Is RF officially ramsacked by the secular movement?

[osgart]

I don't know what you're taking about. . . You make it sound incredibly obvious that religion is "under attack" but I don't know what that means.

Is the attack successful, at least? How would you know?

Is it possible that what you perceive as attacks are actually just other people speaking their minds too?

The motive is clear in the comments of many, they seek to end religious freedom.

And they are entitled to speak their minds that way too.

But religious people are entitled to their religion.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

The motive is clear in the comments of many, they seek to end religious freedom.

And they are entitled to speak their minds that way too.

But religious people are entitled to their religion.

You keep speaking in vague generalities as if everyone who disagrees with religion is somehow united, and specifically want to take religion away from people.

Can you at least point to a few examples of this somewhere to demonstrate you aren't incredibly paranoid?

You. . . don't design wedding cakes for a living, do you?

 

[osgart]

You keep speaking in vague generalities as if everyone who disagrees with religion is somehow united, and specifically want to take religion away from people.

Can you at least point to a few examples of this somewhere to demonstrate you aren't incredibly paranoid?

You. . . don't design wedding cakes for a living, do you?

Everybody is way, way, way too large a generalization. The movement is significant enough to be called an anti religious movement. No paranoia whatsoever.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Everybody is way, way, way too large a generalization. The movement is significant enough to be called an anti religious movement. No paranoia whatsoever.

What about Sam Harris' argument here (from 2005!) do you have trouble with? What makes this speech an anti-religious movement?

What legal and cultural actions have taken place based on this speech that have specially curtailed your religious freedoms?

 

[Enoch07]

Can you at least point to a few examples of this somewhere to demonstrate you aren't incredibly paranoid?

A few threads I submit as evidence.

Let's Get Real, Mosquitos, What is the point in saying Grace, Religious Fervour or Mental Illness (Osgart cited that one already), Christianity has had no effect whatsoever on human morality. This is just a few from the past day or two. There is too many to list if I go back further.

 

[osgart]

What about Sam Harris' argument here (from 2005!) do you have trouble with? What makes this speech an anti-religious movement?

What legal and cultural actions have taken place based on this speech that have specially curtailed your religious freedoms?

Nothing yet! But the motive to end religious faith is a movement that exists. That's all it is!

Make no mistake about it, how many you tube videos do I need to pull up.

It's obvious too.

 

[Enoch07]

What about Sam Harris' argument here (from 2005!) do you have trouble with? What makes this speech an anti-religious movement?

This

That tells you all you need to know about Sam Harris there.

 

[Lyndon]

It seems the anti religious crowd first line of defense for religious attacks is denial, in that they have something in common with Trump!!

 

[Buddha Dharma]

And what is the Dharma? I am a believer in virtue, and vitalism. I've heard the word before but I never sought it out.

The Dharma refers to both the order/nature of the cosmos (Ultimate Reality), and in a Buddhist context usually means the Buddha's teaching. However, I would note the Buddha likely called his teaching Dharma because he claimed to understand the cosmos and the unconstructed. He would have been working with his culture's idea of the term. Who knows though? Maybe I'm inclined to think that because I accept a nature underlying Dharma. Some Buddhists might well say there is nothing to get. Raises the question though of why the Buddha would use Dharma if he meant nihilism.

 

[Curious George]

It seems the anti religious crowd first line of defense for religious attacks is denial, in that they have something in common with Trump!!

I am not sure we have too many anti-religious people on RF. There are probably couple but do you believe there is an abundance?

 

[osgart]

The Dharma refers to both the order/nature of the cosmos (Ultimate Reality), and in a Buddhist context usually means the Buddha's teaching. However, I would note the Buddha likely called his teaching Dharma because he claimed to understand the cosmos and the unconstructed. He would have been working with his culture's idea of the term. Who knows though? Maybe I'm inclined to think that because I accept a nature underlying Dharma. Some Buddhists might well say there is nothing to get. Raises the question though of why the Buddha would use Dharma if he meant nihilism.

You've heard of entropy, how the universe increases from order to disorder.

Now does the Dharma underly the universe? Where does karma fit in? And what is meant by unconstructed?

I apologize, I'm full of questions.

Have you heard of the akashic field?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

You've heard of entropy, how the universe increases from order to disorder.

Now does the Dharma underly the universe? Where does karma fit in? And what is meant by unconstructed?

I apologize, I'm full of questions.

Have you heard of the akashic field?

Rather the Dharma underlies the universe may be the wrong thing to ask, as I understand the term initially refers to what the universe IS.

Karma is often misunderstood by westerners, and is really more or less accepting that effect follows from cause. The misunderstanding though is some westerners think it's a reaping what you sow kind of effect. Really it's more like making a ripple. There's no predicting how your generated karma may effect anyone or anything.

By unconstructed, Buddhists mean the totally undefinable and unspeakable nature of Nirvana, which is why you won't see me say much of anything about the Ultimate Reality I believe in.

The universe's entropy was acknowledged by the Buddha. That everything in the material world is marked with anicca, that is- form objects are temporary, change, and decay. See three marks of existence: anicca, dukkha, and anatta.

Better ask a Hindu about Akashic Field lol

 

[Buddha Dharma]

@osgart while I'm being informative, I'll mention one more thing because I like to be accurate and precise. When the Buddha said Anatta or Anatman, he wasn't denying a real self outright. He was denying anything in the world of forms constitutes a real self- like the constructed ego, sensations, and so forth. He was trying to get people away from all the conjecture that goes with soul concepts.

The Buddhas stem from a real self, or they wouldn't still act in the world, having long passed into Nirvana. In liturgy, we Buddhists ask them to act because they pity sentient beings.

Some traditional Mahayana thought places the Buddhas as true forms of reality. I could not explain this mystery to you though because there is no explanation in human speech.

 

[osgart]

@osgart while I'm being informative, I'll mention one more thing because I like to be accurate and precise. When the Buddha said Anatta or Anatman, he wasn't denying a real self outright. He was denying anything in the world of forms constitutes a real self- like the constructed ego, sensations, and so forth.

The Buddhas stem from a real self, or they wouldn't still act in the world, having long passed into Nirvana. In liturgy, we Buddhists ask them to act because they pity sentient beings.

Some traditional Mahayana thought places the Buddhas as true forms of reality. I could not explain this mystery to you though because there is no explanation in human speech.

Why would you pity sentience? I consider sentience to be a joy. My suffering comes from my body.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Why would you pity sentience? I consider sentience to be a joy. My suffering comes from my body.

What I mean is they pity the suffering of sentient beings. That is what I meant. The Buddha taught out of nothing other than the pure intent to alleviate suffering. This is why we in Mahayana say this is the best motivation for practice. It was the Buddha's motivation to teach.

 

[Kapalika]

I just came on to PM someone and check DIRS real quick for some lurking but saw this on the front page.

But my answer is "Yes".

It seems half the members here are not religious at all and atheists. A reason some of my friends stopped posting here is because it seems this forum has largely become a place for atheists to try to "disprove" religion. It wasn't always like this, or so I like to think. Generally the quality of posting has went down and some tie this to the direction the site took some time back and what kind of people it now attracts.

In any case I don't really come here to debate. Honestly I wish you could customize the front page to display only certain things ect. I only really come for DIRs and discussions and not as much as I used to. Sometimes a debate catches my eye but I find people don't usually like to give other viewpoints a fair consideration so I find it generally moot.

 

[Lyndon]

I am not sure we have too many anti-religious people on RF. There are probably couple but do you believe there is an abundance?

certainly the majority!!

 

[Curious George]

certainly the majority!!

You believe the majority of people on RF are anti-religious? Why do you believe that?

 

[Lyndon]

You believe the majority of people on RF are anti-religious? Why do you believe that?

Because of what they say!!

 

[Kuzcotopia]

A few threads I submit as evidence.

Let's Get Real, Mosquitos, What is the point in saying Grace, Religious Fervour or Mental Illness (Osgart cited that one already), Christianity has had no effect whatsoever on human morality. This is just a few from the past day or two. There is too many to list if I go back further.

Again, is there a difference between stating opinions about religion and advocating the removal of religious rights?

What rights have been taken away in the practice of your religion?