Words as weapons, or tools?

I agree with both Dave and matt.  The choice of words is a good example of the difference between the Abrahamic tradition religions and the Eastern (Taoist and Buddhist) philosophies.  An Abrahamic would refer to items or statements as "weapons" whereas an Eastern would refer to them as "tools".    After all, in The Art of War it is said that winning without fighting is best.

I get tired of these discussions being dominated by an Abrahamic mindset, where words like "blasphemy" and "heretic" have meaning.  The idea that a god set out all of the instructions for humankind in a badly worded and contradictory immutable book to a set of remote tribes in a small corner of the world is laughable, and to continue to engage in discussions with this as the philosophical basis is equally silly.  Abrahamic religions just seem so completely prescriptive and dictatorial, with no scope for dissent.  Quite immature by comparison really.

As far as I am aware (and would welcome correction if anyone knows it) the words "blasphemy" and "heretic" do not exist in the context of Taoism or Buddhism.  After all, in Taoism there is the idea that a person is a fool to laugh at the Tao, but without the laughter, there would be no Tao.  I state this not to explain what the Tao is, but to point out contrary opinions are welcome and indeed necessary for a living philosophy and world view to flourish.

Ugh, it is 1:07am here, so I don’t know if this is making sense.  I fear that I will wake up later today and be terribly embarrassed.