This guy has got it down. I'm just tryin to keep a semi-light mood yall. I know that's not what Bhuddists do. The point is religion will affect your decisions.
I'm just gonna step in quick, and ask everyone to take a deep breath and try to relax in this thread. Things have been getting very heated and although politics and religion are topics that mean a lot to all of you, we still have to maintain a level of civility. So please, clear your heads and relax.
I was going to say the same thing, actually. But in the meantime, I'm going to address the issues mentioned at the beginning of this thread: Name: Louis Nationality: American (Of Cypriot origin) Religious Views: Agnostic (Family is Greek Orthodox) Political Views: Liberal Gay rights: The LGBT community should have all of the rights that heterosexuals do, including those to marriage. These should be legalized nationally. Gun ownership: As stated by SuperDude526, "Heavily restrictive licensing policies, stricter training and psychological examination policies," Market regulation: Government oversight of large corporations and their practices is absolutely necessary. Taxation: Taxes are necessary despite their inconvenience, and those who make more money should be taxed more for the sake of the common good. Healthcare: Allow people to choose from private firms, but provide a minimal government option that has all the basic services for people who cannot afford more expensive private healthcare. Abortion: Only if necessary, i.e. in rape cases or in situations where the mother's life is threatened. Ultimately pro-choice, but women should keep in mind if they simply accidentally got pregnant that there are many couples without children who can't have them. Environment: Considering I'm an Environmental Policy major, I think this is an extremely important matter that the government should stress. It is absolutely necessary that we make a transition from non-renewable resources to renewable resources, that government policy be adjusted to fix our issues with water rights and resource rights. Alternative fuels must be used, buildings must become more energy-efficient, and people in general need to be better-educated from a young age about how to live more sustainably. Recycling and composting needs to become more widespread, and more materials used to make consumables (water bottles, for example) need to become reusable (i.e., make water bottles without BPA in them, which would not only make them reusable but eliminate the risks of developmental problems in children). There's a shit ton more we have to do, but we have to make changes and the sooner we make them, the better off we'll all be. Voting / Suffrage: Tests are necessary, and better education for voters is necessary too. I think it's fair to say that many people who go to the polls are uninformed people. While some people say that this would be the equivalent of a poll tax, it isn't for two reasons: poll taxes were implemented to exclude particular races, and this test would only account for how well-informed people are, which is all people need to be when going to the polls. There's a reason why the Founders of our country did not follow suit with a public assembly as the Greeks did, which is that they did not want uneducated people and people with bad intentions to sway the vote. Voting also needs to be easier to do but still secure enough not to be skewed. Race / gender relations: Total equality is impossible, but it is a goal we must strive for regardless. Only with a strict emphasis on the equality of all peoples can we hope to see racism and discrimination eliminated in future generations. Israel: As with all other countries, stay out of it. We have no right to get involved with other countries unless something completely and utterly inhumane is occurring that threatens the lives of the American people (from the US standpoint). - - - - Addressing an earlier point made throughout the thread: Someone asked earlier why people take religion into account: You would too if you were ultra-religious. That's just how people are. People feel that they will be more adequately represented and accounted for by their government if the person in power is of their religion. That's just how it is. If America were a dominantly Muslim country, we would be advocating for a Muslim President, same goes for Buddhism and Judaism and whatnot. In this particular scenario, we're looking for Christian Presidents, or Protestant ones. Do I agree with this? No. I don't think religion makes any sense to vote on, but people do consider it. People should be voting with the policies of the candidates in mind. Oh yeah, and just as a general note, anyone who takes it upon themselves to insult someone else will receive an infraction. So clear your heads and be mindful of what you say. Thanks.
It goes beyond the religious viewpoint, people are inclined to vote for those candidates that share their core values as well, taking into consideration their stance on subjects such as abortion, the death penalty, etc which in many (not all) cases can be in part determined by a persons religious background. A person who is a devout Catholic is likely to vote for someone that agrees with Church doctrine on abortion, rather than someone that supports it. It might all come back down to religion, but I think you can get the idea.
Name: Dean Nationality: British Religious Views: More or less atheist, from a family that's mostly either Church of England or Catholic. Political Views: Liberal Gay rights: For. Market regulation: Mixed markets. Enough regulation for there to be an even playing field. This isn't really my area of expertise though to be honest. Taxation: Taxes are necessary despite their inconvenience, and those who make more money should be taxed more for the sake of the common good. What Louis said. Healthcare: Shouldn't be a commodity for everyone, but I'm ok with private options being available for people who want them. Abortion: There are cases where I'd be iffy on it but I don't know how that would be legislated, so pro-choice. Environment: The environment should be protected, and most of the measures against pollution and wasting energy and the like seem practical to me anyway. Race / gender relations: For equality, against affirmative action and things like that. When it comes to religion, I think that whatever you believe your rights end where other people's begin.
As for taxes, Calvin Coolidge once said, "Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong".
If someone earns a lot of money, more often than not what they get taxed is probably still peanuts compared to what they keep. I don't see why it'd be that big a deal.
Name: KATHYxx Nationality: USA Religious Views: Secular Humanist Political Views: labels create tribalistic in-group, out-group thinking. I prevent myself from taking mental shortcuts by not aligning myself with any faction. Firstly, Religion: Anyone's core philosophies will radiate out and color all of their subsequent decisions, even when it's indirect and not obvious. Almost all of politics has religious elements at it's core or its voter base. It's much more obvious when you're not of the majority religion. All of the world's beliefs can be categorized in two categories: knowable and unknowable. Knowable is the realm of facts and evidence. Things that we can measure, question and make decisions over with some degree of objectivity, even if there's plenty of grey. The unknowable is the realm of faith: this is where all superstitions sit. Unless religious people provide evidence of their beliefs, it is inherently not fair for them to legislate based on their imaginations, as everyone's idea is different. Every person is entitled to have a belief about the "unknowable" but cannot force anyone else under penalty of law to accept them. The following have origins or justifications in religious belief. Even if you don't think they're religious, many of their proponents justify them for religious reasons, and then disguise that with other rhetoric: Anti-Abortion legislation School Sanctioned Prayer Creationism / Intelligent Design (which is Creationism rebranded after loons discovered that Creationism wouldn't be taught in schools. Don't be fooled) The idea that the world is fair and just Subsequently, the idea that the poor are poor because they are lazy or otherwise deserve it The idea that we shouldn't aid people suffering natural diasters because God is punishing them The idea that black, mexican, jewish, muslim or any other minority is inherently stupider than a white person The idea that women are to obey the head man of the household and should go make a sandwich. Or that women have inferior intelligence / deserve to get raped / etc. The idea that God is on our side in all wars, and our enemies are evil poo-flinging monsters that only exist to undermine our great country The idea that Global Warming can't happen because God wouldn't do such a thing. Anti-Gay laws / Sodomy laws / anything to do with consensual sex. Emphasis on CONSENT. Pedophilia and Bestiality don't include consent. That's why they're different than gay marriage / things other than the missionary position. Alcohol is sitll not consent. All of the above should not be legislated unless religious people can provide *actual* evidence that move their beliefs into the realm of the knowable. As for non-religious things: the Budget: Don't talk to me about cutting programs if the military isn't one of them. If you're firing missles worth as much as any of the organizations you're blathering about, cutting them won't matter. furthermore, I don't believe society should enjoy low taxes while troops are being deployed. If people want war then people should pay for it. Prolonged military spending has crippled countries before. I also think getting out of this budget without both cuts and taxes is a extremely silly idea. Everyone's hurting, so your plight isn't special. Drugs: legalize em, tax em, regulate em. Guns: tax em, regulate em. They are a sort of an infinity-plus-one sword in real life. A game breaker. Science: not infallible, but the #1 source of knowledge that we have. It is to be cherished, not kicked under a rug. The most beautiful thing about it is that it self-corrects. The most important thing : Education. We need education to have educated society, and educated voters, and people to keep this country on top of things. Argumentative Logic should be required for everyone to learn. Furthermore, this is our front line against drugs and other bad stuff. The education model is a little outdated though. Post EDIT: equality: "Reverse Discrimination" is overblown melodrama theater. Do not confuse loss of privilege with being truly disadvantaged. Most white men couldn't tell the difference, not knowing what it's like to be in a minority to start with. Equality is not "well let's just say everyone's equal and make everything the same for everyone and then put our hands in our ears." Because the world is inherently unfair and unequal. We have to make it equal. It's like super smash bros: to find out who's best in a tourney, they always pick stages like final Destination that's flat and is sure to bring out the best in people's skill, and not stages that have a lot of random elements or items. Real life is like the latter.
High five Environmental Policy majors! o/ I want to make an addendum to my taxation bit: I believe the rich's taxes should be higher than the less rich, but all should be high nonetheless (as mentioned, I believe in a social democracy). Also, given higher taxes for the rich that are in place (the top 10% do pay more than the bottom 50% combined), I am sick of teabaggers complaining about how their taxes leave them without a roof over their heads (read: a new flatscreen TV), especially considering national tax rates are the lowest they've been since the Korean War.
Yep, I'm pretty sure it is. The point still stands anyway, that if a politician was a buddhist it isn't unlikely that it would come through in their policies
I'm probably gonna end up sounding increasingly ignorant as I reply to the completely necessary three people telling me I'm wrong, BUT - While buddhism is a religion is the widest sense possible, it's not about following an overseeing all powering creator of the world's ideals and morals - the philosophies of buddhists are based in real life and are less about sin and more about following a loose set of teachings. And I don't really think it can be compared at all to christianity or islam. Well that sure was vague In any case, I also don't see how being a Buddhist would affect someone's decisions in politics. "Staring at bamboo" will probably just help a Buddhist come to more rational and reasonable views, as apposed to someone who's views are affected by someone who will send them to hell or wherever if they don't follow their morals and values. I'm really tired hopefully this makes the tiniest bit of sense.
re·li·gion [ri-lij-uhn] –noun 1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. 2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion. So please enlighten me with how Buddhism is not a religion.