DP, Thanks for the reply. It's probably difficult, if not impossible, to keep religion out of politics in the sense that politicians have personal beliefs that may impact on their personal decision making. However, we in the west mostly live in secular societies and overt religious decisions should stay the hell (excuse the pun) out of legislative decisions that affect all citizens.
I'd also argue with you over the point about atheists knowing the answers to a religious survey but not understanding the intricacies of theology. If someone doesn't know who delivered the Sermon on the Mount they sure as hell (there I go again) don't understand the "intricacies" of theology. Mike. ________________________________ From: DP <wookielife...@yahoo.ca> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 1 October, 2010 23:16:46 Subject: Re: [Zen] More about arguments and ego Well, there are ways that politics and religion/spirituality intersect that are (for me) fruitful and interesting. The debate over Obama's old minister, for example, could have led to a mainstream introduction to Liberation Theology. Or we could talk about "Creation Care," the Evangelical environmental movement. Instead, there are constant threads about keeping religion out of politics, and how atheists are smarter, more moral and more compassionate than religious people. The latest has been about how atheists did better than religiouis people on a quiz about religion. I thought the quiz was superficial, and that just because the atheists knew the answers they didn't know the intricacies of theology. Of course, I was ridiculed for even arguing that theology was complex. So yes, some hurt feelings and envy over the people who have "the truth." but also frustration because I think that it's our emphasis on materialism (in all senses of the word) that causes a lot of the world's problems. --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown <uerusub...@...> wrote: > > Hi DP, > > Could you elaborate on this a bit more: "As well, I am frustrated that the > section of the political forum dedicated to religion is dominated by the > atheists." > > Thanks, > Mike > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: DP <wookielife...@...> > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Fri, 1 October, 2010 7:58:28 > Subject: Re: [Zen] More about arguments and ego > > Â > I appreciate your comments, and your story. That is strange, and yet not > uncommon from what I've heard. OTOH, it's a valuable metaphor for how we > experience the world. We ultimately really don't know. And perhaps what I > feel > is envy over their illusion of certainty (which they definitely present) > > And yet another part of it is that I feel that some of the issues in the > world > (this is a political forum that I'm talking about) need a spiritual outlook > as > well as a real world, material component. Certainly the idea of "there is > nothing more to this world, and when you die that's it" seems to counter any > sense of hope for the future, at least in my opinion. > > As well, I am frustrated that the section of the political forum dedicated to > religion is dominated by the atheists. > > I guess if I *was* more secure in my beliefs I wouldn't let it bother me. > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Kristy McClain <healthyplay1@> wrote: > > > > *bows to all* > > Ã‚Â > > I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but after reading DP's posts on >this, > > >iÃ‚Â decided to share an experience i am having right now.. > > Ã‚Â > > To begin, I was struck when youÃ‚Â wrote that what really bothers you is >that > > >people attack you aboutÃ‚Â what the "truth" is when it comes to > >religion.Ã‚Â >I > > >have said before here that, in my view, there really is no such thing as > >"the" > > >truth or even "a" truth.Ã‚Â Its simply one's perception of it--beit Ã‚Â a >person, > > >idea, theologyÃ‚Â or event.Ã‚Â The need to be right or somehow prove that >one > > >person's perception is correct and therefore, another's is wrong, is at >theÃ‚Â > > >heart of our societal and global conflicts. > > Ã‚Â > > I think most of that is ego-driven, but to pretend or deny that humans > > don't > >have egos is equally foolish.Ã‚Â Its okay to have opinions, beliefs, values >and > > >moral constructs.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â I think the danger of egoÃ‚Â in this is when one >insists > > >their viewiint is the only correct one.Ã‚Â > > > > Ã‚Â > > IÃ‚Â agree with Chris-- great wisdom there when he suggests that when you > > do >not > > >respond to some flaming post or insult or complaint, you actually > >demonstrate > >greater emotional maturity, and they are aware you maintain your views, but >are > > >now moving on to the more important matters of your real life. > > Ã‚Â > > I also agree with Bill.Ã‚Â Such mattersÃ‚Â cannot be analized in some >logical > > >frame.Ã‚Â If you have faith-- thenÃ‚Â logic has little to do with it, and > >perhapsÃ‚Â useÃ‚Â yourÃ‚Â faith that perhaps your message will resonate >somehow via > > >less tangible means. > > Ã‚Â > > Now, as I am now facing a problem that started with internet discussion, > > but > >has now become a real life threat, IÃ‚Â must caution others to beware those > >on-line who indeed may have psychiatric buttons you do not want to inflame. > > Ã‚Â > > The man I've written about here who claims a lifetime of trauma , abuse, > >tragedy and drama is at it again. Ã‚Â After calmly making it clear to him >that I > > >will no longer be a part of his self-created dramas, but wishÃ‚Â him well-- >the > > >followingÃ‚Â events have unfolded.. > > Ã‚Â > > I received an e-mail from a man claiming to be an ordained minister, > > Ã‚Â and > >friend of this man.Ã‚Â Telling me that ****Ã‚Â was in a serious car >accidentÃ‚Â and > > >has been taken to a local hospital..Ã‚Â Stating thatÃ‚Â the eventÃ‚Â >details were > > >still unclear, but reassuring me this man is alive.Ã‚Â Etc., etc..Ã‚Â He >offers his > > >e-mail if I have questions or concers.. as if I must certainly beÃ‚Â >anxiouslyÃ‚Â > > >awaiting any information on this tragic event.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â > > Ã‚Â > > > > Certain that this is more of the same IÃ‚Â do not reply or respond.Ã‚Â For >people > > >with this type ofÃ‚Â psychological disorder which is to a large degreeÃ‚Â > >attention-seeking,Ã‚Â grandiose ideation, and other symtoms.Ã‚Â There is a >bit of > > >narcissisism, but his whole personality is more complex, and best left to be > >diagnosed by medical professionals. > > Ã‚Â > > But I do know the worst thing you can do to such a person is ignore > > them.Ã‚Â > > >Though it is the only appropriate and sane respomseÃ‚Â or treatment.Ã‚Â > > Ã‚Â > > I received a second e-mail a day later stating that the car was totally > >destroyed, andÃ‚Â he had retrieved the personal belongings (and cell >phone)Ã‚Â of > > >our "friend", and encouraged me tio call him with support. He is being > >transferred to another hospital.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Reminding me to keep jim in ourÃ‚Â >heart and > > >prayers. And soÃ‚Â and so on. > > Ã‚Â > > Again, I do not respond, and suspect thatÃ‚Â the person writing the > > e-mails >is > > >indeedÃ‚Â my "friend" himself. > > > > Ã‚Â > > This morning, i received a third e-mail from this minister friend of the >man.Ã‚Â > > >Starting out with telling me that the man in the hospital had toldÃ‚Â him a >bit > > >of what i said to him.. and could not believe how i could be so horrible to >such > > >a wonderful, decent, giving manÃ‚Â Etc., Etc.Ã‚Â It escalated into a > >temper > >tantrum on-line with capitalizedÃ‚Â angry retorts and profanity.Ã‚Â >(Ministers > > >aren'tÃ‚Â Ã‚Â what they used to be) *sigh* > > Ã‚Â > > At this point, I know I'm dealing with a very unbalanced individual who is > >indeed in psychic pain.Ã‚Â But this is out of my league. I care deeply > >about > >prople and ache for every child on the globe.Ã‚Â Not knowingÃ‚Â me, its >hardÃ‚Â for > > >anyone here to knowÃ‚Â myÃ‚Â realÃ‚Â heart orÃ‚Â values. I am not being >cruel,Ã‚Â I am > > >doingÃ‚Â the right thing for him and myself.Ã‚Â > > Ã‚Â > > Ã‚Â > > This isÃ‚Â hard on two levels.Ã‚Â First, thisÃ‚Â man is much "sicker" >thanÃ‚Â I > > >realized, and I am personally afraid.Ã‚Â He has my address.Ã‚Â I have >blocked his > > >numbers from my phones, and will keep all e-mails in a folder for >evidence.Ã‚Â > > >But this man does own firearms, is emotionally unstable andÃ‚Â I got into > >this > > >mess by just trying to be a friendÃ‚Â at an interfaith workshop and >discussion > > >group.Ã‚Â > > > > Ã‚Â > > It is times like this thatÃ‚Â having a family of attorneys is comforting. > > I >have > > >contacted friends who are MD's and a psychiatrist, and explained the >events.Ã‚Â I > > >just want to be left alone, and let the medical personnel where he is sort >this > > >out.Ã‚Â > > > > Ã‚Â > > BUT~~Ã‚Â what if its all a lie? If he is seeing all these doctors,Ã‚Â > > they >are > > >going to pick upÃ‚Â onÃ‚Â this.Ã‚Â But if he is just a neurotic man behind > >a >computer > > >screen, I have reason to fear. > > Ã‚Â > > My point is-- sheezus--Ã‚Â take a breath.Ã‚Â Stand by your convictions if >its > > >important to you.Ã‚Â Let go.Ã‚Â The other option is surrender to listening >to > > >others views with a softened heart.Ã‚Â We all have the right to have our on > >viewpoint, so long as it does not hurt self or others. Or maybe get a new > >hobby:) > > Ã‚Â > > KristyÃ‚Â > > Ã‚Â > > Ã‚Â > > --- On Thu, 9/30/10, DP <wookielifeday@> wrote: > > > > > > From: DP <wookielifeday@> > > Subject: [Zen] More about arguments and ego > > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > Date: Thursday, September 30, 2010, 12:51 PM > > > > > > Ã‚Â > > > > > > > > I've thought some more about my problrm with getting into arguments on the > >internet. I think that the internet has fueled a certain type of ugliness in > >arguments, with its tendency towards short comments that snipe at miniscule > >errors in one's posts. I want to walk away, and yet I hate the idea of the > >bullies winning the argument. > > > > I find that in religious discussions the "internet atheists" (a specific > > term > > >for these type of arguers, not all atheists) tend to crowd out people who > >want > > >to sincerely discuss religion on particular forums, so I get frustrated. > > > > > > But here's where the ego comes in. Obviously, there is ego involved in >winning > > >an argument, but there is also some ego in leaving. I feel like I'm saying >"i'm > > >taking my ball and going home." > > > > As well, i'm very insecure about my beliefs, and I feel like I'm somehow > > not > >worthy of my arguments. How does insecurity relate to ego, or is that a > >completely different question? > > >