Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SGI] Earth Charter

Expand Messages
  • dreemn_bear
    --Ok, Andy. What you are really doing is complaining and objecting to a fundamentalist point of view. Don t let S.G.I. or Ikeda take a stand for anything.
    Message 1 of 8 , Nov 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --Ok, Andy.


      What you are really doing is complaining and objecting to a
      fundamentalist point of view. Don't let S.G.I. or Ikeda take a
      stand for anything.
      Then you take a rock hard position of intolerance to the other
      side.
      Since when was having an opinion and striving for change and
      improvement a tyrrany of evil?

      No change is all good, or for that matter. . all bad. Some
      line and priority has to be set or all that is left is stasis and
      stagnation. That IS ALL BAD.

      Todd Evans.

      /./././././././././.
      H H H H HH H H HH H
      First and foremost, I objected, as I always have, to the
      organization
      > taking ANY political stance, left, right or whatever. To do so is
      to
      > alienate the "other" side. Bill Anker, in another post on this
      > topic, explains very well why it's a bad idea for a religious
      > organization which claims to want to reach "all" people, to
      support
      > and endorse political views which are attractive to some, but
      > repugnant to others.
      >
      > That I happen to dwell on the libertarian side of things is not as
      > important, but of course I objected to the organization's official
      > support of such corrupt organizations as the U.N. and such
      > politically misguided movements and the Earth Charter. For many
      > years that, in itself, did not chase me away, but when more
      serious
      > factors, of which I've spoken at length elsewhere and when,
      reached a
      > certain weight, this particular issue also weighed in. A factor,
      > yes, but not a major one.
      >
      > But here's the kicker: consider any individual who believes, as I
      do,
      > that the Earth Charter is underlaid with a socialist agenda (see
      my
      > post regarding that), who is introduced to the SGI and meets
      Carson,
      > or maybe you, who enthusiastically presents this snippet (as
      Carson
      > just did):
      >
      > "SGI President Ikeda has said: `The Earth Charter is not 'just'
      about
      > the environment. It is broad, encompassing respect for all living
      > beings, the eradication of poverty, the need for justice, and
      > building a culture of peace. The Earth Charter is actually about
      > values, the kind of values we as human beings need to cultivate in
      > order to make our continued existence sustainable. It may be
      > considered a guideline for humanity in the 21st century."
      >
      > "Guideline for humanity?" I'd be outta there. Mr. Ikeda's words
      here
      > sound nice, but the reality is that the Earth Charter (and by
      > default, whether he realizes it or not, Mr. Ikeda) is promoting a
      > socialist collectivist agenda. That's fine for socialists and
      > collectivists, but don't expect anyone else to line up to join
      (once
      > they are honestly apprised of this aspect of your organization,
      which
      > is not always the case, I realize).
      >
      > Of course the really interesting thing (and sad, to some) is that
      > there are lots of folks in your organization who simply write off
      > folks like me, compassionately "knowing" that eventually, maybe
      next
      > lifetime, we'll come around, and in the meantime it's just our
      karma
      > to be so ignorant (or myopic?). Too bad, they say, but kosen-rufu
      > will happen anyway.
      >
      > Cheers!
      >
      > Andy
    • andyhanlen1@aol.com
      Todd wrote:
      Message 2 of 8 , Nov 2, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Todd wrote:

        << --Ok, Andy. What you are really doing is complaining and objecting to a
        fundamentalist point of view. Don't let S.G.I. or Ikeda take a stand for
        anything. >>

        Nope. You clearly did not read what I wrote. Try again (below). It's not
        too hard to discern. Here it is in a nutshell:

        ---> I objected, as I always have, to the organization taking ANY political
        stance, left, right or whatever. To do so is to alienate the "other" side.
        <---

        That's all. If the organization is to be primarily concerned with its
        bodhisattva mission of "widely spreading and teaching" Nichiren Buddhism, then it
        behooves it to refrain from any particular political stance. That's not
        rocket science.

        And, lest you be more confused, please understand that I don't even really
        object to the SGI's left-of-center political positions. It is a free
        organization and can do whatever it likes. I have left it for this and other
        reasons, and simply comment here. My comment may be of use to those in your
        organization who have an interest in helping to shape it into an organization that
        is as open and welcoming as possible to those interested in Nichiren Buddhism,
        regardless of political affiliation.

        Yes, I realize that this is not a great concern. If it were, the
        organization would have maintained a scrupulous political neutrality years ago. Okay.

        Just don't try to paint it as something it is not. And don't expect it to
        be attractive to almost half of the country.

        Cheers!

        Andy



        In a message dated 11/2/2004 3:45:30 AM Central Standard Time,
        vbu7-gax7@... writes:

        --Ok, Andy.


        What you are really doing is complaining and objecting to a
        fundamentalist point of view. Don't let S.G.I. or Ikeda take a
        stand for anything.
        Then you take a rock hard position of intolerance to the other
        side.
        Since when was having an opinion and striving for change and
        improvement a tyrrany of evil?

        No change is all good, or for that matter. . all bad. Some
        line and priority has to be set or all that is left is stasis and
        stagnation. That IS ALL BAD.

        Todd Evans.

        /./././././././././.
        H H H H HH H H HH H
        First and foremost, I objected, as I always have, to the
        organization
        > taking ANY political stance, left, right or whatever. To do so is
        to
        > alienate the "other" side. Bill Anker, in another post on this
        > topic, explains very well why it's a bad idea for a religious
        > organization which claims to want to reach "all" people, to
        support
        > and endorse political views which are attractive to some, but
        > repugnant to others.
        >
        > That I happen to dwell on the libertarian side of things is not as
        > important, but of course I objected to the organization's official
        > support of such corrupt organizations as the U.N. and such
        > politically misguided movements and the Earth Charter. For many
        > years that, in itself, did not chase me away, but when more
        serious
        > factors, of which I've spoken at length elsewhere and when,
        reached a
        > certain weight, this particular issue also weighed in. A factor,
        > yes, but not a major one.
        >
        > But here's the kicker: consider any individual who believes, as I
        do,
        > that the Earth Charter is underlaid with a socialist agenda (see
        my
        > post regarding that), who is introduced to the SGI and meets
        Carson,
        > or maybe you, who enthusiastically presents this snippet (as
        Carson
        > just did):
        >
        > "SGI President Ikeda has said: `The Earth Charter is not 'just'
        about
        > the environment. It is broad, encompassing respect for all living
        > beings, the eradication of poverty, the need for justice, and
        > building a culture of peace. The Earth Charter is actually about
        > values, the kind of values we as human beings need to cultivate in
        > order to make our continued existence sustainable. It may be
        > considered a guideline for humanity in the 21st century."
        >
        > "Guideline for humanity?" I'd be outta there. Mr. Ikeda's words
        here
        > sound nice, but the reality is that the Earth Charter (and by
        > default, whether he realizes it or not, Mr. Ikeda) is promoting a
        > socialist collectivist agenda. That's fine for socialists and
        > collectivists, but don't expect anyone else to line up to join
        (once
        > they are honestly apprised of this aspect of your organization,
        which
        > is not always the case, I realize).
        >
        > Of course the really interesting thing (and sad, to some) is that
        > there are lots of folks in your organization who simply write off
        > folks like me, compassionately "knowing" that eventually, maybe
        next
        > lifetime, we'll come around, and in the meantime it's just our
        karma
        > to be so ignorant (or myopic?). Too bad, they say, but kosen-rufu
        > will happen anyway.
        >
        > Cheers!
        >
        > Andy






        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Don Gropp
        My preference is for Humanistic Socialism or Social Humanism...but of course a political system doesn t really matter as long as concern for the human being is
        Message 3 of 8 , Nov 2, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          My preference is for Humanistic Socialism or Social Humanism...but of
          course a political system doesn't really matter as long as concern
          for the human being is put first and foremost.

          The word Democracy means one thing to a conservative and another to a
          liberal. I'm not sure what it means to a libertarian.


          --- In SokaGakkaiInternational@yahoogroups.com, andyhanlen1@a...
          wrote:
          >
          > Todd wrote:
          >
          > << --Ok, Andy. What you are really doing is complaining and
          objecting to a
          > fundamentalist point of view. Don't let S.G.I. or Ikeda take a
          stand for
          > anything. >>
          >
          > Nope. You clearly did not read what I wrote. Try again (below).
          It's not
          > too hard to discern. Here it is in a nutshell:
          >
          > ---> I objected, as I always have, to the organization taking ANY
          political
          > stance, left, right or whatever. To do so is to alienate
          the "other" side.
          > <---
          >
          > That's all. If the organization is to be primarily concerned with
          its
          > bodhisattva mission of "widely spreading and teaching" Nichiren
          Buddhism, then it
          > behooves it to refrain from any particular political stance.
          That's not
          > rocket science.
          >
          > And, lest you be more confused, please understand that I don't even
          really
          > object to the SGI's left-of-center political positions. It is a
          free
          > organization and can do whatever it likes. I have left it for this
          and other
          > reasons, and simply comment here. My comment may be of use to
          those in your
          > organization who have an interest in helping to shape it into an
          organization that
          > is as open and welcoming as possible to those interested in
          Nichiren Buddhism,
          > regardless of political affiliation.
          >
          > Yes, I realize that this is not a great concern. If it were, the
          > organization would have maintained a scrupulous political
          neutrality years ago. Okay.
          >
          > Just don't try to paint it as something it is not. And don't
          expect it to
          > be attractive to almost half of the country.
          >
          > Cheers!
          >
          > Andy
          >
          >
          >
          > In a message dated 11/2/2004 3:45:30 AM Central Standard Time,
          > vbu7-gax7@s... writes:
          >
          > --Ok, Andy.
          >
          >
          > What you are really doing is complaining and objecting to a
          > fundamentalist point of view. Don't let S.G.I. or Ikeda take a
          > stand for anything.
          > Then you take a rock hard position of intolerance to the other
          > side.
          > Since when was having an opinion and striving for change and
          > improvement a tyrrany of evil?
          >
          > No change is all good, or for that matter. . all bad. Some
          > line and priority has to be set or all that is left is stasis and
          > stagnation. That IS ALL BAD.
          >
          > Todd Evans.
          >
          > /./././././././././.
          > H H H H HH H H HH H
          > First and foremost, I objected, as I always have, to the
          > organization
          > > taking ANY political stance, left, right or whatever. To do so
          is
          > to
          > > alienate the "other" side. Bill Anker, in another post on this
          > > topic, explains very well why it's a bad idea for a religious
          > > organization which claims to want to reach "all" people, to
          > support
          > > and endorse political views which are attractive to some, but
          > > repugnant to others.
          > >
          > > That I happen to dwell on the libertarian side of things is not
          as
          > > important, but of course I objected to the organization's
          official
          > > support of such corrupt organizations as the U.N. and such
          > > politically misguided movements and the Earth Charter. For many
          > > years that, in itself, did not chase me away, but when more
          > serious
          > > factors, of which I've spoken at length elsewhere and when,
          > reached a
          > > certain weight, this particular issue also weighed in. A
          factor,
          > > yes, but not a major one.
          > >
          > > But here's the kicker: consider any individual who believes, as
          I
          > do,
          > > that the Earth Charter is underlaid with a socialist agenda (see
          > my
          > > post regarding that), who is introduced to the SGI and meets
          > Carson,
          > > or maybe you, who enthusiastically presents this snippet (as
          > Carson
          > > just did):
          > >
          > > "SGI President Ikeda has said: `The Earth Charter is not 'just'
          > about
          > > the environment. It is broad, encompassing respect for all
          living
          > > beings, the eradication of poverty, the need for justice, and
          > > building a culture of peace. The Earth Charter is actually about
          > > values, the kind of values we as human beings need to cultivate
          in
          > > order to make our continued existence sustainable. It may be
          > > considered a guideline for humanity in the 21st century."
          > >
          > > "Guideline for humanity?" I'd be outta there. Mr. Ikeda's words
          > here
          > > sound nice, but the reality is that the Earth Charter (and by
          > > default, whether he realizes it or not, Mr. Ikeda) is promoting
          a
          > > socialist collectivist agenda. That's fine for socialists and
          > > collectivists, but don't expect anyone else to line up to join
          > (once
          > > they are honestly apprised of this aspect of your organization,
          > which
          > > is not always the case, I realize).
          > >
          > > Of course the really interesting thing (and sad, to some) is
          that
          > > there are lots of folks in your organization who simply write
          off
          > > folks like me, compassionately "knowing" that eventually, maybe
          > next
          > > lifetime, we'll come around, and in the meantime it's just our
          > karma
          > > to be so ignorant (or myopic?). Too bad, they say, but kosen-
          rufu
          > > will happen anyway.
          > >
          > > Cheers!
          > >
          > > Andy
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.