Video about quest to get Dalai Lama to carry Olympic torch

Discuss

76 Responses to “Video about quest to get Dalai Lama to carry Olympic torch”

  1. Takuan says:

    a 1994 interview with OUT magazine…
    “If someone comes to me and asks whether [homosexuality] is okay or not, I will ask…’What is your companion’s opinion?’ If you both agree, then I think I would say, if two males or two females voluntarily agree to have mutual satisfaction without further implication of harming others, then it is okay.”

  2. Takuan says:

    genocide is not repression, it’s genocide.

  3. Antinous says:

    You’re such the librarian. Where did you find that?

  4. fatcat1111 says:

    The idea here is fine, perhaps noble. Really though I’m more interested in those who made this video. It was perfectly executed. Definite shades of Errol Morris.

  5. Takuan says:

    “A Gay Kenyan Man’s Blog”

  6. Takuan says:

    Dalai Lama urges ‘respect, compassion, and full human rights for all,’ including gays

    by Dennis Conkin
    Bay Area Reporter, June 19th, 1997

    The Dalai Lama, world-revered leader of millions of Buddhists and leader of the Tibetan people, spoke out strongly against discrimination and violence against lesbians and gays during an extraordinary Wednesday, June 11 meeting in San Francisco with lesbian and gay Buddhists, clergy, and human rights activists.

    The religious leader said at the press conference that he had previously been asked his views on gay marriage, and said that such social sanction of gay relationships “has to be judged in the context of the society itself and the laws and social norms.”

    During the 45-minute meeting, the Nobel peace laureate and Buddhist religious leader voiced his support for the full recognition of human rights for all people, regardless of sexual orientation.

    Buddhist sexual proscriptions ban homosexual sexual activity and heterosexual sex through orifices other than the vagina, including masturbation or other sexual activity with the hand. Buddhist proscriptions also forbid sex at certain times – such as during full and half moon days, the daytime, and during a wife’s menstrual period or pregnancy – or near shrines or temples. Adultery is considered sexual misconduct, but the hiring of a female prostitute for penile-vaginal sex is not, unless one pays a third party to procure the person.

    From a “Buddhist point of view,” lesbian and gay sex “is generally considered sexual misconduct,” the Dalai Lama told reporters at a press conference a day earlier.

    However, such proscriptions are for members of the Buddhist faith – and from “society’s viewpoint,” homosexual sexual relations can be “of mutual benefit, enjoyable, and harmless,” according to the Dalai Lama.

    “His Holiness was greatly concerned by reports made available to him regarding violence and discrimination against gay and lesbian people. His Holiness opposes violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation. He urges respect, tolerance, compassion, and the full recognition of human rights for all,” said Office of Tibet spokesman Dawa Tsering in a statement issued within an hour of the meeting.

    Photographs of the historic event were taken, but were available only on the condition that participants’ quotes be reviewed prior to publication.

    That condition violates journalistic canons regarding the freedom of the press. The Bay Area Reporter declined any conditions for the release of the photographs and has lodged a protest with the National Gay and Lesbian Journalism Association over their embargo.

  7. Antinous says:

    All this stuff is over a decade old, and he was clearly waffling about scriptural issues. I wonder what he has to say about it now. I suspect that his position has loosened up, since he seemed to be headed in that direction. We need to get him an interview with Tyra Banks.

  8. Takuan says:

    Look, if this is of significant importance to you,I can always ask someone one remove from him. I’m reluctant to call him just over this single matter, but on my next meeting I can always ask. I can’t say when that will be though.

  9. Antinous says:

    Thanks, but I’ll just have Padmasambhava ask him.

  10. gerta says:

    Okay, fine, genocide. Certainly there’s no repression there. Did you even read the comment?

  11. Antinous says:

    But how many “sex is not just for reproduction”-happy religions are there today?

    As far as I can tell, Christianity is fairly exceptional in its disdain for sex. Other religions may demand that you be married, straight, penile/vaginal, whatever, but most of them view sex as a pretty good thing. And the cult of Antinous was around for as long as Protestantism has been around. You’re already ceding the victory to the forces of repression when you allow them to set the paradigm. Human history has included a lot more fucking than not fucking.

  12. Takuan says:

    yep, both of ‘em. Nothing like calling a shovel an entrenching tool.

  13. Moon says:

    However, if the Lama was NOT a religious figure, he would not be a political figure. If there weren’t some religious hocus-pocus, nobody ever would have heard of this Lama.

  14. begbie says:

    While IMO his goal is noble, it’s also kinda dumb. The Olympics are bad for so many reasons. Big money, cheating and corruption are just the obvious.

  15. Moon says:

    @SOUPISGOODFOOD, maybe you’ve drunk the Kool-Aid and/or work for the CIA?

    /Two can play that game

  16. Takuan says:

    yup, every since they started, the Olympics have been corrupt. I never could see how some throw themselves into it, it’s like a religion.

  17. franko says:

    @ #9: yes, this was quite the to-do when he said this. he is a product of his culture and upbringing, but, he is also a rational, scientificly-minded man. i am sure that his mindset can be changed in this regard. even the buddha initially made the mistake of rejecting the idea of women as monks, but after a period of time he saw the error of this judgement, and he recanted. if the buddha can overcome his clinging to outdated viewpoints, surely the dalai lama can, too.

  18. ZioStefano says:

    < hrf="http://www.smng.cm/ndx.php?vw=shw_fl&fl_d=1613&fl=Gd%20Frdy%20n%20L...">My whl nghbrhd s pryng fr ths t hppn…

  19. Antinous says:

    Nothing like calling a shovel an entrenching tool.

    The new railroad to Tibet is an entrenching tool. Hu Jintao is just a tool.

  20. arkizzle says:

    #55 Soup..

    “”Or do you think that people don’t deserve the right to have their own value systems if it conflicts with yours?“”

    ANY value system that preaches intolerance or hate against a particular group of people, or a person’s natural state of being, is to be abhored.

    Being gay is NOT a value system, nor a choice.

    While I can maybe separate the Dalai Lama’s discrete (not discreet) statement on certain sexual practices and his views on the mutual affections of same-sex people (after all, many heterosexual people fall foul of the Lama’s sexual views), I cannot even remotely abide the Christian (any version) Church’s homophobic stand point on actually being gay.

    Just because the fundies (amongst others) CHOOSE to believe that being gay is a choice (besides all the evidence in the world), it doesn’t give them the right to preach intolerance.

    It’s no different from preaching anti-black or anti-semitic. The reason it seems to be semi-tolerated is because they float under the veil of ‘belief’, and apparantly that’s sacred..

    It isn’t.

  21. Songe says:

    The Dalai Lama would forgive China, that’s what he’s all about.

  22. arkizzle says:

    Yeh, I have no argument with the point you are making. I think its probably quite reasonable to tolerate everybody, until they (individually) give you reason not to. Maybe pre-emptive intolerance is the issue.

  23. Takuan says:

    what? have jeebus carry the olympic torch?

  24. gerta says:

    @34, speaking of tools …

  25. arkizzle says:

    I know, I know: “reason not to” is arbitrary to whomever says it, but at some point we trust (or not) our legal/social frameworks designed to deal with these very issues.

    The European Court of Human Rights, works ok to get between Laws and Individuals.. There is probably room for improvement, we can’t treat all of societies woes with bureaucracy, but thats where we are.

  26. coldspell says:

    From the video still, I thought this video was about recruiting Donald Knuth to carry the Olympic torch.

  27. Takuan says:

    make your point dear

  28. Antinous says:

    it’s like a religion

    It is a religion. Olympian Zeus, remember. By achieving perfect focus and concentration, you become godlike. No different than Buddhism.

  29. Antinous says:

    Clearly she’s suggesting that you’re always useful, frequently pointed and made of steel. I have noticed that you’re the unpopular one this week. It’s nice having a week off. Do we switch back Sunday night?

  30. Daemon says:

    All question of olympic corruption aside… I have a very hard time imagining the chinese government going along with this plan, given their view of the man in question.

  31. Takuan says:

    Nope,I LIKE abuse.

  32. Takuan says:

    Ag gabháil dom sior chun Droichead Uí Mhóradha
    Píce im dhóid ‘s mé ag dul i meithil
    Cé casfaí orm i gcuma ceoidh
    [gach duine] Ach pocán crón is é ar buile…

    [curfá]
    Ailliliú, puilliliú, ailliliú tá an puc ar buile!
    Ailliliú, puilliliú, ailliliú tá an puc ar buile!

  33. gerta says:

    Aw geez, I’m sorry. You probably couldn’t hear my point over that loud whooshing noise, pookems.

  34. Takuan says:

    only a Carpathian evolutionary biologist would think that chestnut funny… woogums

  35. Takuan says:

    c’mon Gerrr-taaa, ya wanna piece of me? Ya wanna piece of ME!!??
    http://altreligion.about.com/library/graphics/valkyrie4.jpg

  36. Matt J says:

    All question of olympic corruption aside… I have a very hard time imagining the chinese government going along with this plan, given their view of the man in question.

    It’s not their torch, I don’t think they have any control over it until it enters China. For the record, I think this is a great idea. I’d love to see this happen.

  37. Doug Sharp says:

    I admire many things about the Dalai Lama and am a big fan of some forms of Buddhism, but the guy has at least one serious flaw that isn’t widely known:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/nov/07110208.html

    “In an interview with the Vancouver Sun in 2004, the Buddhist leader was questioned about homosexuality to which he replied, ‘For a Buddhist, the same sex, that is sexual misconduct.”

    The Dalai Lama elaborated, “they use the mouth and the anus, this is sexual misconduct in Buddhism.” ‘

    Google yields other examples of his hangups about the correct use of sex organs.

    He is much better than the Pope say on gay rights but to me homophobia is a sign of deep spiritual flaws.

    Flame away.

  38. LOLcat Stevens says:

    Personally, I hope that once they hand the Lama the torch, he throws it long, into a ten-thousand foot crevasse, right at the base of a glacier, saying “Gunga galunga… gunga, gunga-galunga…”

    Seriously, the Olympics are such a corrupt spectacle that it seems like anyone with spiritual affiliations would be better off just staying the hell away from the whole affair.

  39. Antinous says:

    You’re right. He did add “if people discriminate based on sexual orientation, that is extreme and it is wrong”, but it is homophobic. But it’s still worth it to irritate the Chinese government.

  40. Takuan says:

    his strength is in his capacity to accomodate. Watch the old bugger closely, he says he’s still working on his anger,but I’ll bet you could stamp on his foot and all he’d do is wince and smile at you.
    Just staying alive and keeping the fight going this long makes him immune to corruption by vaccination.He could wallow in the filth of the Olympics and walk away unstained.

  41. arkizzle says:

    #41

    I’m impressed.

    We do have some good rowdy songs :)

  42. Songe says:

    The Dalai Lama is believed to be incarnation of either Avolokitesvara or Amitabha – I don’t recall which – in any case, he is considered the figurehead of a tradition that aims to relieve all sentient beings of suffering. They haven’t succeeded yet, but they haven’t started any wars, either.

    The reason that the Dalai Lama is interested in, for instance, quantum physics, is that he feels that what physicists are learning now about the fabric of the universe is in line with what buddhist monks have learned from direct experience. In meditation, a calm state of mind is produced, and in this state of calmness, experiments can be run. In this way, you can learn about yourself.

    A buddhist believes nothing, because an unchanging belief is a delusion that causes suffering in an ever-changing universe. Buddhists don’t have ‘rules’ in the ordinary sense – they just have suggestions on a way to see things that reduces suffering to a minimum. The important thing is that you find out for yourself if the suggestion is valid. Broadly speaking, one of these suggestions is to avoid intense sensual experiences – this ranges from sex to eating spicy food – because you can easily become a slave to your senses.

    However, nobody is judged by the dalai lama or anyone else, nor are they condemned to hell if they ‘misbehave’. At worst, you might be reincarnated in the buddhist hell (which is not eternal, it’s just a crappy life). Some buddhist monks pray that they can be reincarnated in hell, just so they can help people get out of it. That’s a pretty cool attitude to have in life if you ask me.

  43. Antinous says:

    Avalokiteshvara – the bodhisattva of compassion.

  44. soupisgoodfood says:

    He is much better than the Pope say on gay rights but to me homophobia is a sign of deep spiritual flaws.

    The thing that many people seem to forget is that in many religions, sex is something that should only be practiced for making babies. Obviously, until two males can have children naturally, homosexuality is not necessarily something that is going to be encouraged in religions that practice restraint in sexual conduct.

    To say that it is a sign of a deep spiritual flaw simply shows that you do not understand the issue very well. Perhaps it is conservative, but it is not necessarily homophobic. That is an important difference.

  45. soupisgoodfood says:

    oh, start enumerating please. Can you get past four or five? Three of which are bound to be elaborations on the same theme?

    Perhaps you should ask someone who is more familiar with such religious practices? I don’t follow such strict rules, but I do respect other people’s way of life if it does not harm others.

    To say that shows that you don’t understand the definition of homophobia. Homophobia doesn’t require conscious philosophical intent. It is what it is. If the pope says that women are inferior to men, is that not misogyny?

    When did the Dalai Lama say that homosexuals were inferior? Of course homophobia doesn’t require conscious philosophical intent. But it does require a fear of homosexuality — that is its definition. Are you saying that deep down, the Dalai Lama despises or fears homosexuals?

    The Dalai Lama is a monk, and monks have strict rules. I know conservative views are not as popular as they used to be these days, but to accuse someone of being prejudice against homosexuality simply because they have strict rules regarding sexual conduct is itself prejudice, not to mention simply being insensitive to other people’s way of life.

    Who are you to judge what works for them? Because I can assure you, the Dalai Lama doesn’t judge people in such ways.

  46. Takuan says:

    “in many religions, sex is something that should only be practiced for making babies”

    oh, start enumerating please. Can you get past four or five? Three of which are bound to be elaborations on the same theme?

  47. Antinous says:

    To say that it is a sign of a deep spiritual flaw simply shows that you do not understand the issue very well.

    To say that shows that you don’t understand the definition of homophobia. Homophobia doesn’t require conscious philosophical intent. It is what it is. If the pope says that women are inferior to men, is that not misogyny?

  48. Antinous says:

    I know conservative views are not as popular as they used to be these days, but to accuse someone of being prejudice against homosexuality simply because they have strict rules regarding sexual conduct is itself prejudice…

    You’re an apologist for homophobia…

    Because I can assure you, the Dalai Lama doesn’t judge people in such ways.

    …and, apparently, a telepath.

  49. Mark in LaLaland says:

    @ Moon
    The Pope probably wouldn’t run with the Torch, but he blessed it in St. Peter’s square, as part of the relay for Torino 2006.

    @ Teapunk
    The Chinese have a great deal of control over who will run with the Torch, wherever it may be.

    Consider that the Torch relay will not even go through Taiwan this year, and you have an idea of the steepness of Mr. Varon’s uphill struggle.

  50. soupisgoodfood says:

    ANY value system that preaches intolerance or hate against a particular group of people, or a person’s natural state of being, is to be abhored.

    But Buddhism does no preach intolerance or hate, just the opposite. You are reading too much into what he is saying. You seem to think that he has something against homosexuality. But this is only based on your own preconceived notions about who you think the Dalai Lama is and what his views are. You have no basis to prejudge people like that.

    The school of Buddhism that the Dalai Lama follows has strict rules regarding sex that affect heterosexual people just as much as it affects homosexual people. It is also a voluntary choice. You can’t force someone to be any type of Buddhist in the first place.

    For example, if a person decides that sex is a distraction for them, and decided that they would only have sex if they decided to have children, then how is that discrimination against gay people?

    As someone talking about tolerance, you seem very intolerant of intolerance. Perhaps you should practice tolerance more? That way you may actually be patient enough to realise that perhaps you are seeing things wrong.

    Being gay is NOT a value system, nor a choice.

    But there is nothing against homosexuality in Buddhism. Other people can’t help it if you define homosexuality only as the act of sexual intercourse, rather than loving another person.

    All your problems here rely on some preconceptions of the Dalai Lama. As someone talking about minorities and discrimination, shouldn’t you know better than to assume who someone else is?

    All this stuff is over a decade old, and he was clearly waffling about scriptural issues. I wonder what he has to say about it now. I suspect that his position has loosened up, since he seemed to be headed in that direction.

    It could very well be that. The Dalai Lama has said that the scriptures aren’t perfect and that they need to be changed over time to reflect the changes in society — or something to that effect.

    Perhaps you should try reading one of his books. You might be surprised to see how rational he is despite his very traditional appearance. His books aren’t aimed at Buddhists, and they aren’t preachy, either. I would never have become a fan otherwise.

  51. Antinous says:

    you seem very intolerant of intolerance

    And on that note, I’m off to chant, pray, meditate and bed.

    Om ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum

  52. arkizzle says:

    SOUP, I wasn’t referring to buddism when I wrote the first line you quoted of me, I was referring to religion in general, and Christianity in particular. Specifically the fundementalists you mentioned in the line you wrote directly before the one I quote of you and responded to..

    “” Just because some fundamentalist Christians in the USA don’t believe in gay rights, that doesn’t mean other people of other religions in other places don’t. Or do you think that people don’t deserve the right to have their own value systems if it conflicts with yours? “”

    The point I was making was:

    1) No, beliefs are not an excuse for prejudice, and
    2) being gay is not a value system to be put on a par with what-god-you-follow or what political ideology you subscribe to.

    I certainly don’t think Buddism is to be abhored. And I don’t at all think the Dalai Lama is homophobic. If you read my comment I say some of the exact things you are throwing back at me.

    Yes, his comments do seem to be about sexual practices, not genetics or who one choose to love. Thats exactly what I said.

    And then you quote me again, and again you are responding to my comments as if I have a problem with the Lama, rather than the Christian Church, which this time I make quite clear.

    So, I’m sorry you had to write such a long response to a non-argument, but if you want to re-read my comment and respond again, I’ll happily play along, otherwise don’t skim comments, you are liable to only be arguing your own preconceived notions of the “sides” and the people you are conversing with.

  53. soupisgoodfood says:

    Sorry, I missed a few of your posts, which lead to some confusion.

    When anybody, especially a religious leader, says that gayness is sinful, he’s inciting hatred and violence, whatever he thinks or however he qualifies it. And if you think that Buddhists don’t get violent, you haven’t been reading the news lately.

    But the Dalai Lama didn’t say that the gayness is sinful. If you don’t understand the difference, then perhaps you need to study the precept of perfect speech a bit more. It may be a subtle difference between what he said, and what you think he means by what he said, but that subtle difference can be important.

    I think the difference is intent. The Dalai Lama has never intended to be homophobic, as far as I can see. Your apparent illusion that he is seems to steam from his views on all sex, not gay sex. It naturally effects gay sex because of biological differences. If you think that is discrimination, then perhaps you should take that up with whoever you think designed the female and male anatomy. Because it makes about as much sense to call him homophobic as it does to call him sexist because only women can have children. Do you see what I mean?

    Perhaps the Dalai Lama could have been clearer on exactly what he meant to avoid this confusion, but he isn’t perfect. And as a Buddhist, you should know better than to criticize Buddhist leaders. Not because Buddhist leaders are infaluble (because they aren’t), but because you also aren’t perfect, either. And using Buddhist principals, it makes sense that chances are, a Buddhist leader is a better Buddhist than a layman. Unless you don’t actually consider yourself a Buddhist, in which case, you shouldn’t be so quick to criticize belief systems that you don’t understand.

    People can believe whatever they want, but when someone opens his pie hole and says something that I find offensive, particularly in an interview, and particularly when millions look to him for leadership, then I reserve the right to say something about it. Are you saying that he gets to speak his mind and I don’t? Because that’s what it sounds like.

    If you had to make sure that you never offended anyone, then you’d need to keep your mouth shut forever, unless you were enlightened. You can say whatever you want, but that doesn’t mean you are saying much of value.

    Before, I didn’t realize that you were a Buddhist, but now that it seems you are, then you really should read his books, if only to see where you think he went wrong. Because in my experience, Buddhists who criticize other Buddhists often have much to learn about life.

    I’m sorry that you feel persecuted and discriminated against by society — I haven’t had that experience in the way you have. But I also think that your anger and frustration have blinded you from seeing things the way they really are. There is a reason anger is generally considered to be a bad thing in Buddhism.

    I’m going to refrain from posting anymore on this topic, as I get into arguments too easily on the web and need to practice drawing the line to stop, but I wish you the best of luck.

  54. arkizzle says:

    Soup, I just want to clarify, if you are still reading:

    Arkizzle and Antinous are two different people, with different opinions, that you may or may not be talking to as one poster.

    Perhaps this is where the confusion arose.

    However, well done on that last long post and knowing when to stop.

  55. OrcOnTheEndOfMyFork says:

    “ANY value system that preaches intolerance or hate against a particular group of people, or a person’s natural state of being, is to be abhored.”

    I doubt you really believe that.

    You’re saying it’s bad to be intolerant to Nazis?

    How about known, re-offending pedophiles? Are we to let them have their way with our children because it’s their natural state of being?

    Unwarranted intolerance is horrible and it still goes on today, however, it must be said that it’s absolutely necessary to be able to discriminate. There are times when it is justified, especially when it involves protecting the innocent and helpless or even just your own well-being.

    Tolerance and intolerance are forces that need to co-exist. Vanquish one completely, and you destroy society. The key is finding the balance and knowing where to draw the line. But this will always be an ongoing struggle as old as Good vs. Evil.

  56. arkizzle says:

    OK, the language was a little broad, but I think you know what I meant. And the statement covers an abhorance of Nazism etc. as it itself clearly promotes hate.

    So unless we are retarded machines running into a stupid-loop of tolerance ideals cancelling each other out, while nazi pedophiles kill us and harm our children, it is not a great puzzle to both, promote tolerance and protect people from harm.

  57. Richard Kirk says:

    The Dalai Lama elaborated, “they use the mouth and the anus, this is sexual misconduct in Buddhism.” If that’s the worst that Google can come up with, he’s pretty clean. In western terms we might say “it a bit unhygenic, and it’s not what that hole’s really for”.

    Personally, I would like to see him with the Olympic flame. And a bucket of water.

  58. Teapunk says:

    @Mark: I know the chinese have a great deal of control about whp carries the torch, that’s why I said “It’s never going to happen that the Dalai Lama is carrying the torch”.
    So unless you’ve mist a “don’t” in you sentence, I assume we are of the same opinion?
    I was thinking of Taiwan, too, actually. This week they’ve had the torch for the Tibetan Olympics which will be held in Dharamsala.
    China might have let Taiwan out of being included forcefully to parading the torch in Taipeh, but the Dalai Lama with the torch is just not going to happen.

    @Antonious: Yeah, right. I just knew someone would pop up with an obscure religion nobody remembers to disprove my point :) But how many “sex is not just for reproduction”-happy religions are there today? And how many of them can be considered a world religion (at least one million of living and active believers) today?

  59. OrcOnTheEndOfMyFork says:

    You make it sound like it’s obvious who should be tolerated and who shouldn’t.

    I gave you some easy examples to make my point, but it’s not always so clear cut. Take the case of a sex offender who served their time in jail. Should they be tolerated having paid their due to society or treated as a dangerous individual for the rest of their lives?

    The fact is, you make these judgments of who is worthy of tolerance everyday, even so far as to be intolerant towards those you feel are intolerant (how’s that for paradoxical?).

    By encouraging blanket tolerance (except for “retarded machine”-obvious cases of course) you only open the way for people to be taken advantage of. Believe it or not, there are groups of people out there who don’t have your best interests or the interests of society at heart.

    It’s a hard but worthy goal to promote tolerance and bring a misunderstood people into the fold, but just letting anyone into the gate, as it were, is only asking for trouble.

  60. Mary Dell says:

    Presumably using the mouth and the anus is also sexual misconduct in Buddhism if heterosexuals do it. Woo, bring on the hand jobs!

  61. teflon says:

    From the video: “…and everyone wants STEVE to do it.”

    I dunno, the goal seems noble, but this guy sounds like it’s all about HIM (Steve) and his ego, not the Dali Lama.

  62. the specialist says:

    how did a discussion of the dali lama devolve into this?
    focus.

  63. Teapunk says:

    As far as I know, that’s pretty much in line with most other major religions – the bible calls homosexuality an “abomination”, I’m pretty sure the Islam isn’t too fond of homosexuality and since the first testament isn’t too friendly on it I’d wager a guess that the traditional Jewish view on homosexuality isn’t too nice either.
    But since the Dalai Lama said this, he’s spend several years to explain in interviews why he said what he said and what he didn’t mean. Google yourself.
    (Just in case: I, personally, don’t really care what you prefer. I just wanted to point out homosexuality and religion are not a good match.)
    Tibetan Buddhism is quite old and has many esoteric traditions, this Dalai Lama is the first in a long line who actually went to see the world and open up to the world, slowly changing old traditions (well, he had to). Chances are, his view on homosexuality will change, too.
    Back to the topic:
    Never going to happen. China will never allow this to happen.

  64. Moon says:

    So, why not have the Pope carry it?

    The leader of the Wiccans?

    I don’t understand what’s so special about this Lama. Does anybody really believe he is the “Chosen One” or whatever?

    More religious hocus-pocus.

  65. soupisgoodfood says:

    You’re an apologist for homophobia…

    No I’m not. Please explain why you think that.

    How exactly does a belief that sex should not be use for pleasure make someone homophobic? You don’t make much sense. Using your logic, heterosexual people are homophobic.

    …and, apparently, a telepath.

    Are you saying that the Dalai Lama has lied in every one of his books? Have you ever read a single one of them?

  66. Antinous says:

    I just wanted to point out homosexuality and religion are not a good match.

    Antinous, Hadrian’s eromenos was the center of one of the most popular religious cults of late antiquity. God and sodomy go together like cake and ice cream.

  67. Antinous says:

    I don’t understand what’s so special about this Lama.

    Just as the Emperor of Japan is a religious figure who is treated as a political figure, at this point, the Dalai Lama is a political figure who is treated as a religious figure. Is he the incarnation of Avalokiteshvara? Even he has suggested that they should just elect his successor.

    I’d pay to see the pope run with the torch. I’ll even bring the drinks.

  68. elsmiley says:

    Antinous, I understand your frustrations, and I agree with pretty much every thing you say, but does every single post have to be about your gayness, other people’s homophobia, etc.? It’s becoming repetitive.

  69. Moon says:

    As near as I can tell, the goal of the Lamas is to live life “religiously” and not do a damn thing. Meanwhile, the people that have to support them are some of the poorest people in the world. Except, of course, if you can convince somebody like Richard Gere that their religion has deep, hidden meanings and is going to save the world (eventually – what’s it been, 10,000 years?)

    Didn’t the Dali Lama institute torture methods in his “Heavenly Palace” to keep the servants in line?

    Hasn’t there been constant connections between him and the CIA to spy on China?

    In October 1998, the Dalai Lama’s administration acknowledged that it received US$1.7 million a year in the 1960s from the U.S. Government through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and had also trained a resistance movement in Colorado, (USA)

    I know he THINKS he’s a god, but let’s not make gods of people.

    The Olympics should go back to being a competition, not a political forum.

  70. Moon says:

    I’m the reincarnation of Beowulf and my goal is to rid the world of Grendels!

    /I’m doing a better job than this Lama!!

  71. Antinous says:

    does every single post have to be about your gayness, other people’s homophobia

    When I have equal rights, I’ll shut up. Can you get that sorted out this afternoon? kthxbai

  72. Antinous says:

    Didn’t the Dali Lama institute torture methods in his “Heavenly Palace” to keep the servants in line?

    I think that’s from the Great, Glorious and Correct Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party. I would have a hard time taking it seriously. Personally I like the Dalai Lama, but Tibetan Buddhism is definitely the new black.

  73. soupisgoodfood says:

    When I have equal rights, I’ll shut up. Can you get that sorted out this afternoon? kthxbai

    Just because some fundamentalist Christians in the USA don’t believe in gay rights, that doesn’t mean other people of other religions in other places don’t. Or do you think that people don’t deserve the right to have their own value systems if it conflicts with yours?

    It seems to me that you think that if someone isn’t pro-gay, they must be anti-gay. Do you think I’m homophobic, too?

    @Moon: I think you have been reading too much propaganda. Or perhaps you work for the PRC?

  74. gerta says:

    @12 The Chinese have exerted a special brand of repression in Tibet and on the Dalai Lama. China didn’t claim authority on appointing the next pope when John Paul II kicked off, but they’ve promised to do so with the next Dalai Lama.

    The rights and wrongs of religions and Buddhism and the Olympics aside, having the Dalai Lama carry the torch sounds like a great protest against one of the more obvious violations of human rights perpetuated by the Chinese govt.

  75. Takuan says:

    The Dalai Lama: I think biologically, there is some kind of desire of the sexual, of course, as part of the biology of the human body, that of course, I think, is a very narrow minded emotion.

    Evan Solomon: Sex, sexual impulse is narrow-minded.

    The Dalai Lama: Oh yes, sex, or the attachment to country, or the attachment to matters, or possession, and attachment to one’s name – these are narrow minded, focused on one particular sort of object. It’s a narrow minded kind of attachment…you see, that from the Buddhist viewpoint, of course there are some beautiful things there, but essentially in its very nature it’s very biased and narrow minded, therefore often it creates more problems. Now, the other kind of feeling of intimacy or closeness, that we call compassion. It’s not biased, even towards your own enemy or neutral people, see even towards your enemy, through discipline and reasoning, you can develop a very close sense of feeling or concern. You see, that compassion, that kind of closeness is unbiased, with reason, and through training can increase. So, the practitioner tries to increase, in two ways, tried to widen that understanding of compassion and love, and that automatically reduced that narrow, single pointed, biased sort of love or compassion. So, that’s the way. Of course, it’s not easy.

    Evan Solomon: It’s not?

    The Dalai Lama: But, you also have the same potential, just like me.

    Evan Solomon: Do you ever feel like you missed having a loving partner and children? Do you ever feel something like that?

    The Dalai Lama: Oh, sometimes, yes.

    Evan Solomon: Yes, you do?

    The Dalai Lama: Sometimes I joke with people and say to monks this instrument has not value.

    Evan Solomon: There’s no value. But, I mean that’s true because the sexual impulse is powerful and you have to get rid of it. Can you ever get rid of it?

    The Dalai Lama: Oh, yes of course. For a monk, celibacy is a main task, getting over that, and then there are other emotions like anger, jealousy, hatred, too much pride, too much egotism, negative egotism, all these are a lot of variety or negative emotion, not just sexuality.

    Evan Solomon: Do you struggle with those? I mean, you always say in your books that you’re a very poor practitioner, which is modest, I know you’re not, but do you struggle with anger and frustration or despair?

    The Dalai Lama: Oh yes, of course.

    Evan Solomon: You do?

    The Dalai Lama: Of course. Now my practice I think started around the age of 15 or 16 years old. Now I’m 69.

  76. Antinous says:

    Do you think I’m homophobic, too?

    Gays are homophobic, women are misogynistic, everybody is racist. It’s the human condition to have prejudices. I have no particular problem with the Dalai Lama, but pretending that his statements aren’t prima facie homophobia doesn’t help the situation. And there’s no such thing as pro-gay. There’s anti-gay and there’s “huh? what are you on about?”

    When anybody, especially a religious leader, says that gayness is sinful, he’s inciting hatred and violence, whatever he thinks or however he qualifies it. And if you think that Buddhists don’t get violent, you haven’t been reading the news lately.

    do you think that people don’t deserve the right to have their own value systems if it conflicts with yours?

    People can believe whatever they want, but when someone opens his pie hole and says something that I find offensive, particularly in an interview, and particularly when millions look to him for leadership, then I reserve the right to say something about it. Are you saying that he gets to speak his mind and I don’t? Because that’s what it sounds like.

    And for the record, I didn’t bring this up and I have defended the man, but not his statements.

Leave a Reply