Best Fundie Quotes of All Time

[Humodour]

Oh god, I actually bothered to visit that quote site and I am so depressed. How can people be that stupid?

[Sand]

Oh god, I actually bothered to visit that quote site and I am so depressed. How can people be that stupid?

 

Never underestimate the stupidity of religious fanatics. There is a good reason why sheep is often used as a metaphor in Christianity.

[julianw]

^Jesus likes lamb?

[Humodour]

Oh god, I actually bothered to visit that quote site and I am so depressed. How can people be that stupid?

 

Never underestimate the stupidity of religious fanatics. There is a good reason why sheep is often used as a metaphor in Christianity.

 

Christians aren't that bad here. It would be much more accurate to apply that metaphor to Scientology and those who support Sharia law.

[Sand]

I was just poking fun at Christian extremists. Religious extremists are always annoying regardless of what religion they adhere to, with the exception of Bhuddist extremists.

[Humodour]

Yeah I was thinking about that. Buddhism rocks. Hinduism seems pretty passive, too... though out of all mainstream religions, I would nominate Hinduism for making the least sense.

[Sand]

Hindu extremists can be very violent: http://www.crosswalk.com/news/religiontoday/11559225/print/

[Xard]

Oh god, I actually bothered to visit that quote site and I am so depressed. How can people be that stupid?

 

Never underestimate the stupidity of religious fanatics. There is a good reason why sheep is often used as a metaphor in Christianity.

 

 

 

"With bright knives he releaseth my soul

He maketh me to hang on hooks in high places

He converteth me to lamb cutlets

For lo, he hath great power, and great hunger

When cometh the day we lowly ones

Through quiet reflection and great dedication

Master the art of karate

Lo, we shall rise up

And then we'll make the bugger's eyes water"

 

[Sand]

[Guest The Architect]

I lol'd too.

[Walsingham]

I'm sure it's possible to find equivalently stupid quotes from nonreligious or moderately religious people.

 

It's completely impossible. Religion is a retrovirus left over from paleolithic times and contracted from touching religious icons. It changes the way neurons connect so they flap about in the brain like seaweed at low tide. Which is why fundamentalists should be vivisected alongside other groups with proven lowly IQs like coloureds and poor people.

[Sand]

And that is coming from one of our more loving moderators!

[Walsingham]

And that is coming from one of our more loving moderators!

 

Wait, is me being bigoted more ironic than you not getting my irony?

[thepixiesrock]

I don't know, Hades usually doesn't get the irony. But he'll say he got it after this.

[Nick_i_am]

Now he'll just make a witty comment about 'pixie sticks' in lue of somthing original.

 

Religious extremists are always annoying regardless of what religion they adhere to, with the exception of Bhuddist extremists.

 

This is BS by the way, Bhuddist Extremists are as bad as everyone else. Just look at Tibet mid last cenutury where gangs of police-monks roamed around happily beating up the populus. No religion is people-poof, even those that don't even really define themselves as a religion.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Have we seen Pastafaria extremism yet?

[Humodour]

This is BS by the way, Bhuddist Extremists are as bad as everyone else. Just look at Tibet mid last cenutury where gangs of police-monks roamed around happily beating up the populus. No religion is people-poof, even those that don't even really define themselves as a religion.

 

Tibet mid-last century was under Chinese oppression.

 

Care to back up your claims?

[Qwerty the Sir]

Care to back up your claims?

 

I've heard news stories about the Monks in Tibet as well.

 

Hulegu Khan. Either Buddhist himself or very favorable and sympathetic towards Buddhism and following many of its teachings. Killed a lot of folks.

 

Had a Nestorian Christian (a very inward looking, pacifist sect of Christianity) wife, who hated Muslims with a passion. So Hulegu treated them worse than the other people who were treated pretty bad to start.

 

A cursory glance at East Asian (India, China and the lands in between) history will show many "civil holy wars" against "heretical" sects of Buddhism.

 

People generally are not so nice. It kinda goes beyond religion (or ideology)...

Edited February 5, 2008 by Qwerty the Sir

[Nick_i_am]

Tibet mid-last century was under Chinese oppression.

 

Care to back up your claims?

 

Sorry, I was way too vaige. 1960s-70s onwards saw the oppression of cirtain sects of buddhism within Tibet, notably of the Santi Asoke movement which was, frankly, persecuted for its anti-establishment mentality.

Edited February 5, 2008 by Nick_i_am

[Humodour]

Care to back up your claims?

Hulegu Khan. Either Buddhist himself or very favorable and sympathetic towards Buddhism and following many of its teachings. Killed a lot of folks.

 

1) That was in 1200 AD.

2) He didn't kill in the name of Buddhism, so you're making an extremely tenuous link there

3) He was actually a lax Christian. He only started to change over to Buddhism near his death.

 

Honestly, you're digging up some strange things to try and paint Buddhism in the same dark light as other religions.

 

Tibet mid-last century was under Chinese oppression.

 

Care to back up your claims?

 

Sorry, I was way too vaige. 1960s-70s onwards saw the oppression of cirtain sects of buddhism within Tibet, notably of the Santi Asoke movement which was, frankly, persecuted for its anti-establishment mentality.

 

From what I read, the 80 or so arrests were a product of Thailand's politics rather than religion. And happily I see no reference to murder or torture.

 

More radical than Dhammakaya and Buddhadasa schools, Santi Asoke is anti-establishment, actively questioning the role and actions of the Thai government. The sect split from the Thai sangha in response to disapproval regarding their independent practices, and remains a separate movement. Many Thais embraced the movement

Edited February 5, 2008 by Krezack

[Nick_i_am]

See above post, the 'follow or suffer' mentality that is the root problem of the fundimentals of all religious orginisations is no less present in buddhism than anywhere else.

[Qwerty the Sir]

Care to back up your claims?

Hulegu Khan. Either Buddhist himself or very favorable and sympathetic towards Buddhism and following many of its teachings. Killed a lot of folks.

 

1) That was in 1200 AD.

2) He didn't kill in the name of Buddhism, so you're making an extremely tenuous link there

3) He was actually a lax Christian. He only started to change over to Buddhism near his death.

 

Honestly, you're digging up some strange things to try and paint Buddhism in the same dark light as other religions.

 

Does time really have anything to do with it? Anyway, the example of the Monks is there if you think recency is more relevant.

 

I recall reading some documents for a class I took that certainly have him refer to his conquests and link it with religious reasons and general religio-speak. Both in Buddhist and Nestorian Christian terms. You might be able to find them from a scholarly article archive or University Library.

 

The Wikipedia article that states this fails to mention other sayings of Hulegu and his strong Buddhist symphaties throughout his life, both early and late. The ambiguity with his sayings is the reason why I didn't outright call him a Buddhist.

 

I'm not trying to paint any religion in any way by the way, just agreeing with someone's sentiment that Buddhism has had "religious extremists" as well, while many people seem to look at it with a different brush than other religions.

[Humodour]

See above post, the 'follow or suffer' mentality that is the root problem of the fundimentals of all religious orginisations is no less present in buddhism than anywhere else.

 

Yet as I pointed out, it was a political dispute in one country of many which practice Buddhism; one even where nobody was murdered or tortured. I'm finding it very hard to reconcile that with "Buddhist extremists".

[Humodour]

Care to back up your claims?

Hulegu Khan. Either Buddhist himself or very favorable and sympathetic towards Buddhism and following many of its teachings. Killed a lot of folks.

 

1) That was in 1200 AD.

2) He didn't kill in the name of Buddhism, so you're making an extremely tenuous link there

3) He was actually a lax Christian. He only started to change over to Buddhism near his death.

 

Honestly, you're digging up some strange things to try and paint Buddhism in the same dark light as other religions.

 

Does time really have anything to do with it? Anyway, the example of the Monks is there if you think recency is more relevant.

 

What monks? I tried to find some information on this, but your reference was too vague.

 

I recall reading some documents for a class I took that certainly have him refer to his conquests and link it with religious reasons and general religio-speak. Both in Buddhist and Nestorian Christian terms. You might be able to find them from a scholarly article archive or University Library.

 

The Wikipedia article that states this fails to mention other sayings of Hulegu and his strong Buddhist symphaties throughout his life, both early and late. The ambiguity with his sayings is the reason why I didn't outright call him a Buddhist.

 

I still fail to comprehend how one being Buddhist and having power means that if one abuses said power, he does so in the name of Buddhism. This seems to be what you're implying with the grandson of Genghis Khan.

 

I'm not trying to paint any religion in any way by the way, just agreeing with someone's sentiment that Buddhism has had "religious extremists" as well, while many people seem to look at it with a different brush than other religions.

 

Fair enough. I'm just not about to pigeon hole Buddhism with other religions unless I have evidence that it makes sense to do so; which I don't.

 

And yes, time matters to some degree. Mainly because this thread is about the here and now; stuff that's happened in recent history - last 50 to 100 years.

 

And yes time matters because, for example, Christianity that was practised 1500 years ago is not the same Christianity practised today, no? The names may not differ, but many other things do. Would you blame Mormons for the crusades?

[Nick_i_am]

Really? The leader and upper echilon of Santi Asoke was arrested and thrown in jail for up to 32 years in a move clearly designed to oppress the movement.

 

Call it what you want, Buddhism runs Tibet and this is clearly an example of a majority ruling sect opressing a splinter-sect that was nibbling at its heels both religiously and politically.

 

Sure, you can say that nobody is blowing themselves up or invading the middle-east, but can you really excuse it as not being fueled by the same mentality that causes all of the above?

 

Becides this, lets not forget the warrior monks of Japan from the 10th to 16th centuries that, in varying degrees, would use buddhism as an excuse to throw their weight around over issues of politics or local resorces.

 

And that's what it boils down to, an excuse to be a git.

 

Don't get be wrong, even for a second, Buddhism is awsome and I wish all religions could be more like it, but it is NOT people-proof. People can, have and will abuse it for their own gain.

 

EDIT: just to clarify again, the only reason Buddism should be lumped with any other religion is because that it still, fundimentally, sets up a hirarchy of power which can be used and abused by those at the top and uses the faith of the peons as its keystone. All the noble scriptures in the world can't save a religion from a rotten upper echilon, and even if such hasn't happened to buddhism to your satisfaction that doesn't in any way mean it couldn't.

 

EDIT2: and while I think of it, what about the monks who burn themselves alive? It's not directly hurting anyone, thankfully, but it's still martyrdom, a tell-tale sign of extremism, even if it is a responce to opression (after all, all extremists belive themselves oppressed in some way).

Edited February 5, 2008 by Nick_i_am