Actually, she's said about that, yes. Sam equates decreasing population size with failure. Not too environmentally concerned, but there we are.
Yes, but we don't hold it against you.
Is Buddhism a Failure?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
Actually, she's said about that, yes. Sam equates decreasing population size with failure. Not too environmentally concerned, but there we are.
Yes, but we don't hold it against you.
Orthodox Jews practice an intolerant religious yes. If I were extremely wealthy I would pay African Americans to try and join Orthodox synagogues in New York (or elsewhere in the USA) and sue any that tried to prevent them from joining. The idea that people are "born" a religion is a backwards idiotic mentality. I noticed Malaysian Muslims passed a law saying Muslims are born "Muslim" and therefor can not legally be able to convert out of being "Muslim".
Talk about idiotic superstitious wankers.
Religious Jews are superstitious yes. Actually anyone who is religious is superstitious and many who are not.
Talk about idiotic superstitious wankers.
Religious Jews are superstitious yes. Actually anyone who is religious is superstitious and many who are not.
The Orthodox Jews I've met are quite fine with blacks. Israel has a fair black jewish population. Any jew who disregards another jew because of skin color is essentially committing sin and - by the book - could be killed.
Though I agree they're still, by and large, quite racist. Just not on the point of blacks or anyone else trying to join their little group.
Though I agree they're still, by and large, quite racist. Just not on the point of blacks or anyone else trying to join their little group.
Where did I say that? May I see a link?
As I understand, anyone can join a liberal Jewish cult, but, the Orthodox supposedly has a rule about someone's mothers mother's mother being "Jewish" - as if superstition were somehow genetic. Which ironically I have a great great great grandmother through my mother's mother's mother who was Jewish before converting to Catholicism. Am I Jewish? No.
If a person sincerely wanted to become orthodox Jew IN the USA and was prevented from doing so, I think there'd be grounds for a lawsuit.
that aside, the Jewish religion is, like any monotheism, inherently intolerant. They were much better off as monolatrists. Actually, back then probably 99% of people were polytheist monolatrist worshiping the local mountain or river god... one would think.
You said as much in regards to the Japanese. I believe it was also mentioned in the thread where you state something or other about Muslims breeding Israel into submission :bugeye:
As if, in this day and age, having 14 children per couple is socially responsible
.No, anyone can convert to Judaism. You're mixing up the rule a bit. If your mother is a Jew then you are a Jew - whether you renounce the religion or not, you are still a Jew. Choosing to become an atheist, Muslim or Christian or Shintoist is all allowed - though obviously considered blasphemy it is not a punishable offense in most interpretations. Yet even when you convert, you are still considered by Jews to be a Jew. I am an open atheist, but my friend's mother still says I will grow up to be a "good Jewish father". I can protest all dinner long, she will still just refer to me as Jewish. This is because of the Jewish notion of Jewish ethnicity (handed from mother) mixed with the idea that God has chosen us to suffer for humanity not living up to his lofty goals. I may be an atheist or Shintoist or whatever, but to the Jews that's not much different than any other Jew who fails to live up to God's expectation of them, though obviously my failure is of a higher magnitude.
Anyone who wants to convert to Judaism is allowed, though none are welcomed at first. It's a well known tradition that a Rabbi has to try hard to dissuade any potential convert, the idea being that if you'd like to convert you better be fucking serious about it and not give up at the first sign of difficulty. I believe certain orthodox Christian churches follow the same tradition, though I'm admittedly not an expert!
Any person can join, it's just going to be difficult. Whether you're in America, Israel or Ghana is irrelevant; according to Jewish law all are allowed to apply for conversion. I'm not going to pretend there are no racist Jews, and probably a few Rabbis who would be suspicious of black person that wanted to join, but it's not sanctioned under Jewish law. Moreover, once someone is converted it is completely against the law to refer to them as in any way whatsoever less Jewish than someone who's mother was a Jew.
As for intolerance being inherent in monotheism... Humans are generally pretty intolerant. That served us fairly well for a few good millennium! All of the major religions and philosophy that came from these periods reflect our natural intolerance.
All that said, a religion is only what people interpret it as. Under certain interpretations neither Judaism, Christianity nor Islam are intolerant. Judaism, in fact, can easily be interpreted the opposite way; as is often pointed out on sciforums, Jews traditionally are not supposed to believe they are special in a good way, they are special in the sense that they are horribly cursed with the burden of upholding and showing off God's law. Christ himself doesn't seem to have been very intolerant in most of the Bible, instead he's more like a hippy preacher. Islam, as well, can be read as allowing a very multi-cultural and just society(i).
They're intolerant only when they get interpreted by people. They're abhorrent only when they become ideology.
(i) I understand why these three come off as completely intolerant. Each book claims it is the greatest and that all else is lesser. Yet it is possible - and indeed standard practice for many theists - to accept that these books were still written by men and thus fallible and wrong in some places. The same way one can identify as a Platonist without necessarily believing there is some eternal world above the clouds where the world of forms exists. Frankly, outside of the 10 commandments in Judaism there is very little that is not debatable and open to interpretation. And if the 10 commandments is the only part that's not allowed to be argued, I'm okay with that... They're not such bad commandments.
Anyone who wants to convert to Judaism is allowed, though none are welcomed at first. It's a well known tradition that a Rabbi has to try hard to dissuade any potential convert, the idea being that if you'd like to convert you better be fucking serious about it and not give up at the first sign of difficulty. I believe certain orthodox Christian churches follow the same tradition, though I'm admittedly not an expert!
Any person can join, it's just going to be difficult. Whether you're in America, Israel or Ghana is irrelevant; according to Jewish law all are allowed to apply for conversion. I'm not going to pretend there are no racist Jews, and probably a few Rabbis who would be suspicious of black person that wanted to join, but it's not sanctioned under Jewish law. Moreover, once someone is converted it is completely against the law to refer to them as in any way whatsoever less Jewish than someone who's mother was a Jew.
As for intolerance being inherent in monotheism... Humans are generally pretty intolerant. That served us fairly well for a few good millennium! All of the major religions and philosophy that came from these periods reflect our natural intolerance.
All that said, a religion is only what people interpret it as. Under certain interpretations neither Judaism, Christianity nor Islam are intolerant. Judaism, in fact, can easily be interpreted the opposite way; as is often pointed out on sciforums, Jews traditionally are not supposed to believe they are special in a good way, they are special in the sense that they are horribly cursed with the burden of upholding and showing off God's law. Christ himself doesn't seem to have been very intolerant in most of the Bible, instead he's more like a hippy preacher. Islam, as well, can be read as allowing a very multi-cultural and just society(i).
They're intolerant only when they get interpreted by people. They're abhorrent only when they become ideology.
(i) I understand why these three come off as completely intolerant. Each book claims it is the greatest and that all else is lesser. Yet it is possible - and indeed standard practice for many theists - to accept that these books were still written by men and thus fallible and wrong in some places. The same way one can identify as a Platonist without necessarily believing there is some eternal world above the clouds where the world of forms exists. Frankly, outside of the 10 commandments in Judaism there is very little that is not debatable and open to interpretation. And if the 10 commandments is the only part that's not allowed to be argued, I'm okay with that... They're not such bad commandments.
DiamondHearts
Registered Senior Member
So, Michael, according to you Orthodox Jews are 'intolerant, idiotic superstitious wankers?'
Now, if I may ask, what experience qualifies to make such an assertion. Do you view Jewish rituals in the Western wall as idolatry? What is your opinion of the Torah and the Talmud. Do you think Judaism is antithetical to progress, and do you think it resists secularism?
Now, if I may ask, what experience qualifies to make such an assertion. Do you view Jewish rituals in the Western wall as idolatry? What is your opinion of the Torah and the Talmud. Do you think Judaism is antithetical to progress, and do you think it resists secularism?
?!michael said:
What grounds would those be?
They do lend themselves easily and frequently to such employment, however - and the more insidiously and dangerously for being under the cover of their better side.Tyler said:
Bad, weak people do bad, weak things, regardless. To get good, strong people to do bad, weak things - that's the trick of tyranny.
All religious people are superstitious and in that there is a level of idiotic. If they can not admit that the possibility exists there are other Gods or no God then they are intolerant wankers to boot.
What qualifies me to make that judgment call? I'm a Liberal American - I know what's best
And this is true, it's why you refuse to say Polytheistic Shinto religious beliefs are as valid as you Monotheistic Islamic religious beliefs. You are ashamed to say this because it will show that you and your beliefs are intolerant. My Liberal American ideals have already changed you DH and have become a part of your own moral code. Yours is the first step on a long road to civility. If Your great great great grandkids are lucky they will get to where I am now
Last edited:
Is it legal to prevent American Citizens from becoming members of organizations on the grounds of their genetics? Organizations that exist in the USA? Organizations that are given tax breaks? Is it? If so then we can simply vote to change that law.
It is if the organization in question is a religion, along with certain other exceptions.
For example, if your genetics result in you being female, it is perfectly constitutional for an organized religion that calls for male-only priests to discriminate against you in their priest-hiring activities.
Good luck with that. "We" won't include the vast majority of religious people in the US, so it's unlikely that "we" will get very far.
Oh, good call! That will probably change in time. One would hope. Or perhaps by the time it does we'll have moved past many such superstitions?
We can only move at the pass of society. I think society is still happy to discriminate against women, as women still must wear tops to cover their nipples, while men don't! I call bullshit on that!
But, tell a Black person they can not join, this I think we may not accept any longer?
Sometimes it just takes a court case and a public presentation. I think the argument could be framed to show that's it's certainly not fair to discriminate against a black person. Especially if liberal Jews were to side with the black man and call bullshit on orthodoxy.
Quintessence
Registered Member
That is a contradiction, or you are using an implicit form of the No True Scotsman Fallacy. Why wouldn't the current Buddhist societies follow Buddhism? Are you trying to state that they do not have the essence of the True Buddhism?
Tyler,
I'm not saying you are wrong, actually you are right, what I was suggesting is that (and it seems to be) that SOME Jews of the Orthodoxy persuasion do not think it is possible to be Jew UNLESS you are born Jew. For those people, then yes, that should be against the law. As for the situation that you presented, sure, that is fair.
That said, I still maintain that Judaism, as are all monotheisms, is inherently intolerant - particularly against the polytheistic beliefs.
You mentioned that many of the older generation will still think someone is Jewish even when they are not religious? Say they are Shinto or Catholic. Do you think that this is a good way to think about things?
Also, I have never met a Muslim Jew? Is it common?!?
Do you have any evidence whatsoever of these people? I seem to remember your first post on the subject was a "what if" scenario. Now somehow it's moved into the "it happens often" category? I must have missed where you posted any proof of that assertion at all.
And I that it's all a matter of how you interpret. Judaism was born out of polytheistic roots and actually seems to fit in nicely as a minority culture within many different religions. Jews ought to believe that they are the people chosen to represent the one true and most powerful God's way over all the other gods. It is an accepted aspect of Judaism that there could never possibly be such a situation where the whole world became Jewish. On the other hand, both Islam and Christianity would be happy if all the world converted to their faiths. Thus both had various crusades and religion-spreading wars of different types.
It's not just the older generation, it's all of the religious people. I frankly don't care if they still consider me a Jew. I'd be lying if I said I had inherited none of the culture.
"Jew" is such a broadly defined term you really should specify religious jew (a member of the religion), ethnic (born) / social (participates in the society) jew.
My understanding is that a religious jew remains a religious jew as long as they don't convert to another religion. So there are a growing number of jews who are religious jews and practice buddhism. (They call themselves jubus.)
You could be an ethnic jew and convert to another religion, but you'd no longer be religiously a jew and would forfeit the "right of return" for example. Such a person could be called a jewish muslim.
A number of religious jews don't necessarily believe in god any more. They focus on the social, ritual and traditional lifestyle aspects of the religion. Needless to say the more traditional jews have issues with this.
None of this is any great secret and the jews I've discussed it with have all taken it in stride as part of the jewish character. Of course I don't hang with a lot of hyper conservative orthodox jews so your milage may vary.
I don't link all your quotes, believe it or not.
I know: shocking. You can dismiss it here, if you like. Yet, this is what you've said previously. :shrug:
Tyler,
I'm not Jewish and so I'll defer to you on this matter. However, I was sure that Orthodoxy Judaism, as a rule, only considered people Jewish whose mother was Jewish. I thought that was the whole point in ignoring the fathers offspring? You know, the old: You always know who the mother is saying.
If Orthodoxy Judaism does indeed allow an African American protestant to convert than that's not an issue and I concede the point to you
As to monotheism. Initially Jews were monolatrists. This I think is fine as it's even close to the topic in this thread, Buddhism. Accepting that other people's beliefs are valid, and yet, only holding your own is the only thing possible - as there are as many beliefs as their are people. However, IMO monotheism on the other hand is the evolution of monolatrism into an intolerant belief. I think you'll even find that monotheism evolved during the periods in history when Jews felt threatened. Not the time to be thinking about tolerance. There's a reason why Buddha (literary creation or otherwise) went to meditate peacefully. We all know you have to be a good head-space. Just look at my posts! Most of the time I'm probably working 14 hours a day and write posts that are pretty offputting. Even if there's a point to be made, it made ruthlessly, with little or no tact, and sometimes I can't think clearheaded enough to see I am spewing shit all over the place.
So, I'm a great example of how ideas that seem decent, can turn ugly! Like monotheism
I like this notion of having to suffer for God. There's an once of humility in that. I suppose it also brings a community together. BUT, the better philosophy would be that we are all humans and we all suffer equally and in the same way. You see, if you feel your suffering is more than the next guys, well, it might make it easier to put a bit more suffering on his plate?
No?
Any time there's a permanent segregation of people from the rest of society it's a step in the wrong direction and it usually ends badly.
I'm not Jewish and so I'll defer to you on this matter. However, I was sure that Orthodoxy Judaism, as a rule, only considered people Jewish whose mother was Jewish. I thought that was the whole point in ignoring the fathers offspring? You know, the old: You always know who the mother is saying.
If Orthodoxy Judaism does indeed allow an African American protestant to convert than that's not an issue and I concede the point to you
As to monotheism. Initially Jews were monolatrists. This I think is fine as it's even close to the topic in this thread, Buddhism. Accepting that other people's beliefs are valid, and yet, only holding your own is the only thing possible - as there are as many beliefs as their are people. However, IMO monotheism on the other hand is the evolution of monolatrism into an intolerant belief. I think you'll even find that monotheism evolved during the periods in history when Jews felt threatened. Not the time to be thinking about tolerance. There's a reason why Buddha (literary creation or otherwise) went to meditate peacefully. We all know you have to be a good head-space. Just look at my posts! Most of the time I'm probably working 14 hours a day and write posts that are pretty offputting. Even if there's a point to be made, it made ruthlessly, with little or no tact, and sometimes I can't think clearheaded enough to see I am spewing shit all over the place.
So, I'm a great example of how ideas that seem decent, can turn ugly! Like monotheism
I like this notion of having to suffer for God. There's an once of humility in that. I suppose it also brings a community together. BUT, the better philosophy would be that we are all humans and we all suffer equally and in the same way. You see, if you feel your suffering is more than the next guys, well, it might make it easier to put a bit more suffering on his plate?
No?
Any time there's a permanent segregation of people from the rest of society it's a step in the wrong direction and it usually ends badly.