Well that’s just objectively false. Like it or not, religion is a hugely significant part of history, and it’s incredibly important for contextualization.
Besides, in the modern era, if it’s not hurting anyone, why do you care? Let them alone to do their thing in peace.
Superstition is also a large part of Steve Jobs history, it’s what killed him.
So would he have been better off if he had not been superstitious?
Exercising religious superstition is not culture, it’s stupidity that harm both society and the individual.
Stupidity is a significant part of our history, that doesn’t mean we should preserve stupidity.
A lot of culture, is irrational and or superstitious. Tibetan culture has a lot of that, Chinese culture as well and American culture is also no exception.
You may find that disagreeable and not worth preserving, and I’m even inclined to agree with that on many occasions. But who is to decide which parts of ones own culture can be done away with, if not the people practicing that culture?
Can I decide which parts of your culture don’t agree with MY values and take that away from you?
Yes but regarding culture people always talk about how we need to preserve culture, obviously we shouldn’t actively work to preserve stupidity.
And religion is stupid superstition and doesn’t deserve to be preserved, and where it is demonstrably harmful to others, it should definitely not be allowed.
It’s no different than Nazi propaganda and organisations being illegal in most countries.
Can I decide which parts of your culture don’t agree with MY values and take that away from you?
If parts of our culture is demonstrably harmful, it is in our own interests to remove those parts. Racism would be a good example. And we are working on it, but somehow people keep being racist.
Would that be worth taking away his autonomy and will without consent?
Make all the misguided excuses you want for what China is doing. It won’t make it right. It was wrong when the United States did it to my family. And it is wrong when China is doing it now.
If China wants to help them. Then offer them opportunity and choice. If the opportunities and choice are better. Their culture will adapt and change to it. Forcing eradication of their culture through violence will only breed resentment and grievance.
Would that be worth taking away his autonomy and will without consent?
Wow congratulations, first real argument in any response I’ve received until now.
But they are not really taking away his autonomy by closing the monastery, they are only putting an end to a harmful practice that is illegal.
Now the part about harmful may be a matter of opinion. But personally I believe religious practices are mostly harmful.
How is that not taking away autonomy? That’s kind of literally the definition of. They aren’t appealing for them to close the monastery on their own. They are forcing it.
You and I can both state plainly that the practices are harmful. And even justify the assertion. We would never subject ourselves to it by choice. But that’s the thing it has to be a choice. Give them other choices other opportunities. That is absolutely fine.
But the moment you enact your beliefs upon others through violence. It doesn’t matter if you are factually correct. You are no longer the “good guy”. You’ve lost the argument. If you cannot make the case for it on merits alone.
There is a very good reason concepts of imperialism and colonization are frowned upon these days. Why you don’t see many groups talking about going out and civilizing savages. These are the so-called “good intentions” that the proverbial road to Hell is paved with. The same sort of justification that they used to separate my grandmother from her family. And sent her to special schools. The kind that in many places often ended up with mass Graves of children.
Well that’s just objectively false. Like it or not, religion is a hugely significant part of history, and it’s incredibly important for contextualization.
Besides, in the modern era, if it’s not hurting anyone, why do you care? Let them alone to do their thing in peace.
Superstition is also a large part of Steve Jobs history, it’s what killed him.
So would he have been better off if he had not been superstitious?
Exercising religious superstition is not culture, it’s stupidity that harm both society and the individual.
Stupidity is a significant part of our history, that doesn’t mean we should preserve stupidity.
People have a right to be stupid, though.
A lot of culture, is irrational and or superstitious. Tibetan culture has a lot of that, Chinese culture as well and American culture is also no exception.
You may find that disagreeable and not worth preserving, and I’m even inclined to agree with that on many occasions. But who is to decide which parts of ones own culture can be done away with, if not the people practicing that culture?
Can I decide which parts of your culture don’t agree with MY values and take that away from you?
Yes but regarding culture people always talk about how we need to preserve culture, obviously we shouldn’t actively work to preserve stupidity.
And religion is stupid superstition and doesn’t deserve to be preserved, and where it is demonstrably harmful to others, it should definitely not be allowed.
It’s no different than Nazi propaganda and organisations being illegal in most countries.
If parts of our culture is demonstrably harmful, it is in our own interests to remove those parts. Racism would be a good example. And we are working on it, but somehow people keep being racist.
Would that be worth taking away his autonomy and will without consent?
Make all the misguided excuses you want for what China is doing. It won’t make it right. It was wrong when the United States did it to my family. And it is wrong when China is doing it now.
If China wants to help them. Then offer them opportunity and choice. If the opportunities and choice are better. Their culture will adapt and change to it. Forcing eradication of their culture through violence will only breed resentment and grievance.
Wow congratulations, first real argument in any response I’ve received until now.
But they are not really taking away his autonomy by closing the monastery, they are only putting an end to a harmful practice that is illegal.
Now the part about harmful may be a matter of opinion. But personally I believe religious practices are mostly harmful.
How is that not taking away autonomy? That’s kind of literally the definition of. They aren’t appealing for them to close the monastery on their own. They are forcing it.
You and I can both state plainly that the practices are harmful. And even justify the assertion. We would never subject ourselves to it by choice. But that’s the thing it has to be a choice. Give them other choices other opportunities. That is absolutely fine.
But the moment you enact your beliefs upon others through violence. It doesn’t matter if you are factually correct. You are no longer the “good guy”. You’ve lost the argument. If you cannot make the case for it on merits alone.
There is a very good reason concepts of imperialism and colonization are frowned upon these days. Why you don’t see many groups talking about going out and civilizing savages. These are the so-called “good intentions” that the proverbial road to Hell is paved with. The same sort of justification that they used to separate my grandmother from her family. And sent her to special schools. The kind that in many places often ended up with mass Graves of children.