I decided to put this poll together to get a very informal idea of how religion and the subject of gay marriage are related. It probably won't answer any big questions, but it could still be interesting anyway...

---

- Rory
- Owner of Neopoleon
- Monster in the sack

You forgot the Ignostics!

I couldn't answer the poll because there wasn't an option that fit my opinion.

I don't wish to change the religious definition of marriage, only the definition recognized by the government.

I don't care about getting married in your churches, by your religious leaders, or in front of your god(s).

Imposing federal regulations based on the doctrine of whatever religion was popular at the moment is more scary to me than the thought of a man marrying a horse!


Although, the thought of a man and a horse on their wedding night does bring upon a certain cold sweat.  I saw that MPEG that was being sent around via email a few years ago.  Now I understand where the saying "hung like a horse" comes from... 

---

The mind plays tricks on you. You play tricks back! It's like you're unraveling a big cable-knit sweater that someone keeps knitting and knitting and knitting and knitting and knitting and knitting...

I voted for but my mental retardation (buddhism) wasn't named *sniff*. Not that it matters for if we look into the buddhist scriptures the stance on homosexuality is...... non-existent. Isn't that great? It's not an issue. Besides that, the only thing religion says about a person is the book he or she (who uses s/he anymore - and what about the gender neutrals of this world, shouldn't it be s/h/it?) has on the shelf (mostly in mint condition by lack of use).

---

Erwin Blonk
IT admin and troubleshooter
The Netherlands (for now)

eblonk:

I voted for but my mental retardation (buddhism) wasn't named *sniff*. Not that it matters for if we look into the buddhist scriptures the stance on homosexuality is...... non-existent. Isn't that great? It's not an issue. Besides that, the only thing religion says about a person is the book he or she (who uses s/he anymore - and what about the gender neutrals of this world, shouldn't it be s/h/it?) has on the shelf (mostly in mint condition by lack of use).

Something I don't really discuss with anyone is that I am into Buddhism.

And, given its tenets of compassion, tolerance, and understanding, I felt it was entirely unnecessary to put it on the list.

Plus, it's more of a spiritual philosophy than it is a religion. I think, although I could be mistaken, that practitioners of Buddhism who want to worship a higher power, at least in Japan, add Shinto to the list.

That's what the ex-fiancee told me, anyway.

I think.

It was a while ago...

---

- Rory
- Owner of Neopoleon
- Monster in the sack

Rory:

Something I don't really discuss with anyone is that I am into Buddhism.

As it is, I hardly bring it up either in any situation because I feel that it is irrelevant.

Rory:

And, given its tenets of compassion, tolerance, and understanding, I felt it was entirely unnecessary to put it on the list.

Agreed. It was more of a joke, I feel leaving it out was very right.

Rory:

Plus, it's more of a spiritual philosophy than it is a religion. I think, although I could be mistaken, that practitioners of Buddhism who want to worship a higher power, at least in Japan, add Shinto to the list.

That's what the ex-fiancee told me, anyway.

I think.

It was a while ago...

I pretty much agree. There is debate about wheter it is a religion. It differs from philosophy in the sense that it sort of tries to say what life is all about.

I see it like this: if nirvana is a town on a map, no single person gets there by the same path or the same means. If you are to  the west in a car, you drive eastward. That would be useless advice for someone with a bike located in the north. He can't drive and going east wouldn't get him there anyway. To each his own right path, which can easily be something other than buddhism.

So some do worshipping type practices (Shinto is half-buddhist, it has hierarchy as far as I understand it, and although it looks like it here and there, hierarchy is a concept alien to buddhism), others don't. I tend to be of the philosophical kind (always been, even before I knew anything about buddhism). Bowing before a buddha is not so much worship but says 'thank you, I really like your book'. I could fill a few websites with my views on it.

I sometimes listen to the podcasts of a particular Australian monk, Ajahn Brahm aka the Seinfeld of buddhism (he likes to put in jokes, some a bit lame by his own admission). As to homosexuality, he recently talked to the Dalai Lama when he heard his views on the subject were not enlightened enough (he said 'I'll tell him he's wrong').

I used to be on the website of a nice lay buddhist, but he had too much 'buddhism is the best' (although not in that smug or aggressive way that some people promote their religion) in his writings. I don't like that.

I'll stop here because a)it's 2:20 am here and b)it seems I'm promoting buddhism here and I don't want to do that :)

---

Erwin Blonk
IT admin and troubleshooter
The Netherlands (for now)

eblonk:

I pretty much agree. There is debate about wheter it is a religion. It differs from philosophy in the sense that it sort of tries to say what life is all about.

Well, whatever it is, I rather like it. Probably because just about everything I've read either already aligns with my own opinions, or appealed to me more than my previously held opinions.

eblonk:

To each his own right path, which can easily be something other than buddhism.

Word. I just like that it's all sitting there, waiting for me already. And I like that it isn't pushy (it doesn't have to be - it's appealing enough that I was attracted to it without any enticement).

eblonk:

I sometimes listen to the podcasts of a particular Australian monk, Ajahn Brahm aka the Seinfeld of buddhism (he likes to put in jokes, some a bit lame by his own admission).

I've been listening to some stuff by Jack Kornfield.

At first it felt weird to listen to Buddhism as taught by a westerner, but when I really thought about it, there was nothing odd about it at all.

Except his voice. He has a strange voice...

eblonk:

I used to be on the website of a nice lay buddhist, but he had too much 'buddhism is the best' (although not in that smug or aggressive way that some people promote their religion) in his writings. I don't like that.

It's a weird situation - I do sometimes think like that: "It's the best." But, I think that, for the most part, the kind of people who are genuinely attracted to it are not the kind of people who want to rub it in other people's faces that it's #1.

I just quietly enjoy it :)

eblonk:

I'll stop here because a)it's 2:20 am here and b)it seems I'm promoting buddhism here and I don't want to do that :)

Again, there's that weird thing - you love it, but don't want to push it on people.

It almost makes me feel like it's doomed by its own kind, passive nature.

---

- Rory
- Owner of Neopoleon
- Monster in the sack

Rory:

Well, whatever it is, I rather like it.

Which is the whole point anyway.

Rory:

Probably because just about everything I've read either already aligns with my own opinions, or appealed to me more than my previously held opinions.

Same here. I had opinions I formed by myself since I was, well, since I can remember (my mother can recall that I read the newspapers since I was 8yo and refused to read a certain paper for the bias and sensationalism). After 3 decades, I ran into buddhism. It took another 2 years to actually meet a real life buddhist :)

Rory:

I've been listening to some stuff by Jack Kornfield.

Word. I should check him out.

Rory:

At first it felt weird to listen to Buddhism as taught by a westerner, but when I really thought about it, there was nothing odd about it at all.

As it is, the first book I read was by Lama Surya Das, an American. And Brahm is a british bloke.

Rory:

eblonk:

but he had too much 'buddhism is the best' in his writings. I don't like that.

It's a weird situation - I do sometimes think like that: "It's the best." But, I think that, for the most part, the kind of people who are genuinely attracted to it are not the kind of people who want to rub it in other people's faces that it's #1.

I know exactly what you mean. I gave that a lot of thought. Not that I'm almost nearly sure now. Buddhism is a means to an end, it's not a goal in itself. It sets itself apart from especially the Abrahamic religions by stating that after you reach nirvana, buddhism is not of any use anymore. And there is that story in which some VIP (probably a king) comes to the buddha saying he wants to convert and gets the advice to think real hard why he wants that. The message is two-fold. One, if you can't find what you need in your own convictions, what are the odds you find it by adopting a different set of principles? Two, buddhism is just an instrument, be sure it is of use to you before you pick it up, there are other ways to go about it.

Suppose you are someone that really needs someone with a stick behind them to be nice. Buddhism can't help you there. People that need that are not less than people who are nice because they think it's great to be nice. It's best that they get what they need,even if the deity in question does not exist (you might notice I neatly side-step the issue that such religions also attract the power hungry that eagerly provide and handle the stick, but not out of the goodness of their hearts). The stickman is a shaky foundation however, because the stick-craver might stop believing in the stickman, or change his interpretation. The latter is even more dangerous, because stickman believers don't think they have an interpretation of their religion, they believe they know it the right way and before you know they take up the stick themselves, after stickman told them how he wants it wielded. A sticky subject.

Rory:

eblonk:

I'll stop here because a)it's 2:20 am here and b)it seems I'm promoting buddhism here and I don't want to do that :)

Again, there's that weird thing - you love it, but don't want to push it on people.

It almost makes me feel like it's doomed by its own kind, passive nature.

It might. But than again, it will return by any other name. Or you might say it's always there, it needs zero adherents to exist.

The thing is, buddhism leaves no room for aggression. Many religions have ways to incorporate aggression (either active conversions or downright violence) in their system. If buddhism does that it self-destructs, it cannot co-exist with aggression. I don't know exactly how Gotama pulled that one off, but you just can't. It's like dividing by zero.

---

Erwin Blonk
IT admin and troubleshooter
The Netherlands (for now)

WOW i see what kind of people are at this site....I just love hearing people try to defend being gay. I love them , but they are sick and need help.   You know that does not belong there.. boys have a penis..girls have a vagina....it takes them both to make children.   OTB

OTB,

Are you saying that sex should be used only for procreation?  Unless they are not fertile, gay men and women can have babies if they choose to.  There are numerous examples of gay women that are inseminated (artificially or naturally) and carry a baby to term.  Why should the sexual preference of another, even if you don't understand it, be any of your concern?  Is it because of your religious bigotry towards homosexuals?  One could argue that those deluded by a mythical, baseless religion are sick and need help.  Don't worry, I still love you.

---

The mind plays tricks on you. You play tricks back! It's like you're unraveling a big cable-knit sweater that someone keeps knitting and knitting and knitting and knitting and knitting and knitting...

Regardless of whatever your religion, once you adopt the philosophies of that practice and incorporate them into your daily life, it becomes more than just a religion or a philosophy- it becomes a way of life.  I personally am a Buddhist but I also agree with a lot of other philosophies that other religions promote as well.

I think each person needs to decide for themselves what is right for them.  I agree with Eblonk in that I don't believe in the propagation or promoting of Buddhism.  If you want to learn more, great, I'll point you in the right direction and tell you to give it a go, but I won't preach to you the greatness and virtues of Buddhism. Just because most Buddhists don't go door to door passing out pamphlets doesn't necessarily mean that we're being passive; we are living the way a Buddhist is supposed to: we are just being the way we are.

I am a Christian but do not see attacks on lifestyles of the lost productive.  My faith does not fall apart if words or concepts like "Marriage" are redefined or are not understood.  These fights are lame attempts to make the World a Better place in which to go to Hell.  Futile to say the least.

---

MGySgt Christopher B. Wisehart
USMC Retired