Christianity Or The Bar ?

[AsiaCheese]

Have to admit, this is a bit of a hobby-horse of mine - but am I the only one who thinks neither creationism or evolution explains mankind?

Creationism is way beyond belief - god loves us but permits the atrocities that happens to individual people - and they are people, just like you and I.

Evolution? - We get back to the old probs about how on earth did something as basic as the eye develop? There would have been no use for it until is actually worked.

So where do we go from here?

Simple: read Richard Dawkins' books, or grab/torrent a few of his BBC videos (both the ones specifically on Darwinism and those on religions). There's a very good explanation on how eyes came about -- and that's from the horse's mouth (a biologist), and not from the horse's ass (the people with populist explanations for just about anything and everything, slightly limited by 10,000 years of this world's existence)...

BTW: who designed the designer? Can't just have "evolved" -- wouldn't fit the script!

OK, so put it in layman's terms here.

For one, you can read it yourself in Richard Dawkins' 1986 book "The Blind Watchmaker".

Then, there's a pretty good write-up in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye). Not sure if I can put links here, but go to wikipedia.org slash wiki slash Evolution_of_the_eye.

[yabaaaa]

Do people not read the title of a thread before responding?

Is it a ‘herd mentality’ thing, one person posts off topic and the rest follow, kind of like lemmings jumping off a cliff?

In the vein of the current topic (which I will add again and for the record is NOT the O/P’s); I must quote one of my favorite movie lines EVER concerning God, religion, etc and it pretty much sums up my belief about the entire subject;

Morgan Freeman (a famous US actor) had a line in the 2003 Stephen King movie "Dreamcatcher";

"God is nothing more than an imaginary friend for grown-ups."

I say; feel free to use your imaginary friend all you want but don't judge me, look down on me or in any way feel he hasta be my imaginary friend too. I'll pick my own if you don't mind

Modz; think we might be able to bend this topic anywhere near back on target?

I prefer "if god didnt exist man would invent him"

[yabaaaa]

Streetcowboy - that's a great question: Is there any reason why a practicing Christian could not maintain a stable job as a hooker in a gogo bar?

I would say absolutely not, empirically. Just go to The Philippines. Most girls working in bars there are devoutly religious.

Yes I know everytime my trousers come down they scream "oh my god"

[StreetCowboy]

Do people not read the title of a thread before responding?

Is it a 'herd mentality' thing, one person posts off topic and the rest follow, kind of like lemmings jumping off a cliff?

In the vein of the current topic (which I will add again and for the record is NOT the O/P's); I must quote one of my favorite movie lines EVER concerning God, religion, etc and it pretty much sums up my belief about the entire subject;

Morgan Freeman (a famous US actor) had a line in the 2003 Stephen King movie "Dreamcatcher";

"God is nothing more than an imaginary friend for grown-ups."

I say; feel free to use your imaginary friend all you want but don't judge me, look down on me or in any way feel he hasta be my imaginary friend too. I'll pick my own if you don't mind

8><----SNIP----><8 digression deleted

Modz; think we might be able to bend this topic anywhere near back on target?

8><----SNIP----><8 digression deleted

IN a desparate attempt to get back on topic, I feel tempted to go down to the pub, and save someone, if only for one night

SC

[phetaroi]

Again, show us the evidence that Christians in Thailand are insisting that the help they offer the most desperate and disadvantaged people in this society is based on those people converting to Christianity.

Guest House, I enjoy reading your posts and you are often quite insightful. I think you're wrong in this, however.

I will have to relate a story about in the United States, but I doubt very much that things are all that different here. One day at work we were having a conversation about...well, let's say the soup kitchen type of establishments in large cities by organizations like the Salvation Army (although not at all restricted to that particular organization. One of our younger workers surprised us by saying that he had once been very down on his luck for a while and had availed himself of such services on a number of occasions. The conversation eventually got to about the same point this thread has gotten to -- that the "price" of that help was "hearing the message". He said that was his experience. It wasn't forced down his throat, but the message through pamphlets and images and words was always there.

I might add, that a couple I know extremely well, who border on poverty themselves, have made yearly trips to the Gulf region to continue to help rebuild after Hurricane Katrina. Their last visit was less than a year ago, and they do it at their own expense. We have talked about why they are so faithful to it and their answer is in two parts -- "for the glory of god" and "to spread the word of god to others through our charity".

Edited January 17, 2010 by phetaroi

[canuckamuck]

A person becomes a missionary because they feel two things:

1) They feel great satisfaction helping people in bad situations. Believe it or not, some people actually want to help others. In fact it is what makes them give up secular careers and advancement in the rat race. Even most Christians do not have this kind of compassion.

2) They believe their worldview can help others change their attitude and start over with confidence. They believe this because it works for them.

True or false: Success in life is heavily dependent on confidence and attitude.

So missionaries come and try to help people out, they teach new skills, they sometimes provide a place to live, they care for people that no one cares for, and they share their personal beliefs because that is what you do when you give advice. It would be quite strange if they did everything except, share what they believe to be the answer to successful living.

Sometimes they change lives for the better, often the people return right back to where they were.

They understand that people hate them for this; certain people will always be angry at seeing others succeed at being decent. It doesn’t matter.

[Robroy]

As someone who has realised God is a fiction I nevertheless have to concede that some Christians do amazing work in Thailand.

However some are drum-bangers, & others give English lessons on condition that the student agrees to learn a little about The Lord as well. That should probably stop.

[Felt 35]

The finest people I ever have meet in Thailand is an American Missionary couple which lived for more than 30 years here before they headed back to USA some years ago. They teaches Christian religion but never any fanatic acts to see there and they hardly talked about their beliefs outside the classroom.

The article the OP refer to are telling us a story from Bangkok and when the article is written in a way that can make the reader feels the girls are almost persuaded to a choice between the bar and Christianity it seems for me they are given a opportunity to learn about the Christianity and personally I believe that the girls trying out that opportunity are searching for something else, but nothing are stopping them from turn around.

[slapout]

canuckamuck' I Will not disagree with what you post but would add to your last statement. Certain people seem to get dismissive/angry at those who attempt/propose being decent to others, as well as those who are successful.

[robblok]

Thailand is a country where religion is not forced upon anybody.

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

Would your home country be better off if the Salvation Army did not exist?

YES

I thought disrespectful statements were not allowed here.

They are not.. but the truth is.

[Xangsamhua]

Roman Catholic clergy were allowed into Ayudhya in 1564 with the mission to minister to Catholics already in the city. However, before long, a small number of Siamese did "convert", whether fully or as another pathway complementary to their native Buddhism I don't know. Apart from the unfortunate events surrounding the alleged attempted conversion of King Narai, which led to the Siamese Revolution of 1688 and subsequent suppression of Catholicism, there has been an understanding that the Catholic Church in Siam/Thailand will not engage in proselytism among Buddhists in this country. Most Catholics in Thailand are from ethnic minorities - Chinese, Vietnamese, mountain people, etc. That is probably a significant factor in the good relations over many years between the Siamese court/leadership elite and the Church.

In any case, present-day Catholic missionary philosophy is focused on "evangelisation", essentially meaning witnessing the ethical teachings of Jesus individually and socially through practice of these teachings for the physical and spiritual welfare of the people being served. Obviously, the missionaries believe that one can be a follower of Jesus's teachings, if not a "disciple", without going through baptism. One doesn't have to be a "Christian" to be a "christian" and it's in everyone's interest that people are helped to be well and happy and to have a positive and loving disposition to the people around them.

This has been the prevailing view since the Second Vatican Council, if not before. The present regime in the Vatican is a bit more narrow-minded, but they have no interest in turning to the Eurocentric and narrow-minded vision of the missions sent out by colonial counties in the 18th and 19th centuries. In fact, after Bishop Las Casas shamed the Spanish government in the 16th century into introducing new laws to protect the rights of colonised people, Catholic missions have always had a health, education and welfare focus.

I don't know how the Protestant and Evangelical churches view their missionary efforts in Thailand. I expect they are more interested in proclaiming the Bible and the "good news" about Jesus' resurrection, etc. This has been proven over many years to be largely a waste of time at best and often communally divisive. The former Presbyterian missionary in northern Thailand, Herb Swanson, has described some of the bitterness that can arise if a village is split between Christians and Buddhists. I suspect many Protestant/Evangelical missionaries, once they've been here a little while, realise that proselytism doesn't work, but useful skills and the ability to train, heal, teach and just be generally helpful can achieve a great deal and are themselves their own reward.

Below is an example of a Catholic missionary activity on the Myanmar border.

THAILAND - 'Bamboo school' gives hope to kids on the margins Published Date: January 15, 2010

Kids at the 'bamboo school' SANGKHLABURI, Thailand (UCAN) — Thailand's rapid development and industrialization over the past three decades has created many winners but has also left some sectors behind.

One group, literally living on the margins of the country, has been particularly affected — the mostly stateless ethnic people living on the country's border with Myanmar.

A De La Salle missioner is one of those working in the region providing education for children through his "bamboo school," so called because the students use bamboo desks and chairs.

The 230 kids, aged four to 17, are mostly ethnic Burmese, Karen or Mon, although some are Thai. They are from families that practice animism, Buddhism and Christianity.

Educational opportunities

"With basic education, these children can face the difficulties in their lives," said Brother Victor Gil Munoz, director of the La Salle Learning Center in Sangklaburi, just two kilometers from the border with Myanmar.

"Most want to find employment and finally settle within Thailand," he added.

"Some of the students live on the Thai side of the border while (others) cross the border … every day," said Brother Munoz, who started the center in mid-2008.

He is assisted by 10 Thai volunteer teachers of Thai, English and mathematics.

The school also provides lunch. "Most children come to school without taking any breakfast at home," the Italian brother said.

For lunch, the children bring their own rice and the school supplies vegetables and meat, provided by a farm the school runs. The farm also provides practical instruction for the students in growing vegetables and rearing livestock including ducks and pigs.

Hope for a future

Weerawan Visetsing, a volunteer teacher, said many migrant workers send their children to this school because they are too young to work. But when the children are old enough they drop out and work with their parents.

The school, however, gives them a leg up in life.

"Without education, these children of ethnic-minority migrant workers will have no chance of having a better life," Brother Munoz said.

One student, Nosamu, a 15-year-old Karen girl, told UCA News that she lives with her grandparents across the border. Her parents work in a factory.

"I am so happy to attend this school. If I can speak and write in Thai, I can work and get good income," she said.

Nathee, 11, an ethnic Mon boy, said his brothers are construction workers in the south of Thailand. "If I can communicate in Thai, I can join my brothers at work when I grow up," he said.

http://www.ucanews.com/2010/01/15/bamboo-s...-on-the-margins

[mojaco]

One of you said: "Religion relies on brainwashing from a young age and that certainly is practiced here."

"Brainwashing" - I doubt very few would know how to do that. Even the USA isn't successful in that with terrorists. But ALL of us are under those trying to influence us to their concepts of reality from the day we are born. So what is wrong if a "Christian" feels his/her way of life is correct, and even if they are "only" helping BG to try to convince them that "Christianity" is better, they still help the lady? That is NOT akin to brainwashing, and at least is an alternare choice for the lady to consider while they are helping her.

And, by the way, the Bible is very clear about His requiring us to have true, pure, helping love to others. It is just that very few do, and that brings a bad name to "Christianity" Not ALL "people of faith" are the types of hypocrytes described by so many of you here. Oh, and I DID give some help to Haiti through a Christian group there - was that so evil?

Edited January 18, 2010 by mojaco

[robblok]

One of you said: "Religion relies on brainwashing from a young age and that certainly is practiced here."

"Brainwashing" - I doubt very few would know how to do that. Even the USA isn't successful in that with terrorists. But ALL of us are under those trying to influence us to their concepts of reality from the day we are born. So what is wrong if a "Christian" feels his/her way of life is correct, and even if they are "only" helping BG to try to convince them that "Christianity" is better, they still help the lady? That is NOT akin to brainwashing, and at least is an alternare choice for the lady to consider while they are helping her.

And, by the way, the Bible is very clear about His requiring us to have true, pure, helping love to others. It is just that very few do, and that brings a bad name to "Christianity" Not ALL "people of faith" are the types of hypocrytes described by so many of you here. Oh, and I DID give some help to Haiti through a Christian group there - was that so evil?

The terrorists are adults.. children are easy to fool. I agree we are all being influenced from when we are young. Too bad there inst a law against teaching religion until 18 or so. Then people can really decide if they believe it or not. That way they don't get pushed into it.

I never said Christians cant do good things. I just say its not an exclusive christian thing and you don't need to have a religion to be good. I think its not bad at all for them to save bar girls. They can do that if they like if someone needs help its ok to help them. Its bad however to push your morals unto others and im not sure if they do that.

[cognos]

.."Do people not read the title of a thread before responding?.."

point taken.. many of the bg's want out, and this might be a viable alternative for some..maybe if they find out Buddha predicted a new coming Messiah in 500 years or so (that would have holes in each hand, and a cut under his breast, and marks from thorns on his head) some may embrace new ideas ( a few do). I respect Buddhism by the way, just happen to be a Christian. Its IRONIC I guess that many non Christian believers on TV ( I respect their views) are circumsized ( Christian idea, correct me if I am wrong) and occasionally have sex in the Missionary position (Missionary Christian idea that was suggested to native " converts " in North America in the 1600's, correct me if I am wrong)..

[StreetCowboy]

.."Do people not read the title of a thread before responding?.."

point taken.. many of the bg's want out, and this might be a viable alternative for some..maybe if they find out Buddha predicted a new coming Messiah in 500 years or so (that would have holes in each hand, and a cut under his breast, and marks from thorns on his head) some may embrace new ideas ( a few do). I respect Buddhism by the way, just happen to be a Christian. Its IRONIC I guess that many non Christian believers on TV ( I respect their views) are circumsized ( Christian idea, correct me if I am wrong) and occasionally have sex in the Missionary position (Missionary Christian idea that was suggested to native " converts " in North America in the 1600's, correct me if I am wrong)..

I think that circumcision was widely practiced in pre-Christian Roman times, and is commonplace amongst Jews, and probably was from pre-Christian times. I think also that you will find the name "missionary position" may have originated with Christians but the practice was not unique to them...

I guess bar girls are quite exposed to Christian interference (compared to say disenfranchised hill tribes) because of the ease with which missionary types can get to them; also, they are relatively clean, well-educated and speak fair English for the most part, so it is probably not such unpleasant work for the more fastidious amongst us.

However, compared to prostitutes in the missionaries' own countries, they are probably relatively less-disadvantaged. Prostitution in Thailand does not seem to be stigmatised to the same extent as in many Western countries, and therefore seems to be higher up the "pecking order" of careers. Having said that, I speak from a position of relative ignorance, never having spoken to a Western prostitute, to the best of my knowledge. Perhaps some of our members with a broader circle of Western friends could enlighten us?

SC

?Do Russians / Ukrainians / Africans count as Western?

[ballpoint]

.."Do people not read the title of a thread before responding?.."

point taken.. many of the bg's want out, and this might be a viable alternative for some..maybe if they find out Buddha predicted a new coming Messiah in 500 years or so (that would have holes in each hand, and a cut under his breast, and marks from thorns on his head) some may embrace new ideas ( a few do). I respect Buddhism by the way, just happen to be a Christian. Its IRONIC I guess that many non Christian believers on TV ( I respect their views) are circumsized ( Christian idea, correct me if I am wrong) and occasionally have sex in the Missionary position (Missionary Christian idea that was suggested to native " converts " in North America in the 1600's, correct me if I am wrong)..

I think you'll find that all bg's in the popular expat hangouts are working there voluntarily. There's nothing to stop them getting out, other than the need for money. You might as well say many of the menial factory workers want out, or many of the - insert any tedious job here - want out. These do gooders "helping" them because they are high profile cases, and because they attract the attention of people who misguidedly think they are slaves, would do far greater good helping to feed and educate children so they are able to have more choices in life from a younger age.

I'll agree that some, if not many, religious people do good in the world, but many others do pure badness. When was the last time you heard of an atheist suicide bomber killing thousands? Why do you never see a war between the atheists and the agnostics reported? Yet we see christians killing christians, christians killing muslims, muslims killing christians, muslims killing muslims, muslims killing jews, muslims killing hindus, hindus killing muslims, all for purely religious reasons. I have my doubts about many of the do gooders too. Why do you need a reason to help others? Whether it be the promise of a place in heaven, good karma, or getting 50 virgins in paradise? Why not do good for the sake of doing good, and not for any perceived reward? I'm not going to go to heaven, I'm not going to be reborn. Once dead the components of my body will return to the soil and the only thing left will be the DNA I passed on to my daughter. In short, this life is the only chance I'll get, so I may as well get all I can out of it. But, I'll still go out of my way to help others. No thought of future reward is needed, or should be needed.

What the Buddha actually said was there will be those who, after death, due to enlightenment, will be reborn in an otherwise empty higher "realm", and will come to believe they are the master and creator of that realm. After a while, others will also enter that realm after death and will come to accept the original occupant as being its creator. When some of these "souls" are reincarnated on earth they will remember the "creator" and will become prophets. It provides an explanation for Christ, Mohamed, and other prophets, but in no way agrees with what they are saying. In Buddhism, the "Gods" are beings that have been around longer than humanity, and so have reached a higher state of enlightenment, but are in no way creators. To try and state that Bhudda specifically predicted Christ as a messenger of the creator is simply not true.

Finally, you are starting to get into the realms of the ridiculous when you start talking about circumcision and the missionary position as being arguments for christianity. Christ himself was not a christian at birth, yet was circumcised, and do you really believe that no one actually had sex in that position prior to it being given its popular name in the 1600's? Might as well accuse someone of doing it doggie style of being a canine worshipper. Or maybe a dyslexic who believes in Dog.

[dumbnewbie]

I'd like to reply to some of those who challenged my earlier post on the first page of this thread, but in the interest of keeping to the original topic, I will instead quote from the article mentioned in the OP, which I'm guessing few have yet read:

Though missionaries preaching the word of the Lord near raunchy entertainment spots have become a Bangkok mainstay in the last few years, I must say I have never witnessed any man or woman heed the advice of a preacher and refrain from descending into the Devil's pit of scantily clad young ladies. Perhaps this is why new tactics are being deployed...

Rather than simply preaching to passers by, the Thompsons' tactic is to pay the girls' bar-fines to bring them inside the centre... and attempt to persuade them to accept Jesus. The reward for acceptance is a weekly income of 800 Baht (£16), free accommodation and vocational courses...

The Thompsons' motive is ultimately one of religious conversion and the fringe benefits are the lure in a somewhat deceitful sales pitch. But perhaps it is short sighted to view the entire offering with such contempt. There is nothing stopping a girl taking up the opportunity, utilising the resources, saying Jesus is wonderful for six months and then moving on to a better life, and a new career...

The Thompsons cite that 35 out of approximately 1000 girls (3.5%) have taken them up on their offer of sanctuary.

OK. So in this particular instance, the missionaries are apparently trying to convert the people they're "helping" to Christianity.

The article goes on to speculate that perhaps the only reason more girls aren't taking them up on the offer is because they identify so strongly with Buddhism that they cannot imagine giving up that identity and cutting themselves off from the "Thai family". If this is the case, it could be argued that the price the missionaries are asking of these bar girls is too high to be helpful.

But I suspect there is a more pragmatic reason so few bar girls choose to be "helped". The article doesn't mention what vocations the Thompsons offer training in, but I can't imagine they pay anything near what prostitution does.

So what are we left with? To my mind, you have holier-than-thou Christians telling these girls that they're doing something dirty, shameful and immoral, for which they will go to hel_l when they die. And that in order to avoid such a horrible fate, they should change their religion and entire worldview AND that they should do menial labor for much lower pay and accept a dramatically lower standard of living for themselves and whatever family they support.

So this is why I posted what I did on the first page of this thread: it appears to me that the Christian missionaries in question are not motivated so much by a desire to provide real help where it's really needed as by a desire to combat the perceived "evil" of prostitution - i.e., fornication, adultery, sodomy, or whatever hateful, judgmental words they use to demonize any and all sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman. The Old Testament (Jewish Torah) prescribes the death penalty for extra-marital sex, just like Islam does. The New Testament, which is more pertinent to Christianity, says if you absolutely must have sex, it must be within marriage, but it's much better to have no sex at all, EVER, even if it means cutting off your genitals. Don't believe me? Start reading the New Testament - it's in there, and I can at least narrow it down a bit for you - it's in one of the following books: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts or Romans. So don't tell me Christianity isn't the most anti-sex religion on earth.

You see, some of us don't see anything morally wrong with sex outside of marriage, or with paying for sex. We simply can't believe in an angry, monstrous sky-god who would even care about such trivial stuff, let alone send us to hel_l to be tortured for eternity over it. Who's getting hurt? If people are being violently coerced or tricked into prostitution, that's a different story - punish the criminals. If STDs are being spread, I'm all for public health measures to combat disease. But a free exchange of sex for money? It's perfectly fair. Morally speaking, it's no different from dating and marriage, where the guy essentially pays for sex from the woman.

Lifelong monogamous marriage may seem like a wonderful ideal to religious people, but the reality for most of us is different. It's boring. Most people get bored having sex with the same person over and over and over and over again, certainly after a few years time. If we insist on holding people to this unrealistic standard, what happens is that you have "cheating", and lying, and horrible fights, and broken hearts, divorce, and long-suffering kids of divorce - and it's all so unnecessary. Marriage should be about more than sexual monogamy/monopoly. It should be about lifelong friendship and partnership and raising happy, healthy kids. Why should recreational sex destroy all that? Moral stigma should be reserved for people who break up a marriage and traumatize their children for life over something so trivial as sex.

It just seems to me that if we had more realistic expectations of marriage and more realistic acceptance of human sexuality, we'd all be so much better off. From what I know, many non-Western (i.e., non-Christian) cultures have a "don't ask/don't tell" policy when it comes to adultery - as long as the spouse doesn't know, it can't hurt him/her. And even if it is discovered, people should be mature enough to accept that it doesn't mean the entire marriage is over and destroyed. I mean really - chances are the spouses aren't having sex any more anyway, right? I have a lot of respect for people like Hillary Clinton, who chose to keep her marriage and family intact despite a highly public and embarrassing incidence of infidelity.

Bar girls, by and large, are not being exploited, and they certainly are not evil, and they don't need to be made to feel guilty and then "saved". They are providing a lot of pleasure, usually with a lot of good humor, and are getting paid nicely for their efforts, relative to other work they could be doing.

So if Christian missionaries really want to help people, I'd suggest there are a lot of other people with much greater need. That's all.

Edited January 18, 2010 by dumbnewbie

[StreetCowboy]

Top Rant!

SC

[canuckamuck]

OK. So in this particular instance, the missionaries are apparently trying to convert the people they're "helping" to Christianity.

The article goes on to speculate that perhaps the only reason more girls aren't taking them up on the offer is because they identify so strongly with Buddhism that they cannot imagine giving up that identity and cutting themselves off from the "Thai family". If this is the case, it could be argued that the price the missionaries are asking of these bar girls is too high to be helpful.

But I suspect there is a more pragmatic reason so few bar girls choose to be "helped". The article doesn't mention what vocations the Thompsons offer training in, but I can't imagine they pay anything near what prostitution does.

So what are we left with? To my mind, you have holier-than-thou Christians telling these girls that they're doing something dirty, shameful and immoral, for which they will go to hel_l when they die. And that in order to avoid such a horrible fate, they should change their religion and entire worldview AND that they should do menial labor for much lower pay and accept a dramatically lower standard of living for themselves and whatever family they support.

Reading the bolded bits there is quite telling about the level of knowledge you speak from.

So this is why I posted what I did on the first page of this thread: it appears to me that the Christian missionaries in question are not motivated so much by a desire to provide real help where it's really needed as by a desire to combat the perceived "evil" of prostitution - i.e., fornication, adultery, sodomy, or whatever hateful, judgmental words they use to demonize any and all sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman. The Old Testament (Jewish Torah) prescribes the death penalty for extra-marital sex, just like Islam does. The New Testament, which is more pertinent to Christianity, says if you absolutely must have sex, it must be within marriage, but it's much better to have no sex at all, EVER, even if it means cutting off your genitals. Don't believe me? Start reading the New Testament - it's in there, and I can at least narrow it down a bit for you - it's in one of the following books: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts or Romans. So don't tell me Christianity isn't the most anti-sex religion on earth.

lol, that is hilarious. You know the bible is the most studied book in the world. Believe it or not there are people who know what it says, and you clearly have no idea what it says. You are way out of your depth on this.

You see, some of us don't see anything morally wrong with sex outside of marriage, or with paying for sex. We simply can't believe in an angry, monstrous sky-god who would even care about such trivial stuff, let alone send us to hel_l to be tortured for eternity over it. Who's getting hurt? If people are being violently coerced or tricked into prostitution, that's a different story - punish the criminals. If STDs are being spread, I'm all for public health measures to combat disease. But a free exchange of sex for money? It's perfectly fair. Morally speaking, it's no different from dating and marriage, where the guy essentially pays for sex from the woman.

Lifelong monogamous marriage may seem like a wonderful ideal to religious people, but the reality for most of us is different. It's boring. Most people get bored having sex with the same person over and over and over and over again, certainly after a few years time. If we insist on holding people to this unrealistic standard, what happens is that you have "cheating", and lying, and horrible fights, and broken hearts, divorce, and long-suffering kids of divorce - and it's all so unnecessary. Marriage should be about more than sexual monogamy/monopoly. It should be about lifelong friendship and partnership and raising happy, healthy kids. Why should recreational sex destroy all that? Moral stigma should be reserved for people who break up a marriage and traumatize their children for life over something so trivial as sex.

It just seems to me that if we had more realistic expectations of marriage and more realistic acceptance of human sexuality, we'd all be so much better off. From what I know, many non-Western (i.e., non-Christian) cultures have a "don't ask/don't tell" policy when it comes to adultery - as long as the spouse doesn't know, it can't hurt him/her. And even if it is discovered, people should be mature enough to accept that it doesn't mean the entire marriage is over and destroyed. I mean really - chances are the spouses aren't having sex any more anyway, right? I have a lot of respect for people like Hillary Clinton, who chose to keep her marriage and family intact despite a highly public and embarrassing incidence of infidelity.

Bar girls, by and large, are not being exploited, and they certainly are not evil, and they don't need to be made to feel guilty and then "saved". They are providing a lot of pleasure, usually with a lot of good humor, and are getting paid nicely for their efforts, relative to other work they could be doing.

So if Christian missionaries really want to help people, I'd suggest there are a lot of other people with much greater need. That's all.

This last section is a sermon of your own, you have your own worldview too it seems and you don't mind pushing it on people as fact either. Although it comes across as a plea to leave the bargirls alone because you are worried about losing the only access you have to females in your price range.

Please list the cultures out side of Christianity that have a don't ask don't tell policy when it comes to infidelity. I have my doubts you'll have a long list. I'll give you a hint it's not Thailand, because several sharp knives and a few happy ducks say your wrong.

[MaiThaiMai]

Thailand is a country where religion is not forced upon anybody. Religion relies on brainwashing from a young age and that certainly is practiced here. Would your home country be better off if the Salvation Army did not exist?

YES

I thought disrespectful statements were not allowed here.

They are not.. but the truth is.

Ain'† DA† da'†roo† Bruddha oh-oh, me †inks da† Godera†or is closing-in now...(again) I know I can'† hide bu†† I can sure run ...

[PeaceBlondie]

Ballpoint asked, "When was the last time you heard of an atheist suicide bomber killing thousands? Why do you never see a war between the atheists and the agnostics reported? Yet we see christians killing christians, christians killing muslims, ...., all for purely religious reasons." I've never seen reports of a devout Christian pacifist killing anybody.

[PattayaParent]

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.

On the contrary, you still have the need for religion. So the brainwashing was very effective.

[PattayaParent]

God is human, as he(?) was invented by humans, the elite, for the sole purpose of keeping the ordinary folk in line and suppressed.

Who was it who said "If God didn't exist, man would have had to invent Him?"

[ballpoint]

Ballpoint asked, "When was the last time you heard of an atheist suicide bomber killing thousands? Why do you never see a war between the atheists and the agnostics reported? Yet we see christians killing christians, christians killing muslims, ...., all for purely religious reasons." I've never seen reports of a devout Christian pacifist killing anybody.

That may be so, but you can’t deny that people have been killing each other in the name of religion for millennia. And often with the full, if sometimes covert, backing and connivance of officials of their church, mosque, temple, synagogue, stone circle, pyramid, holy cave, etc, etc. A few good apples don’t make a rotten barrel any better, it’s inherently in the nature of religion. After all, the Bible attributes 2,270,365 deaths, not including the victims of Noah's flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, or the many plagues, famines, fiery serpents, etc, because no specific numbers are given for these, to God, but only 10 to Satan. The recent BBC debate on whether the catholic church is a force for good showed that, despite the missions and charity work, the abuses and suffering caused by such things as its ban on contraception, the widespread molestation of children in their care, the assertion that homosexuals will go to hel_l, the inequality of women, not to mention the historical horrors inflicted on free thinkers and the resultant huge setback to scientific progress, mean that most people see the church as definitely not being a force for good. It was resoundingly defeated, with more against it after the debate than before. Granted, that’s just one example, but it’s rather a resounding one. Mark Twain agrees: "Man is a Religious Animal. Man is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion -- several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbour as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven.... The higher animals have no religion. And we are told that they are going to be left out in the Hereafter. I wonder why? It seems questionable taste”.

It’s easy to see why religion was invented, it’s all about control. “Yes, we leaders have more sheep / cattle / virgins / gold / money / power than you, but be good, work hard for us, fight our battles, sacrifice your children and give us your wealth and you shall be rewarded when you die”. In short, “be meek and inherit the earth, once we’ve finished with it”. But, one wonders what relevance the superstitions of a group of Middle Eastern sheep herders living thousands of years ago has today, especially given that “the God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” (Richard Dawkins in “The God delusion”), and that so, so much of what they say has resoundingly been disproved.

[PeaceBlondie]

Ballpoint, that's why I belong to a local pacifist church without centralized control, who never fornicated with emperors.

[cognos]

"..Bar girls, by and large, are not being exploited.."

no??? what about the ones who are "sold" into the "profession?"

what about the good girls who become "jaded" after working in the industry X number of years, and start to seek a " payback?", as witnessed by the myraid of rip off stories on TV??

what about the unusual number of farang who seek them out for wives and gf's? ( although granted for some it may be a blessing, as a few are " rescued")

what about those who contact Aids, and bear children with Aids/HIV?? Have these children been "exploited" in your view.. with a veritable death sentence to start life??

[cognos]

"..As someone who has realised God is a fiction..

hmmmm, realised, surmised, theorized, or guessed??

signed: hope you never hit rock bottom and need God, but he will be there if you change your mind and do

[phetaroi]

God is human, as he(?) was invented by humans, the elite, for the sole purpose of keeping the ordinary folk in line and suppressed.

Who was it who said "If God didn't exist, man would have had to invent Him?"

It's been attributed to historians Will and Ariel Durant, although I think it actually predated their publishing.

[Hawk]

One of us is wrong..if its me, answer this..what good will money do for the "elite" when they are dead??

It is all about control not money. Earthly power is much more fun than playing a stupid harp for eternity.

[gregb]

My wife had a run in with a missionary a few years before she met me. He was recruiting on campus at Ramkhamhaeng, she was freshman and she was curious. She was lucky she didn't have a phone at that time or she would have had to change her number. She finally had to move and not tell anyone where she was going to get away from the guy.

Anyone who thinks these missionaries aren't intimidating isn't looking too hard. It is possible that they do help a few people once in a while, but they terrorize alot more people than they help. My wife had nothing against Christianity until the missionaries got their claws on her.

BTW, Richard Dawkins is my hero. There are very few people with the moral courage to say they "despise" religion. Here's his militant atheism talk for anyone who is curious and doesn't know who he is. It's well worth listening to even if you don't agree with him.

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_dawkins_o...nt_atheism.html