Fun with politics and news! Covering Lol Politics and Lol News. Breaking news — lol-style.
 

« Previous | Next »

RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE


dalai lama  and archbishop desmond tutu

RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE
You see?  It IS possible for people of different faiths to sit and enjoy each other’s company.

(The Dalai Lama and Archbishop Desmond Tutu)

Picture by: dunno source Caption by: BSuddery via Poster Builder

» Recaption This!

» View All Captions

Incorrect source or offensive?

Add this to your blog:
(Copy & paste code)

» 420 comments

  1. F1rst says:

    ╔═╦╦╦╦═╦══╗
    ║═╣║╔╣╚╬╗╔╝
    ║╔╣║║╠╗║║║
    ╚╝╚╩╝╚═╝╚╝

    • PortlandMark says:

      Formula One, also known as Formula 1 or F1, and currently officially referred to as the FIA Formula One World Championship,[2] is the highest class of auto racing sanctioned by the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA). The “formula” in the name refers to a set of rules to which all participants and cars must comply.[3] Formula A, later known as Formula 1, limited cars to 1,500 cc supercharged and 4,500 cc un-supercharged.[4] The F1 season consists of a series of races, known as Grands Prix, held on purpose-built circuits, and to a lesser extent, former public roads and closed city streets. The results of each race are combined to determine two annual World Championships, one for the drivers and one for the constructors, with racing drivers, constructor teams, track officials, organizers and circuits required to be holders of valid Super Licences,[5] the highest class racing licence issued by the FIA.[6]

      Formula One cars race at high speeds, up to 360 km/h (220 mph) with engines revving up to a formula imposed limit of 18,000 RPM. The cars are capable of pulling in excess of 5 g-forces in some curves. The performance of the cars is highly dependent on electronics (although traction control and driving aids have been banned since 2007), aerodynamics, suspension and on tyres. The formula has seen many evolutions and changes through the history of the sport.

      Europe is Formula One’s traditional centre, where all of the teams are based, and where around half of the races take place. However, the sport’s scope has expanded significantly in recent years and Grands Prix are held all over the world. Events in Europe and the Americas have been dropped in favour of races in Asia and the Middle East – of the eighteen races in 2008, nine were held outside Europe.

      Formula One is a massive television event, with a global audience of 600 million people per season.[7] The Formula One Group is the legal holder of the commercial rights[citation needed]. As the world’s most expensive sport,[8] its economic effect is significant, and its financial and political battles are widely covered. Its high profile and popularity make it an obvious merchandising environment, which leads to very high investments from sponsors, translating into extremely high budgets for the constructor teams[citation needed]. However, mostly since year 2000, due to the always increasing expenditures, several teams, including works teams from car makers and those teams with minimum support from the automotive industry or other F1 teams, have gone bankrupt or been bought out by companies that want to easily establish a racing team within the sport.

  2. dalai llama says:

    Pull mah finger !

  3. factory says:

    are you gonna fart? my religion approve this

  4. Sheesh says:

    Now just do something about the religious intolerance of the atheists….

    • PortlandMark says:

      Tolerance meaning leaving the atheists to themselves, or meaning atheists should quit trying to be as big of jerks in their proselytizing as the fundamentalists (Christian AND Muslim) are in theirs? I think I could support either one.

    • Why Not? says:

      Or better yet, maybe we should do something about religions that define themselves by what they are not. If a religion has a clearly defined group of people who are “other” or excluded, like “gentiles” or “infidels,” it will never lead to peace. “Humanity” is the largest category there is and that excludes no one.

    • bitter troll smells total BS…-sniff sniff-

      sides them showing up at your door was not the same as you showing up to mass and interupting the service.

      if you showed up to the priests house to chat with him that would of been the same thing.

      but then again, bitter troll smells total BS

    • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

      You could have asked the girls to leave and they would have. The fact that you chose to listen to them did not give you the right to interupt church for the entire congregation. Why did you just go over to those girls house?

      • true but time and place, had he gone door to door to the people that worshiped at that temple and asked them if they wanted to hear about the existance of nothing, then they refused him it would then he would have reason to bitch. its like going to a hospital and telling people they dont need health care…time and place man

        • No1askedme says:

          I agree, it’s not a very good example, but I’m just trying to communicate the intended message.

          • The Amazing Rando says:

            Standing up in the middle of a church service and trying to teach people about atheism is nothing short of real-life trolling. Frankly, I don’t care if everything the guy said was exactly true, I’d still throw the guy out on his ass and let him know that Christ thinks he’s a tool. It doesn’t matter. This guy’s story is fake anyway.

            • My ex and I used to attend his mother’s church twice a year. We were CEOs – Christmas and Easter Only. Even though I don’t like church, I went because it made his mother happy.

              One year, right after he and I had split up, the pastor called on him to get up onstage and receive the blessings of the congregation, to look out at all of the people and know that he was surrounded by friends.

              My ex is a very private person, and an agnostic. Being put on display like that in front of a room full of people he didn’t really know, during a painful personal period in his life was, to be kind, not what he needed.

              Busting into a sermon to preach atheism is an a$$hole maneuver, but that story goes both ways. Like Andy Dick.

              • That’s completely forking crazy.

                What the hell is wrong with some people? Seriously.

                • The Amazing Rando says:

                  Sadly, it’s not uncommon at all. My wife got more visits at the hospital for the gall bladder surgery than after my daughter was born. As it turns out, family in general have been about the least supportive through this ordeal. There are exceptions, but not many.

            • Jeremy says:

              I sure hope the story isn’t true. The thought of interrupting a Catholic mass this way makes me shudder and gives me a horrible feeling in my gut. I mean, if you understand the value and significance the Catholics place on their mass, and you had half a shred of decency in your whole body, you probably wouldn’t dream of doing something like that.

              But the fact that he said the Catholics were doing door-to-door evangelism kind of gives away the fakeness of the story. I have had Jehovah’s Witnesses do this to me, and definitely Mormons, and on rare occasions fundamentalist Protestants, but NEVER have I ever heard of Catholics doing this. It’s just not the way the Catholic Church operates. Perhaps there are exceptions, but very uncommon/unlikely.

              • Kittymouth says:

                In my experience, the Catholic church is more exclusive and more personally-centered. That is, if you’re going to join the Catholic church, you’re going to do it because you were either raised in it or you chose to join all on your own.
                They really don’t solicite for members who will just come whenever and don’t actually believe what they’re saying. Which is nice really. I’ve never had a Catholic go out of their way to preach at me. If I’ve been preached at, it was because I went up to them and asked for info which they were happy to give.

                I also agree that anti-preaching in a church is just Trollish. He felt wronged by either the girls or the preacher, but that wouldn’t give him the right to come in and disturb the service that I and my family was attending if this had happened at my church.
                Now if the WHOLE CONGREGATION had been holding loud angry sermons on his lawn…

    • jim says:

      This story sounds pretty fishy. I’ve been a Catholic my entire life and I’ve never known any Catholic to go door to door proselytizing, nor have I ever had a Catholic come to my door doing that. Not ever.

    • paws4thot says:

      Ref your (2), catholics (note small ‘c’) may or may not go door to door; I’ve never known the Roman Catholic Church (note capitalisation of proper name) do so.

    • The Amazing Rando says:

      Oh great. We’re a troll’s social experiment.
      I think most of us agree that it’s wrong to go door to door shoving religion down people’s throats. It would also be dead wrong to walk into a church and preach about atheism. Either way, it sucks.

      • Oh great. We’re a troll’s social experiment.

        Yup. This cracked me up, though.
        Note to the general public: I also do not want you knocking on my door to: 1) Tell me about your totallysuperawesome political candidate; 2) Ask me if I want to sell my car (Dude? It would have a SIGN or something!); 3) Sell me Avon or your overpriced school fundraiser crap.

        • Semperfidd says:

          What if they came bearing Taco Bell coupons?

        • Serpentine says:

          I’ve had people knock on my door asking whether I’m selling my car too! It happened about 4 times in about 2 years. Doesn’t sound like much, but there was absolutely nothing to suggest I was selling it…
          (I did end up selling it, and because of a passing guy who asked me whether it was for sale, but only because some douche threw a brick through the window and I couldn’t afford to fix it)
          So this is a common phenomenon, is it?

          • Well if someone really wants your car and if the money’s right, you will sell it, that’s why they ask.

          • I had it happen recently; I thought it was odd, because aside from the whole “no indication that it’s for sale” thing, it was a 10 year old Camry with nothing terribly notable about it. I mean, if it was a 67 Camaro or something, I can understand asking just on the offchance that the person might want to sell, but there’s probably 20 10 year old Camrys, minimum, in local cars for sale listings….

            • Serpentine says:

              My aforementioned vehicle (poor Myldred :( ) was a Nissan Pulsar that’s older than I am (1984), that belonged to my grandmother. The passenger seat back tilting handle was gone, the petrol guage didn’t work, the inside lights were broken, it was generally crappy and, of course, the entire back windscreen had been smashed by a brick.
              Based on our sample of 2, I don’t think it’s newer cars that’re generally inquired about.

    • Min says:

      That’s peculiar. Do you consider the Dalai Lama a theist, then? Most Buddhists are atheist, you know.

      • bad fairie says:

        i was under the impression that the Dalai is a deist?

        • HelOnWheels says:

          Don’t you know that everybody that doesn’t believe in a Judeo-Christian god is a durty, durty, hippie, pinko-commie atheist!!

      • HelOnWheels says:

        “Most Buddhists are atheist”

        They’re either Buddhists or they’re atheists. How can they be both?

        • Because you asked says:

          Buddhists follow the teaching of Buddha (who was a person, not a deity). They do not ‘worship’ him, he is but a teacher.

          There ARE variations / off-shoots of Buddhism that worship a god, or gods, but a student of Buddha (i.e., a Buddhist) can certainly be an atheist – it is not contradictory.

          • HelOnWheels says:

            Yes, Tibetan Buddhism theology includes various deities and the “one God”. I should have said that Point taken. What I should have said is that “Min, you’re wrong!! Most Buddhists are NOT atheist. The numerous practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism would disagree with you. Your argument is invalid.”

    • Shazza says:

      OH, thank the Gods; we’ve been taught a lesson from the computer-pulpit-thingie — and I didn’t even have to put on shoes or underwear.

    • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

      Atheists tolerate religion just fine, they just don’t tolerate religious people pushing their faith-based agenda on everyone else.

      F.T.R. I am not an atheist, I’m quite comfortable with religion, its activist-religious people that I have a problem with.

      • No1askedme says:

        SOME atheists tolerate religion just fine. Trust me, there are some real zealous atheists out there.

        • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

          Agree, but they are currently outnumbered by the religious zealots that have dominated the “mind your neighbor’s business but don’t apply the rules to yourself” mentality that dominates any discussion now-a-days.

    • Danbala says:

      Exactly how much of that do you have to withstand, and what group is it that are “the atheists” in your experience?

    • Ellen says:

      Never happened. Nice story. Are you sure you aren’t studying creative writing.

    • Kittymouth says:

      You troll. How can you assume that “Captain Obvious” wasn’t an atheist? So you take your own story as an excuse to bash religious people by saying that “No atheists commented. I guess that’s because we’re better empirical thinkers than you dumb-ass church going sheep.”
      How dare you use us as some warped little experiment. “Let’s play mind-games with the Christians and see if I can’t start a flame war!”
      You’re worse than a troll.
      You’re a n00b.

  5. Lam says:

    Everyone look and learn.

  6. Tessie says:

    Alternate caption:
    “No. YOU da man!”

  7. gmc360 says:

    Damn! I forgot to go to mass again today.

  8. charro the Floydist says:

    It looks more like they’re making fun of eachothers clothing.

  9. Jenna says:

    I don’t think pointing and laughing at the other guy is a great example of “tolerance”.

  10. PortlandMark says:

    Sense of humor fail? Or irony ftw?

  11. Whoosh says:

    Archbishop Desmond Tutu. I may be old-fashoined, but a man in pink with Tutu for a last name amuses me greatly.

  12. robertdeniro says:

    Yoooouuuuuu!!

  13. Omegastar says:

    I dont think the Dalai Llama hates anyone. I think thats a required for the position :P

  14. Maxwell Silverhammer says:

    “One of these days Desmond… BANG! ZOOM! Right to da moon!

  15. S says:

    “A rabbi, a priest and a minister walk into a bar…stop me if you’ve heard this one Des….”

  16. koopa says:

    Everyone is all smiles…on camera. Roosevelt and Stalin are seen all smiles during WWII footage, but little did the Allies know Stalin infiltrated the Manhattan Project with spies and started his own nuclear bomb program with espionage. That’s what tolerance can look like.

  17. ROFL says:

    Eddie for President!!!!!!

  18. GreenFuzzyLeaf says:

    This pic looks like the event in Seattle a while ago, where he came to spread the word on compassion. I wanted to go, but the tickets were all sucked up before I had even heard about the event. D: At least I didn’t have to be downtown during the high traffic days, though.

  19. HellHathNoFury says:

    ‘It was YOU that ordered the last pink Snuggie! I had to settle for maroon’

  20. No1askedme says:

    GAH! Too much harmony, not enough chaos in this thread! New topic sure to cause flaming:

    Global warming is real and it’s gonna kill us all if we don’t change our ways!

    • Jojo says:

      I’d like Proof on my desk by monday. Now, skedadle!!!

      • -throws a polar bear on his desk-

      • No1askedme says:

        “Greenhouse gasses” have been undeniably shown to reflect infrared radiation. Infrared radiation expresses its self as heat when it is absorbed by matter, causing an increase in internal systemic energy AKA temperature. Modern manufacturing and refining techniques release tons of greenhouse gasses (mostly CO2) into the atmosphere. The atmosphere surrounds the earth and is fairly homogenous at consistent altitudes. Therefore the greenhouse gasses released into the atmosphere are spread relatively evenly over the earth. As sunlight enters the Earth’s atmosphere it heats up the Earth’s surface. This absorbed heat is later emitted as infrared radiation perpendicular to the surface it is radiating from. Greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere then cause some of this radiation to reflect, causing a “greenhouse” effect. As more greenhouse gasses are released into the atmosphere the effect becomes more severe. Polar ice core surveys have shown that the amount of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere has increased almost exponentially over the past two centuries. The Earth’s average global temperature has been increasing steadily ever since accurate measurement methods have been

        • TheOne says:

          Then come join our religion, the worship of the all powerful Obama, blessed be his name! Give up your worldly belongings ( you call it a tax, but we prefer the word “gift”) to the Sacred Church of the Chosen One ! Join our daily self flogging as we chant ” Hope! Change!” repeatedly as we watch his Holiness walk on water, bring peace to all and torture those unbelievers by calling them childish names.
          May his blessings flow upon you as you rejoice in his Golden Shower, may he live forever! Give unto him all your monies and rejoice in “spreading the wealth around”! For he is the ALmighty Teleprompter Jeebus and we praise him for his silvery tongue and pray to cure his wife of poor fashion sense! Amen.

        • curious says:

          And the temperture changes on Mars? Are they caused by greenhouse gases too? By the way, the new term is global climate change, since the earth has entered a different climate cycle. Do you suppose the earth was warmer when dinosaurs roamed the U.S. ? Maybe them dinosaurs weren’t aware of their carbon footprint – its probably why they went extinct.

          • No1askedme says:

            Temperature changes are natural for any planet, but they generally follow a relatively consistent pattern under most conditions. Earth’s temperature has done nothing but go up for far too long now for it to be a fluke. As for past temperature patterns, these can be linked to extraordinarily large amounts of plant-life, which would alter atmospheric composition, and major geological events like the eruption of super-volcanoes and huge meteor impacts. Thanks to data gathered from ice cores drilled from the polar regions, it has been determined that there has never been as much CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere as there is today. As previously stated, rises in atmospheric CO2 (along with some other greenhouse gasses) follow trends identical to increases in average planetary temperature.

            • The Amazing Rando says:

              Here’s what I don’t get. Why not try to do better for the environment? Even if global warming is wrong, at least the earth will be in better shape overall. I mean, what’s the argument against looking out for the environment? “We don’t think global warming is happening, so let’s pollute the crap out of everything, it’s okay!” No, it’s not okay.

              • No1askedme says:

                Because most people would rather pave over the whole planet than try to protect any part of nature. Humans are born with a need to control our environment, it’s how we have prospered as a species. However, our ability to alter our surroundings has progressed faster than our evolution, so our old impulses are now an outdated compulsion that manifests as a near-psychotic need in most people.

                • and the entire world can be one big basketball court!

                  SCREW FOOD

                • charro says:

                  We’re a virus.

                  • No1askedme says:

                    Naw, we just need a sense of perspective. The first time nature really takes an honest to goodness swing at us, we’ll probably start to take action.

                    • charro says:

                      No, we’re still a virus. bitter got it.

                    • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                      Guess what? If nature decides to take a swing at us in either direction, we can’t do a damn thing about it. We can’t change it because we’re too small in the scheme of things.

                      THere is nothing wrong with being responsible, but thinking that we actually have that much of an impact either way is just hubris.

                      • No1askedme says:

                        We can stop screwing up our environment. That would probably change some things. Do you really think the several million tons of CO2 we’ve released into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution hasn’t changed our world? Trust me, things like erratic whether patterns and droughts/floods are only the beginning, if things don’t change in the next few decades we’ll witness truly costly natural disasters.

                      • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                        Considering the fact that volcanic eruptions tend to put out more CO2 than we can, and is absorbed by the environment and corrected (and have been for millions of years before we got here), I guess you’ll have to forgive me for not being convinced that we’re a huge drain on the planet.

                        I have no problem being responsible, the problem I have is being forced to be a certain level of responsible by people who don’t know any better than I do.

                        By the way, throwing weather patterns into the mix isn’t a good argument, considering that we’ve had weather patterns for millions of years and have only really been able to track them for the last 100 (at best) :-)

                      • No1askedme says:

                        Volcanic eruptions are uncommon today and put out variable amounts of CO2. Humanity’s output is constant and has been growing exponentially for nearly 150 years. Also, we’ve cut down somewhere around 50% of all the Earth’s forests, and plants are greatest utilizers of CO2 on the planet: especially trees. The only other organisms that consume CO2 constantly are microscopic and most of those absorb CO2 dissolved in the water they live in; and water can only hold a relatively small amount of CO2. Also, weather patterns have changed slowly historically, but over the past 30-40 years there have been drastic and unprecedented changes. These changes vary from region to region, but if you look at charts detailing rainfall for a region by year, you’ll notice severe changes in the past few decades. In addition to erratic weather patterns, some of the undersea water-flows have recently begun to change, slowing and shortening, causing numerous problems for all life forms, particularly in Europe. Geological evidence in the form of sea-bed erosion tell us that these flows have hardly changed at all since the end of the Carboniferous period (if memory serves, I may be mistaken as to the time period, but the erosion evidence is real). In addition to all these early warning signs, the average global temperature has increased almost about 1.33 degrees Fahrenheit over the past century, and the water-table has been rising at a startling rate ever since the industrial revolution, especially recently. All the indicators are there, doesn’t it make sense to err on the side of caution?

                      • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                        Like I said, I have no problem being responsible, but not at the whim of people who don’t really know any better than I do.

                        You said earlier that if nature decides to take a swing at us, we’ll take action. I’d like to expound on that by saying that if nature decides to take a swing at us, there isn’t a damn thing we can do about it. Nature has an amazing ability to self-regulate for its own survival. Species become extinct every day, and are replaced in one way or another. Evolution is used to make sure that those things best suited to the environment at hand live on.

                        Now, as far as the actual science of the CO2 emissions and where they come from, I can’t get into a debate with you because that’s not my area of expertise. But based on the things I’ve heard and read, the science behind global apocalypse if we DON’T DO SOMETHING NOW is sketchy at best, simply because of the time periods we’re dealing with. We are speculating about things like geological evidence because we really don’t know. It’s all our best guess based on what we see and can infer. I love watching dinosaur “histories” on the Discovery Channel because they go into such detail about how this particular dinosaur died locked in a winnerless battle to the death with this other dinosaur that was found next to it. That’s speculation, and we can’t know.

                        Considering that the earth has been trucking along for so many millennia without our help or hurt, I’d say that erring on the side of caution is fine, but let’s not overdo it. Living in grass huts and walking everywhere isn’t the way to go about saving the planet. Going around preaching that the earth is going to implode, and might get hotter and melt the ice caps, but by god it’s the coldest summer in memory and for some reason the temperatures have been stagnant for a while now (the last ten years or so), so we really can’t explain that, but TRUST US, THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!!! I believe Ted Danson made a total ass of himself back in the 80’s by claiming that if we didn’t do something RIGHT THEN that the world would be completely different and probably wouldn’t exist anymore by the year 2000.

                        Doomsday predictions are silly at best, and harmful at worst. We really just don’t know, and there is enough competing information out there as to the actual effect of humans on the environment that we should take pause before we write laws about things like cap and trade. Considering how damaging it will be to normal people (in the form of price increases), I think that sketchy science isn’t the best hook to hang your hat on.

                        *Note: I say sketchy not in the way that people haven’t done all their research, I mean that there are a lot of scientific studies out there, and not all of them support the same things. In fact, didn’t the EPA get in trouble recently when one of their own studies was suppressed because it didn’t toe the line as far as climate change is concerned?

                      • No1askedme says:

                        I see what you’re getting at, I may have misunderstood your intent at first. By no means am I advocating anything radical, I’m simply saying that things aren’t perfect and they aren’t improving. We’ve dug ourselves a pretty big hole, don’t get me wrong, but it’s not like the world is going to end anytime soon if we still decide to ignore the problem. My point is people need to start looking beyond their own immediate interests and start changing the ways they do things accordingly. That’s all I’m getting at.

                      • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                        Forcing cap and trade and other “green” measures down our throat under the auspices that it will somehow magically save the planet isn’t the way to go about it. The science just isn’t to that point yet. Things change every day.

                        I think the ways that we’ve changed in the last 100 years speak volumes about humanity as a whole. The timber industry is self-sustaining, in that for every tree they cut down they try to replant two (speaking from personal experience here). The industrial revolution changed a lot about this world, but we’ve managed to ramp back on the pollution and waste (and work hours) since we got started. I don’t hear about acid rain anymore, do you? CAFE standards for cars have done wonders for reducing emissions from cars.

                        The problem is that if the US is the only one doing this stuff, it isn’t going to do any good anyway. India and China beat us in polluting, IIRC. Us living in grass huts isn’t going to do anything but put our country back 200 years, which is silly.

                        I think if we just keep going at our steady pace of gradual improvement that we know works as opposed to smacking people around a little and MAKING them drive Segways with lids on them to “save the planet”, we’ll do just fine. And it’ll be a better example to the rest of the world, who doesn’t seem willing to set themselves back 200 years along with us.

                      • No1askedme says:

                        I agree, there are plenty of people taking things too far without thinking it through. I’m afraid this “cap-and-trade” thing will only cause problems. However, the U.S. is sadly behind in terms of environmental policy. Our national vehicle emissions standards are behind even China’s, and our agriculture is causing permanent environmental damage from the overuse of pesticides and soil-tilling without any legal repercussions. The biggest problem we face is that the corporations have so much money the fines they are charged for violating emissions standards are insignificant and are frequently ignored. Sure we’ve come a long way, but it isn’t enough yet.

                • The Amazing Rando says:

                  See, I just thought it was about money. LOL

                • Semperfidd says:

                  Nope…Most people dont want to pay 3 times as much for their electric bill and gas for their evil car or their corn flakes..the list goes on.

              • charro says:

                Rando, stop making sense. People don’t like that.

              • bad fairie says:

                besides, when jubilee or ecstasy or the rapture or whatever the bs is called in this century comes, they’re all going to be suckered up to heaven with reincarnated bodies so why would anyone care about the planet or the non-believers left behind – we’re all going to be in league with satan anyway.
                or the other excuse is that man was given dominion over everything so men get to destroy the planet cause their book said so.
                someday i hope to bleach the garbage my fundie sister rants out of my brain – why can i remember this sh!t and not my own cell number?

                • charro says:

                  I love ecstasy

                  • bad fairie says:

                    never tried it, too old, it came along long after my drug induced hazy years. yet, when i go on hrt again, wouldn’t mind giving it a try or two as long as i had a young buck who could keep up ;)

                • TiannaBanana says:

                  True, the Bible says that humans have dominion over everything, but it also says that humans have to be “stewards of the earth” (Genesis 1:26-31) – meaning that humans have responsibility to care for the earth and its creatures. Even the Bible promotes environmental consciousness and care.

      • The Amazing Rando says:

        Jojo doesn’t just want proof. Jojo wants Proof. That’s even proofier proof.

    • maddok says:

      Nah. We’ll just grow oranges in Alaska.

    • No1askedme says:

      I’m not certain about all that stuff going on with the ozone layer, that’s a lot more complicated. I can’t say for sure. All I know is that there was a hole in it at some point or another and aerosol is bad for it.

      • HelOnWheels says:

        There’s still a hole in the ozone layer. It’s in the southern hemisphere and “they” say it’s one of the main reasons why there are higher incidents of skin cancer in Australia.

        • This is true.. The scientists that said the ozone layer are from New Zealand and the ozone layer is over Antartica. The link to the article is {http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=mending-ozone-good-for-global-warming}

          • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

            Wanna know why there’s a hole in the ozone layer? *non-scientific opinion here*

            The sun creates ozone. The southern regions of the globe don’t get as much sun during certain parts of the year due to the tilt of the earth. Therefore, less ozone over Antarctica. The hole grows and shrinks as we get more and less sun.

            Also, Al Gore needs to be dumped into the ocean. If you’re going to preach it, live it. Which is why I respect the hell out of Ed Bagley Jr.

            • No1askedme says:

              Sun radiation creates highly charged oxygen ions that are then capable of forming Ozone (O3). O3 is normally unstable, but the sun’s radiation maintains it much of the year; so it does have a sort of “thick and thin” cycle. However, the ozone layer never develops holes on its own due to consistent exposure to the sun’s rays everyday, but certain chemicals released into the atmosphere interact with the relatively unstable O3 and denature it, slowly but surely depleting the ozone layer. This problem is simpler ti deal with than global warming because O3 eventually reforms, and there’s a lot more ozone than there are chemicals that destroy it in the atmosphere. All we need to do is reduce our output of these chemicals to a safe level (one that does tolerable damage to the ozone layer), and eventually the hole(s) will go away on their own.

              P.S. I agree with you on Al Gore, he’s a total douche willing to lie to push his policies.

              • Would you Gore haters feel any differently if Gore offset his energy use by purchasing carbon credits, thereby maintaining a carbon neutral footprint?

                • CyanEyed says:

                  Carbon credits? … What do those accomplish? It’s like the catholics selling indulgences: inane.

                  • What do they accomplish? From associatedcontent.com:

                    “Money has always been the motivator for deforestation, but a new study suggests that introducing a carbon credit market into these developing nations, forests could be saved. When comparing the amount of carbon released by slash-and-burn deforestation to the amount of carbon credits that will be available in the next few years from industrialized nations researchers believe that the incentive for deforestation could be eliminated.”

                • No, because that would just end up putting more cash in the a$$hole’s pocket.

    • Bitter's Chef says:

      People just think it’s global warming. Actually, they landed in hell and just haven’t realized it yet

  21. Jojo says:

    Well of course, as long as it isn’t Christianity and Islam, they’ll get along just fine.

    • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

      When do Catholics blow up atheists?

    • Antelieris says:

      http://listverse.com/2009/07/10/top-10-misconceptions-about-islam

      Islam is VERY tolerant against other religions. The quaran even states that they must be. As for the murder part, the minority are the ones who support non-muslim murder, not the other way around.

      • The Amazing Rando says:

        I think trying to draw conclusions of an entire religion based off personal experience or a few people you’ve seen is a bad idea. Again, you keep talking about extremists. By the way, people were probably “displaying their religion” after a terrorist attack because they wanted to show that despite some extremists’ actions, they are not ashamed of their religion.

        • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

          It’s not just him drawing conclusions from personal experience, it’s a lot of other people too. Plus the fact that there has been not much in the way of condeming those who do attack in the name of Allah, even at the National Muslim day of prayer her in the US. It would have been a perfect time to denounce, but it never happens.

          • Rando the Floydist says:

            Please tell me you people aren’t serious? You actually think the Muslim religion condones this? I guess I’d better keep an eye on the Muslims who work at my store. :eyeroll:

          • No1askedme says:

            The majority is not always right. Besides, what message does that send if we use a day of prayer to condemn others? How can condemn what you yourself do not fully understand? You don’t need to change your own views, but you seriously need to learn to accept the ideas of others’. The more I read your posts, the more convinced I become that you’re not really an ignorant or stupid individual; you’re just not familiar with the perspectives of others. My suggestion to you is to look into others’ viewpoints, whether you agree with them or not. I don’t think you’re a bad person, you’re just lacking perspective.

        • Danbala says:

          What I have come across after acts of terrorism by muslims, is an outcry from the society for every other muslim to show their colour – to go out there, be a muslim all the way – be extra religious, essentially, but be against the acts of terrorism. So I think that muslims showing their religion extra much after a muslim terrorist attack can be interpreted as a show of defiance within the faith – against the terrorists -rather than the other way around.

          I guess I just ain’t paranoid enough. Sorry. :p

      • Shazza says:

        (donning hipboots)

        “Warning! Extreme Steaming Shovel-ful of Semi-solid Nitrogenous Bovine Waste Alert!

    • TheOne says:

      “Show us on the doll where the Priest touched you as a child”

    • PLaw says:

      Well, I don’t honestly consider Mel Gibson and people like him “good” Catholics. I guess every religion has its extremists.

      I have had the pleasure of dining with the Dalai Lama and I find him to be one of the kindest, holiest men that I have ever met.

    • The Amazing Rando says:

      You are such a retard I can’t even believe you actually exist. You must be some sort of computer glitch that somehow resulted in some random words put together into sentences. You’ve let the actions of a few fringe terrorists dictate your belief of all Muslims. My boss is Muslim (not even from the Middle East, GASP!), and I’m pretty sure he doesn’t plan to kill any non-Muslims. Except maybe his boss, but that’s not religiously motivated. You suck, dude. Srsly.

      • not a lil scared on day your boss with run in with a bomb strapped to his chest going LALALALLALALALLALALALA FOR COBRAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

      • We have to beware of muslims, they’re out to get us. They already got France, it’s just a matter of time until they come to the US! Be warned and have your firearms ready!

        • brak says:

          Actually, I think maybe we gave them France. Who else would want it?

        • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

          and England too… Some neighborhoods you can’t even walk around outside without a burqua. Keep your cars inside!

          • No1askedme says:

            If you live in Great Britain (which I assume is what you mean by England), you should park your car inside anyways. Being relatively small landmass, the air is rather humid from onshore breezes which bring corrosive salt-water with them. It’s not very good for the paint.

        • Shazza says:

          …um, you forgot the part about the sky falling, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria, run around and panic…

          • Peter Venkman says:

            I thought I had that part covered already.

          • Shazza says:

            Forgot to add: I was born in France. It actually doesn’t belong to the US, so *we* can’t give it to anybody else. Seeing as how the healthcare in France is rated number one in the world, I have no problem being given the parts you don’t want, though!

            I don’t remember wearing a burka — though I think my mother may have bought me a little beret. Not raspberry.

    • The Amazing Rando says:

      This is a very bigoted POV you’ve got there HMYC (your name sucks, btw).

    • HelOnWheels says:

      “there are some good Muslims who don’t support murder of non-Muslims, but they are just a minority sadly”

      Really?? Where are you getting this “information”?

  22. Shy Mox says:

    Thich Nhat Hanh is all about LGBT rights.

  23. stick a fork in your eye you anus says:

    Is that so?

  24. Shy Mox says:

    No, its definitely a religion, especially Tibetan Buddhism. The Dalai Lama is believed to be a reincarnation of a bodhisattva and has a holy right to rule Tibet, and in the future we will all be saved by the Buddha who is not yet born, Maitreya. This “Buddhism isn’t a religion” BS is just denying Buddhism’s superstitions, mythology and metaphysical beliefs, which we have plenty of, to try and appeal to people who don’t like organized religion.

    • coyoteman says:

      I read somewhere that Buddhists also believe that if someone believes in an Abrahamic God (especially the Christian “God the Father – creator of all things” ) then that person is eternally doomed to the samsara cycle and cannot achieve nirvana. This is supposedly because such a god is a “delusion of the human mind” and such delusions (read “fairy tales”) block enlightenment. Is this true? It would be very sad if so because it would make Buddhism just as self-righteous and intolerant as fundamentalist Christianity.

      • No1askedme says:

        I’ve never heard of that, but it doesn’t sound like a very buddhist idea to me. Keep in mind, there are crazies in all sectors for society.

      • wallFly says:

        everyone is doomed to that cycle, only from the people i’ve talked to they don’t refer to it as “doomed” but rather speak of it more like a journey. what you’re sayin is close enough, i suppose, though it sounds like it’s been skewed to sound worse than it is. my guess is it’s someone trying to put a negative slant on buddhism, probably in favor of their own religion or whatever. just a guess, mind you.

        • wallFly says:

          p.s. and it’s everyone, buddhists as well, that go through that cycle. except for some reason, i keep thinking it was a hindu belief not buddhist… i get those two religions mixed up (it’s been a while since i’ve studied either, sorry)

      • coyoteman says:

        Thanks for the replies. I read it on some Buddhist web site but it might have been a fundamentalist extremist site (I’m sure Buddhists have these as do all religions/philosophies). That ’s why I was asking to see if it was mainstream thought or just some fanatics.

        BTW both Buddhism and Hinduism believe in samsara – the doctrine that a person undergoes an infinite loop of birth/death/rebirth cycles until they break out via enlightenment and reach nirvana. Jainism – a little known religion in India also believes this. Together they are known as the Dharmic religions.

    • No1askedme says:

      It depends who you ask. I’ve known christians who are also buddhist. But Tibetan Buddhism definitely qualifies as a religion unto its self.

    • HelOnWheels says:

      “faith in your god instead of the mystical beliefs of Buddhism”

      Buddhist beliefs include a “one God”. And I’m betting that you’re making it up about the Tibetan Buddhist woman because it’s Tibetan Buddhism that has deities that represent the many incarnations of the one God.

    • Shy Mox says:

      There’s not much basis for that in text, I’ve heard a few teachers say that but its not something all Buddhists believe or something Buddhism as a whole encourages, maybe in her particular sect. Its like saying “Christianity encourages polygamy” because of Mormons.

  25. Roxie says:

    The Dalai Lama is a feminist.

  26. supermac says:

    the to old to stand. :(

  27. tarenapoli says:

    ah, yes–that paramount sign of religious tolerance: smiling and pointing at someone. Now that is something I’ve NEVER seen any Christian do. Christians are incapable of smiling and pointing and joking with people they don’t agree with.

    But HERE, in this picture, we have solidarity and authenticity and admirable tolerance. Oh, would that Christians could one day point and smile and joke with anyone but another Christian! Will it ever be so in our lifetimes? *sob*

  28. talus says:

    my thought here is awesome

    Mohattma Ghandi:
    “I do love your christ, I do not love your chrisitians they are so unlike your christ.”
    Ghandi was a Hindu not a buddhist but the qoute works here pretty well.

  29. Paul says:

    Long live His Holiness HHDL XIV!

    Good to see a couple of people who don’t take it that seriously, though.

  30. spartacus says:

    Pic was crying out for a potatochop
    http://cheezburger.com/View.aspx?aid=2685700352

  31. Lilybean says:

    “You the man!”
    “No, YOU the man!”
    It may seem like religious tolerance, but it’s actually a ferocious debate of each others’ divinity and Godhood.

  32. Schwinehund says:

    oh rearry?


Your comment

 

 

Search

Get Daily Lol News Emails


EmailSubscribe
Enter your email address:
 

TwitterFollow us
on Twitter »
FacebookBecome a
Facebook fan »
RSSRSS Feed »
  • Recent Comments

    creaturefeature has … on And then the nasty ol…
    froofrou on Giggity Giggity
    Pleasant Troll on And then the nasty ol…
    Chandu The Neopolita… on Giggity Giggity
    The Amazing Rando on Mr. Yang Was Just Asked
    The Amazing Rando on Giggity Giggity
    The Amazing Rando on Giggity Giggity
    wickets ebil twin on Giggity Giggity
    Bix Nood on Mr. Yang Was Just Asked
    suicide_blonde on Mr. Yang Was Just Asked
  • Tag Cloud

  • The National Archives

  • Most Popular Pictures

  • RSS Cheezburger Network Blog

  • Even More Lulz