Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Christians being forced into converting to Buddhism in Myanmar

ClayTheScribeClayTheScribe Veteran
edited September 2012 in Buddhism Today
http://tribune.com.pk/story/431776/myanmar-christians-forced-to-convert-to-buddhism-rights-group/

This is pretty awful and goes against everything I stand for as a Buddhist. The Buddha would be against his ways being forced onto others. Buddhism is a gift, not a mandatory practice. I hope the Dalai Lama speaks out against this. This cannot stand. But maybe someone else can give me some more context here?
«1

Comments

  • That doesn't sound right, the opposite sounds more likely to be true. I'ma go read this story.....
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    This story is also at this site: http://global.christianpost.com/news/christian-students-in-myanmar-forced-to-shave-heads-convert-to-buddhism-81211/

    I think that if it's true, it's detestable and should be stopped!

    "These schools are designed to facilitate a forced assimilation policy under the guise of development." -- This seems familiar. The US military is basically a Christian organization as well, right down to telling you that the only proper position for sex is the missionary position, and you can get court marshaled otherwise.
  • But see Christianity is all about conversion so while it violates the First Amendment, at least within their own religion it makes sense and they can get away with it. Buddhism is NOT about conversion.
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    That's why I thought it was backwards. People being converted to Christianity has been a historical occurrence that most people have heard about, but the opposite... I've never heard of anyone being force-converted to Buddhism. That makes me sad not only for the people being converted, but also for "Buddhism", because now we can't say something like this has never happened in regards to Buddhism.
  • Ignorant/unconscious behaviour is in all of us, just as awakening is in all of us. But I don't know how anyone can be "forced" into loving kindness. Shaving heads is one thing, enlightenment another.
  • They're not trying to force them into loving kindness because forcing is an aggressive, not loving or kind act. They, like so many others, are trying to force people into their warped world view toward who knows what ends. What's worse is they can try to justify it by saying Buddhism is not about conversion and we're only trying to to help them. But Buddhism is about saving and helping oneself, not trying to "save" others from themselves. Hardly ever works. Like I said, I hope HHDL catches wind of this and says something, but he usually disappoints me when it comes to coming out against poor practices in Buddhism like monks lighting themselves on fire ::facepalm::
    Jeffrey
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    It's very simple.
    The people forcing the conversions, are not 'Buddhist' by nature, only by Name.
    CloudClayTheScribeMaryAnnebuddhakai
  • They're not trying to force them into loving kindness because forcing is an aggressive, not loving or kind act. They, like so many others, are trying to force people into their warped world view toward who knows what ends. What's worse is they can try to justify it by saying Buddhism is not about conversion and we're only trying to to help them. But Buddhism is about saving and helping oneself, not trying to "save" others from themselves. Hardly ever works. Like I said, I hope HHDL catches wind of this and says something, but he usually disappoints me when it comes to coming out against poor practices in Buddhism like monks lighting themselves on fire ::facepalm::

    The point I was making was the same as yours, that true Buddhism resides in the heart and can't be forced on anyone.
    CloudClayTheScribe
  • This is a surprise twist. Normally, it is the other way round. Perhaps, Christianity does it better. They built schools where they can preach and give away goodies. In the history of Asia, there are people who are called rice Christians, poor people normally who get free rice and convert as a result.Forcing is never its cup of tea, I am sure.
  • I was hoping one of our members lived or has lived in Burma/Myanmar and can shed some light onto what's going on because that article was brief.
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    @ClayTheScribe, Well you can find some more information on it. The link I posted is slightly different content than the one you did, and I think there were more... they're from different news sources. Google is your friend. :) Just Google "christians forced convert buddhism". Some have tiny little blurbs, some have more information. Also it seems this story is rather new, so I bet more information will be forthcoming before long (and other sources will get ahold of it and post their own slant).

    This one is completely different than the others, much more information: http://www.dvb.no/news/christians-face-systematic-discrimination-in-chin-state/23620
    (Perhaps all of the others are distilled versions of this one!)
  • I'm tired and lazy, Cloud, bring the information to me! ;-P
    BhanteLucky
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    Christians face systematic discrimination in Chin state
    By HANNA HINDSTROM
    Published: 5 September 2012, DVB [Democratic Voice of Burma]

    Christians in Chin state face systematic religious discrimination at the hands of the Burmese government and are often forced to convert to Buddhism, a new report by the Chin Human Rights Organization (CHRO) has revealed.

    CHRO accuses the nominally-civilian government of pushing ahead with the military policy of “Burmanisation” in ethnic minority areas, resulting in widespread human rights abuses including violations of religious freedom, forced labour, torture, and sexual violence.

    The report, based on 100 in-depth interviews over the past two years, documents numerous cases where the state has destroyed crosses or denied Christians the right to worship through arbitrary regulations, threats and violence. Many civilians complain of being forced to build pagodas or hand over their land to make way for Buddhist constructions.

    “President Thein Sein’s government claims that religious freedom is protected by law but in reality Buddhism is treated as the de-facto state religion,” said CHRO Program Director Salai Ling. “The discriminatory state institutions and ministries of previous military regimes continue to operate in the same way today. Few reforms have reached Chin state.”

    The report criticises the government’s Border Areas National Races Youth Development Training Schools (known locally as Na Ta La), where Christian students are offered a more affordable education, but are regularly coerced or threatened into converting to Buddhism. Some students even report being forced to shave their heads and wear monks’ or nuns’ robes.

    “If you don’t want to be a monk, you must join the military,” the headmaster of a Na Ta La school told students in 2010, according to the report.

    Buddhist monks are reported to be working together with the Ministry of Religious Affairs in recruiting Na Ta La students, as well as tracking down those who have fled from the schools.

    “Local people tell us that some of these monks they believe to be military agents, and there certainly seems to be a very close relationship between monks and the military in Chin state over the years, with the military exacting forced labour to build pagoda monasteries and more recently with regard to these schools,” CHRO Advocacy Director, Rachel Fleming told DVB.

    A 20-year old Chin woman who ran away from one such school in May 2011 told CHRO, “The monks from the school came there with soldiers from Light Infantry Battalion 274, looking for me. They told me, ‘You have to come back to the school or else you will be forced to join the army.’ ”

    “The schools appear to offer a way out of poverty but there is a high price to pay for Chin students,” said Fleming. “They are given a stark choice between abandoning their identity and converting to Buddhism, or joining the military to comply with the authorities’ vision of a ‘patriotic citizen’. ”

    In March, a US government report listed Burma as among the world’s worst countries for religious freedom, citing incidents of bibles being burnt in predominantly Christian territories.

    “One of the most under-reported aspects of Burma’s human rights record has been the regime’s discrimination and persecution of religious minorities and violations of religious freedom,” said Benedict Rogers, East Asia Team Leader, Christian Solidarity Worldwide.

    The recent sectarian clashes in Arakan state has shed a light on the persecution of the Muslim Rohingya minority, who are denied the right to citizenship even though many have lived in Burma for generations.

    Large swathes of Burmese monks have lent backing to the government’s policy, with hundreds of them pouring onto the streets of Mandalay over the past few days calling for the Rohingya to be expelled from Burma.

    “It was very sad to see such kind of actions taken by the monks who have been heavily oppressed and killed in many cases in 2007 during Saffron Revolution,” Soe Aung, a spokesman for Forum for Democracy in Burma, told the Voice of America.

    Although the President recently established a 27-member commission to investigate the unrest in Arakan state, CHRO insists that an international mechanism will be necessary to address union-wide grievances.

    “As far as we can see there haven’t been enough reforms of key state institutions that would guarantee a fully independent impartial investigation,” said Fleming. “What we’re calling for is an international investigation to the human rights situation throughout Burma and particularly in ethnic areas.”

    http://www.dvb.no/news/christians-face-systematic-discrimination-in-chin-state/23620
  • @ClayTheScribe, How's that? :D
    ClayTheScribe
  • BhanteLuckyBhanteLucky Alternative lifestyle person in the South Island of New Zealand New Zealand Veteran
    Horrible, ignorant people. It makes me ashamed to be "Buddhist", and only gives my Christian acquaintances ammunition to hassle me.

    Unfortunately this kind of thing has been going on in Burma for decades, but it is only now that the news is getting out, as journalism becomes more free as the dictatorship relaxes its grip.
  • I'm not saying I agree with the tactics (because I don't) and I'm not saying I agree with mandatory service in any military, (I'm not sure how I stand on that, because a few countries do it, successfully) ...
    but I can tell you that if it was America and suddenly, we all woke up and realized WE had been over-run, overtaken, overwhelmed, -- whichever word you choose -- by say, Islam, you can bet your bottom dollar there would be a HUGE movement to eradicate that religion and "restore our cultural roots" which most in America believe would/should be Christianity. Don't kid yourself and think otherwise.

    It has already been happening in our political background for the last 20-30 years. There is an entire, well funded, much supported agenda behind closed doors (and sometimes not behind closed doors at all!) to "Re-Christianize America". The T-baggers and other extreme-Right-Wingers are (partly) a result of that....

    I didn't read the entire link yet, but I will - once I wake up fully and have my morning coffee jolt ;) . Christianity historically has been a world 'invader'.... is it really 'wrong' for people to sooner or later fight back and try to restore themselves and their religious cultures?
    I'm wondering if there isn't a decent motivation going on here, but perhaps it's being carried out in a less than ideal (or really bad?) way; or being reported with a particularly negative slant.



  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    @MaryAnne, I think you'll want to read the article ASAP, because your comments don't coincide with what's going on at all, and I don't think you wanna be mistaken for supporting what's going on over there. ;)
  • “It was very sad to see such kind of actions taken by the monks who have been heavily oppressed and killed in many cases in 2007 during Saffron Revolution,” Soe Aung, a spokesman for Forum for Democracy in Burma, told the Voice of America.
    It is a persistent fallacy to conflate victimhood with morality. When someone is the victim of a crime, they are 'in the right' so to speak, and that rightness sticks to them and becomes an expectation.

    We may think 'but haven't they learned anything from their treatment?'. Some people do learn compassion from adversity, but if the trauma isn't dealt with, the ego may learn to defend its perceived weakness by appropriating and projecting power, even if this means victimising others.
  • shanyinshanyin Novice Yogin Sault Ontario Veteran
    I appreciate your point.
  • I've read the news article. Absolutely, these are horrible acts of government oppression and civil rights violations (assuming of course they believe in 'civil rights').
    But let's not get confused... these are not Buddhists or Buddhist monks doing this to Burma's Christians; it's the Government.

    Even in the article they are more than a little suspicious that the monks involved in this crap are most likely government 'agents' - and not monks at all.

    So I wouldn't be too quick to 'condemn' Burmese Buddhists as horrible examples of Buddhism -- at least not based on this. The common Buddhist man or woman obviously has little power against such a government.
    So I say don't fall for the blame game when it comes to "Look what those Buddhists are doing!" It's the intrusive government oppressing and disrespecting the minority (Christian) people, not other Buddhists.

    I am also not that shocked by this discrimination and bigotry.
    There is plenty of this kind of thing all over the world, in most cultures and in all levels of government.
    I was a Pagan for about 35 years right here, in the USA... Land of the Free? Hmmm.
    On many occasions I felt the sting of discrimination.
    I got spit on, my car was vandalized, my house was a popular target for mischief at times, I was told not to discuss my religion on the job, nor to wear any sort of "pagan jewelry" or tattoos where they could be seen.
    I have been yelled at in public and once a gas station attendant refused to serve me because he saw a Pagan bumper sticker on my car.
    I was even FIRED from a job because of being a Pagan. (I couldn't prove it, so no lawsuit for me).

    What's the difference between USA and Burma?
    Well, the level of actual violence is one thing - Burma is way ahead on that one. And the fact that here, Christians were the bigots and oppressors, but in Burma they are the minority/oppressed.
    Other than that, not much difference when it comes to religious bigotry.
    This is why it is exceedingly important to keep ALL religion out of our laws and governments. This is why the USA is heading down a slippery slope.... with all this "We're a Christian Nation" BS.

    No, I'm really not that shocked.

  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    I agree, religion in government is a bad mix, especially when the people of that culture/nation/whatever are of varied religions (including non-religion). People being hateful of religions other than their own is one thing, and only those people can be blamed, but the government getting involved in bigotry or discrimination (other than to stop it) is just wrong.
    MaryAnne
  • MaryAnne

    Hmmmm...
    Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
    King James Bible, Exodus 22:18

    How can a Christian be a Christian WITHOUT being hostile to Wiccans?

    It's written in their holy book. All religions have stuff like this to some extent. It's stupid, but we tolerate religions because paradoxically, they can lead people beyond this sectarian bullshit.

    You can't be truly religious without overcoming your own religion, Buddhism included.



  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    @PrairieGhost, That's when they believed there were real witches that had demonic magical powers... quite different from a Wiccan, and everyone knows it. Man wrote the Bible and obviously there's superstition mixed in to an extent; how much varies depending on your particular beliefs. ;) The thing about witches isn't a Commandment or anything. There are a ton of things in the Bible that people don't take seriously anymore. Not following everything in the Bible does not make a Christian not a Christian, just like not following everything in the Buddhist scriptures does not make a Buddhist not a Buddhist.
    vinlyn
  • Yeah, but many Wiccans do say they have magic powers. Some perform animal sacrifices.
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    So do Voodoo peeps. Do you honestly think people were discriminating because the Bible has that line about witches? Is a Pagan the same as a witch or Wiccan? People will discriminate against anything that's other than their own belief system... the more different it is, the less tolerant they are of it. Times have changed somewhat in regards to that, it used to be much worse in America than it is now.
  • Ok, there are indeed many paths up the mountain, but honestly, some paths are in conflict with others. That doesn't mean either of them is right or wrong.
  • It's not so much about religion as conformity. Let's face it, governments will always oppress minorities for the simple reason non-conformists are distrusted and seen as potentially subversive. We don't have to look far to see this kind of bigotry.
    MaryAnne
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    @PrairieGhost, That's exactly why government should be secular, not based on a religion. :D People of the various religious groups may be conflicted, but the government should not be a source of religious oppression. Separation of Church and State is one of the best things that's ever happened for America, IMO.
    MaryAnne
  • Cloud...

    Secular? Which god is that?

    What is his dogma and what must one sacrifice to live in his shadow?

    You are right of course, but not in any final sense.
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited September 2012
    If you're trying to be funny it's not working. ;) I mean just what I said... government should be non-religious, which is exactly what Separation of Church and State accomplishes (though there are still problems I think). Now if Myanmar had something like that, maybe this issue of Christians being forced to convert to Buddhism wouldn't have arisen.

    I think we're getting off-track and distracting from the point of the thread anyway, so I'll take my leave of the conversation.
  • No, no, I wasn't. I don't mean to start an argument.

    As I said, you are correct, but only in a relative sense. Secular is another world view, like the domain of a god, and all the gods have clay feet.
  • Yeah, but many Wiccans do say they have magic powers. Some perform animal sacrifices.

    Just in case you weren't being funny/sarcastic, Wiccans never have performed animal sacrifices... never. Can't speak for all the (literally) hundred different Pagan traditions or sects, but Wiccans - and several other pagan traditions- I know a lot about. :)

    As for magic powers- well that's a whole other topic of discussion. But yes, many if not most Wiccans do magic rites and rituals. Demonic or connected with the "devil"? Nope. Wiccans don't have a devil figure in their belief system. That's a Judaeo-Christian thing.



  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran

    But see Christianity is all about conversion so while it violates the First Amendment, at least within their own religion it makes sense and they can get away with it. Buddhism is NOT about conversion.

    The First Amendment has nothing to do with something happening in Burma.

    Additionally, the concept of conversion is not against the First Amendment. It states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Conversion in the U.S. is not dictated by the government, and, coincidentally, I have never seen anyone in the U.S. forcibly converted. It's no more forced than when a salesman gives you a sales pitch in Best Buy.

    While I agree that what's happening in Burma is wrong, it has nothing to do with the First Amendment.

    RebeccaS
  • MaryAnne

    Hmmmm...

    Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
    King James Bible, Exodus 22:18

    How can a Christian be a Christian WITHOUT being hostile to Wiccans?

    It's written in their holy book. All religions have stuff like this to some extent. It's stupid, but we tolerate religions because paradoxically, they can lead people beyond this sectarian bullshit.

    You can't be truly religious without overcoming your own religion, Buddhism included.



    I think Cloud answered that question pretty well. You can leave behind the negative, out-dated bigotry and ignorance of ANY religion, accentuating the better, positive, nurturing and compassionate parts instead... and still be of that religion.

    Actually, if you think about it, that should be the DUTY of every person who claims any religion as their own. That's what makes religions Alive and Evolved.

  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Cloud said:

    @PrairieGhost, That's exactly why government should be secular, not based on a religion. :D People of the various religious groups may be conflicted, but the government should not be a source of religious oppression. Separation of Church and State is one of the best things that's ever happened for America, IMO.

    While I agree in principle that the separation of church and state is most desirable, I also believe that it should not be up to Westerners to tell people in other parts of the world how they should design their government. For example, there's tons wrong with the government structure in Thailand...and there's tons wrong with the government in the United States.

    MaryAnne
  • The secular warcry is often cast as: 'We are tolerant of everything but intolerance.'

    Except it isn't true. It can't be true, because at some point, a secular (meaning based on the sanctity of economic transactions, because outside religion there is currently no other view which maintains itself to be comprehensive) society has to make value decisions affecting the lives of its citizens, and it can't do that in a tolerant, inclusive way. One decision has to be made.

    So if Buddhists say they believe desire causes suffering, they will be ignored by the advertising standards agency. Actually Christians have a version of this too. And Muslims, and Jews and Hindus and Rastafarians and so on. In actual fact, most people believe that money is an inadequate focal point to base society and government on.

    Interestingly, we are all ignored. Those who think we benefit from the current system (and this is most of us, not just the 1 percent, so we can see that the conflict is internal, not just based on partisan divisions within society) are completely intolerant of our beliefs, and if we express them, e.g. by nonpayment of taxes, non recognition of property, public protests etc, we will find out just how intolerant our secular gods are.

    Our secular government is useful at present, for prosperity and plurality. It's better than most recent alternatives have been. But, though this is not easy to see because we were born into this society, we should not forget that it asks for a lot from us in return, and ultimately proves itself intolerant of our deepest nature.
  • Are you sure it's not the old regime trying to create a problem? I suggest the same, lets read the rest of the story as it comes.
  • PrairieGhostPrairieGhost Veteran
    edited September 2012
    MaryAnne:
    You can leave behind the negative, out-dated bigotry and ignorance of ANY religion, accentuating the better, positive, nurturing and compassionate parts instead...
    Why not just leave the negative out-dated bigotry and ignorance full stop?

    If I read the comment the Bible made on witches, well to be frank, you can forget about me becoming Christian.

    If I hadn't wanted enlightenment, and therefore been selfish, wanting what it offered, I'd have dismissed Buddhism long ago for incorporating silly stuff.

    Learn from religions, sure, but identify with them to the point where you feel you have to defend them? Accentuate their positive side? Why not just see the negatives for what they are?

    Rather than clinging for centuries to the No True Scotsman fallacy.

    Look, the reason we cling to religions, economic theories, humanist ideals, the scientific method, all systems of belief, long after the flaws are seen, is not that we're stupid or bad, it's that we're scared, because we think we don't have anything else. Only we're wrong, fortunately.

  • SileSile Veteran
    edited September 2012
    Please keep in mind that anything coming from the .pk domain has to be taken with large vats of salt until checking it out through other sources. Anyone can generate "news" these days; doesn't make it so.
    RebeccaSpoptartMaryAnne
  • PrairieGhostPrairieGhost Veteran
    edited September 2012
    MaryAnne:
    Just in case you weren't being funny/sarcastic, Wiccans never have performed animal sacrifices... never.
    Public spokespeople (appointed by whom?) for Wicca condemn animal sacrifice in the same way as the Anglican Church condemns homophobia.
    But yes, many if not most Wiccans do magic rites and rituals.
    Which Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism for that matter expressly forbid, and penalties, in this world, have been and are applied. People are put to death for doing those rituals: India, Pakistan, parts of Africa... have no enemy in your heart but know your enemy all the same.
    Wiccans don't have a devil figure in their belief system. That's a Judaeo-Christian thing.
    The Horned Consort of the Goddess is based on Pan, whose likeness was used by the Christians as the Devil. The idea being our higher natures conquering our lower, animal natures. Too often this means head conquering heart. Of course heart conquering head is just as bad.

    I'm sorry, I'm so off topic.
  • PrairieGhostPrairieGhost Veteran
    edited September 2012
    Cloud:
    That's exactly why government should be secular, not based on a religion. People of the various religious groups may be conflicted, but the government should not be a source of religious oppression. Separation of Church and State is one of the best things that's ever happened for America, IMO.
    Just to condense, America only tolerates various religions because the people who are making a lot of money don't think religions are particularly important in terms of their ability to make more money. Buddhism is tolerated because it's economically irrelevant. Actually, even Christianity, for all the apparent power of the block vote, is treated in exactly the same way.

    In Myanmar, the powers that be DO think religions are important in terms of their ability to hold onto power. They are probably correct to some extent. Ironically, if Christianity becomes popular, secularism (western style capitalism) gains a foothold in the country.
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran

    Cloud:

    Just to condense, America only tolerates various religions because the people who are making a lot of money don't think religions are particularly important in terms of their ability to make more money. Buddhism is tolerated because it's economically irrelevant. Actually, even Christianity, for all the apparent power of the bloc vote, is treated in exactly the same way.

    In Myanmar, the powers that be DO think religions are important in terms of their ability to hold onto power. They are probably correct to some extent. Ironically, if Christianity becomes popular, secularism (western style capitalism) gains a foothold in the country.

    In terms of America, I think we are learning that block voting by religion is a lot less potent than previously thought. This year there is a major split in the Catholic vote. The evangelical Christian bloc is thought to me moving toward a Mormon (although just last evening I was listening to a report about how many Mormons are not voting for Romney). I think that overall the influence of religious-based voting in the U.S. is diminishing as formal religion is being increasingly replaced by personal religion.

    In terms of Christianity fostering western style capitalism...live in Thailand for a while...capitalism is alive and well and thriving, and it has nothing to do with Chrstianity.

  • Vinlyn
    In terms of Christianity fostering western style capitalism...live in Thailand for a while...capitalism is alive and well and thriving, and it has nothing to do with Chrstianity.
    Yes, that was an overstretch. I do think that Christianity could be perceived to be potentially destructive to the balance of power and culture in Myanmar, and identified with western interests/culture.
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Living and spending time in Thailand over many years made me take a different view of "state religions". For all intents and purposes, Buddhism is the state religion there. The state regulates Buddhism and Buddhism is visibly involved in government on a daily basis.

    At the same time there is significant religious freedom. The Sikh population in Bangkok (for example) is very obvious in Bangkok, and I happened to know some Sikhs while living there, and they felt relatively comfortable with how things are. You will hear quite a different story from the Muslims, particularly from those in the Deep South (particularly the southern 3 provinces of Pattani, Narithawat, and Yala. But I sometimes think that a large part of that is the conundrum of we want to be apart because we are different...and damn you for treating us as apart and different. It is not dissimilar to what I experienced with my adopted son's friends (he is Muslim from Pakistan), who complained that Americans don't understand Muslims, but were not at all welcoming when Americans would want to learn about their somewhat closed culture.

    It has been a part of Thai political culture since the days of King Chulalongkorn around the turn of the century to look at the outlying provinces as being remote (not that they really are in modern times), as a place to "take" economic wealth from (tin and rubber, for example, in the South), and as areas where activity was often "suspicious" (as seen with Hilltribes in the north, the more havily Lao-culture of Issan, and the Muslims in the South. Even during the mid-1960s when the CPT (Thai communists) were active, it was not very clear that they were actually communists in terms of philosophy, as much as they were unhappy with their lot in Thai life.
    PrairieGhostSile
  • vinlyn
    we want to be apart because we are different...and damn you for treating us as apart and different.
    Thumbs up.
    Even during the mid-1960s when the CPT (Thai communists) were active, it was not very clear that they were actually communists in terms of philosophy, as much as they were unhappy with their lot in Thai life.
    Yes. As in a rugby scrum, a stance is irrelevant unless it is bracing an opposing stance.

    Combine this with governments consisting of and/or working for the individuals in society who enjoy the fruits of the status quo, the practical reasons for intolerance become clearer.

  • MaryAnneMaryAnne Veteran
    edited September 2012

    MaryAnne:

    Just in case you weren't being funny/sarcastic, Wiccans never have performed animal sacrifices... never.
    Public spokespeople (appointed by whom?) for Wicca condemn animal sacrifice in the same way as the Anglican Church condemns homophobia.

    I'm not sure what you mean by that... are you saying that Public "PR" for Wicca spins things one way, but in actuality things are another?
    Are you implying that animal sacrifice does go on (in Wicca) but it's kept on the down low for PR reasons?

    Because if that IS what you are saying... you are absolutely wrong. The Wiccan Rede (which is the Wiccan equivalent to the precepts of Buddhism) specifically states - loud and clear - Do No Harm.
    If you meet, read about or hear of a "Wiccan" who harms animals/kills animals in rituals, believe me, they are NOT Wiccan, no matter what they claim.

    But yes, many if not most Wiccans do magic rites and rituals.
    Which Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism for that matter expressly forbid, and penalties, in this world, have been and are applied. People are put to death for doing those rituals: India, Pakistan, parts of Africa... have no enemy in your heart but know your enemy all the same.

    Buddhism is against personal spiritual rites or rituals? Because there sure are plenty of rites and rituals, demons and Devas and all sorts of religious observances in Buddhism, and every single other religion you just mentioned. The Christian mass is one hellova ritual show every week. The Jews have ritual meals, candle lightings, death rites, etc. All religions do.
    But you are correct, indigenous (pagan) religions are not tolerated well once Christianity has invaded and become the majority religion in many countries. Look how Native Americans were/are treated once Christian settlers took over their land and built the "White-Euro-Christian USA" around them.

    Again, I don't know if you are just adding to my comments - or somehow contradicting them? I'm confused...
    Wiccans don't have a devil figure in their belief system. That's a Judaeo-Christian thing.
    The Horned Consort of the Goddess is based on Pan, whose likeness was used by the Christians as the Devil. The idea being our higher natures conquering our lower, animal natures. Too often this means head conquering heart. Of course heart conquering head is just as bad.

    Just because the Christians stole a Pagan God Figure and spun him into the Devil, does not in turn make Pagans "Devil Worshippers".
    Pagans do not see him as the classic Christian "devil" and never did.

    Besides, wasnt the Christian Devil an angel that challenged God and was cast out of heaven?
    Yeah, not exactly the same thing.... ;)



  • Mods, if you could split this, it'd be cool.

    MaryAnne:
    Pagans do not see him as the classic Christian "devil" and never did.
    So you mean he is the same guy but you don't think he's bad?
    I'm not sure what you mean by that... are you saying that Public "PR" for Wicca spins things one way, but in actuality things are another?
    That would be a bit strong. I'm saying that Wicca spokespeople wish to distance themselves from the dark side of some pagan faiths, but that Wicca spokespeople actually have no say in what Wicca practitioners actually do, and some Wiccans do perform animal sacrifice.

    I googled and came up with this site, where some clearly have the view that animal sacrifice can be part of Wicca. You can say they aren't Wiccans but who decides?

    http://www.wiccantogether.com/forum/topics/the-argument-for-animal
    Besides, wasnt the Christian Devil an angel that challenged God and was cast out of heaven?
    Much, much too complicated to get into the theology of that one... the Devil isn't defined very well in the New or Old Testament. The fallen angel thing is medieval.
    Buddhism is against personal spiritual rites or rituals? Because there sure are plenty of rites and rituals, demons and Devas and all sorts of religious observances in Buddhism, and every single other religion you just mentioned.
    Cognitive dissonance.

    Ok, what the religions tend to ban is asking spirits for stuff or information. Because it binds one to samsara. Wicca does have a lot of that compared to other religions.
  • The 2nd Book of Enoch, also called the Slavonic Book of Enoch, contains references to a Watcher Grigori called Satanael.[8] It is a pseudepigraphic text of an uncertain date and unknown authorship. The text describes Satanael as being the prince of the Grigori who was cast out of heaven[9] and an evil spirit who knew the difference between what was "righteous" and "sinful".[10] A similar story is found in the book of 1 Enoch; however, in that book, the leader of the Grigori is called Semjâzâ.
    In the apocryphal literature, Satan rules over a host of angels.[11] Mastema, who induced God to test Abraham through the sacrifice of Isaac, is identical with Satan in both name and nature.[12]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil

    Apologies, it's classical, not medieval, but it was popularised in the medieval period.
  • "PrairieGhost" Said:

    The secular war cry is often cast as: 'We are tolerant of everything but intolerance.'

    Except it isn't true. It can't be true, because at some point, a secular (meaning based on the sanctity of economic transactions, because outside religion there is currently no other view which maintains itself to be comprehensive) society has to make value decisions affecting the lives of its citizens, and it can't do that in a tolerant, inclusive way. One decision has to be made.

    So if Buddhists say they believe desire causes suffering, they will be ignored by the advertising standards agency. Actually Christians have a version of this too. And Muslims, and Jews and Hindus and Rastafarians and so on. In actual fact, most people believe that money is an inadequate focal point to base society and government on.

    Interestingly, we are all ignored. Those who think we benefit from the current system (and this is most of us, not just the 1 percent, so we can see that the conflict is internal, not just based on partisan divisions within society) are completely intolerant of our beliefs, and if we express them, e.g. by nonpayment of taxes, non recognition of property, public protests etc, we will find out just how intolerant our secular gods are.

    Our secular government is useful at present, for prosperity and plurality. It's better than most recent alternatives have been. But, though this is not easy to see because we were born into this society, we should not forget that it asks for a lot from us in return, and ultimately proves itself intolerant of our deepest nature.

    **************************************************************

    I have to completely disagree with your definition of 'secular' -- especially pertaining to government.


    Secular;   adjective

    1. of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests.
    2. not pertaining to or connected with religion ( opposed to sacred): secular music.
    3. (of education, a school, etc.) concerned with nonreligious subjects.
    4. (of members of the clergy) not belonging to a religious order; not bound by monastic vows ( opposed to regular).
    5. occurring or celebrated once in an age or century: the secular games of Rome.

    That's pretty clear. You've tied secular up with economic transactions and value decisions of a society.
    We are talking about a secular GOVERNMENT & LAWS which can be different than a "secular society".
    Society is made up of the people and the combined cultures of those people. Governments should be secular in governing and laws, while the people should still be free to be religious - or not- as they see fit.

  • MaryAnne:
    Again, I don't know if you are just adding to my comments - or somehow contradicting them? I'm confused...
    Haha. I'm not playing to win, which is often confusing. I'm interested.
This discussion has been closed.