Buddhism has found a new institutional home in the West: the corporation

Post by watwut » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 6:03 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #373

standardUser wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many, many nations allow 2nd trimester and late term abortions, though those are always extremely rare and often have complicating circumstances. I don't tend to respect people who use the fringe case to argue the mainstream point as I find it disingenuous.

Only two EU countries allow elective abortions—what we’re talking about here—significantly into the second trimester. The Netherlands applies a viability standard similar to Roe , and Sweden draws the line at 18 weeks. Every other EU country has found that a fetus is sufficiently developed at 12-14 weeks that its life can’t be extinguished absent extenuating circumstances. For that reason, you can’t sweep them under…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 7:03 AM UTC

thisiscorrect wrote: post #293

pc2g4d wrote: post #281

"Chen: What we see is the erasure of Buddhism as a religion or tradition that Asians or Asian Americans can claim or identify with." She writes from a race-essentialist framing to a degree and that drives me crazy. "white Americans" "white Westerners" x6 There's a sort of cultural appropriation shame being layered here---as if it's bad to have light skin and be interested in Buddhism, or adapt Buddhism to your existi…

Somehow these arguments about cultural appropriation only ever go one way. I've never heard anyone claim that it's cultural appropriation when non-Westerners adopt -- and benefit from -- various Western schools of thought. I've never felt the urge to gate-keep, say, the germ theory of disease from non-Westerners. What right do I have to do that? What right does the author have to gate-keep Buddhism? Why do people do…

Post by ominous » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 7:15 AM UTC

NoraCodes wrote: post #348

throwawayacc2 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. But, something has cough my attention. > we are almost certainly speaking from completely different ontological perspectives Do you consider me ontologically evil? Am I, as some people on the internet often refer to those with my sense of mortality, “a demon wearing human flash”?

I'm not sure why you would think that, as it's not what I said at all. Rather, I suspect based on this opinion that I disagree with some things you take as axiomatic, and vice versa, and therefore we have little to learn from arguing with each other.

Post by _hcuq » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 9:30 AM UTC

klyrs wrote: post #382

thisiscorrect wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow these arguments about cultural appropriation only ever go one way. I've never heard anyone claim that it's cultural appropriation when non-Westerners adopt -- and benefit from -- various Western schools of thought. I've never felt the urge to gate-keep, say, the germ theory of disease from non-Westerners. What right do I have to do that? What right does the author have to gate-keep Buddhism? Why do people do…

> I've never heard anyone claim that it's cultural appropriation when non-Westerners adopt -- and benefit from -- various Western schools of thought. To be fair, until very recently in history, failure to convert to Christianity and assimilate into the colonial culture was illegal and practicing one's native culture or even speaking the language could get one killed. On the other hand, one could only assimilate so fa…

Post by depr » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 11:08 AM UTC

throwawayacc2 wrote: post #341

Reading the comments, one argument I keep seeing in different form is essentially “corporations/the west are hollowing out/perverting/distorting/using only some parts of buddhist teachings, and this is bad”. Why? Why is modifying an idea, even by twisting it to be the very opposite of it’s “original meaning” ( I don’t believe that exists, everything is a modified version of something else) an intrinsically bad thing?…