Should commercial ventures and estates in SL be allowed to discriminate?

[Madelaine McMasters]

3 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Perhaps "two year-old's" would have been more appropriate.

I'm with Tari here. Even two year olds have things to teach us. They've not yet learned all the prejudices we'll teach them. By the time they're six, they're pretty much indoctrinated and we have to hope there's enough blank slate left for them show us the way forward. If I'm at all open minded, it may be because my parents spent as much time asking questions with their little one as answering them for her.

[Luna Bliss]

4 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

Thats a very sweeping statement... ALL religions have a shared belief in a monotheistic concept do they? I suspect historically, many thousands of polytheistic believers would think you were talking out of your arse.

Like I said, that whole pseudo intellectual thing seems to be going on, the one where you talk crap and claim its Universal Crap shared by ALL TRUE BELIEVERS in EVERYTHING, when it's just not so.

NO

Increasingly some spiritual groups focus on the essence of religion and deem it to be more important than all the rules.

Religions evolve.

[Paul Hexem]

2 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

You totally misinterpreted my point -- of course I don't ONLY care about the suffering of people I like.

The point I was making is that there are DEGREES of suffering, and so we must favor the group that has suffered the most if we must choose.

That could certainly be a debate worth having, things like how much and to what extent, and so on, sure.

I just wanted to play devil's advocate and say that if we're not careful, the pendulum will swing too far in the other direction. Gotta find the balance.

[Theresa Tennyson]

11 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

Thats a very sweeping statement... ALL religions have a shared belief in a monotheistic concept do they? I suspect historically, many thousands of polytheistic believers would think you were talking out of your arse.

Like I said, that whole pseudo intellectual thing seems to be going on, the one where you talk crap and claim its Universal Crap shared by ALL TRUE BELIEVERS in EVERYTHING, when it's just not so.
 

No, Love was saying that the group or philosophy they were a member of believed that, not that all religions did. Baha'i has a similar outlook.

Does your lipstick smear when you sit down?

[Love Zhaoying]

8 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Even two year olds have things to teach us.

Yes, sure. The point of my quote is, we know a lot more than they do. And we are unable to communicate we are “right” because they don’t have the background, knowledge, communication skills, or social graces that we do. Kinda like this thread, capiche?

[Love Zhaoying]

4 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Love was saying that the group or philosophy they were a member of believed that, not that all religions did.

Thanks. Watch out, she’s gonna blow!  While Hinduism is viewed by the West as “polytheistic”, my branch is “non-dualistic monotheism”. (There is only one God, and we are not separate from God.)

Edited January 3, 2018 by Love Zhaoying

[Luna Bliss]

8 minutes ago, Gadget Portal said:

15 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

You totally misinterpreted my point -- of course I don't ONLY care about the suffering of people I like.

The point I was making is that there are DEGREES of suffering, and so we must favor the group that has suffered the most if we must choose.

That could certainly be a debate worth having, things like how much and to what extent, and so on, sure.

I just wanted to play devil's advocate and say that if we're not careful, the pendulum will swing too far in the other direction. Gotta find the balance.

I agree it should be evaluated carefully, but that pendulum has a long way to swing to equal what minorities have suffered, given the way we've treated blacks, gays, the disabled, and other minorities through the ages in this country and around the world.

Though I love spirituality, I hate religion, and especially any religion that says other human beings are trash and should be denied rights (you know, like the cake-denying person does, and the official trying to deny gays a marriage license).

[Love Zhaoying]

13 minutes ago, Gadget Portal said:

That could certainly be a debate worth having, things like how much and to what extent, and so on, sure.

I just wanted to play devil's advocate and say that if we're not careful, the pendulum will swing too far in the other direction. Gotta find the balance.

If only there were reparations, in the 1870’s when it should have happened. So much pain and suffering since then, impossible to calculate.

[Madelaine McMasters]

15 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Yes, sure. The point of my quote is, we know a lot more than they do. And we are unable to communicate we are “right” because they don’t have the background, knowledge, communication skills, or social graces that we do. Kinda like this thread, capiche?

I get your point, but sometimes we're unable to communicate we are "right" because we aren't. And it's the lack of background, knowledge, communication skills and social grace that allow the two year old to tell us.

If only we'd listen.

;-).

[Paul Hexem]

7 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I agree it should be evaluated carefully, but that pendulum has a long way to swing to equal what minorities have suffered, given the way we've treated blacks, gays, the disabled, and other minorities through the ages in this country and around the world.

Though I love spirituality, I hate religion, and especially any religion that says other human beings are trash and should be denied rights (you know, like the cake-denying person does, and the official trying to deny gays a marriage license).

Humans have been abusing religion since recorded history. We've gone from worrying about the Crusades to worrying about cake.

I'd say we're making progress.

 

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

If only there were reparations, in the 1870’s when it should have happened. So much pain and suffering since then, impossible to calculate.

"Reparations" aren't solutions.

[Tari Landar]

33 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I'm with Tari here. Even two year olds have things to teach us. They've not yet learned all the prejudices we'll teach them. By the time they're six, they're pretty much indoctrinated and we have to hope there's enough blank slate left for them show us the way forward. If I'm at all open minded, it may be because my parents spent as much time asking questions with their little one as answering them for her.

Exactly...you're just better at putting things into words than me

I have a kiddo that's spent her entire life understanding others, showing and sharing empathy, and, well, facing struggles most wouldn't likely ever encounter. Her struggles are no different than others, though. That's a point I have stressed my kids' entire lives, to them I mean. That no matter what adversity they are facing in life, there are always those facing just as much, always those facing things that matter just as much(or hurt just as much for that matter), always others that need empathy-even sympathy-just as much. Though this probably takes us off on another wild tangent, going further and further from the discussion...Children aren't typically born with an inherent need or desire to discriminate, or be prejudice, or rather not one they express of their own accord(typically..please remember I used that word, it's not a blanket statement, lol) That is a learned behavior, whether it is learned from their environment, or learned from those responsible for teaching them within that environment, perhaps a combination of both..it's learned. 

Children can be buttheads at times, but, they are, generally speaking, more accepting, more diverse in their thinking, more open to BEING diverse in their thinking..and they're pretty blank slates when they pop out. It is we, those who came before them, that are responsible for ensuring those slates don't get tainted with the nonsense(the bad kind), idiocy, racism, discrimination, and generally speaking, most of the bad/negative things we do/think/say both about as well as to, others. Sure, we can't eliminate or prevent it all, but we don't do a very good job, again generally speaking, of making a valiant attempt, either. Children become what we see in adults today, more often than not, because of outer influences(parents, family, friends, other folks, etc..) which help mold them. We should want that this mold, this blank slate, to becomes the best it possibly can, to have the best positive impact it can. We should not want for future generations to have to deal with the negative things we have, or those before us. We should ALWAYS want to do better, and always strive to do better, so that we can help others also do the same.

So, yeah, to bring this back 'round....kids are, generally speaking, a hell of a lot better human beings, than most adults are. Its everyone else around them that helps to make them not so..eventually. There's not a whole hell of a lot anyone can say to prove otherwise, either(barring instances wherein genetics plays a much larger role, of course, but that's a whole 'nother topic). I actually feel pretty bad when I encounter people so close minded they aren't even willing to ever accept that the other side might have merit. I mean, they don't have to agree with the other side of the fence, but disregarding the fact that merit may exist, just tells me that somewhere along the way, someone(or someones perhaps) helped to mold this individual in a manner that isn't all that conducive to positive growth. That makes me pretty sad..that somewhere along the way a negative influence somewhere trumped over the alternative and helped to close and lock proverbial doors that, I strongly believe, ought to remain, at the very least...unlocked. 

Edited January 3, 2018 by Tari Landar

[Klytyna]

25 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Also, that same "Christ Consciousness" aka the "Holy Spirit" is the same between ALL religions.  There is only one Spirit, there is only one Presence. You get the picture.

 

4 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

No, Love was saying that the group or philosophy they were a member of believed that, not that all religions did. Baha'i has a similar outlook.

Does your lipstick smear when you sit down?

 

The expression "is the same in ALL religions" certainly implies that he is claiming that ALL religions share this belief in a "Christ Consciousness/Holy Spirit", not just his particular brand of "Ecumenical Monotheistic Hinduism", it also implies that he believes that ALL religions are in fact the worship of ONE deity, which is part of his system of belief. 

Realistically the "your religions are just you doing my Religion badly" is a long way from his hope for Religious Tolerance, don't you think?

Further... Statements to the effect that your religion is prepared to accept a rival religions deity as part of it's pantheon, does NOT make you a member of the rival religion, especially when the tennets of the rival religion specifically exclude accepting your religion at all.

It's like claiming that saying "Chris Rock is a very funny & talented comic" makes you an Honorary African American.
 

[Luna Bliss]

1 minute ago, Gadget Portal said:

Humans have been abusing religion since recorded history. We've gone from worrying about the Crusades to worrying about cake.

I'd say we're making progress.

lol I never thought of it that way

[Love Zhaoying]

2 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

 

 

The expression "is the same in ALL religions" certainly implies that he is claiming that ALL religions share this belief in a "Christ Consciousness/Holy Spirit", not just his particular brand of "Ecumenical Monotheistic Hinduism", it also implies that he believes that ALL religions are in fact the worship of ONE deity, which is part of his system of belief. 

Realistically the "your religions are just you doing my Religion badly" is a long way from his hope for Religious Tolerance, don't you think?

Further... Statements to the effect that your religion is prepared to accept a rival religions deity as part of it's pantheon, does NOT make you a member of the rival religion, especially when the tennets of the rival religion specifically exclude accepting your religion at all.

It's like claiming that saying "Chris Rock is a very funny & talented comic" makes you an Honorary African American.
 

Your terrible misquotes out of context are not worth refuting. You persistently misconstrue and project. Next!

[Aethelwine]

18 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

 

 

The expression "is the same in ALL religions" certainly implies that he is claiming that ALL religions share this belief in a "Christ Consciousness/Holy Spirit", not just his particular brand of "Ecumenical Monotheistic Hinduism", it also implies that he believes that ALL religions are in fact the worship of ONE deity, which is part of his system of belief. 

Realistically the "your religions are just you doing my Religion badly" is a long way from his hope for Religious Tolerance, don't you think?

Further... Statements to the effect that your religion is prepared to accept a rival religions deity as part of it's pantheon, does NOT make you a member of the rival religion, especially when the tennets of the rival religion specifically exclude accepting your religion at all.

It's like claiming that saying "Chris Rock is a very funny & talented comic" makes you an Honorary African American.
 

I don't see how your analogy works at all. What I understand several people to be talking about is the universalism that many religions have tended too. Bahá'í being a muslim example, Neo-Vedanta a Hindu example, and in Christianity Quakers and other universalist and unitarian groups.

Edited January 3, 2018 by Aethelwine

[Theresa Tennyson]

5 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

The expression "is the same in ALL religions" certainly implies that he is claiming that ALL religions share this belief in a "Christ Consciousness/Holy Spirit", not just his particular brand of "Ecumenical Monotheistic Hinduism", it also implies that he believes that ALL religions are in fact the worship of ONE deity, which is part of his system of belief. 

 

Gee, I didn't pick that up, and Love said that wasn't what they meant. 

Of course, my native language is English and not Buttese...

 

Who is the authority who can state whether any given religion is Christianity? Who do you apply to?

How about Hinduism?

[Love Zhaoying]

57 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

58 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Some Hindus maintain that Jesus was an avatar of Vishnu, who has a long history of "playing charades with a box of joke shop novelty costumes."

Also, that same "Christ Consciousness" aka the "Holy Spirit" is the same between ALL religions.  There is only one Spirit, there is only one Presence. You get the picture.

If a certain someone could read IN CONTEXT, they would see that I was continuing Theresa’s statement regarding what SOME HINDUS believe regarding the connections between all religions. A certain someone has not achieved a high enough level of reading comprehension.

[Aethelwine]

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

If a certain someone could read IN CONTEXT, they would see that I was continuing Theresa’s statement regarding what SOME HINDUS believe regarding the connections between all religions. A certain someone has not achieved a high enough level of reading comprehension.

Like the Ramakrishna mission celebrating Christmas Eve and Buddha's birthday.

[Klytyna]

2 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Who is the authority who can state whether any given religion is Christianity? Who do you apply to?

How about Hinduism?

So, you agree that its inaccurate for an "Ecumenical Monotheistic Hindu", to claim that his religion is the One True Hinduism?

As for stating if a religion is Christianity, practically every Christian cult has claimed that authority at some point or other.

Putting a statue of "Buddy Jesus" next to the "Mr Lucky Elephant-Head" on the shelf doesn't make you a Christian in the eyes of most Christian cults, quite the reverse, they will mostly disavow you for having a "heathen statue" at all, graven idols and all that, 

That's where we Atheists have an advantage, we don't have to decide who is part of Cult A or Cult B or Cult C.

We can just say "Superstitious Skydaddy Cults with no factually supportable claims". It saves so much time.
 

[Theresa Tennyson]

1 minute ago, Klytyna said:

So, you agree that its inaccurate for an "Ecumenical Monotheistic Hindu", to claim that his religion is the One True Hinduism?

As for stating if a religion is Christianity, practically every Christian cult has claimed that authority at some point or other.

Putting a statue of "Buddy Jesus" next to the "Mr Lucky Elephant-Head" on the shelf doesn't make you a Christian in the eyes of most Christian cults, quite the reverse, they will mostly disavow you for having a "heathen statue" at all, graven idols and all that, 

That's where we Atheists have an advantage, we don't have to decide who is part of Cult A or Cult B or Cult C.

We can just say "Superstitious Skydaddy Cults with no factually supportable claims". It saves so much time.
 

Tell me about the God you don't believe in.

[Aethelwine]

 

5 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

So, you agree that its inaccurate for an "Ecumenical Monotheistic Hindu", to claim that his religion is the One True Hinduism?

As for stating if a religion is Christianity, practically every Christian cult has claimed that authority at some point or other.

Putting a statue of "Buddy Jesus" next to the "Mr Lucky Elephant-Head" on the shelf doesn't make you a Christian in the eyes of most Christian cults, quite the reverse, they will mostly disavow you for having a "heathen statue" at all, graven idols and all that, 

That's where we Atheists have an advantage, we don't have to decide who is part of Cult A or Cult B or Cult C.

We can just say "Superstitious Skydaddy Cults with no factually supportable claims". It saves so much time.
 

 

Ecumenicals would tend to believe there are different paths to an understanding of divinity. That any conception of "One True" anything has to be flexible enough to accommodate a diversity.

Edited January 3, 2018 by Aethelwine

[Klytyna]

25 minutes ago, Gadget Portal said:

Humans have been abusing religion since recorded history. We've gone from worrying about the Crusades to worrying about cake.

I'd say we're making progress.

Not as much as you think...

Remember there are still people out there, who have gone from worrying about the Crusades to executing people for playing soccer or having a tape recorder.
 

[Luna Bliss]

5 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

That's where we Atheists have an advantage, we don't have to decide who is part of Cult A or Cult B or Cult C.

We can just say "Superstitious Skydaddy Cults with no factually supportable claims". It saves so much time.

Religions are just a way of perceiving reality.

Atheism has it's own way of perceiving reality, and so I consider it a religion too.

It's pretty insulting to think your religion is 'the way' while other people's perceptions of reality are delusional.

[Love Zhaoying]

9 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

Like the Ramakrishna mission celebrating Christmas Eve and Buddha's birthday.

EXACTLY. Ramakrishna is one Hindu saint who embraced other religions. I was always told that he walked out of a Christian sermon on “sin”.

[Love Zhaoying]

7 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

Ecumenicals would tend to believe there are different paths to an understanding of divinity. That any conception of "One True" anything has to be flexible enough to accommodate a diversity.

You are a breath of fresh air! Someone who understands what it means.