Dali Lama school visit? [Archive]

AnnW

05-09-2001, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by Mickey
Buddhism isn't really a religion...it's more of a philosophy that promotes peace and acceptance, so I don't have a problem with it.

It may not be a religion but according to his biography his title is "His Holiness" and he is the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people....

"His Holiness the 14th the Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso, is the head of state and spiritual leader of the Tibetan people. He was born Lhamo Dhondrub on 6 July 1935, in a small village called Taktser in northeastern Tibet. Born to a peasant family, His Holiness was recognized at the age of two, in accordance with Tibetan tradition, as the reincarnation of his predecessor the 13th Dalai Lama, and thus an incarnation Avalokitesvara, the Buddha of Compassion"

I think he would be interesting to hear, but I do think it blurs the lines a little bit. I wonder if they would have bussed in 1,000 students to hear the Rev. Billy Graham, Mother Teresa or the Pope?

angie r

05-09-2001, 10:05 AM

It isn't a religion, it is a cult. As for whether or not I'd want my kids to see the Dali Lama? I don't think so. It does seem so strange that the schools are doing this? Dali Lama's brother lives in Bloomington where we used to live and they have a huge "center" there. Dali visits quite often and I have never seen the schools there make an event of it. It is nice when Richard Gere shows up to visit him though. :biggrin:

Amy2

05-09-2001, 12:32 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by angie r
[B]It isn't a religion, it is a cult.

Angie, I'm sorry, I don't know if this is arrogance or ignorance? Buddhism has been a major religion for millions of people for centuries!

As to the actual question, I agree with Ann that it is blurring the line somewhat. However, if the topics discussed are world peace, living, relationships, whatever and are NOT related to the specifics of the religion or converting people to the religion, I think this wise person may have a lot to offer. As would many "religious" speakers. I think the problem would be if it were some kind of evangelical meeting.

Amy

angie r

05-09-2001, 09:44 PM

So now I am rude or stupid?? It is so nice having a debate with you Amy. Even if I was wrong about it not being a religion, it is my opinion and I don't feel that you calling me arrogant or ignorant is a very kind thing to do.

Amy2

05-10-2001, 01:15 AM

Angie, I just couldn't believe you would say something like that. Imagine if I were to say "Christianity is a cult" I would be SKEWERED! What were you thinking?

But with that said, you're right, I needn't have insulted you. Sorry to be rude.

Amy

kat

05-10-2001, 07:49 AM

Amy, In the first century Christianity was considered a cult and its members acussed of incest and cannibalism.

Brichard

05-10-2001, 10:50 AM

What is a cult?

That is a good question and you may find many definitions.

But, I'll share my understanding of what a cult is.

A cult as I understand it is a derivative of another religion. For Example, I consider Jehovah's Witness and Mormon's cults as they "grew" out of Christianity.

I have studied some of the world religions, but I admit most of what I know is just a snapshot. And, if you don't constantly study it is tough to remain abreast of all the nuances. Our Sunday School class did a study on world religions, and by and large most of them were cults.

Some would say that Buddhism was an outgrowth of Hinduism, and that may give it cult status in the minds of some people.

Amy, you are rude. You like to keep things stirred up and have admitted that the board seems "boring" to you on occassion. So, I'm not surprised with your choice of words. Since you often agree with Mickey, I notice you didn't attack her for saying Buddhism was a phillosophy and not a religion.

But... you have done that before. When I agreed with somebody (Diane P. I think) that people around you do influence you... you didn't attack the original post, but chose to disagree with me. You knew I'd argue the point and hey... you like to argue.

I'll still debate with you, but I still think you are rude. If you did something once and apologized that would be one thing. But when you continue to repeat the behavior then the apologies lose some sincerity.

I think you view yourself as being tolerant of other views because you have a very open view of religions. You seem to think there are several keys to the lock of salvation. Which hey, if that is your opinion... have at it.

But, by disagreeing with certain Christians on this board who think there is only one key... you are being intolerant of that view. Again, I'm not telling you what view to have, but don't mistake disagreement with arrogance.

I viewed an old Powerpoint presentation I had from when we studied Buddhism and this is what I have. I'll tell you in advance that it isn't very complete. I acutally read a book on a Yogi in my agnostic phase, but I remember very little. Eastern religion/cult... whatever... is a pretty complicated study.

Siddharta Gautama (Born 560 B.C.)
Age 29… shaved his head, yellow robe and wandered as a beggar monk
Went through most of the Hindu ways and found no happiness
Sat under a tree for 40 days and nights
Mara (evil one) tried to get him to give up quest
Tempted him with goods and promises
End of 40 days, experienced “Nirvana” (the final state)
Founded order of monks (Sangha)
Died at age 74
Never claimed deity status

BUDDHA
denied Vedas and Upanishads
denied that man has a soul and that present world is unreal
did accept reincarnation
Karma - duty one has to perform according to his station
strongly opposed the caste system (salvation for all)
“The Middle Way” - salvation for all.

“Four Noble Truths”
Suffering is Universal - salvation is the release from suffering

The cause of suffering is craving (selfish desire)

Cure is to eliminate craving

Eliminate craving by following “The Middle Way” - the noble

THE EIGHTFOLD PATH
Right viewpoint
Right aspiration
Right speech
Right behavior
Right occupation
Right effort
Right mindfulness
Right meditation

Nearly 500 million followers
Many sects/divisions
Most popular worship Buddha
Buddha could have achieved nirvana but chose to stay and serve as a “savior” to mankind
Buddha was an agnostic - there is no help from God
Sin is anything that hinders man’s progress.
Man responsible for own sin
Man saved through self-effort alone.
No social work - suffering is your own fault

Amy2

05-10-2001, 12:30 PM

Brichard, thank you for coming down from on high to make your pronouncements. I will work to consider myself sufficiently scolded. Shall I "strike back" and list my personal opinons of you? Nah.

That said, if I HAD come on and said "Christianity is a cult!" I would have been lambasted and you l know it. Please, let us not be hypocritical about it.

I have never said I am tolerant of Christianity. I am tolerant of other people's choice to be Christian, but there are many facets of the religion I consider "wrong." Of course, it's not okay to say that here.

As to your reference to Mickey, she and I have had many many conversations separate from the board, and she had spoken to me privately about her post. I had linked her one of my favorite websites, and she responded in kind. I didn't feel the need to respond to her on the debate board. Not that that is ANY of your business who I choose to respond to, or why! And frankly, whether or not you choose to debate with me is irrelevant to me. It's your choice if you want to or not!

You don't like my style. Okay. I get that.

Amy

kat

05-10-2001, 12:50 PM

Brichard, thank you for coming down from on high to make your pronouncements. I will work to consider myself sufficiently scolded. Shall I "strike back" and list my personal opinons of you? Nah.

I think you just did. And I feel that you very often make similar little covert statements.

As to what a cult is, it seems a little like considering whether a morning glory is a flower or a weed: it depends, I guess, on your perspective.

Mickey

05-10-2001, 12:58 PM

Firstly, I just want to say that I don't think Amy is sitting around trying to think of ways to intentionally stir up trouble here--she's just very to the point. I kind of like that she has the guts to say what she thinks without sugar-coating it. I don't think that is the equivalent of being vindictive or mean, although if you are sensitive, I can see where your feelings could get hurt.

Your definition of a cult is interesting, Brichard. I believe many religions are a spin off of others, but I don't believe that is the main way to differentiate between a "valid" religion and a cult. I have found that what defines a cult is a matter of personal opinion. But then that's just MY personal opinion! ;)

I see Buddhism as more of a philosophy because they don't worship any God or person. They revere Buddha as an enlightened guy who wandered around teaching people about finding inner peace. They believe in reincarnation up to the point of Nirvana (enlightenment). Tibetans believe that the Dalai Lama is Buddha reincarnated. That Buddha was enlightened and reached Nirvana, but he did a noble thing by choosing to continue to be reincarnated (as the Dalai Lama) to continue to teach. That doesn't mean they worship Buddha or the Dalai Lama--it's not like Christians worshipping Christ. They just view Buddha and the Dalai Lama as a wise, noble and enlightened person who has a lot to offer the world.

That's my interpretation of it. Teaching people things like "there is no way to happiness, happiness IS the way" isn't "religious" as I see religion. No one's telling you that you have to send lots of money to the Dalai Lama or that you need to worship him.

So, that's why I don't have a problem with bussing kids to hear the Dalai Lama--but I can see where others who may not see Buddhism the way I see it would have a problem.

Brichard

05-10-2001, 01:11 PM

Amy,

I'm not sure why you consider me to be on high as you refer to me. I've never spoken down to you that I am aware of. I've never said I was better then you are, nor do I think that I am.

I do think I am more polite then you are, and that is why I said you were rude.

I respect the fact that you speak your mind, and that you hold true to your values.

But when you infer that a person is ignorant or arrogant based on a view that they have is just plain disrespectful.

Whether or not you keep things stirred up really doesnt' bother me. Having different vantage points is necessary for a debate. It can be fun!

I just don't think you have to be rude to do it. And I think you can speak your mind and be polite.

Brichard

05-10-2001, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by Mickey
Your definition of a cult is interesting, Brichard. I believe many religions are a spin off of others, but I don't believe that is the main way to differentiate between a "valid" religion and a cult. I have found that what defines a cult is a matter of personal opinion. But then that's just MY personal opinion! ;)

I did not always think of the word cult as I do today.

When I used to think of the world cult I would think of people like "The Branch Dividians." But, if you go to any Christian bookstore they will define Mormonism etc. as cults. If I had a dictionary I would look up the word cult, but alas I don't have one at my disposal.

I think many of us have a different definition, which is why I explained in my post what the definition Angie R and I had been given. I've normally not seen Buddhism listed as a cult, but I could see where some could get that.

kat

05-10-2001, 01:45 PM

cult a system of religious beliefs and ritual also its body of adherents; a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; a great devotion to a person, idea, or thing. etc.

Mickey

05-10-2001, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by Brichard

I did not always think of the word cult as I do today.

When I used to think of the world cult I would think of people like "The Branch Dividians." But, if you go to any Christian bookstore they will define Mormonism etc. as cults. If I had a dictionary I would look up the word cult, but alas I don't have one at my disposal.

I, too, have seen Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses referred to as cults.

I've posted this site before, but it really is interesting and they have a section on cults:

http://www.religioustolerance.com (Scroll down to click on "cults".)

It's interesting that the formal definition of "cult" describes all religions.

If size is an indication (small group = cult), then that idea goes out the window when you look at the Unification Church (Moonies). They have a HUGE following, but it's still considered a cult--even though they view themselves as a denomination of Christianity.

I think you need to consider cult status when the followers can't or won't think for themselves--when their reply to everything is what their leader/God tells them. Hmmm...but then that, too, describes a lot of "valid" religions. I know many Christians who are like that.

Perhaps you can consider a group a cult if the followers are expected to give much of their money to the church? But then most valid religions expect you to tithe.

Yep...seems like a matter of personal opinion.

Lynda/WA

05-10-2001, 03:53 PM

Yesterday I heard a clip from a talk given by the Dali Lama in Michigan (maybe Minnesota?). He was asked something about if the Chinese government were to change (ie overthrown). His answer said something about stepping down from his religious position. I may have gotten that wrong because I was so caught up with him mentioning his *religious position*. Sounded to me like he considers himself a *religious* leader. that cought me because we had already started debating whether he was or wasn't.
the second question they asked him was which of three religions he felt was the best (can't remember which three were named). His answer was something about as long as they espouse peace he considers them a good religion.

I don't know what the talk he gave was for. If these questions were asked of him during the talk with school children would you consider them approptiate?

I'm sure some of the topics discussed will be brought up after Monday's talk so I'll get into more detail then.

angie r

05-10-2001, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by Lynda/WA
Yesterday I heard a clip from a talk given by the Dali Lama in Michigan (maybe Minnesota?). He was asked something about if the Chinese government were to change (ie overthrown). His answer said something about stepping down from his religious position. I may have gotten that wrong because I was so caught up with him mentioning his *religious position*. Sounded to me like he considers himself a *religious* leader. that cought me because we had already started debating whether he was or wasn't.
the second question they asked him was which of three religions he felt was the best (can't remember which three were named). His answer was something about as long as they espouse peace he considers them a good religion.

I don't know what the talk he gave was for. If these questions were asked of him during the talk with school children would you consider them approptiate?

I'm sure some of the topics discussed will be brought up after Monday's talk so I'll get into more detail then.

I find that very interesting. If the Dali Lama is Budda reincarnate how can he "step down?"

netmechwife

05-11-2001, 11:16 AM

re·lig·ion (r-ljn)
n. Abbr. rel., relig.

Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, a principle, or an activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

I do not understand how it is ok for the schools to take children to hear a spiritual speaker but not let them pray or bring their bibles to school (which is not affecting other students). The ten commandments have a lot of "good things" in them but they are not allowed in schools either. For example: Honor your father and mother (all students respect their parents, right?), do not covet what others have, DO NOT KILL (wouldn't it be great if all students respected that one?), do not lie, do not make false witness against a neighbor (is gossiping a problem with teenagers?) do not commit fornication (how many teen pregnancies and STDs are there these days?) If this is not allowed then why are they taking students to hear a speaker who has "good things" to teach them. Why are the schools teaching students to find their "inner spirit" or meditate? (yes there are schools doing this.) Why are schools teaching evolution when it has not been proven to be fact... etc. etc.

I think its called intolerance...

Amy2

05-11-2001, 12:43 PM

The Dali Lama is a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, and the talk was about how to promote nonviolence and peace. He was asked about the what he considers the "top three" religions, and he said any religion that promotes peace is a worthy religion. He didn't say "worthy" but something to that affect. He was not there as a religious speaker, but as a Nobel Peace Prize winner, discussing that issue.

Amy

coulie

05-11-2001, 05:09 PM

There are several definitions for the word "cult"

Brichard, you have a dictionary on your computer. I think if you click on your tool bar at the top "Edit" you should get a drop down menu which gives you a dictionary option.

Anyway, I think the reason there seems to be so much disagreement is because people are responding to different interpretations and definitions of the word cult. Hard to have a real debate if ya'll are talkin about completely different things. Which definitions were you referring to Angie and Amy?

Anyway, anywho.who....

Brichard, there are not degrees to passing judgment on others. You have passed judgemnt on Amy just as she has passed judgment. Stating that someone is rude is a passing of judgement. It's no different or better than insinuating to someone that they are ignorant. Both are judgements and I only point it our because you seemed to defend your way of communicating as better.
Sh-- wrapped in a pretty package is still Sh--

I must restate this...To anyone that it matters to

......you cannot get your feelings hurt unless you allow it. So stop allowing it! And that doesn't mean stop talking to each other. It means listen differently. It means pay more attention to why you feel emotional and what is it's source. We tend to pick up our sore spots early on. Later in life people and events can push that button. Angie, certainly your button could not be pushed if it didn't already exist. You've given Amy way too much power. and it is your doing, not hers.

Enjoy, be peaceful and have some fun today!

Coulie

AnnW

05-11-2001, 05:39 PM

Coulie, I agree with you to a point. I think you DO have power over how you react to someone's rudeness, but that doesn't mean that they are not being rude. Just like your analogy..rude is rude now matter how one might react to it.

And, I am planning on having some fun today!! :)

coulie

05-11-2001, 06:59 PM

AnnW,

Oh good...fun is good...glad you are going to have some.

I just realized I am grossly inept at at navigating this website. I posted that last reply prior to noticing that there was a second page. Sorry.

I did read some more. I normally would have thought "gee, Dali Lama??" Kool! and sent my youngn's along. But, this is really some good debate about church and state. I hope all the intellectuals will keep posting perspectives on this.

For me, if a religion condems others that believe differently, I feel less tolerance for it. Does the Dali Lama condem non believers? Does Christianity? I seem to remember one post in this thread that mentioned tolerance and something to the effect that perhaps they won't allow Christianity in the schools because there was a tolerance issue or lack of. I'm not sure what that meant....Anyway, forgive me for my awkward way of referencing....(in fact, if ya'll bear with me, I might attempt to use that quote tool in the next post just to see if I can do it)
I am wondering why they would allow this event unless they felt very certain that ,even under fire, they could by law defend it if they were called to do so.

I am certainly not educated enough in theology to cross reference various religions and beliefs. I rely on all of you for that.

Keep posting please!!!

Coulie

coulie

05-11-2001, 07:07 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by AnnW
[B]Coulie, I agree with you to a point. I think you DO have power over how you react to someone's rudeness, but that doesn't mean that they are not being rude.

And, so what? A person has just acted rudely. So?

I am not seeing the point you are trying to make.

And, I just have to go post this now and see if I used the quote tool correctly.

Coulie

AnnW

05-11-2001, 07:43 PM

Originally posted by coulie
[QUOTE]Originally posted by AnnW
[B]Coulie, I agree with you to a point. I think you DO have power over how you react to someone's rudeness, but that doesn't mean that they are not being rude.

And, so what? A person has just acted rudely. So?

I am not seeing the point you are trying to make.

And, I just have to go post this now and see if I used the quote tool correctly.

Coulie

Perhaps I misunderstood your post, but the way I read it, you seemed to be excusing the rudeness by saying the person that was offended should change their way of looking at the rudeness, that it was the offended person's problem that they were offended. I was simply saying that, yes, you can choose to blow off a rude comment and not be offended, but it doesn't make that comment any less rude or offensive.

TXmom

05-11-2001, 08:48 PM

Who says a child can't take a bible to school?

netmechwife

05-11-2001, 11:16 PM

I am sorry to have sounded as if all children are not allowed to bring bibles to school. That is not what I meant. I should have thought out how to write my post better. However there are schools that have not allowed children to bring bibles to school. It is not legal but it happens. I am sorry to have stepped on anyones toes as well. I am new here and just wanted to give people something to think about.

Linda/NE

05-11-2001, 11:50 PM

I don't know much about the Dali Lama but this is my take on that and other issues brought up here.

First of all, I think people tend to view a speaker by more than just what he/she is going talk about. That person's reputation, lifestyle, etc comes into play. No, that may not be fair or tolerant, but face it many people do. I would guess many of us would do that also, especially if that person was connected to something we strongly oppose.

As far as busing students to this-- this reminds me of a time when a controversial NE senator (Ernie Chambers) came to talk in our hometown. He did his talk the night before for the parents. Then the parents had the choice of whether their child could or couldn't listen to the same speech the next day. (Much similar to parents viewing movies before allowing the children to see them.) I personally wouldn't feel comfortable busing my kids to see someone of controversial nature with out first hearing what he has to say.

My knowledge of cults (based on a high school research paper) are those groups with a leader here on Earth that requires complete commitment, takes over every aspect of their life and decision making. Also, in cults the members are not able to just walk away--members may be killed if trying to escape. Now please keep in mind that this was the information back in the 80's, most of it having to do with Jim Jones. I really did find the information fascinating.

It's not surprising that kids today have so many problems getting along and resort to violence to solve problems. As I look at the events in this thread, I see someone disagreeing with another's post and rather than stating her own view, questions whether it was made out of stupidity or arrogance. Then the dicussion goes into whether one poster was rude, or if other posters take offense too easily. Luckily it seems that things calmed down and the discussion was brought back to the main focus of the thread. But I can see how easily a simple disagreement can snowball into a major issue.

I know from experience how frustrating it is when my view seems so clear and someone else argues it. It's easy to mis- read what someone wrote or meant, and it's just as easy to let emotions do the talking instead of logic and common courtesy.

Now, since I really have nothing of value to add about whether this is a religion or cult, I'll shut up and leave the debate to those who've researched it. :)

coulie

05-12-2001, 12:17 AM

QUOTE:Originally posted by AnnW

"Perhaps I misunderstood your post, but the way I read it, you seemed to be excusing the rudeness by saying the person that was offended should change their way of looking at the rudeness, that it was the offended person's problem that they were offended. I was simply saying that, yes, you can choose to blow off a rude comment and not be offended, but it doesn't make that comment any less rude or offensive."

Let me respond here,

I was not excusing anything. It is true some people choose to act in a rude way. That is their business. "Blowing it off" does not examine it. It "mole holes" the issue.
The degree to which the rudeness offends one is based entirely on the degree to which the offendee allows it or feels it.

When what "they" say makes me feel bad I then have the choice to spend my time blaming and convincing myself that "he/she" has wronged me or is bad..
.or....
I can examine why it triggered my feelings. It's not an excuse. It's me deciding that I would like to be the one accountable and responsible for my feelings. I would rather not assign my feelings to someone else. When I look at my relationship conflicts this way I find a more peaceful and true resolve.

Here's two scenarios,
#1.
Joey spits on the sidewalk. It offends me. I think that is a very rude thing to do. I scold Joey and let him know that spitting is absolutley unnacceptable.
For me this experience triggers my childhood memories of my drunk father who killed himself. He used to spit in public thinking it was a sign of strength. I experienced pain around his perception of himself that he was strong.

#2.
Joey spits on the sidewalk. It makes me smile from ear to ear. I think it is so classic ten year old boy. I love the way he "lugies up" I revel in the images of Norman Rockwell and such. I only gave birth to daughters and I longed for that Micky Mantle in my brood of kids. Seeing Joey spit just stirs my soul.

The apparent issue is spitting. Is spitting rude? I think most people would probably think so.

In scenrio #1.
The person offended might feel a strong need to spend time convincing the spitting person that it was rude.....Brichard did that with his reaction to Amy...

Scenario #2.
No defense neccessary. No offendee.

Did something rude happen? Yes. Did it trigger people? Some, but not all.

Q: When someone was triggered, was it the offense (spitting) that deserved attention?

A: Yes, IF... the offeneded person needs to revisit the rudeness and it's effects on them, over and over again.

A: No, IF...the offened person seeks resolve.

Simply an observation about choice and real accountability for our feelings and our reactions to our experiences. Not an excuse. If ya'll need to give another human being power over your feelings then go for it.

and Ann, what did you do that was fun today?

I went swimming and talked on the computer.

Coulie

Brichard

05-12-2001, 12:44 AM

Originally posted by coulie
Brichard, there are not degrees to passing judgment on others. You have passed judgemnt on Amy just as she has passed judgment. Stating that someone is rude is a passing of judgement. It's no different or better than insinuating to someone that they are ignorant. Both are judgements and I only point it our because you seemed to defend your way of communicating as better.
Sh-- wrapped in a pretty package is still Sh--

......you cannot get your feelings hurt unless you allow it. So stop allowing it!

Well Coulie, I'm not sure I understand your whole post but I'll try to explain my position. Judgement is another one of those funny words that people have different meanings of. But... I have no interest in going down that path. But I'll give you a few of my thoughts.

First of all, I'm really not upset. In my mind I see a history of Amy being impolite. If something happens once then I think you can disregard it. But, when you see little covert statements over and over... one makes opinions on that information.

For those of you who don't think Amy was being rude, check out the quote below.

But with that said, you're right, I needn't have insulted you. Sorry to be rude

This was originally posted by Amy. So if she thinks she was rude, why shouldn't I think she was rude? I don't think there is much debate on that issue. I simply agreed with her!

I also find it funny that one of the things people like about Amy is the fact that she doesn't "sugar coat" things. If that is the case... those people must love my direct post! lol

Its like... it is ok if Amy is blunt about her feelings, but if somebody else calls her out on it ... she is the victim? I am totally baffled by that logic.

I've never called Amy a name. I've never attacked her views. I have always respecfully disagreed. I've never called her "on high, ignorant, arrogant." Hmmmm.... who said those things? Me? Nope.

I just said that she wasn't very nice.

But, by no means did it negatively affect my day. I didn't do anything wrong.

I know tons of people who don't believe what I believe. And I can debate issues with them all day long. My identical twin brother is one of these people. We are extremely close. But you know what... when we talk... we are nice to each other.

I'm assuming you are referring to "my way" of communication as being polite with each other. If so, I absolutely think that is the best way of communicating. One can be nice without sugar-coating. You can be blunt and be nice.

Ultimate Judgement is God's responsibility. But there are laws that govern our society. There are also laws of civility and etiquette. Some of those issues get pretty cloudy, but this isn't one of them. When the author agrees with the behavior, I think it is pretty cut and dry.

If people don't keep the gloves up then the debate gets ignored. I've been on forums where that is all they do. Insult each other 24 hours a day. How do people get pleasure from that? I don't get it.

The "Amy doesn't agree with you and that is why you said something" debate just doesn't hold any water with me.

Mickey doesn't agree with me, and I said nothing to her.

Dr.Dan didn't agree with me, yet we always kept the gloves up.

Why the difference? It isn't the views that caused my reply. It was the lack of respect.

Now, I will admit to this. The only emotional attachment I had was that the negative post was directed at my wife. So, had the poster been somebody else I would have been less likely to respond.

But, my feelings would have been the same on the behavior irregardless of that fact.

netmechwife

05-12-2001, 12:59 AM

It seems to me that these days there is a clouding of Right and Wrong.

Does taking up an offense mean that if someone were to be punched everone around should ignore it because they shouldn't let things bother you?

netmechwife

05-12-2001, 01:15 AM

Everone leaves:)

coulie

05-12-2001, 02:27 AM

To Brichard,

i've read and re-read...and I can't find a single reference to your wife???

But anyway, you didn't quite get what I was trying to communicate and that's ok.

If you want me to talk more about it let me know.

For now I feel finished,

Coulie

netmechwife

05-12-2001, 02:32 AM

I thought I was the only one up.

Brichard's wife is angie r.

I thought I'd say hi, before I miss my chance...

AnnW

05-12-2001, 10:18 AM

I was referring to words not actions.

I giggled and laughed with my kids. :) Going swimming today.

coulie

05-12-2001, 02:45 PM

AnnW,

Thanks for your clarification.
I think my point was so missed about "own your experience thing" that I find it amusing.

So where do you swim? Is it for fun or do you compete?

Do your kids swim?

Coulie

coulie

05-12-2001, 02:47 PM

Originally posted by netmechwife
I thought I was the only one up.

Brichard's wife is angie r.

I thought I'd say hi, before I miss my chance...

Hi Netmechwife,

nice to meet you. and thank you for filling me in. I was driving myself a little nuts trying to foolow Brichard's last post. But it makes more sense now.

Will talk some more later,

G-day!

Coulie

AnnW

05-12-2001, 05:05 PM

Originally posted by coulie
AnnW,

Thanks for your clarification.
I think my point was so missed about "own your experience thing" that I find it amusing.

So where do you swim? Is it for fun or do you compete?

Do your kids swim?

Coulie

No, I got your point...but I think mine was missed! LOL

Our neighborhood has a community pool. I just hang out and read. LOL My kids are fish, have been swimming since birth and on our swim team since ages 4. DD is excited cause this year she will get to do all the strokes...breast, back, butterfly and free!

coulie

05-12-2001, 07:07 PM

AnnW,

Really? Do you think I missed your point? If I did, I am more than open to hearing you differently this time, sans MHO.

Coulie

AnnW

05-12-2001, 08:16 PM

Originally posted by coulie
AnnW,

Really? Do you think I missed your point? If I did, I am more than open to hearing you differently this time, sans MHO.

Coulie

I don't think I can...I am already bored with this..aren't you??? LOL

coulie

05-12-2001, 08:28 PM

yup....lets find something new to fight about...umm I mean debate.

coulie

AnnW

05-12-2001, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by coulie
yup....lets find something new to fight about...umm I mean debate.

coulie

ROFL!!!!

KathyT

05-14-2001, 12:30 PM

....I just read through this entire debate after it having been referred to in other posts and it has just now dawned on me that Amy and Amy/CO are 2 different people, lol! :banghead:

I know AnnW, serves me right for drive by posting/ reading, lol!

It just struck me as really funny, I couldn't make sense of the change of tone in Amy's posts.

Very interesting thread by the way, thanks to all of you who took part ;)

AnnW

05-14-2001, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by KathyT
....I just read through this entire debate after it having been referred to in other posts and it has just now dawned on me that Amy and Amy/CO are 2 different people, lol! :banghead:

I know AnnW, serves me right for drive by posting/ reading, lol!

It just struck me as really funny, I couldn't make sense of the change of tone in Amy's posts.

Very interesting thread by the way, thanks to all of you who took part ;)

ROFL!!! yep, that's what you get Kathy!!! Serves you right! :newwink:

Lynda/WA

05-15-2001, 05:00 PM

Update on the His Holiness the Dalai Lama visit - Most of what he spoke about to the school kids was peace. However there were reference to Buddhism and religion. Here are some examples from Monday's talk in Portland.

At one point, he suggested that the United States "should have more nuns and monks. That's one way to make contribution to population control, nonviolently," he said. "That's half-joke, half-serious."

During a brief question-and-answer session, one student asked if he ever had doubts that he was the chosen one.

The Dalai Lama told 8,000 high school students Monday that they don't have to be religious to lead purposeful lives and cultivate "basic human good qualities" such as tolerance, compassion and kindness.

"Even without religious faith, you can be a happy person. But without these (qualities), you will not be a happy person," said the Nobel Peace laureate and high lama of Tibetan Buddhism.

BTW - I have since learned that at least some of the schools studied Buddhism in the weeks prior to the visit.

Linda/NE

05-16-2001, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by Lynda/WA

At one point, he suggested that the United States "should have more nuns and monks. That's one way to make contribution to population control, nonviolently," he said. "That's half-joke, half-serious."

In a way that's similar to the logic behind encouraging abstinence rather than safe sex. I personally don't think it's a bad idea, but being a nun or monk is a calling. The person would have strongly feel that is what he/she should be following that path- it's not something people can be forced into.

Lynda/WA

05-16-2001, 03:48 PM

Linda/NE - I agree with you. I don't have any objection to the statement just the circumstances it was made in. I don't feel I should be paying taxes to have school children adviced to become monks and nuns. And yes I do pay taxes in a school district that sent kids to learn from the Dalai Lama. If this statement had been made at any of his other non-school talks here I wouldn't have cared at all. This was one of my worries about schools sending kids to his talk, that he wouldn't be able to seperate himself from his religious (spiritual) beliefs. You can't help but feel that by the public school system setting this up that the kids will feel it is an endorsement of his beliefs. An endorsement that is prohibited for any other religion. Can you visualize any public school system doing this for the pope - even if he planned on talking about peace?
BTW - the same day the public schools were sending kids to be taught by the Dalai Lama it was decided that the Ten Commandments couldn't be included in with other papers our founding fathers used as framework in setting up our government to be displayed in schools. The same schools that taught about Buddhism have to ignore that the Ten Commandments helped guide at least some of the founding fathers.

netmechwife

05-16-2001, 08:07 PM

Thank you for sharing more facts on the situation Linda:)

Laneysmom

06-01-2001, 02:05 PM

As a Christian, I believe in showing tolerance and love towards others as Jesus did when walked among men. He reached out to and lived among the dregs of societyl like Mary Magdelene as well as those like Nicodemus who were the cream of society. I am not a Christian because I am, or think I am, perfect. I am a Christian because I AM imperfect with a lot of weaknesses that go along with being human. I am incapable of the kind of love I believe Jesus has - "Agape" (perfect love). But, I have a living, evolving relationship with God and I strive each day to live in way that is pleasing to Him. This includes the tolerance of, but not necessarily the endorsement or support of, a variety of opinions - political, religious, etc.

My DD, also a Christian, attends public school and is exposed to a variety of lifestyles. That is why it is vitally important that my husband and I instill in her our family values and morals. It is not the school's responsibility to raise our DD with a sense of morality, etc. it is her father's and mine. We teach religion at home and we are regular church goers and serve in various capacities in our church. I send her to school to get an education and we help her with her education at home and are involved in school functions as well. I wouldn't want her bussed on school time using school funds to see Billy or Franklin Graham (or any Christian speaker), the Dali Lama, Rev. Moon or any other religious and/or "philosophical" leader. And yes, our DD is aware of other religious beliefs because not only have we taught her, but our family has friends who are Jewish, 7th Day Adv., Jehovah Witness, agnostic, etc. She must know why she professes certain beliefs because ignorance breeds doubt and confusion.

Perhaps there is room for a bit more tolerance on this forum and less righteous (or unrighteous?) indignation. So, blast me now...or maybe not :)