sexual_chocolate

your bias is showing.

hmmmm, interesting chimp behaviour that i didn't know about.... i've wondered why humanoids have such strong taboos against gay (mainly male) sex. i think there could be something here....

yes, and is hamas in a position to paint the moon green?

are you quite serious? hamas has spoken repeatedly (many don't want to hear) about recognizing israel in exchange for concessions. plus, they are the elected leaders of the region; do you really think continuing on the current path is going to lead to anything better? there's a proven track record with that one....

Carter, who brokered the 1978 Israeli-Egyptian peace and won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, has defended what he calls his personal peace mission, saying Hamas must be engaged in order to achieve Israeli-Palestinian peace. link this administration is like a 4th grade class: "we don't like you so we won't talk to you. neener neener."

so much for you "cheeriness"... sun is gone, birds are no longer chirping. i said it with a big smile on my face, russkie boy.

hey, god just told me to tell you to STFU! And I heard him perfectly.

hysterectomies are acts of god? why'd they get an hysterectomy? god told them to.

oh jesus, he isn't the only one crying.

you ever heard of sterility being reversed? an act of god being reversed? yeah maybe in the ozarks you haven't heard of it, but people actually get preggo after being acted upon by god. insane, huh?

okay, but in a world of invitro-fertilization lesbians can still have kids, no? possible, but not natural bs (again). everything we stupid humans do is "natural".

Exactly (on all three points).

bs. what's "more conducive to life" at this stage is if we all turn gay and don't reproduce for oh, about 50 years. i imagine you're aware of overpopulation?

and if you define kkk as an idiot, then his opinion has very little merit. the concept of marriage isn't exclusively christian, so saying christian notions need to prevail is asenine. i might draw the line at legitimizing marriage to non-humanoid animals though (cuz how can you be sure rover really isn't being forced into it with threats of a bath, or being fed cat fud?).

that's what i thought....

WHAT?????????????????? PLEASE EXPLAIN.

heh. we bought a house that the sturtevants owned way back almost a hundred years ago or somesuch.

it seems like you have it figured out. congratulations!

that's 70,000 a year. i didn't know she was a trucker.

"only 6000 a month"?

we are? and he is? sounds like you're making up some funny rules here! but even taking that as the starting point, you'll run into a hell of a wide range of "buddhisms", from exoteric layman's buddha and god worship stuff, to stuff i personally think is more in line with siddharta's teachings, ie. personal experiential practice of the path, sans superstitions and beliefs. it'd be slim pickings if you tried to have a "christianity" with only jesus's teachings, now wouldn't it? kinda vague, unknown, few direct quotes, etc. whereas gautama taught for what, 45 years. very little about his life seems to be a mystery, so there is more certainty as to what he really said. better preserved teachings. as far as getting "back to the essence": you try, with a scholarly approach, to do just that, and then try to be honest with the results. sure people are aware of the story of his "enlightenment". and? from my understanding, he wasn't into making a "religion"; he was into teaching people a practice that had lead to his "enlightenment", or liberation. i don't get the feeling he was into a cult of personality, trying to convert people. in fact, it seems he did just the opposite, telling people not to take his word for it but to try the practice. as far as his past life experiences go, that's his gig. you can either believe in them or not, or perhaps have a more esoteric understanding than a simple "soul reincarnation" gig, but that's up to you. maybe it's a central part of "buddhism" to the layman's exoteric understanding, but i hardly view it as a necessary belief. just remember there are more sophisticated ways of understanding "karma" and "reincarnation" than some blind belief in soul and subtle body migrations.

from what passages of siddharta's teachings do you take this? what i've been exposed to is his reluctance to even engage in speculative conversations regarding "soul", "god", "subtle body", etc. I think some citations from a body of liturgy might be in order, so this isn't some disembodied speculative conversation about "buddhism". and nagarjuna came after siddharta.

what is this "supernaturalism" that you refer to in siddharta's teachings?

where do you get this? a bit of a strange position to take, considering the dl's views on one changing their religion (as in "don't do it"). i've personally seen some early polling results: over 75% of the kids who went are now converting to buddhism! these charges might, for the thinking person, require some sort of factual underpinning; care to provide? i think when buddhism traveled to tibet and was incorporated into the existing animistic bon religion, many aspects of it changed. perhaps if you had said "tibetan buddhism has "superstitious" aspects", you might have been a bit more accurate than simply making ungrounded generalizations. just a thought.

i wenta to a the private schoola.