Thai PM publicly defies paranormalists

[NoDeity]

In searching to find out whether this had been posted here yet, I saw that the Thai prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, made the news because his daughter was taking a job at McDonalds.

Well, now he's making the news because Boonlert Pairin, a prominent Thai astrologer and senator, claims that the stars are warning of disaster for Thaksin but the PM is having none of it.

I'll use a few short excerpts from a news story at http://canada.com/news/oddities/story.html?id=D5776BE3-C385-4D83-BED4-B53502EE08D6

Pairin told reporters that he checked Thaksin's stars and found that he faces a critical period between Dec. 16 and Jan. 14, possibly in the form of an assassination attempt or an accident.

He said he has written to Thaksin with three solutions to ward off the tragedy: performing a religious rite, meditation to purify the soul or dissolving the parliament. He also urged Thaksin to put off foreign travel. Dissolving the parliament? Heavens... surely the good senator has no ulterior motives!

The PM's response: Thaksin, however, told Pairin and other fortune tellers to burn their books if their predictions prove to be wrong.

"I believe in science and the preaching of Lord Buddha. I don't believe in the supernatural," Thaksin said.

Of course, as always, if nothing happens to Thaksin between mid-December and mid-January, the creeps will have some kind of excuse ready. Still, it's rather refreshing to have a head of government openly declare: "I don't believe in the supernatural".

[rdaneel]

I'm sure JWB doesn't believe in the supernatural, because God forbids it. ;)

[NoDeity]

Actually, there's nothing about fundamentalist Christianity that should lead a fundy to believe that there are no supernatural powers. After all, the Bible does not say that witches don't exist. Rather, it says that one should not permit a witch to live.

[rdaneel]

Now that I think about it, I seem to recall seeing at least one chick tract that shows modern day witches performing evil magic, but I just figured a few isolated loons like chick would believe it. I suppose I shouldn't be suprised if it's more widespread among fundies than that.

[NoDeity]

You overestimated the rationality of American Christianity. :D

Jack Chick might be extreme even among fundies but many of those folks live in a frightening world that is populated by warring demons and angels, supernatural/spiritual forces of good and evil, and they're on the lookout for evil forces that conspire to harm the beloved of God.

Silly? Of course. In my experience, having been raised an evangelical Christian, it's commonly believed.

[thaiboxerken]

Yep, that christian bible is full of paranormal activities, demons, dieties and ghosts. It really wouldn't be christian-like to not believe in such things, because the bible supports the existence of them. Then again, christians pick and choose which parts of the bible to believe and what parts not to.

[T'ai Chi]

Still, it's rather refreshing to have a head of government openly declare: "I don't believe in the supernatural".

LOL!

He also said he believes in "Lord Buddha". :rolleyes:

[NoDeity]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi

He also said he believes in "Lord Buddha". :rolleyes:
Not exactly. He said that he believes in the preaching of "Lord Buddha". He declared allegience to what the man taught, not to the man himself.

The title "Lord" does not necessarily have anything to do with religion. In North America, when we say "Lord" we're generally talking about God or Jesus but that's not the primary meaning of the word.

So, since the title doesn't primarily indicate deity and since Buddha himself did not claim to be a god, we shouldn't leap to the conclusion that Thaksin was refering to Buddha as a god. (I don't actually know that you were making that assumption, though.)

I'm not personally awed by the teachings of Buddha but I know quite a few atheists who do appreciate them. One can be a good Buddhist without believing in God or gods. Personally, I wouldn't necessarily be troubled if my prime minister openly embraced Buddhism. For many, it's more like a philosophy than a religion.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by NoDeity

Not exactly. He said that he believes in the preaching of "Lord Buddha". He declared allegience to what the man taught, not to the man himself.


So he believes in the preaching of Lord Buddha... OK...

I wonder if he believes in the Buddha having supernatural powers?
In the Buddha having undergone countless rebirths?
In the Buddha being holy?
In the Buddha being enlightened?
In the Buddha knowing all worlds?
In the Buddha being a teacher of Gods and men?
In the Buddha knowing the Truth?
In Buddha being able to make his body as samll as the size of an tom?
In the Buddha being able to make his body gigantic?
In the Buddha having mastery of miraculous powers?
In the Buddhist holy wars?


The title "Lord" does not necessarily have anything to do with religion. In North America, when we say "Lord" we're generally talking about God or Jesus but that's not the primary meaning of the word.


Seems to be semantics to me.

[NoDeity]

[shrug] I don't know exactly what he meant when he said that he believes in what Buddha taught -- and neither do you.

[thaiboxerken]

So he believes in the preaching of Lord Buddha... OK...

Which one? There are many Buddha. If you want clarifications for your questions, I suggest you write the Prime Minister yourself.

He also said he believes in "Lord Buddha".

True, it is rather funny because Lord Buddha was probably a mythical figure. One person's superstition is another's religion.

For many, it's more like a philosophy than a religion.

Christians use the same argument for their religion, I see no difference in being a "philosophical" Buddhist or a "religious" Buddhist. Replace Buddhist with Christian, Muslim or other religion and I still don't see the difference.

[Luciana]

Originally posted by NoDeity
Dissolving the parliament? Heavens... surely the good senator has no ulterior motives!


:cs: :j2: :fg:

Thanks for the first belly laugh of the weekend!!!

[NoDeity]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
Christians use the same argument for their religion, I see no difference in being a "philosophical" Buddhist or a "religious" Buddhist. Replace Buddhist with Christian, Muslim or other religion and I still don't see the difference.
Really? I've never heard Christians say that Christianity is more a philosophy than a religion but, hey, maybe you have. I'm not sure what a specifically theistic philosophy that was not a religion would look like but all sorts of thing are possible, right? I'm sure nobody would have a problem being both an atheist and a believer in the Son of God.

Buddha, on the other hand, did not claim to be a deity. I haven't tried it myself but I've been repeatedly assured by those who have that one can be both an atheist and a good Buddhist. They do have that silly business about reincarnation but you'll note that such a notion does not necessarily require god belief.

Like I said earlier, I'm not particularly attracted to Buddhism but to compare it to Christianity is just silly.

[NoDeity]

Originally posted by Luciana Nery


:cs: :j2: :fg:

Thanks for the first belly laugh of the weekend!!!
Thank you for being someone who can appreciate the story for what it is.

[thaiboxerken]

Really? I've never heard Christians say that Christianity is more a philosophy than a religion but, hey, maybe you have.

I have, and yes, they were wrong. They did believe in a god and all of the supernatural that came along with it. But, my point is that christians use the same argument.


Buddha, on the other hand, did not claim to be a deity.

No, but he did claim other supernatural things. It is that supernatural that makes it a religion.

I haven't tried it myself but I've been repeatedly assured by those who have that one can be both an atheist and a good Buddhist.

Yes, but you'd be an atheist that believed in the supernatural. It is a religion because of the supernatural that is contained within the belief system.

They do have that silly business about reincarnation but you'll note that such a notion does not necessarily require god belief.

Nope, but it requires a belief in the supernatural.

Like I said earlier, I'm not particularly attracted to Buddhism but to compare it to Christianity is just silly.

Not really, because while the Buddha's did not claim to be "son of god", they did claim to have some divine knowledge of the universe. Buddha is one of many religious and mythical heros that predated the Jesus stories and that the Jesus story emulates. It's very comparable because both systems contain a supernatural reward and punishment in the afterlife for deeds done during life. They both have no evidence for their supernatural assertions. Buddha is a prophet for all intents.

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

Holy s**t! The prime minister doesn't believe in the paranormal so we must logically conclude it's not real!!!!!!!!!!!! Finally the f**king evidence debunkers have been waiting for!

:crazy: :hit: :hit: :hit: :hit: :hit: :biggrin: :a2: :con2:

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

Originally posted by !Xx+-Rational-+xX!
Holy s**t! The prime minister doesn't believe in the paranormal so we must logically conclude it's not real!!!!!!!!!!!! Finally the f**king evidence debunkers have been waiting for!

:crazy: :hit: :hit: :hit: :hit: :hit: :biggrin: :a2: :con2:

None of you are posting because you know I'm right!

[KelvinG]

Originally posted by !Xx+-Rational-+xX!


None of you are posting because you know I'm right!

Right about what? What's your point exactly?

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

Originally posted by KelvinG


Right about what? What's your point exactly?

This is proof that the paranormal isn't real! Anyone who thinks otherwise is a irrational woo-woo! This is an undeniable fact that science tells us!

*goes back to plotting against crab people*

:j1: :j1: :j2: :wink8: :hit: :bgrin: :a2: :con2: :crazy:

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

And I talk to science all the time....!

:cry: :s2:

[Ladewig]

I notice a strong cultural difference here. If a U.S. senator said to reporters, "the president is going to face a critical period soon; perhaps involving an accident or an assassination attempt unless he (and his party) call for a congressional recess," then that senator would be facing a critical period involving talking to several Secret Service agents (and rightly so).

[thaiboxerken]

Holy s**t! The prime minister doesn't believe in the paranormal so we must logically conclude it's not real!!!!!!!!!!!! Finally the f**king evidence debunkers have been waiting for!


A strawman argument. No one has stated that we must conclude that astrology isn't real simply because the Prime Minister said so. You ass.

We logically conclude astrology doesn't work because it hasn't worked, ever.

This is proof that the paranormal isn't real! Anyone who thinks otherwise is a irrational woo-woo! This is an undeniable fact that science tells us!

No, it's simply evidence that the Prime Minister doesn't believe in that particular form of paranormal activity. But you are correct, anyone that believes in astrology is an irrational woo-woo.

Astrology is not a science, and it's not a method that works to do what it claims. That is a fact.

I notice a strong cultural difference here.

True, but a U.S. Senator probably gives rational and evidential reasons for the statement. If a U.S. Senator said that the bones he divined with told him the same thing, I am thinking the Pres would ignore the advice. Then again..... GW Bush isn't all that bright so he may be a woo woo himself.

[Cinorjer]

Not really, because while the Buddha's did not claim to be "son of god", they did claim to have some divine knowledge of the universe. Buddha is one of many religious and mythical heros that predated the Jesus stories and that the Jesus story emulates. It's very comparable because both systems contain a supernatural reward and punishment in the afterlife for deeds done during life. They both have no evidence for their supernatural assertions. Buddha is a prophet for all intents.

You might want to actually learn something about Buddhism before you spout off. We as skeptics go around complaining the woo woo crowd doesn't bother to learn what science and evolution are all about before launching into diatribes against us. You're making the same mistake. What you've shown is not an informed opinion, but a bias against anything that falls under the label of "religious".

The Buddhism as practiced by myself and many others does not claim Buddha is divine, had divine knowledge, or contains a belief in supernatural reward and punishment or even contain an afterlife. His teachings have nothing to do with any supernatural anything, but are statements of human condition and conduct. People being what they are, many myths and legends have accumulated as people incorporated Buddhism into their native religions, and those may be argued against. But so far, the only thing you're doing is showing those who do know or practice Buddhism that you don't know what you're talking about. It's like someone railing against Christianity who has never bothered to read the Bible.

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

A strawman argument. No one has stated that we must conclude that astrology isn't real simply because the Prime Minister said so. You ass.

No, it's simply evidence that the Prime Minister doesn't believe in that particular form of paranormal activity. But you are correct, anyone that believes in astrology is an irrational woo-woo.



TBGay, duh your a dumb **** sucking f**ktard for trying to sound logical by replying to something that obviously wasn't serious! You better start being more dissmissive or else you will become a woo-woo!

http://www.student.smsu.edu/s/san232s/hardfunnypics/masterobviousbook-Stoltenborg.jpg

[Glory]

Originally posted by NoDeity
You overestimated the rationality of American Christianity. :D

Jack Chick might be extreme even among fundies but many of those folks live in a frightening world that is populated by warring demons and angels, supernatural/spiritual forces of good and evil, and they're on the lookout for evil forces that conspire to harm the beloved of God.

Silly? Of course. In my experience, having been raised an evangelical Christian, it's commonly believed.

I have never known a Christian who did not believe in astrology and witch craft and black magic. They believe utterly that it is evil and dangerous to their immortal souls. I have been warned more than once to stay a way from astrology because it is "not of God" and I would be "messing with forces I do not understand" and which are "very dangerous." Why someone would warn me to stay away from something I have no interest in what so ever is a mystery to me but there it is.

Glory

[thaiboxerken]

You might want to actually learn something about Buddhism before you spout off.

I have, you obviously don't agree with my assessment.

The Buddhism as practiced by myself and many others does not claim Buddha is divine, had divine knowledge, or contains a belief in supernatural reward and punishment or even contain an afterlife.

Ok, maybe you practice a different type of Buddhism than I've been exposed to.

His teachings have nothing to do with any supernatural anything, but are statements of human condition and conduct.

Yea, everything is temporary and all that.

People being what they are, many myths and legends have accumulated as people incorporated Buddhism into their native religions, and those may be argued against.

This is exactly what happens in religions.

But so far, the only thing you're doing is showing those who do know or practice Buddhism that you don't know what you're talking about. It's like someone railing against Christianity who has never bothered to read the Bible.

Wait, one has to read the bible to understand that Christianity is a myth? Buddhism has supernatural beliefs, therefore it is a religion.

[thaiboxerken]

TBGay, duh your a dumb **** sucking f**ktard for trying to sound logical by replying to something that obviously wasn't serious! You better start being more dissmissive or else you will become a woo-woo!


So insulting skeptics isn't a serious thing? I will refute your insults as well as your "serious" arguments. Although I doubt that you have anything but insults in your arsenal.

[Glory]

Originally posted by !Xx+-Rational-+xX!


TBGay, duh your a dumb **** sucking f**ktard for trying to sound logical by replying to something that obviously wasn't serious! You better start being more dissmissive or else you will become a woo-woo!

It would have been more obviously not serious if it had been been funny. Rather, it came across as sarcastic criticism of those of us who are interested in discussing the incident. By resorting to profane name calling, you indicate that you are aware that you really don't have a substantial leg to stand on.

Glory

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

So insulting skeptics isn't a serious thing? I will refute your insults as well as your "serious" arguments. Although I doubt that you have anything but insults in your arsenal.

No! And TBGay never insults anyone here or is sarcastic...!

[thaiboxerken]

No! And TBGay never insults anyone here or is sarcastic...!

I insult people all of the time, but I also refute their arguments logically as well. What happened to your other screenname, did it get banned?

[Cinorjer]

Wait, one has to read the bible to understand that Christianity is a myth? Buddhism has supernatural beliefs, therefore it is a religion.

One has to read the Bible before one can hold an informed opinion about the beliefs and practices of a religion based on the Bible, yes. That is separate from whatever opinions you might have about those who call themselves Christians.

Suppose someone popped on here and wrote "Yea, I know all about evolution. Descended from monkeys and all that." It would be glaringly apparent to you that this person doesn't know what he's talking about and is not interested in anything someone else has to say that disagrees with his beliefs. Supposedly, skeptics are better than that.

By the way, you obviously have no idea of what a myth is, either. Something may be a myth and still be historically accurate, although that's neither here nor there.