Someone on another forum here has, in the context of 'consideration of freedom of/from religion', presented two examples of the evil inherent in all religions. One of these examples, Iran, we tend to have some information on. The other, Bhutan, which is described in that post as a "Buddhist Theocracy", we might tend to have little or no information on. That is probably because not a whole lot happens there, as compared to a lot of spots on this planet.
Here is some history and some facts on how it works in that remote kingdom. This from the Wiki entry, Bhutan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhutan
Extracts:
The Kingdom of Bhutan [buː'tɑːn] is a landlocked South Asian nation situated between India and China. The entire country is mountainous except for a small strip of subtropical plains in the extreme south which is intersected by valleys known as the Duars.
Bhutan is one of the most isolated nations in the world; foreign influences and tourism are regulated by the government to preserve its traditional Tibetan Buddhist culture. Most Bhutanese follow either the Drukpa Kagyu or the Nyingmapa school of Tibetan Buddhism. The official language is Dzongkha (lit. "the language of the dzong"). Bhutan is often described as the last surviving refuge of traditional Himalayan Buddhist culture.
Bhutan has been a monarchy since 1907. The different dzongkhags were united under the leadership of the Trongsa Penlop. King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who has made some moves toward constitutional government, announced in December 2005 that he would abdicate in 2008 in favour of his eldest son. On December 14, 2006, he announced that he would be abdicating immediately, and his son, Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck, took the throne. As of April 22, 2007, parliamentary elections are scheduled to be held in 2008 for the first time in the country's history, upon royal orders[3].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bhutan
Extract:
In 1907, an epochal year for the country, Ugyen Wangchuck was unanimously chosen as the hereditary king of the country by an assembly of leading Buddhist monks, government officials, and heads of important families. The British government promptly recognized the new monarchy, and in 1910 Bhutan signed a treaty which "let" Great Britain "guide" Bhutan's foreign affairs. In reality this did not mean much given Bhutan's historical reticence. It also did not seem to apply to Bhutan's traditional relations with Tibet. The greatest impact of this treaty seems to be the perception that it meant Bhutan was not totally sovereign.
In 1953, King Jigme Dorji Wangchuck established the country's legislature – a 130-member National Assembly – to promote a more democratic form of governance. In 1965, he set up a Royal Advisory Council, and in 1968 he formed a Cabinet. In 1971, Bhutan was admitted to the United Nations, having held observer status for three years. In July 1972, Jigme Singye Wangchuck ascended to the throne at the age of 16 after the death of his father, Dorji Wangchuck.
In 1998, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck introduced significant political reforms, transferring most of his powers to the Prime Minister and allowing for impeachment of the King by a two-thirds majority of the National Assembly.[citation needed] In late 2003, the Bhutanese army successfully launched a large-scale operation to flush out anti-India insurgents who were operating training camps in southern Bhutan.
A new constitution was presented in early 2005[5] which will be put up for ratification by a referendum before coming into force. In December 2005, Jigme Singye Wangchuck announced that he would abdicate the throne in his son's favour in 2008 . On December 14, 2006, he stunned his countrymen by announcing that he would be abdicating immediately.
On February 8, 2007, the Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty was substantially revised. Whereas in the Treaty of 1949 Article 2 read as "The Government of India undertakes to exercise no interference in the internal administration of Bhutan. On its part the Government of Bhutan agrees to be guided by the advice of the Government of India in regard to its external relations.", in the revised treaty it now reads as "In keeping with the abiding ties of close friendship and cooperation between Bhutan and India, the Government of the Kingdom of Bhutan and the Government of the Republic of India shall cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests. Neither Government shall allow the use of its territory for activities harmful to the national security and interest of the other."
The revised treaty also includes in it the preamble "Reaffirming their respect for each other's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity;", an element that was absent in the earlier version. The Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty of 2007 thus lays to rest any questions that may have existed in regard to the independence and sovereignty of Bhutan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Bhutan
Extract:
Among the Bhutanese people, several principal ethnic groups may be distinguished. The second dominant group is the Ngalops, a Buddhist group based in the western part of the country. Their culture is closely related to that of Tibet. Much the same could be said of the Sharchops ("Easterners") the dominant group, who are associated with the eastern part of Bhutan (but who traditionally follow the Nyingmapa rather than the official Drukpa Kagyu form of Tibetan Buddhism). These two groups together are called the northern Bhutanese. The remaining 15% of the population is ethnic Nepali, most of whom are Hindu.
**
NB: per that last statement, it is not unreasonable to draw the inference that most of the rest of the population is Buddhist.
Let me clue yous in on one key feature of what a Buddhist believes. The idea is that suffering has no really compelling causes. That it happens because we invest in a lot of stuff that has no real meaning, and gets in the way of a focused, calm, happiness. That all of this stuff, this noise, has a corrupting influence, they call it a defilement of mind, and what they mean ultimately by 'mind' is the Universal Mind.
EG: In 1999, the king also lifted a ban on television and the Internet, making Bhutan one of the last countries to introduce television. In his speech, the king said that television was a critical step to the modernization of Bhutan as well as a major contributor to the country's Gross National Happiness (Bhutan is the only country to measure happiness) but warned against the misuse of television which may erode traditional Bhutanese values. Some believe it has indeed affected Bhutan in a negative way [4]
One other thing you may note, is that you won't find these people fighting among themselves. You will also find that when their neighbors mess with them, EG: The Chinese, they try, and try again to set things right, utterly peacefully with those not-so-neighborly incursions.
They don't really exist in our western world so much; they just want to be free of all this crap that isn't really helpful, and tends to lead to something other than any kind of what they call happiness. That's a sort of tradition they have.
I could go on and on and on with these amazing differences between that world and the one we tend to inhabit. The point is that someone here, with an axe to grind against religion, period, has seized upon this place, with no information on it, it appears quite haphazardly, and confounded it viz a viz Iran as a Theocracy, as two exemplars of the Evil that happens when religions govern. That is an absolutist position that has been shown to be based on premises that don't follow from anything except those premises.
Any reasonable person can look at this information and draw their own inference as to whether this isolated kingdom, where nothing much newsworthy tends to happen, is a real good example of evil in this world.
I thank you for your patience.
TMW
And there was me thinking it was something sniffed for cheap thrills.
Cheap Thrills
In the backa my car
Cheap Thrills
How fine they are
*makes either falsetto squeals or low voiced 'buh, buh's depending on mood*
I have tried to get somewhere in the middle of those two sounds, but so far, not so much joy...
Cheap thrills, as an ethos, is something Bhutan has shown little interest in, traditionally. They seem to going for something more... sometimes less is more.
TMW
More than cheap thrills?
You mean they want some sort of spiritual sustainance that does not come from Tom Cruise?
A foreign land indeed.