[Buddha-l] NYTimes.com: Let Us Pray for Wealth

[SJZiobro at cs.com]

Erik Hoogcarspel <jehms at xs4all.nl> wrote:

>SJZiobro at cs.com schreef:
>> "Joy Vriens"<jvriens at free.fr> wrote:
>>
>>   
>>>> More money means less religion. Could it be that more money means more education as well? Erik
>>>>       
>>> On an indivudal level I am convinced that more money means less religion. If one has money and doesn't use it to help others, one isn't taking religion seriously. I know the tendency for wealthy people is to want to have the best of both worlds through conscience stilling charity, but that's not an option. Paying loads of anonymous taxes is a much more religious thing to do than "do charities". It's a combination of real generosity and humility, so more impact.
>>>
>>>     
>>
>> How is paying exhorbitant amounts of taxes to the government a more religious act than paying to charities of one's choice?  Govenrment funds all sorts of things that are antithetical to religion, for instance, abortion and the resulting harm done to the woman on all levels (not to mention the killing of an innocent human being).  Also, your tax dollars help fund the current wars on terrorism.  I happen to support these wars, but if you consider war antithetical to religion, then my question still holds.
>>
>>   
>It's remarkable that religion is so easily associated with what 
>Nietzsche called the 'slavemorality'. Religion means charity, 
>submissiveness, humility, etc. Why not think of the religion of the 
>brahmin (ritual engineer), vraatya (religious bodybuilder), or yogi 
>(mastering his own body and mind)? I don't think that the question 
>whether a war is just or not, or how to spend tax revenue has any 
>bearing on individual religious feelings. Christians impose their view 
>on religion on others, saing they are the champions of charity and 
>therefore better then others. Many people buy that, and they forget 90% 
>of christian powerhunting history and the fact that most third world 
>countries have been destroyed by foreign charity.

Erik, I find it remarkable as well that so many academics in lemming-like manner make the association of which you speak.  Your points are well taken, but they are beside the point vis-a-vis the strawman portrayal of 1) Christianity and Christians, 2) the question of religious feelings (which is actually a red herring in this thread), and 3) the typical, banal, and mendacious claim that only Christians impose their values upon others, implying that non-Christians do not, and this regardless of the evidence in the realm of legislation, law, politics, education, etc.  The only issue is whether one can make a necessary and substantive corrolation of paying large amounts of taxes with religious acts (especially in a culture where there is such a bruhaw over certain theories of the separation of Chuch and State that in fact excise religion from the public and civil realms) and, if one can, whether paying these taxes in all instances escapes paying into funds and activities that are antithetical to religion.  By the way, I understand that there is a prohibition against killing in Buddhist schools of thought.  Is this true?  If so, why would one not associate paying taxes to a government that is engaged in war with paying to fund an activity that is antithetical to this religious notion?

Regards,

Stan