.

 

My liver, for instance, functions as a filtration system (among other things) but evolutionary theory doesn't support the idea that it has that "purpose" -- it just happened that way...

 

EDIT: FWIW, there are other sources for variation between specimens besides evolution, of course -- such as the already-pointed-out environmental influences during developmental stages, for instance.

 

What if one takes the approach everything is mind? or consciousness

 

light wave vibration sound

 

everything emanating from the Tao?

 

the Tao does not emanate from matter

 

without the influence of the Tao...

 

Not even Darwin believed in his THEORY of evolution

 

totally blown away by the complexity and sophistication that is life / nature

 

Chaos hmm everything seems pretty stable here