I can not help but wonder if, as Sharon Stone is recorded as having said, the Chinese earthquake was the consequence of "bad karma" then what is she going to say about the floods in Cedar Rapids, and the earthquake in Japan.
And please, TF, do not get me wrong. I have as much sympathy for the victims of these latter examples of nature at work as I had for the earthquake in China.
This is about the colossal stupidity of that Stone(d) woman.
Nothing else.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Actually Sharon Stone was quite correct about the earthquake being caused by China's bad karma as a nation. Burma also has plenty has plenty of bad karma.
Both the floods in Iowa and earthquake in Japan did not cause that much loss of life. People were traumatized and property was lost, so some karmic results were definitely felt by many.
See more info on group karma at http://www.sentforlife.com/karma.html
Sorry Dave, that line of reasoning sounds to me just a little too much like blaming the sons for the sins of the father. That really is the flaw in behind Stone's statement.
I have little doubt that the vast majority of those killed in China and Myanmar would have had as little individual influence upon the policies and actions of their respective government as you have over yours. Did you have any (direct) influence on Iraq, or on Afghanistan, or any other action of your government; and take that both in agreement and opposition. If you agreed with an action of the government but had no say in the decision that is as much karma as the consequences of the decisions of the military junta in Myanmar.
To then attribute the consequences of natural forces to the cause of political attitude (as Stone did, and as you seem to have some agreement) is, truly, nonsensical.
What, I wonder, is the bad karma owing to Japan to result in the destructive earthquakes of the past couple days?
Sharon Stone should work on acting, not so good at that either. This is a non issue with me.
The occurance of a natural disaster is unrelated to the activities of a people or a government. However, the effects of that disaster are not.
A clear case in point, Burma, because of its backwards policies is an incredibly poor nation. That lack of resources makes its people both more vulnerable to natural catastrophes and also makes it more difficult to alleviate suffering. Burma's refusal to allow most foreign aid simply made the problem worse.
This is of course not a result of any mystical force, but simply the unalterable fact that greater resources equals more protection and more resiliance. Government policies have a direct effect on the availibility of resources.
Post a Comment