Although I do apologize for what you consider poor sarcasm.

I dont know Buddha is Laughing said that he was a collectivist in the model of Rousseau. Seemed pretty clear to me.

My point about guns and god is to expose the true character of the nutcases who make up the majority of those professing to be peaceful christians. Christianity is not a peaceful myth. Since it cannot possibly win the hearts and minds of those who care to think for themselves, it’s rife with fear mongering, plagues, murderous deities, stonings, and all manner of depravity parading as god’s holy hand. The only way to keep the flock in the corral is through the sheer terror of the consequences of disobeying god.

We should welcome guns into churches. Then, as the faithful encounter irreconcilable differences even amongst themselves (see Anglican Church, Baptist Church, Episcopal Church, et al) we can at least hope a full scale battle erupts every Sunday in every church across this deranged land of ours until the brethren eliminate themselves to the betterment of our tiny planet and the universe in general. Amen.

As are you.

Not being a fan of Christianity itself and being of a people who suffered harshly from the Crusades, you won’t find me forgetting the evil that they wrought. It is interesting though that in mentioning the Crusades it is always forgotten that were it not for Charles Martel all of Europe might have been forcibly converted to Islam four centuries before the First Crusade. Using them as a metaphor of religious intolerance is weakened when the other side of the issue is not mentioned.

Buddha,
The Amber series would make for at least a series of 10 great films and I’d pay good money to see them King Random.

Also your response to Jill, especially referring to Nicaea expressed my feelings/thoughts and then went beyond them eloquently and accurately. I’m with you in believing we must start with ourselves and the ego that motivates us.

Jill,
you’re right the Q documents reveal only a skeleton and the Gospels were written after Jesus death, but somehow I think a nugget of the actual man was revealed and he probably was of the same line of thought as the Buddha and all the like philosophies floating around the Earth in the five centuries before him. I think Buddhism is more about following a correct life path and getting beyond fear and hatred, than it is about fearing them.

We98,
I’m sorry but you are blissfully ignorant if you think anyone commenting on this site believes in the drivel you espouse with
poor sarcasm.

Then we are in agreement. And thank you. You are very kind.

I agree that those emotions can definitly cloud our judgement. I didn’t think you were trying to convert me!

I think you see the good things in Jesus because you are good hearted. I think someone like Sara Palin sees some really ugly things in Jesus because she isn’t good hearted. The Bible can support both views, so I say, people should just own up to the fact that it’s them making the choice to be good or cruel and not worry about what any religious text has to say on the matter.

I’m not suggesting hate or fear don’t have valid evolutionary functions, just that letting them control your thinking is bad. It clouds judgment. It’s an issue of inform vs. control. Acting or reacting.

It’s a given I have no interest in converting you. I’m not a religious Buddhist. Philosophical. I was merely providing context.

We don’t really know that much about what Jesus really said and did. The Q documents are sparse. The gospels are written after the eyewitnesses to Jesus died. So it seems we are back to good people, looking to the good things Jesus was said to have done, as a guide in their life.

There are some decidedly mixed things that Jesus was said to have done (again, we really don’t know that much about what he actually did) so following Jesus’ example may not always be the best policy when trying to live a good life.

I understand what you are saying about the philosophy of Buddhism. I don’t share the beliefs of Buddhism– for example, I don’t think people should be afraid of feeling hate or fear. These are feelings that are telling us something. In some cases they are a call to self-examination especially when we are constantly hateful and afraid. In others, they are feelings telling us something in our life is dangerous–to look out! It’s important to know if something is dangerous so that we may take action to avoid/counter/protect ourself and others. I definitely agree that we should engage in self examination. People who don’t are usually cruel and do many bad things. Whether one is religious or not, a careful look at our own behavior is always a good idea!

I may be misunderstanding what you said and if so, I apologize. But based on my understanding, this is how I feel

Psst. “[T]hey are often following, not scripture . . . but the goodness that is within them”? I think that’s what Jesus was getting at, Jill. Just because some of the gospel have ridiculous cultural relics hampering them, don’t discount Christ’s fundamental teachings that God is love and to find Him, seek Him in your heart. The Council of Nicaea did a number when they assembled the New Testament from the multitude of gospels. Sometimes they lost touch with Christ’s appeals to the angels of our better nature out of their own more earthly considerations. In many ways, this message of seeking inside is quite consistent with tenets of Buddhism that the way to enlightenment is to seek the Buddha within although Buddhism works on the paradigm of desire being the root of all suffering, not original sin. The problem with Christianity is not Christ, but misapplication and understanding of gospels that often only capture part of the lesson and all of the third party writers non-enlightenment related agenda(s). Just like there are many moderate Muslims who wouldn’t dream of forcing their beliefs on others, there are Christians who feel the same way. In my experience, these people are usually looking for their peace of mind by self-examination, taking to heart the lesson that God helps those who help themselves, instead of seeking external approval from an invisible sky father that by all rational observation is indifferent to humanity. Not hostile. Not unloving. Indifferent. An Aristotelian prime mover. The engine of reality. And He will not be rescuing anyone. None of us are special or chosen. We’re all on the same spaceship. Rescuing humanity is OUR job. All of us. And we can all start by looking inside and putting our inner demons on a leash while freeing the angels of love, compassion and mercy. If you can’t eliminate or reduce hate and fear from your motives, how can you expect to fight those evils in the world? The only thing in life one has absolute control over is your internal reality (barring psychosis) and a limited influence on the world immediately around them. Want to make the world a better place? The starting place seems obvious. And let’s be honest, we’ve discussed ego as a root cause for evil behavior before and what would be the largest impediment to self-examination? Ego. It is axiomatic that not all advice obtained in a religious context is bad advice. I will agree that a LOT of it is though. Sorting through what’s gold and what’s garbage just may be the death of us all.

My desires matter not if they do not align with the greater good of the collective. I will henceforth be We98.

Sincerely,

We98

I find I have to agree with you. When Christians act in a kind, peaceful manner, they are often following, not scripture (or at least they are ignoring hugh portions of scripture) but the goodness that is within them. They attribute this goodness to god but I think it is really them.

To find it strange that followers of the Bible are also violent, self-aggrandizing, deeply conflicted misanthropes is, in itself, strange. Bringing guns to a worship service fits perfectly into the disturbed world view of the “guns and god” crowd. Violence has long been a staple of the “christian” tradition (see, Spanish Inquisition, The Crusades, The Great Flood). If christians can win hearts and minds, do as the missionaries did, kill the heathens; or at least beat them until a conversion takes place.

What I find most odd is that “christians” have been cast as peaceful sorts. The church has a rap sheet as long as my arm.

FYI, long ago when I first starting countering propaganda as a hobby, one of my first nicks was PrinceRandom. I love the Amber books. Talk about a set of books ripe for film!

Lem was a great, but I agree on the movies/translation issue. I’ll look into Vandermeer. The only “new” guys I’m reading at the moment are Ken McLeod and Alistair Reynolds, but they are hard S/F. I don’t know what they put in the water in Scotland, but they are making some fine S/F writers these days. I suspect the secret ingredient is Scotch. I also recently read my first Stephen Baxter. I need to catch the rest of those too.

I knew I liked you guys for more than just politics!

I think that it’s a shame Lem always seems to get left out of these discussions. I know that sometimes the translations are a little “off” but if you’re looking for social commentary and black humor, few do it better. “Memoirs Found in a Bathtub” is my one of my favorite books of any Genre. I’m not a huge fan of Solaris, but the book is far superior to the American Re-making of the movie.

There’s a new(er) writer I’ve discovered recently, Jeff Vandermeer, that might be worth checking out. He’s still a little “fresh” but his books are definitely getting better as he goes. I’m not sure that I’d call everything he writes SF, but a lot of it is.

As a side note, I think that some of Borges’s short stories could be called SF as well.

If you appreciate literary SF, might I suggest Gene Wolfe. His works are grouped into “Books” but he has stand alone novels as well. I suggest:

The Book of the New Sun – “Shadow of the Torturer”, “Claw of the Conciliator” (now sold in one volume “Shadow and Claw), “The Sword of the Lictor” and “Citadel of the Autarch” (now sold in one volume “Sword and Citadel”).

The stand alone novels I suggest – “The Fifth Head of Cerebus”, “Free Live Free” and “The Urth of the New Sun”.

The Stars My Destination is my favorite Count of Monte Cristo re-telling. That and Cities in Flight are the two books responsible for realizing SF could actually be good literature.

“Those are great. Who’s for tasers?”

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

How about Saint Amabilis of Auvergne, patron of lunatics?

Want to see more go to:

http://saints.sqpn.com/patronage-groups/

Sorry all! I was countering since removed spam with that last post. My bad!

On a practical level, let’s look at his record of analysis. Wrong about Lehman just ahead of their stock dropping like a rock, in his own voice:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=845526259
This cost investors millions. This was not long after similar predictions cost investors dearly for bad advice on Bear Sterns. This was shortly before he had the audacity to suggest that viewers hound AIG employees about inappropriate behavior and then promptly bowed to kiss their ring when Big Daddy AIG demanded an apology. Not only often wrong, but a tower of gelatin. I won’t say Jell-o as it is not only copyrighted, it would be an insult to a product I love. Hmmmmm . . . jiggle-y.

Here’s a nice summation of why Jim Cramer is an entertainer, not a source for serious financial news or analysis:
http://www.markets.com/story/SpecialReport-6152008-JimCramerBadMoney.php

No, I haven’t. I only rarely go for anthologies but I have a few. I’ll keep an eye out though. Have you looked at abebooks.com?

That’s the one. I like it, there’s some very interesting commentary on the roles of religion and science in society. The second book is good too, but you can tell they were written years apart.

Buddha,

Have you ever seen the anthology Miller edited? I’ve been looking for a couple years now, and it seems to be MIA.

Do you mean this book? I haven’t read it. Is it good? It sounds like it’s great!

“Set in a monastery in the desert of the Southwestern United States after a devastating nuclear war, the story spans thousands of years as civilization rebuilds itself. The monks of the Albertian Order of Leibowitz take up the mission of preserving the surviving remnants of man’s scientific knowledge until the day the outside world is again ready for it.” (wikipedia)

I think Saint Leibowitz may be the patron of large format cameras. Unless there’s something about her I don’t know. There could a secret behind those celebrity photos.

Saint Leibowitz, or is that a little to blatantly fictional?

Those are great. Who’s for tasers?

St. Adrian of Nicomedia? That’s a new one to me!

That’s almost worth changing nicks for.

St. Christopher (saint of lost travelers) phosphorous tracer rounds

St. Peter ( upon this rock…etc.) trebuche, sling

St. Vitus (patron against dog bites) rottweiler

St. Bridgid of Ireland (patron of cows) electrical prod

St. Hubertus of Liege (patron of archers) crossbow

St. Adrian of Nicomedia (believe it or not patron of arms dealers) worshipers choice, bigger is better!

Michael the Archangel (patron of swords) gladius

Maybe arming bears could solve a lot of ecological problems.

I’m pretty sure the park would belong to Yogi if he sported body armor and a computer controlled .50 cal. Perhaps give them big shots of adrenalin before returning them to the wild. Conservation? This could be a self-policing solution. “Hey hey hey, Boo Boo! Blast tha’ Ranger!” Or anything else that threatened their habitat.

Again, it’s not about the animals. It’s all about the humans.

It is axiomatic that not all ideas are good ideas. Shades of PETA?

Is there some law against having a gun in church?

I’m not immune to the fact that there are real dangers in life, but like most people I’ve come to trust myself to be able to avoid or escape them and leave it at that. Having once been hit full on by a car as a pedestrian I’m aware of how danger can come out of nowhere. The thought though of a gun on my hip and constantly scanning my surroundings for potential threats is to me a life not worth leading. The statistics not only back up Gyges’ thoughts, they overwhelmingly show that carrying a gun is often most dangerous to its’ possessor.

Copy that.

Or maybe 2 people would have been shot, or three, or four.

Personally I think churches that own their own property should be able to choose if they want guns in their congregation or not. Assuming of course that it wouldn’t break any local\state\or federal laws. I also think that in the vast majority of situations hand guns are terrible for self defense, and usually just increase the probability of an innocent bystander getting hurt.