Dragon Team

God or gods?

Contrary to popular understanding, Hindus recognise one God, Brahman, the eternal origin who is the cause and foundation of all existence.

The gods of the Hindu faith represent different expressions of Brahman.

Different Hindu communities may have their own divinities whom they worship, but these are simply different ways of approaching the Ultimate.

Hindus recognise three principal gods:

   * Brahma, who creates the universe
   * Vishnu, who preserves the universe
   * Shiva, who destroys the universe.

Brahma

Brahma is the Creator. However, Brahma is not worshipped in the same way as other gods because it is believed that his work - that of creation - has been done.

Hindus worship other expressions of Brahman (not Brahma), which take a variety of forms.

Hindus are often classified into three groups according to which form of Brahman they worship:

   * Those who worship Vishnu (the preserver) and Vishnu's important incarnations Rama, Krishna and Narasimha;
   * Those who worship Shiva (the destroyer)
   * Those who worship the Mother Goddess, Shakti, also called Parvati, Mahalakshmi, Durga or Kali.

I've an Indian friend who, when he was seven ,moved with his family from India to England, where he was enrolled at a new school. On his first day he was asked to speak to the class about a saint from his Hindu tradition.

Enthusiastically he began to tell the story of the saint called Ishu, who was born in a cowshed, was visited by three holy men, performed many amazing miracles, walked on water and spoke a wonderful sermon on a mountain.

Of course, he was telling the story of Christ. But he was bewildered to hear that the teacher laid claim to Ishu for herself and her friends and she let him know that this was her Lord and her story, not his. He was very upset about this, because Ishu's tale was his favourite story.

You see, in a sense, Hindus don't really see Jesus as a Christian at all. (Of course Jesus didn't either, because the term wasn't used during His lifetime.) In Hindu thought, church or temple membership or belief is not as significant as spiritual practice, which in Sanskrit is called sadhana.

As there is no Church of Hinduism, everyone holds their own spiritual and philosophical opinions. It is difficult then to understand someone's spirituality simply by looking at their religious trappings. So, in India it is more common to hear someone ask, "What is your sadhana (practice)?" than, "What do you believe?"

Then when we ask how we can see spirituality in Hindus, the answer comes: by behaviour and practice. We can ask are we humble, are we tolerant and are we non-violent? Can we control our senses and our mind? Are we aware of others' suffering and are we willing to give up our comfort to help them? Looking at these criteria Jesus measures up as a Sadhu, a holy man. He preached a universal message, love of God and love of brother, which was beyond any sectarianism or selfishness. Jesus was one of those people who appealed from heart to heart, and that's what makes him such a good Hindu Saint. Shaunaka Rishi Das

Shaunaka Rishi Das

In my particular tradition, and among other Hindus, He is seen as much more, as an Avatar, specifically a Shaktavesha Avatar or an empowered incarnation. This means that God has sent Him to us for a specific mission to fulfil God's will on earth. The greatest challenge

When I was 14 I began a personal and serious study of the New Testament. I wanted to understand what Christ had to say about things, so I paid particular attention to the words of Jesus Himself. I can see now that the whole direction of my life was determined by this formative study and by the thoughtfulness invoked by it.

I read such passages as Luke 5: "forsake all and follow me". I remember distinctly, as a 14 year old, developing my own understanding of what that meant. I had formed a sense of mission and vocation by reading the Bible, seeing that the love of God should be shared with others. The greatest commandment - to love the Lord our God with all our heart, all our words and all our deeds, and love our neighbour as ourselves - struck me as an instruction, as a plea and, actually, as a necessity. Considering how to do to that, how to forsake all and follow God out of love, has provided me my greatest challenge in life.

As a young boy, that meant giving up sitting in front of the TV with my cup of coffee, two sugars and a biscuit (these were the comforts of my life at that time). It meant to go down to the town centre of Wexford, my hometown, stand in the Bullring, and preach the glory of love of God to all who wanted to hear it. From my reading of Christ's words and the example of his life, I knew that is what I was called to do, but did I do it? No, I couldn't. That surrender to God I had to postpone.

The instructions and teachings of Christ were crystal clear to me but I wasn't having an easy time trying to follow them. Isn't it funny how it sometimes seems easier to fight for our principles than to actually follow them? Thus my script was written, the challenge laid down, a challenge that Christ had posed to the whole world. "He who has ears let him hear", he would say. I seemed to have those unfortunate ears.

Christ was different. He was radically different. He preached for three years and got killed for it. He gave everything. A friend betrayed him. We have all had some experience where someone we trust turns on us, but imagine how we would feel if a friend betrayed us to death! Does the word forgiveness spring to mind? Not in my case, but it comes a close second. In Hindu scripture it says that forgiveness is the principal quality of a civilised man, and civilisation is measured in terms of spiritual qualities rather than economic or scientific advancement. It's quite clear to me where Jesus hung his hat on that issue.

For instance, in our civilised world, who would get away with going to a funeral, approaching the chief mourner and asking him to surrender everything to God now, as Jesus did? When the chief mourner replied "But I've got to bury my father", Christ said "let the dead bury the dead". I wonder what the tabloids in those days had to say about that.

Of course, Jesus didn't get away with this either, but he had the courage of His convictions. He spoke the truth, the absolute truth to a materialistic society and risked life and limb for His mission. I wonder how He might fare today with His uncompromising stand on hypocrites and whited sepulchres? For instance, if he was to visit Belfast he might have problems being heard unless He declared first if he were a Catholic or a Protestant Christian.

Sectarianism is bigotry, discrimination or hatred arising from attaching importance to perceived differences between subdivisions within a group, such as between different denominations of a religion or the factions of a political movement.

The ideological underpinnings of attitudes and behaviors labeled as sectarian are extraordinarily varied. Members of a religious or political group may feel that their own salvation, or success of their particular objectives, requires aggressively seeking converts from other groups; adherents of a given faction may believe that for the achievement of their own political or religious project their internal opponents must be purged. Sometimes a group feeling itself to be under economic or political pressure will attack members of another group thought to be responsible for its own decline. It may also more rigidly define the definition of "orthodox" belief within its particular group or organisation, and expel or excommunicate those who do not agree with this newfound clarified definition of political or religious 'orthodoxy.' In other cases, dissenters from this orthodoxy will secede from the orthodox organisation and proclaim themselves as practitioners of a reformed belief system, or holders of a perceived former orthodoxy. At other times, sectarianism may be the expression of a group's nationalistic or cultural ambitions, or exploited by demagogues.

A sectarian conflict usually refers to violent conflict along religious and political lines such as the conflicts between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland (although political beliefs and class-divisions played major roles as well). It may also refer to general philosophical, political or armed conflict between different schools of thought such as that between Shia and Sunni Muslims. Non-sectarians espouse that free association and tolerance of different beliefs are the cornerstone to successful peaceful human interaction. They espouse political and religious pluralism.

Dragon Team is a clan, not a very good one, still a clan tho. Keiths a gay cunt, picks up his gf from nursery everyday after bowling - sharpish -.

Reasons why Keith is a faggot:

>

  :P
  Lol.
  Keith

Keith also made an online diary, probably the gayest thing to ever happen inside popre. Cunt should be kerbed asap. Bobs an unloyal cunt who not even loyal to his own mam.

1 Hatred against persons on religious grounds

The Public Order Act 1986 (c. 64) is amended in accordance with the Schedule to this Act, which creates offences involving stirring up hatred against persons on religious grounds. 2 Racial and religious hatred offences: powers of arrest

In section 24A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (c. 60) (arrest without warrant by persons other than constables) after subsection (4) add—

“(5) This section does not apply in relation to an offence under Part 3 or 3A of the Public Order Act 1986.” 3 Short title, commencement and extent

(1) This Act may be cited as the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.

(2) This Act comes into force on such day as the Secretary of State may appoint by order made by statutory instrument.

(3) An order under subsection (2) may make—

(a) such supplementary, incidental or consequential provision, or

(b) such transitory, transitional or saving provision,

as the Secretary of State considers appropriate in connection with the coming into force of this Act.

(4) This Act extends to England and Wales only.

Section 1 SCHEDULE Hatred against persons on religious grounds

In the Public Order Act 1986 (c. 64), after Part 3 insert— “Part 3A Hatred against persons on religious grounds Meaning of “religious hatred” 29A Meaning of “religious hatred”

In this Part “religious hatred” means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief. Acts intended to stir up religious hatred 29B Use of words or behaviour or display of written material

(1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.

(2) An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the written material is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and are not heard or seen except by other persons in that or another dwelling.

(3) A constable may arrest without warrant anyone he reasonably suspects is committing an offence under this section.

(4) In proceedings for an offence under this section it is a defence for the accused to prove that he was inside a dwelling and had no reason to believe that the words or behaviour used, or the written material displayed, would be heard or seen by a person outside that or any other dwelling.

(5) This section does not apply to words or behaviour used, or written material displayed, solely for the purpose of being included in a programme service. 29C Publishing or distributing written material

(1) A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.

(2) References in this Part to the publication or distribution of written material are to its publication or distribution to the public or a section of the public. 29D Public performance of play

(1) If a public performance of a play is given which involves the use of threatening words or behaviour, any person who presents or directs the performance is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.

(2) This section does not apply to a performance given solely or primarily for one or more of the following purposes—

(a) rehearsal,

(b) making a recording of the performance, or

(c) enabling the performance to be included in a programme service;

but if it is proved that the performance was attended by persons other than those directly connected with the giving of the performance or the doing in relation to it of the things mentioned in paragraph (b) or (c), the performance shall, unless the contrary is shown, be taken not to have been given solely or primarily for the purpose mentioned above.

(3) For the purposes of this section—

(a) a person shall not be treated as presenting a performance of a play by reason only of his taking part in it as a performer,

(b) a person taking part as a performer in a performance directed by another shall be treated as a person who directed the performance if without reasonable excuse he performs otherwise than in accordance with that person’s direction, and

(c) a person shall be taken to have directed a performance of a play given under his direction notwithstanding that he was not present during the performance;

and a person shall not be treated as aiding or abetting the commission of an offence under this section by reason only of his taking part in a performance as a performer.

(4) In this section “play” and “public performance” have the same meaning as in the Theatres Act 1968.

(5) The following provisions of the Theatres Act 1968 apply in relation to an offence under this section as they apply to an offence under section 2 of that Act—

   *

     section 9 (script as evidence of what was performed),
   *

     section 10 (power to make copies of script),
   *

     section 15 (powers of entry and inspection).

29E Distributing, showing or playing a recording

(1) A person who distributes, or shows or plays, a recording of visual images or sounds which are threatening is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.

(2) In this Part “recording” means any record from which visual images or sounds may, by any means, be reproduced; and references to the distribution, showing or playing of a recording are to its distribution, showing or playing to the public or a section of the public.

(3) This section does not apply to the showing or playing of a recording solely for the purpose of enabling the recording to be included in a programme service. 29F Broadcasting or including programme in programme service

(1) If a programme involving threatening visual images or sounds is included in a programme service, each of the persons mentioned in subsection (2) is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.

(2) The persons are—

(a) the person providing the programme service,

(b) any person by whom the programme is produced or directed, and

(c) any person by whom offending words or behaviour are used. Inflammatory material 29G Possession of inflammatory material

(1) A person who has in his possession written material which is threatening, or a recording of visual images or sounds which are threatening, with a view to—

(a) in the case of written material, its being displayed, published, distributed, or included in a programme service whether by himself or another, or

(b) in the case of a recording, its being distributed, shown, played, or included in a programme service, whether by himself or another,

is guilty of an offence if he intends religious hatred to be stirred up thereby.

(2) For this purpose regard shall be had to such display, publication, distribution, showing, playing, or inclusion in a programme service as he has, or it may reasonably be inferred that he has, in view.