Christianity Or The Bar ?

[sharecropper]

"Choice" is my prefered word in this matter.

At my place of work (a Thai government institution), 3 songs are sung each & every morning. One is the National Anthem, the 2nd one is the Kings Anthem & the 3rd song is something about "Thai Buddhism" (not real Buddhism). This institution teaches people who are mostly adults in the eyes of Thai law (18+ years old), although there are some students who are under 18 years of age. Some students are Muslim.

This is nothing short of "programming".

Not unlike pledging allegance to the flag start of everyday in the USofA

The difference is that you do not get arrested or prosecuted for refusing to pledge allegiance. You do recall a certain court case in Thailand involving someone that did not wish to stand and sing along, right? There are a few subjects in Thailand where dissent is not allowed. Need a hint? Look at the TV forum rules on subjects and institutions not to be discussed.

It's all relative though. Isn't it illegal to burn the flag in the US?

[mccw]

As far as missionaries and Christianity, the Christians do perhaps more good works in this country than the Buddhists do. Nothing against Buddhism as I think it is a beautiful religion and is much like Christianity in many ways anyhow. But as a whole I believe the Christian church has done more charity-wise that Buddhists, but to be fair they also have more money.

not sure why you think christians do more good works,,,,,,,, maybe they have better publicists?

[slapout]

Many Christians I have met seem to believe that punishment for bad deeds is death in some eternal flame thrower type environment (final), whereas many Buddhists have indicated that they have multiple reincarnation opportunities to get it right or at least better. I would not even began to compare various religions vs good/bad deeds

[PeaceBlondie]

Off-topic, but flag-burning is not illegal in USA, I think.

However, this is the rule here: "7) Not to post slurs or degrading comments directed towards any group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation."

[mojaco]

<snip>.. narrow minded, self righteous, Prudes.

<snip>

I would think such an absolute declaration as yours is exactly as "narrow minded and self righteous" ? That is, YOUR opinion is given as the only correct one? Seems all sides of any discussion like the current one simply shows we ALL are the same, only differing in what we believe - god exists! god is a fiction! right! wrong! good! bad!

Even those that declare all is relative are "bigoted" in their own way. It amazes me that this subject always generates so much fervency, unless "guilt" is bothering ALL sides?

[TheJoker12]

Thailand has its own religion that is forced upon the people.

[IanForbes]

<snip>.. narrow minded, self righteous, Prudes.

<snip>

I would think such an absolute declaration as yours is exactly as "narrow minded and self righteous" ? That is, YOUR opinion is given as the only correct one? Seems all sides of any discussion like the current one simply shows we ALL are the same, only differing in what we believe - god exists! god is a fiction! right! wrong! good! bad!

Even those that declare all is relative are "bigoted" in their own way. It amazes me that this subject always generates so much fervency, unless "guilt" is bothering ALL sides?

There is a difference though. I don't CARE what religion someone chooses. I feel it is entirely their own choice and I won't pass judgement saying one is wrong and another one is right. It is only those that say THEIR way is the ONLY RIGHT WAY that are narrow minded and self righteous. The prudes are those that portray all sex outside of THEIR type of marriage is somehow being bad. And, too often the prudes either hate sex altogether, or they say one thing but, if given the opportunity, do the exact opposite to what they are preaching.

[canuckamuck]

There is a difference though. I don't CARE what religion someone chooses. I feel it is entirely their own choice and I won't pass judgement saying one is wrong and another one is right. It is only those that say THEIR way is the ONLY RIGHT WAY that are narrow minded and self righteous. The prudes are those that portray all sex outside of THEIR type of marriage is somehow being bad. And, too often the prudes either hate sex altogether, or they say one thing but, if given the opportunity, do the exact opposite to what they are preaching.

Truly if you didn't care it would show in your opinion. I see the opposite is true and you do care that some have chosen a world view with a core belief that it is the only correct one. Why is that an issue, do you see any of these people being held against there will? Do they have any power over you?

This is like when a non-drinker goes to a party and everyone acts concerned that they don't have a drink in their hand. Why do they care?

[Hawk]

Christian and islamic religions are both based on hearsay and myths.

They should both be classed as fairytales.

But the bar is certainly no fairytale.

Edited January 16, 2010 by Hawk

[IanForbes]

There is a difference though. I don't CARE what religion someone chooses. I feel it is entirely their own choice and I won't pass judgement saying one is wrong and another one is right. It is only those that say THEIR way is the ONLY RIGHT WAY that are narrow minded and self righteous. The prudes are those that portray all sex outside of THEIR type of marriage is somehow being bad. And, too often the prudes either hate sex altogether, or they say one thing but, if given the opportunity, do the exact opposite to what they are preaching.

Truly if you didn't care it would show in your opinion. I see the opposite is true and you do care that some have chosen a world view with a core belief that it is the only correct one. Why is that an issue, do you see any of these people being held against there will? Do they have any power over you?

This is like when a non-drinker goes to a party and everyone acts concerned that they don't have a drink in their hand. Why do they care?

Good points. You are right. I don't really care and that is why I walk around with a big smile on my face all the time. But, with just such an opinion as you mentioned I wouldn't bother reading or responding to ANY topic other than how do you get from point A to point B in Thailand. Why would I bother offering advice to some stranger? Why would I reply to "Where can I find a good hamburger?"

What I HAVE seen is narrow minded, self righteous prudes objecting to just about every topic to a point where I don't even bother visiting formerly good, interesting sites.

[mojaco]

There is a difference though. I don't CARE what religion someone chooses. I feel it is entirely their own choice and I won't pass judgement saying one is wrong and another one is right. It is only those that say THEIR way is the ONLY RIGHT WAY that are narrow minded and self righteous. The prudes are those that portray all sex outside of THEIR type of marriage is somehow being bad. And, too often the prudes either hate sex altogether, or they say one thing but, if given the opportunity, do the exact opposite to what they are preaching.

Truly if you didn't care it would show in your opinion. I see the opposite is true and you do care that some have chosen a world view with a core belief that it is the only correct one. Why is that an issue, do you see any of these people being held against there will? Do they have any power over you?

This is like when a non-drinker goes to a party and everyone acts concerned that they don't have a drink in their hand. Why do they care?

Good points. You are right. I don't really care and that is why I walk around with a big smile on my face all the time. But, with just such an opinion as you mentioned I wouldn't bother reading or responding to ANY topic other than how do you get from point A to point B in Thailand. Why would I bother offering advice to some stranger? Why would I reply to "Where can I find a good hamburger?"

What I HAVE seen is narrow minded, self righteous prudes objecting to just about every topic to a point where I don't even bother visiting formerly good, interesting sites.

You really have a fixation problem with your constant referral to "narrow-minded, self righteous prudes" don't you? No way you are walking around with a big smile on your face ALL THE TIME! Chill out!

[yabaaaa]

Christian and islamic religions are both based on hearsay and myths.

They should both be classed as fairytales.

But the bar is certainly no fairytale.

And makes a lot more sense!!

[MrHammer]

I can see how the idea of God allows people to find strength that they don't believe is within them. Of course, it isn't God who gives them the strength they find in religion, but themselves. Even Christianity says so.

It's difficult to live without moral boundaries and having to find out good and bad for yourself. Thais have a pretty lenient look on good and bad. For those caught up on the wrong end of that, Christianity offers real answers.

[cognos]

I'm guessing that the main problem most of us have with Christianity in particular is the way it obsesses over sexuality and tries to repress it and give everyone a huge guilt trip over it (unless it involves a priest and a little boy - that's OK apparently).

Why do Christians have to equate nearly every form of sex with abuse and "sin"? Why can't they focus their disapproval and moral crusades on something else, like... oh, I don't know... how 'bout VIOLENCE? Or drug/alcohol abuse? Or poor hygiene and disease? Why is it always about sex with these people? Why can't they just accept that sex is one of the greatest joys in life and not in-and-of-itself harmful and evil?

It should go without saying that nobody should be forced or even coerced into sex, much less into prostitution. But aside from that criminal aspect, and the STD problem... well, aside from those two things, what the hel_l is the problem really? If Christians would just stop demonizing sex I think they'd find a lot fewer people stridently opposed to them.

sorry, you are wrong friend..if you check the bible you will find that sex is condoned between wife and husband and even praised as a blessing, in so many passages it ain't funny.. you do NOT have a leg to stand on with your argument.. it is a slippery - sloped argument you espouse without basis of fact... what is NOT condoned is adultry. Songs Chapter 2, 3..16 " my lover is mine and I am his "..Chapter 3 " All night long on my bed..I held him and would not let him go.." Read a little!!

signed: get your facts straight before you spread incorrect statements

[Seismic]

I'm guessing that the main problem most of us have with Christianity in particular is the way it obsesses over sexuality and tries to repress it and give everyone a huge guilt trip over it (unless it involves a priest and a little boy - that's OK apparently).

Why do Christians have to equate nearly every form of sex with abuse and "sin"? Why can't they focus their disapproval and moral crusades on something else, like... oh, I don't know... how 'bout VIOLENCE? Or drug/alcohol abuse? Or poor hygiene and disease? Why is it always about sex with these people? Why can't they just accept that sex is one of the greatest joys in life and not in-and-of-itself harmful and evil?

It should go without saying that nobody should be forced or even coerced into sex, much less into prostitution. But aside from that criminal aspect, and the STD problem... well, aside from those two things, what the hel_l is the problem really? If Christians would just stop demonizing sex I think they'd find a lot fewer people stridently opposed to them.

sorry, you are wrong friend..if you check the bible you will find that sex is condoned between wife and husband and even praised as a blessing, in so many passages it ain't funny.. you do NOT have a leg to stand on with your argument.. it is a slippery - sloped argument you espouse without basis of fact... what is NOT condoned is adultry. Songs Chapter 2, 3..16 " my lover is mine and I am his "..Chapter 3 " All night long on my bed..I held him and would not let him go.." Read a little!!

signed: get your facts straight before you spread incorrect statements

Well that IS the problem, I dont think he is alluding to sex between husband and wife, what he is referring to is the general religious bias against sex outside of marriage. You can quote the bible all day long, it is a book (like all other religious texts) that is so full of contradictions that it shoots itself in the foot, same for the Koran with the differences between the Mecca and Medina Surahs. What it all comes down to in the end is that many people feel the need for some strong belief to anchor themselves and I have nothing against that, I feel that every person on this earth should have the right to chose their beliefs and live by them. I am against those that feel it is their mission in life to try and coerce you into following their own particular belief. If you want to believe in some ultimate deity that watches over us then fine, thats great and if it helps you get through the day, then even better. But dont try to impose your beliefs on me.

Personally to me religion is a prop, funny how all major religions have one common belief, that is some form of afterlife. That is why people become religious, because they want a little more than their "three score and 10". Again I have nothing against that, I think that everyone should be free to express their beliefs in whatever way they see fit, as long as it doesnt intrude on my personal beliefs, which are that I will believe in god when he pops round and asks me if I want a chat and a few cold beers.

[beammeup]

Charities, schools, good works, all superb. Nobody would argue with that.

But when it comes to peddling improbable and unprovable supernatural stores around those good works, to gullible, largely uneducate and now "saved" punters, then I have a problem with religion.

I am not intending to start a religious debate (that is a hole different issue, one I try to avoid at all costs), but why would you care about what "saved punter" believe, or what some people who receive charitable assistance believe?  If it works for them, what should it matter to you?

People who use religion, be that Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism,  or the Church of the Mighty Sasquatch, to force or coerce members into violence against others, OK, then I have a problem with that, too.  But simple religious beliefs, that is up to the individual and makes no difference to me one way or the other.

And while this doesn't indicate any valid demographical trends, the only Buddhists I know who have converted to Christianity have all been university-educated, so it is not only the uneducated masses, as you seem to attest. 

I was going to say something very similar after I read the whole thread. Glad others think as I do. I know there are a lot of people against religion. They were brainwashed it was forced on them etc... You cant be forced to believe something if its not in your heart.

[IanForbes]

You really have a fixation problem with your constant referral to "narrow-minded, self righteous prudes" don't you? No way you are walking around with a big smile on your face ALL THE TIME! Chill out!

I don't have a fixation on anything other than enjoying myself. And, you won't find anyone more chilled out than me. I will agree that I don't always have a smile on my face after 30 hours of constant travel and then have to deal with some snotty customs agent. I don't always have a smile on my face when my Canadian government okays another project to destroy our environment and kill off a fishery that has lasted for eons. But, I don't have a lot of say in those matters so I just accept it as other's human failings.

[yabaaaa]

I'm guessing that the main problem most of us have with Christianity in particular is the way it obsesses over sexuality and tries to repress it and give everyone a huge guilt trip over it (unless it involves a priest and a little boy - that's OK apparently).

Why do Christians have to equate nearly every form of sex with abuse and "sin"? Why can't they focus their disapproval and moral crusades on something else, like... oh, I don't know... how 'bout VIOLENCE? Or drug/alcohol abuse? Or poor hygiene and disease? Why is it always about sex with these people? Why can't they just accept that sex is one of the greatest joys in life and not in-and-of-itself harmful and evil?

It should go without saying that nobody should be forced or even coerced into sex, much less into prostitution. But aside from that criminal aspect, and the STD problem... well, aside from those two things, what the hel_l is the problem really? If Christians would just stop demonizing sex I think they'd find a lot fewer people stridently opposed to them.

sorry, you are wrong friend..if you check the bible you will find that sex is condoned between wife and husband and even praised as a blessing, in so many passages it ain't funny.. you do NOT have a leg to stand on with your argument.. it is a slippery - sloped argument you espouse without basis of fact... what is NOT condoned is adultry. Songs Chapter 2, 3..16 " my lover is mine and I am his "..Chapter 3 " All night long on my bed..I held him and would not let him go.." Read a little!!

signed: get your facts straight before you spread incorrect statements

Edited January 16, 2010 by yabaaaa

[khundon]

I'm guessing that the main problem most of us have with Christianity in particular is the way it obsesses over sexuality and tries to repress it and give everyone a huge guilt trip over it (unless it involves a priest and a little boy - that's OK apparently).

Why do Christians have to equate nearly every form of sex with abuse and "sin"? Why can't they focus their disapproval and moral crusades on something else, like... oh, I don't know... how 'bout VIOLENCE? Or drug/alcohol abuse? Or poor hygiene and disease? Why is it always about sex with these people? Why can't they just accept that sex is one of the greatest joys in life and not in-and-of-itself harmful and evil?

It should go without saying that nobody should be forced or even coerced into sex, much less into prostitution. But aside from that criminal aspect, and the STD problem... well, aside from those two things, what the hel_l is the problem really? If Christians would just stop demonizing sex I think they'd find a lot fewer people stridently opposed to them.

sorry, you are wrong friend..if you check the bible you will find that sex is condoned between wife and husband and even praised as a blessing, in so many passages it ain't funny.. you do NOT have a leg to stand on with your argument.. it is a slippery - sloped argument you espouse without basis of fact... what is NOT condoned is adultry. Songs Chapter 2, 3..16 " my lover is mine and I am his "..Chapter 3 " All night long on my bed..I held him and would not let him go.." Read a little!!

signed: get your facts straight before you spread incorrect statements

Fact??? The Bible is not Fact, it is no more than a leap of faith. Made up of anecdotal stories handed down, changed, interpreted, miss intrepeted, miss translated and so on and so on. One in which you either believe or disbelieve.

If I remember, it was 400 years after the death of Jesus, that anyone even started to put pen to parchment and started to write the first part. I could be wrong though.

Just because certain things are written in the bible, does not make it fact. Unless you are of the opinion that a fictional tome written now, could as if by magic, become fact after 2000 years and around which a religion could be based.

As for "Christian Missionaries" they have a less than honorable past, going into third World countries preaching the "Lords word", while at the same time engaging in every deviant practice known to man and some they invented themselves.

You only have to look at many news sites and you will find they are still at it. The B*****ds.

Sex between man and a woman is the most pleasurable thing, providing you are between the right man and woman.

You may well feel that the wages of sin is death, but I will reply, yes, but the hours are good.

I have no problem with missionaries helping the bar girls, but I do have a problem when they do it, not because that is the human thing to do, but in order to "convert" another to the cause.

[PeaceBlondie]

There is an extant portion of the New Testament, a copy, reliably dated to the early second century AD. The Old Testament allowed Hebrew patriarchs to put their penis inside several body cavities of all their wives and concubines, and probably of Gentile harlots. Masturbation is nowhere clearly forbidden in either Testament. The NT does not restrict a Christian to one wife.

[phetaroi]

Religion relies on brainwashing from a young age and that certainly is practiced here.

I'm not so sure it has much to do with brainwashing as it does human nature to "believe".

I was raised a Methodist. The day I hit 18 I converted to Catholicism. Then after a few years of visiting Thailand I considered myself a Buddhist, and it is "where" I have found more contentment.

So much for the brainwashing from a young age.

[phetaroi]

That statement reflects your bias. Many of these women do not wish to be 'rescued'. They willingly enter the trade and enjoy the money and lifestyle that it can give to them.

Perhaps that your biased thinking based on your own shallow view of Thai life.

Making a choice is not always a willing choice.

[phetaroi]

The difference is that you do not get arrested or prosecuted for refusing to pledge allegiance. You do recall a certain court case in Thailand involving someone that did not wish to stand and sing along, right? There are a few subjects in Thailand where dissent is not allowed. Need a hint? Look at the TV forum rules on subjects and institutions not to be discussed.

Well...not quite totally correct. In the past there were students punished and suspended from American schools who did not stand and recite the Pledge. Yes, that was in the past, but it did happen and was not that uncommon.

[phetaroi]

The existence of God is proven mathematically as there is no possibility that the universe could exist coincidentally without intelligent design. There are many experiments carried out in the field of quantum physics which demonstrate that consciousness and reality are interconnected, and that God is at least probable. In my experience, the people I have met who are most upset by the concept of religion or God are people who have the most to lose in the end if they are wrong. It is no use arguing about it anyway, as everyone will find out one way or another in the end.

As far as missionaries and Christianity, the Christians do perhaps more good works in this country than the Buddhists do. Nothing against Buddhism as I think it is a beautiful religion and is much like Christianity in many ways anyhow. But as a whole I believe the Christian church has done more charity-wise that Buddhists, but to be fair they also have more money.

I don't know that it fair to say God's existence has been "proven" by mathematics, but logic tells me that all that IS, is mere coincidence...that's not at all logical. Anymore than the idea that your ability to see and interpret or speak a language simply evolved by coincidence from Pre-Cambrian stromatolites makes any sense. My university professor who taught me invertebrate paleontology courses were all Christians who regularly attended church, except for those weekends when we were in the field. It is not an "either, or" proposition...unless you believe instead in Rush Limbaugh.

As for Christians doing more "good" than Buddhists, while it is partly a financial matter, I think it also has something to do with being on a "group path" or a "solitary path". The goals are somewhat different in the two religions.

[OriginalPoster]

The difference is that you do not get arrested or prosecuted for refusing to pledge allegiance. You do recall a certain court case in Thailand involving someone that did not wish to stand and sing along, right? There are a few subjects in Thailand where dissent is not allowed. Need a hint? Look at the TV forum rules on subjects and institutions not to be discussed.

Well...not quite totally correct. In the past there were students punished and suspended from American schools who did not stand and recite the Pledge. Yes, that was in the past, but it did happen and was not that uncommon.

There were two Supreme Court cases involving that issue in the 1940's. Since 1943, it's been settled law that students cannot be punished for refusing to cite the Pledge of Allegiance. Of course that doesn't mean that the kids won't get bullied and harassed by other kids over it, it just means that teachers and school administrators can't be the ones doing the bullying and harassing. Even before the 1943 decision the issue wasn't that people were being arrested or prosecuted for not saying the pledge though, the case arose from children of Jevohah's witnesses being expelled from school for unwillingness to recite the pledge.

Edited January 17, 2010 by OriginalPoster

[canuckamuck]

As for Christians doing more "good" than Buddhists, while it is partly a financial matter, I think it also has something to do with being on a "group path" or a "solitary path". The goals are somewhat different in the two religions.

Of course, Buddhism is focuses on issues pertaining to self, and undistorted Christianity is concerned with serving each other.

[cognos]

"..As for "Christian Missionaries" they have a less than honorable past, going into third World countries preaching the "Lords word", while at the same time engaging in every deviant practice known to man and some they invented themselves.

You only have to look at many news sites and you will find they are still at it. mad.gif The B*****ds..."

Do you really think that argument is a valid reason to reject the tenants of Christianity?? Anyone, including ME, that would believe your argument at face value would say.."why would I want to be a Christian and be LIKE THAT!!".. The only problem with your thesis is you are not talking about Christians, you are talking about DEVIANTS who sexually ( or physically, or emotionally) abuse children,adults etc .. and CLAIM they are Christian are NOT..they are hiding behind the veil of Christianity..using that "religion" to put themselves in a position of trust to perpetuate their deviant practices..if they are deviant.. they are NOT Christians..so please don't delude yourself into thinking they are. Is that so hard to swallow??

signed: be against Christianity if you wish, but don't call deviants Christians, they are just deviants, no more, no less

[mca]

The difference is that you do not get arrested or prosecuted for refusing to pledge allegiance. You do recall a certain court case in Thailand involving someone that did not wish to stand and sing along, right? There are a few subjects in Thailand where dissent is not allowed. Need a hint? Look at the TV forum rules on subjects and institutions not to be discussed.

Well...not quite totally correct. In the past there were students punished and suspended from American schools who did not stand and recite the Pledge. Yes, that was in the past, but it did happen and was not that uncommon.

Were they reported to the police with the possibility of being charged with a crime that carries a custodial sentence though?

[OriginalPoster]

The difference is that you do not get arrested or prosecuted for refusing to pledge allegiance. You do recall a certain court case in Thailand involving someone that did not wish to stand and sing along, right? There are a few subjects in Thailand where dissent is not allowed. Need a hint? Look at the TV forum rules on subjects and institutions not to be discussed.

Well...not quite totally correct. In the past there were students punished and suspended from American schools who did not stand and recite the Pledge. Yes, that was in the past, but it did happen and was not that uncommon.

Were they reported to the police with the possibility of being charged with a crime that carries a custodial sentence though?

No, what happened was that in the late 1930s and early 1940's some children of Jehovah's Witnesses were expelled from school for refusing to recite the pledge. The Supreme Court first upheld the school's right to expell the kids in 1940 but then reversed itself in a similar case in 1943, ruling that compulsory unification of opinion violated the 1st amendment of the constitution.

Edited January 17, 2010 by OriginalPoster

[mca]

Cheers.