I've gradually reached the conclusion that the real problem for Christian apologists and theologians is their trouble with pronouns: they just don't understand the difference between 'me' and 'us'.

Perhaps Peter was home sick from kindergarten that day.

Peter , yes your Cat is happy and deservedly so , one suspects.

You , however , are not happy.

Wrong religion could be a cause..... or maybe Religion in any form .

Athiestism is better

Some of the Dalai Lama's views seem about as destructive as some christian teachings.

Before knocking the teaching of ethics Peter might do better to reflect on how well the teaching of variants of christian belief has not worked to achieve ethical behaviour. It was Peter who ïn a recent article was promoting the saying of prayers in university http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=14890 "What would happen if prayers were said before lectures in chemistry, English literature, physics and maths? What would happen if prayer was said before lectures in business and commerce? Students would be introduced to the idea that they are not there simply to obtain credentials so that they could command high salaries and prestige.

Seemingly no comprehension of the behaviour of many of those for who the saying of prayers is a regular part of their lives.

Glass houses Peter?

R0bert

"But no one should be able to get away with uttering obviously superficial solutions to deep problems that accompany our humanity."

Gee Peter, that sounds like you are discussing any religious leader at all!
As far as I am concerned, no one should be able to get away with pushing the made up invisible man barrow that all religious leaders currently get away with.

"The fact that this happens time and time again indicates that by turning our back on our own religious traditions we have become theologically naïve and will accept all manner of proposals from a man in a monk's robe whom thousands flock to hear."

Whose religious traditions? Yours?
If not believing in religion or Gods makes me "theologically naive", then I give thanks for that!
The man in the monk's robe could also describe the Pope couldn't it?
I agree we shouldn't be accepting all his 'proposals' either...

Peter,
>>his insistence on ethics as the key to a better world and presumably to a happier people. Indeed, he contrasts ethics with religion, which he parodies…<<

I am not sure where you get the parody part from, but you probably refer to the statement “Dalai Lama Tells His Facebook Friends That 'Religion Is No Longer Adequate'” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/13/dalai-lama-facebook-religion-is-no-longer-adequate-science_n_1880805.html) which is an oversimplification of what Dalai Lama actually claims on his Facebook: “All the world’s major religions … promote inner values. But the reality … today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate”. Note, “religions” not “religion”.

Or more explicitly:

“Certainly religion has helped millions of people in the past, helps millions today and will continue to help millions in the future. … (A)s the peoples of the world become ever more closely interconnected in an age of globalization and in multicultural societies, ethics based in any one religion would only appeal to some of us; it would not be meaningful for all.” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/02/beyond-religion-dalai-lam_n_1125892.html)

This is rather obvious if one realises that what Dalai Lama is referring to is the VARIETY of religions (as “denominations”) rather than religion as a phenomenon (as the Huffington Post heading seems to suggest) seen by some as a positive, by some as a negative, trait of human nature.

What Dalai Lama is apparently pointing to - with his emphasis on ethics above particular religions - is the “natural moral law” intrinsic to all humans (whether seen as a product of evolution or as an a priori given by God); compare also the concept of World Ethos of Hans Küng.

See also http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=9368#152712. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/13/dalai-lama-facebook-religion-is-no-longer-adequate-science_n_1880805.html.

I think that what happened to the Tibetans is instructive to the Lexi and Poirot clones of this world.

If you reject the principle of defending your own territory by force, and if you want to live in lotus land in harmony with everything and everybody, and if you find a nice tree and go to sleep in the sun, you will probably wake up with some bastards foot on your neck.

Any organism which stops fighting for it's own survival will eventually become extinct.