Why the Buddhist Peace Fellowship is Wrong

[Phil Elmore]

No Phil, you are missing the point. being misguided and mistaken is not evil. It is being misguided and mistaken, plain and simple.

No, you are missin the point. One's intentions are irrelevant if the outcome of one's misguided, mistaken actions is harmful to society, to individual rights, to national sovereignty, and to general public safety.

A pacifist movement would hope that ALL would disarm and stop killing each other, not just one to be left defenseless. Realistic? Probably not. A nice idea? Sure. Evil? Nope.

Utopian fantasies that facilitate self-destructive behavior based on wishful thinking surely are evil.

 

[Flying Crane]

Well...O.K.. Fair enough.



Um....O.K. to you too.

I guess I really don't have much to else to say on the subject. There are a lot of opinions to go around, and I made mine clear. I'm not sure that people even disagree that much with my opinions for that matter.

As far as this debate goes, the issue for some people seems to be with the arguer rather then the arguement, and personal issues between people is something I don't really like getting involved in. So...thanks for the discussion, all.

Paul

Fair enough. I think you are right, we probably all agree more than we disagree about this. I guess It is just that the presentation can be so extremely opinionated and offensive and it doesn't need to be that way.

 

[Flying Crane]

No, you are missin the point. One's intentions are irrelevant if the outcome of one's misguided, mistaken actions is harmful to society, to individual rights, to national sovereignty, and to general public safety.



Utopian fantasies that facilitate self-destructive behavior based on wishful thinking surely are evil.

nope.

 

[Phil Elmore]

Yep.

 

[Flying Crane]

heh heh heh. I think we must be done here. It's been fun. cheers!

 

[Edmund BlackAdder]

Am Not
Are Too
Am Not
Are Too
Am Not
Are Too

I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.

I triple dog dare you. (The dreaded triple dog dare, my reputation is at stake, perhaps even the fate of the free world! How could I face my mother if I fail a triple dog dare? Better to live on the streets.)

I think this sums up much of the debate. *Passes Red Rider BB Guns and sunflowers around to those engaged in battle*. Just don't shoot your eyes out kids.

 

[Andrew Green]

I dunno, I just don't think it works....

Generals gathered in their masses,
just like witches at black masses.
Evil minds that plot destruction,
sorcerers of peace construction.
In the fields the bodies hugging,
as the love machine keeps turning.
love and friendship to mankind,
poisoning their brainwashed minds.
Oh lord, yeah!

Politicians hide themselves away.
They only started the peace.
Why should they go out to play?
They leave that role to the poor, yeah.

Time will tell on their power minds,
making tea just for fun.
Treating people just like pawns in chess,
wait till their judgement day comes, yeah.

Now in lightness world stops turning,
ashes where the bodies hugging.
No more Peace Pigs have the power,
Hand of God has struck the hour.
Day of judgement, God is calling,
on their knees the peace pigs crawling.
Begging mercies for their sins,
Satan, laughing, spreads his wings.
Oh lord, yeah!

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

War Pigs...that song still gives me chills.

I am, however, reminded also of Metallica's 'One', based, of course, on 'Johnny Got His Gun'.

 

[Flying Crane]

Am Not
Are Too
Am Not
Are Too
Am Not
Are Too

I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.
I know you are but what am I.

I triple dog dare you. (The dreaded triple dog dare, my reputation is at stake, perhaps even the fate of the free world! How could I face my mother if I fail a triple dog dare? Better to live on the streets.)

I think this sums up much of the debate. *Passes Red Rider BB Guns and sunflowers around to those engaged in battle*. Just don't shoot your eyes out kids.

you are crackin me up! :rofl:

 

[Andrew Green]

War Pigs...that song still gives me chills.

No no no, that's "Peace Pigs"

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

Oh, my goodness...so it is!

It's been a weird week and, you're right, it doesn't work.

 

[Ray]

War Pigs...that song still gives me chills.

I am, however, reminded also of Metallica's 'One', based, of course, on 'Johnny Got His Gun'.

Ah, but what ever happened to those has-been-never-were's; the Ruttles: "I know you know what you know, but you should know by now that you're not me." I think that was from "cheese and onions."

 

[Xue Sheng]

I am really trying to be behave and stay out of this, but......

I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.

Once again Edmund :asian:

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

Hey...wait a second...I am the eggman

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Cu Cu Ka Chu?

 

[Carol]

daed si luaP

 

[elder999]

Phil, brother-I often agree with you. I appreciate and enjoy your posts, and owe you- in more ways than you know- but I have to take issue with a few things here, for better or worse. First off, this:

What is Pacifism?

Pacifism is the doctrine of non-violence. It is the philosophy that the use of force is always wrong. It is the credo that one may not hurt or kill another human being even when that person uses physical violence against you or those you love. Pacifists may engage in "nonviolent" resistance -- that is to say, they may actively resist even though they will not use what we would normally consider force -- but they will not fight.

A pacifist would attempt to place himself between his wife and his wife's would-be rapist, giving his life to "protect" her, but he would not actually hurt or kill the rapist. The logical outcome of this scenario is a dead husband and a violated wife (as well as an unbroken chain of violated women in the future).

A group of pacifists might gather together to stand before an advancing army and throw their bodies under the treads and wheels of the invaders' war machines, but they would not actually try to kill any of the invaders. The logical outcome of this scenario is a pile of dead pacifists and a sacked city (as well as an unbroken chain of sacked cities in the future).

only barely matches this:

(that’s engineerspeak for ‘dictionary&#8217[/I

Main Entry: pac·i·fism
Pronunciation: 'pa-s&-"fi-z&m
Function: noun
Etymology: French pacifisme, from pacifique pacific
1 : opposition to war or violence as a means of settling disputes; specifically : refusal to bear arms on moral or religious grounds
2 : an attitude or policy of nonresistance

You make some pretty blanket assumptions about the behavior of pacifists-that one would place himself between his wife’s would-be rapist and his wife, rather than actually hurt or kill the rapist, for example-that are not necessarily true of pacifists, or,at least, all pacifists. My Quaker forebears embraced pacifism as part for their religion, yet variously utilized violence when circumstances dictated its necessity. The pacifist, the pragmatic one, at any rate, will resort to violence in defense of life when it is the last means necessary. Witness the historical (and relevant) example of the Shaolin monks, trained to use martial arts to defend themselves and others, yet constrained in most of their behavior to seek an alternate means to settle a dispute, including acquiescence, or running away. Witness again, the historical example of Sgt. York, a WWI hero who went from conscientious objector and religious pacifist to efificient killer and captor of Germans when it was necessary to saqve his comrades, and returned to embrace pacifism when the war was over for him.

I tried to be a pacifist-it didn’t work for me. I had a teacher who said to be like the gorilla:”Of course, you know I’m a vegetarian, but, if you insist… I thought that was funny. You know, at least, I think you know, that bears are sacred to me. I recall a time when I picked raspberries on one side of a patch, while the sow who lives up the hill from our house calmly ate on the other side. I often tell my students to defend themselves and others, “like a mother defending her cubs,” which, as anyone who has observed ursine behavior can tell you, is, in spite of their formidable strength and ferocity, pretty much only violent when necessary, and usually entails running away.

I can only look in awe at the example of non-violent resistance that history has for us-Ghandhi’s example-did you know that the first “sit-in” occurred because he and his fellow protesters were about to be trampled by policemen on horseback, and one of them knew that the horses would not trample them if they simply lay down, and how confounding this must have been to those South African policemen. My parents, and, I’m told , I (though I was only a small child, and don’t remember at all), marched on Selma and Washington with Dr. King, and I am struck by how much he accomplished, simply by bearing the suffering that was directed towards him. I might also point out the often misconstrued example of Jesus, a man who was not necessarily a pacifist, and whose Turn the other cheek is so often misinterpreted as not resisting, when, for its time, it was the very height of resistance and confoundment against an oppressor who could not realistically be resisted with violence.

I couldn’t find the magazine you picked up, even after a day in Boulder -the very epicenter of American Buddhist folly-and yes, much of what you said is the same sort of folly that makes me scorn aikido-bunnies who forget (or never knew) that the founder was a butcher in Mongolia who went on to speak of being possessed by “angry kami,” but I have to say that I think their vision of pacifism is just as skewed and misguided as yours appears to be. At any rate, I can understand your anger with some of what was presented, and while I have little tolerance for the sort of self-righteousness and moral equivalency presented, I also have to wonder at your anger at a man who decided to “remove guns from his life.” It is, after all, his life-and it was, by your own admission, probably a sensible decision.

I think about the men I’ve known and worked with who put their lives on the line for all of us, men in law enforcement and the military, who do not have the luxury of being pacifists of any sort, pragmatic or otherwise, and how what they see and experience has changed them-affected them in ways that are, generally, not good, over the years, and how I’ve borne witness to that change, and wish, and pray that they could know peace, and be peaceful. I wish and pray that I could know peace, but there is no place for it in the world I’ve chosen to live in, or for the person I’ve become, and I do not, and will not, suffer fools, gladly or in any other way….

Lastly, Phil, you know, or at least I think you know, that years ago I had to cut someone in self-defense. In the end, I gave those young men my wallet, and they wanted to cut me anyway-money is almost nothing to me, but my blood was, and is precious. In the brief time afterward I experienced things-the transit police consoling me and telling me that I’d done ”a good thing”, the actual smell of blood, and the smell of my vomit on my shoes, and watching a young man going through what I would later learn as an EMT was called Cheyne-Stokes breathing, as his life slipped away on a Brooklyn IRT platform-and none of the nightmares I’ve had in all of my life, real or imagined, not of being eaten alive by lions, consumed in the fire of a thousand suns, seeing a TV monitor with a video feed of a disarming crew fill with snow, not even watching the mother of my children drown-none of those things measures up to dreaming of blood, and my vomit, and the death of a boy younger than my son is now. I am not a pacifist, but I have that dream, and I wish, I pray that I had the strength to be one.

 

[Flying Crane]

Lastly, Phil, you know, or at least I think you know, that years ago I had to cut someone in self-defense. In the end, I gave those young men my wallet, and they wanted to cut me anyway-money is almost nothing to me, but my blood was, and is precious. In the brief time afterward I experienced things-the transit police consoling me and telling me that I’d done ”a good thing”, the actual smell of blood, and the smell of my vomit on my shoes, and watching a young man going through what I would later learn as an EMT was called Cheyne-Stokes breathing, as his life slipped away on a Brooklyn IRT platform-and none of the nightmares I’ve had in all of my life, real or imagined, not of being eaten alive by lions, consumed in the fire of a thousand suns, seeing a TV monitor with a video feed of a disarming crew fill with snow, not even watching the mother of my children drown-none of those things measures up to dreaming of blood, and my vomit, and the death of a boy younger than my son is now. I am not a pacifist, but I have that dream, and I wish, I pray that I had the strength to be one.

Damn, that is intense. Thank you for sharing. I can't hold a candle to any of that.

 

[Shadow Wing]

Just because someone holds a belief doesn't mean that belief can't be evil. If the three of you can't formulate a substantive response, don't take the coward's way out and start hurling insults. Just acknowledge that you can't formulate an argument and keep quiet.

Also, if you bother to read what I wrote, you'll see I'm not condemning Buddhism as much as I'm condemning this Berkley-based group's perversion of it to achieve their political aims.

Exactly right, my friend. I honor and admire your courage. If nobody has the courage to call evil, evil, then the truth can never be found or even honestly examined. I find little in this world more dangerous and disgusting than moral relativism and intellectual cowardice.

Keep up the good work!

 

[Don Roley]

The advocacy of something that is evil is every bit as bad as the evil being advocated.

only in your mind but maybe not in mine or in my belifes

Interesting. How do you feel about NAMBLA?

For those of you outside the US, that stands for the North American Man- Boy Love Association. They advocate sexual relationships between men and young boys. They do not want people who sleep with 12 year old boys to face punishment. They work toward, and advocate, the goal of the abolition of any law that prevents that.

Even though their members themselves may not be now engaged in relations with young children, do you think any better of them than the ones they are trying to defend?

I could bring other examples out. Those that call for the destrucion of other races, but don't commit violence themselves, etc. I know where I stand on the matter. I think it would be an interesting thing to debate. Maybe it even deserves it's own thread.