Do Catholics support the re-building of Iraq?

[GregoryPalamas]

Seriously, taoist. I don’t know that any poster is any less sick of man’s inhumanity to man than you are. What does taosm suggest as an alternative to defending ourselves? The Catholic answer is offer them Christ. What is your answer?

CDL

 

[BlyssfulDreamer]

Do Catholics support the re-building of Iraq? Why give money to build a foreign nation full of people following an entirely different religion which also persecutes Catholics?

It has nothing to do with religion in my book. We have spent billions and billions on that country and that doesn’t even take into account the most precious of all…all the lives we have lost. There comes a time when we must let them stand on their own. Most of the time when we get things up and running for them, such as electrical facilities, they are too lazy to take over the care of the place and then we have to go back in and start all over again. They are going to have to stand on their own on this…IMO…
:heart:Blyss

 

[wabrams]

You’ve lost me. Islamic aggression against who? Defend ourselves from who? Taoist way of doing what?

You said you are a student of history, so now you have some interesting topics to go research.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

You said you are a student of history, so now you have some interesting topics to go research.

Indeed!!

CDL

 

[Taoist]

Seriously, taoist. I don’t know that any poster is any less sick of man’s inhumanity to man than you are. What does taosm suggest as an alternative to defending ourselves? The Catholic answer is offer them Christ. What is your answer?

You go off-topic without notifying me and expect me to read your mind about your vague idea, then attack me when I ask for clarification. My telepathic powers are not as strong as you assume, nor is your ability to be rational. Stay on-topic and I’ll be happy to have a discussion.

 

[IanBoyd57]

Do Catholics support the re-building of Iraq? Why give money to build a foreign nation full of people following an entirely different religion which also persecutes Catholics?

You’re seriously considering not supporting helping people because they aren’t your religion?

Do you have any idea what you’re saying?

Nice stops here, sorry.

How can people argue that religions are so useful when you get people saying things like this?

You know, I would totally be willing to throw out and forget all the other killings, slaughters, and brutal murders that both christians and muslims and jews have all committed, if we could just get over our horrible intolerances.

This is ridiculously evil.

I’m not going to sugar coat it.

That was a horrible statement and really, truly makes me feel that much worse about the state of the world today.

So, that’s how you feel about them?

That’s how accepting you are?

Yet you expect them to open up and accept our religion and Jesus with open arms?

This is why the world hates the US.

 

[Taoist]

IanBoyd57, you pass the honesty test in this thread. Your response was what I was fishing for. Karl Marx was kind when he said, “Religion is the opiate of the masses,” I consider it to also be the “wedge” of the masses. Too often religion is used to divide men than unite them, draw lines between them of “us” and “them,” give men a reason to direct their fears and suspicions to another group. Religion is in the class of other myriad wedges used to divide men, such as skin color, language, geography, diet, occupation, sex, the car you drive, the beer you drink, and the team you cheer for. And like the other wedges, religion is an arbitrary distinction existing only in the mind of the person who believes the distinction exists.

Shakespeare eloquently summed up Taoism, unwittingly, with one sentence from Hamlet, “There is nothing neither good nor bad. But thinking makes it so.” I admit that this damned war and the sanctimonious apologies for it on this forum have shaken me from my center and the imbalance has caused me to write such a terrible question, and you, IanBoyd57, are the only one here with the guts to call me on it in an honest manner. Perhaps it will be the start of a truely honest discussion.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

IanBoyd57, you pass the honesty test in this thread. Your response was what I was fishing for. Karl Marx was kind when he said, “Religion is the opiate of the masses,” I consider it to also be the “wedge” of the masses. Too often religion is used to divide men than unite them, draw lines between them of “us” and “them,” give men a reason to direct their fears and suspicions to another group. Religion is in the class of other myriad wedges used to divide men, such as skin color, language, geography, diet, occupation, sex, the car you drive, the beer you drink, and the team you cheer for. And like the other wedges, religion is an arbitrary distinction existing only in the mind of the person who believes the distinction exists.

Shakespeare eloquently summed up Taoism, unwittingly, with one sentence from Hamlet, “There is nothing neither good nor bad. But thinking makes it so.” I admit that this damned war and the sanctimonious apologies for it on this forum have shaken me from my center and the imbalance has caused me to write such a terrible question, and you, IanBoyd57, are the only one here with the guts to call me on it in an honest manner. Perhaps it will be the start of a truely honest discussion.

You offer nothing but sophistry. I doubt that anyone is interested.

CDL

 

[Taoist]

You offer nothing but sophistry. I doubt that anyone is interested.

CDL

Juevenile insults demonstrate a small and weak mind. You must present more substance than this to be taken seriously.

 

[Hastrman]

Those sharp weapons are instruments of evil omen, and not the instruments of the superior man;–he uses them only on the compulsion of necessity. (Dao De Jing 19)

As Yagyuu Munenori observed, in reference to the above, to take up arms when there is no other choice, “Is also part of the Way of Heaven”. He explains, “If you do not understand why this is so, the answer is that the leaves flourish and flowers bloom in spring, but leaves fall and trees wither with the coming of Autumn.” Or in other words, War is Yang. Peace is Yin. Both are necessary parts of the whole.

Not to have gone to war in Iraq could be seen as violence of a different sort, a violence that allowed the excessively Yang government of Iraq to persist (this is a Taoist concept, that Yin and Yang can be viewed as their opposites if you only change perspective). The invasion, itself Yang, can be viewed as similar to certain techniques of the Onmyou (Japanese reading of YinYang) mystics, who sometimes added Yang to Yang or Yin to Yin, in order to force it back into equilibrium by achieving critical mass of the imbalanced force.

So, Taoist, how’s about knocking off the self-righteous pontificating? Your simplistic view of the Tao–which, coincidentally, just happens to bolster your politics–is becoming quite tiresome.

 

[Sixtus]

Doubtless the ultra Right Wing would disagree but I think that going to war in the first place was wrong. But then I give our politicians credit that they are the ‘front line’ troops, they see what is going on in the big picture which we simple folk do not see.

But having destroyed Iraq, think we now have a duty to re-build it. I go so far as to say rebuild it to the level it was at [and I include National Health Service] that existed prior to our invasion.

My only concern is what it is going to cost us. I think the war will prove to be one of the costliest decisions of the millenium, not only in financial terms but also in cost to human life.

One simple act of killing is terrible. The scale of the killings that we have not only ignored but condoned in Iraq, by creating the schemata in which they are inevitabe, makes the significance of a single murder pale into insignificance. Was it just me or could everyone else predict the present situation?

I had a £10 wager with a friend that the Coalition would still be in Iraq 5 years after the war was over. .That was at a time when we were told 'it would all be over in 6-months. That it would spill over into bloody civil war and that hundreds of thousands would die. My friend nearly died.of laughter. Tragically, I was 100% right.

That is what I think is wrong and provocative towards our God. So too how we are destroying the world by allowing global warming reach the stage of no-return.

But we are not worried about that, all we are worried about is whether or not so and so is a freemason. I sometimes think we have completely ‘lost the plot’

 

[Taoist]

As Yagyuu Munenori observed, in reference to the above, to take up arms when there is no other choice, “Is also part of the Way of Heaven”. He explains, “If you do not understand why this is so, the answer is that the leaves flourish and flowers bloom in spring, but leaves fall and trees wither with the coming of Autumn.” Or in other words, War is Yang. Peace is Yin. Both are necessary parts of the whole.
This I will agree with, and I have already admitted to being thrown off my center and towards the Yang, but I am finding it difficult to return to the center when more gasoline is deliberately poured on the fire that is Iraq.

Not

to have gone to war in Iraq could be seen as violence of a different sort, a violence that allowed the excessively Yang government of Iraq to persist (this is a Taoist concept, that Yin and Yang can be viewed as their opposites if you only change perspective). The invasion, itself Yang, can be viewed as similar to certain techniques of the Onmyou (Japanese reading of YinYang) mystics, who sometimes added Yang to Yang or Yin to Yin, in order to force it back into equilibrium by achieving critical mass of the imbalanced force.
This assessment shows up nowhere in the Tao Te Ching, nor Chuang Tzu, nor do I agree with it. The tao is achieved by leaving it alone. Forcing the tao to work against itself to return it to balance is to go against it.

I am not against war since there are times when its time comes, but the war in Iraq was a bad idea from the start, and attempting to re-build it before the war has ended is folly.

 

[Hastrman]

This assessment shows up nowhere in the Tao Te Ching, nor Chuang Tzu, nor do I agree with it. Forcing the tao to work against itself to return it to balance is to go against it.

I am not aware of a fundamentalist movement within Taoism. You have, to be blunt, a Sola Scriptura, Western Protestant approach to the Tao, which is not the right one. The Tao that can be taught in a book, to paraphrase said book, is not the eternal Tao.

The amount of Yin and Yang in any given relationship–say, between governments and people–is not the Tao. The Tao is their aim, the Perfect to which they aspire and, imperfectly, reach. It is no more going against the Tao to add Yang than it is to decrease Yang. By increasing Yang, Yin will be restored–and, one is not directly contradicting the trend of things, but going with them and even helping them along. I can conclude that you are not acquainted with Jujutsu, or this would have been self evident. It is no more interfering with the Tao to attempt to restore balance to a government, which (though not in those terms) was the goal in Iraq, than to attempt, as you yourself say you have done, to restore it in a person.

I am not against war since there are times when its time comes, but the war in Iraq was a bad idea from the start, and attempting to re-build it before the war has ended is folly.

This is what Catholics call prudential judgment, and is similar to an aspect of what Taoists call Wu Wei (lit., There-is-not Action). Obviously Bush thought war’s time had come. The fact you disagree with him is perhaps of interest, but doesn’t make him wrong. It just means you’re a Taoist who’s also a liberal, rather than any number of Taoists who have been conservative (such as the aforementioned Yagyuu Munenori, who was Taoist and Zen, and a loyal agent of the Tokugawa Shougunate).

 

[IanBoyd57]

IanBoyd57, you pass the honesty test in this thread. Your response was what I was fishing for. Karl Marx was kind when he said, “Religion is the opiate of the masses,” I consider it to also be the “wedge” of the masses. Too often religion is used to divide men than unite them, draw lines between them of “us” and “them,” give men a reason to direct their fears and suspicions to another group. Religion is in the class of other myriad wedges used to divide men, such as skin color, language, geography, diet, occupation, sex, the car you drive, the beer you drink, and the team you cheer for. And like the other wedges, religion is an arbitrary distinction existing only in the mind of the person who believes the distinction exists.

Shakespeare eloquently summed up Taoism, unwittingly, with one sentence from Hamlet, “There is nothing neither good nor bad. But thinking makes it so.” I admit that this damned war and the sanctimonious apologies for it on this forum have shaken me from my center and the imbalance has caused me to write such a terrible question, and you, IanBoyd57, are the only one here with the guts to call me on it in an honest manner. Perhaps it will be the start of a truely honest discussion.

Fascinating. On other forums, when I see posts such as that, I often assume it is a troll, thinking to myself that no one could be so dumb, but in this case, I truly believed that you were serious, and I was wrong. Huh.

Well, I can sleep better now. Thank you.

 

[IanBoyd57]

You offer nothing but sophistry. I doubt that anyone is interested.

CDL

Irrelevant of your own personal religion, I think anyone with some kind of grasp on history can appreciate the violence, intolerance, division, and fighting that religions have caused throughtout time.

The holocaust is perhaps the most obvious, but the crusades, the inquisition, the witch hunts, etc. have objectively damaged, and severely so, the world in which we live in, and continues to do so to this day.

Erm…since I’ve been ‘warned’ I should probably add…

It is not my intention to offend or ridicule any religions. These are historical facts. I neither slaughtered 6 million jews nor invaded innocent countries and slaughtered even more innocent people. Also, I’m not trying to make fun of any of the religions which did precisely those things. It’s history folks.

 

[Hastrman]

The official religion of Nazi Germany (which killed the 6 million Jews you mention) was atheism.

The official religion of Communist Russia, which killed 30 million people, was atheism.

The official religion of Communist China, which killed 70 million, was atheism.

In one century, atheists killed more innocent human beings than all religions had in all previous human history. And I haven’t even counted other communist countries, or China’s forced abortions.

But no, keep copping a self-righteous attitude. It makes your ignorance all that much more amusing.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

The official religion of Nazi Germany (which killed the 6 million Jews you mention) was atheism.

The official religion of Communist Russia, which killed 30 million people, was atheism.

The official religion of Communist China, which killed 70 million, was atheism.

In one century, atheists killed more innocent human beings than all religions had in all previous human history. And I haven’t even counted other communist countries, or China’s forced abortions.

But no, keep copping a self-righteous attitude. It makes your ignorance all that much more amusing.

Indeed.

CDL

 

[Taoist]

I am not aware of a fundamentalist movement within Taoism. You have, to be blunt, a Sola Scriptura, Western Protestant approach to the Tao, which is not the right one.

Nor am I aware of a catholic movement within Taoism.

The Tao that can be taught in a book, to paraphrase said book, is not the eternal Tao.

You’re confusing us. Which is it? Am I not reading and doing enough about the Tao, or is reading anything at all about the Tao in a book not knowing the eternal Tao? Or should I learn about the Tao through instructors?

The amount of Yin and Yang in any given relationship–say, between governments and people–is not the Tao. The Tao is their aim, the Perfect to which they aspire and, imperfectly, reach. It is no more going against the Tao to add Yang than it is to decrease Yang. By increasing Yang, Yin will be restored–and, one is not directly contradicting the trend of things, but going with them and even helping them along. I can conclude that you are not acquainted with Jujutsu, or this would have been self evident. It is no more interfering with the Tao to attempt to restore balance to a government, which (though not in those terms) was the goal in Iraq, than to attempt, as you yourself say you have done, to restore it in a person.

One must be able to read about the Tao otherwise you would not continue to describe how to achieve it. Aside from the Japanese martial art of Jiujitsu, how else have you learned about the Tao? I admit you have a good grasp of it, and I’m happy to have someone who understands it, and thus me, rather than the normal dismissal someone in this environment would receive who is not Catholic.

This is what Catholics call prudential judgment, and is similar to an aspect of what Taoists call Wu Wei (lit., There-is-not Action). Obviously Bush thought war’s time had come. The fact you disagree with him is perhaps of interest, but doesn’t make him wrong. It just means you’re a Taoist who’s also a liberal, rather than any number of Taoists who have been conservative (such as the aforementioned Yagyuu Munenori, who was Taoist and Zen, and a loyal agent of the Tokugawa Shougunate).

You are correct again. However, where I offered an opinion you offered an observation. Are you willing to offer your opinion on the war and re-building?

 

[wcknight]

Irrelevant of your own personal religion, I think anyone with some kind of grasp on history can appreciate the violence, intolerance, division, and fighting that religions have caused throughtout time.

The holocaust is perhaps the most obvious, but the crusades, the inquisition, the witch hunts, etc. have objectively damaged, and severely so, the world in which we live in, and continues to do so to this day.

Erm…since I’ve been ‘warned’ I should probably add…

It is not my intention to offend or ridicule any religions. These are historical facts. I neither slaughtered 6 million jews nor invaded innocent countries and slaughtered even more innocent people. Also, I’m not trying to make fun of any of the religions which did precisely those things. It’s history folks.

Some of what you say is true but consider as the prior poster mention the millions killed by athiests versus, the dozen or so in the witch hunts, about 38 in total in the inqusition. The crusades were all out wars, and yes atrocities were committed on boths sides but were they really following their faiths in these atrocities ??

No excuse but there were still far fewer than in the wars of the last centuries where religion were not the issue.

PLUS consider the many folks that religions especially Christians have saved. It is precisely the humanitarian aspects of Christians that have prevented many more lives form being lost and encourages the humane treatment of prisoners.

It is not always the case, but in the vast majority of times, Christians are to be more merciful in principle. We hear about all the failures, but there are far more cases of upright moral behavior than not.

It’s simple common sense that if someone truly follows a reasonable moral code (for example Chrisitianity), they will more likely act with mercy and forbearance.

There have been exceptions, but you have to ask yourself, was it because of the moral code that led to this or was it the decision of the individual(s) or group(s) to ignore the code.

IF it is the moral code that teaches, condones or encourages such behaviors then there is a problem with the code. BUT if it is a decision of ignoring or violating the moral code, then the blame or fault, must necessarily lie with the individual or group.

Even if you look at the Crusades, the decision to protect travelers and defend access to the Holy Land (which previously was open to Christianity) was initially justified. The implementation, alternative motives, and in some case cruel execution of the work was not.

 

[jman507]

In the end it’s not so much religion that caused wars, it is more what a person morally reasons. Usually it gets pinned down to the questions, “Is what I am defending, important enough to kill another who is in opposition to it along with all the consequences that go along with it?” It can be defending, Christianity, Islam, Marx’s ideas, my homeland, my home, my girlfriend’s honor, or my need for another dose of drugs. Sometimes the reasons are good and sometimes the reasons are not good.