Thai Judgment

[chiangmaikelly]

not if you are a deviate, hard for eg a killer to judge a killer.

thats why your struggling to understand

Are you calling me a deviate?

A killer is someone who kills someone. That is obvious to everyone; killer or not.

I know what a killer is. A killer is someone who kills someone.

What is a deviate? Especially important if you are calling me a deviate.

in my opinion, not that it matters.

cheating on your wife is not normal behaviour for normal good people.

you seem to be supporting his behaviour that deviates from what is considered by most including the lady he made a marital promise to be wrong.

hence the reason i use the word deviate.

Studies suggest around 30–40% of unmarried relationships and 18–20% of marriages are marked by at least one incident of sexual infidelity. Men are more likely than women to have a sexual affair, regardless of whether or not they are in a married or unmarried relationship.

In some jurisdictions an extramarital affair may incur unexpected financial costs. In Australia, for example, affairs of two or more years duration can be deemed a de facto relationship, exposing the married cheater to financial claims in the Family Court on their superannuation savings, income and property. A de facto relationship may exist even when the partners do not think so. It is the Court that will define when it began and ended, based on the evidence.

If 30% of men have red hair would you call a redhead a deviate? Who gets to say that infidelity is wrong? You? If I have 4 wives is that OK? Am I a deviate?

I think you are saying that you are god and you get to say who is right and wrong and according to your holiness you; you have determined cheating is the definition of being a deviate.

I know you are going to say the majority feel that way but then we get into morality being determined by the majority and so we are back to you as god thing. You really think you are god or speak for god or can interpret the will of god. Hmmm.

So who is normal and who is a deviate is up to you eh?

[BigJohnnyBKK]

in my opinion, not that it matters.

cheating on your wife is not normal behaviour for normal good people.

you seem to be supporting his behaviour that deviates from what is considered by most including the lady he made a marital promise to be wrong.

hence the reason i use the word deviate.

You think it is "normal" for people to be "good"? You either have a very loose definition of "good" which doesn't seem to be the case, or a very strange one of "normal".

And you seem to be assuming such promises are made in the first place, I haven't promised anything like that to any of my partners for nearly ten years now, and certainly none of the more "official" marriages, and therefore haven't needed to "cheat" on any of them.

OT but the noun is "deviant" and usually is meant in a stronger sense, as in "pervert". Normal heterosexual adultery is actually quite normal in nearly every culture that's attempted to encourage monogamy, usually through religious rules that most people ignore.

[TommoPhysicist]

I think the word you are all looking for is 'deviant'.

One that differs from a norm, especially a person whose behavior and attitudes differ from accepted social standards.

Before judging someone to be a 'deviant' you would first need to specify what social standards you are using. (note the definition says nothing about sexuality, just differing from the norm)

@Payak

You declare yourself a Buddhist, but all your posts seem to be using the teachings of Christianity as your 'social standard', which in itself could be considered deviant behaviour by many.

On further consideration, as an Australian, even claiming to be a Buddhist in itself would class you as a deviant (from Australian social standards).

Edited November 11, 2012 by TommoPhysicist

[BigJohnnyBKK]

You declare yourself a Buddhist, but all your posts seem to be using the teachings of Christianity as your 'social standard'

Devout Buddhists are pretty darn conservative about sexuality, despite the pretty vague pronouncements on the topic by the happy fat guy.

But it's true that lay people in Buddhist cultures don't take the strictures as seriously - as in condemning others - as those living in the monotheistic ones. Buddhists tend to take a more laid back attitude to "sin", knowing the universal laws of cause and effect will come back around and bite your butt down the road, no need for people to be moral police over each other that some holier than thou glass house dwellers here.

[payak]

You declare yourself a Buddhist, but all your posts seem to be using the teachings of Christianity as your 'social standard'

Devout Buddhists are pretty darn conservative about sexuality, despite the pretty vague pronouncements on the topic by the happy fat guy.

But it's true that lay people in Buddhist cultures don't take the strictures as seriously - as in condemning others - as those living in the monotheistic ones. Buddhists tend to take a more laid back attitude to "sin", knowing the universal laws of cause and effect will come back around and bite your butt down the road, no need for people to be moral police over each other that some holier than thou glass house dwellers here.

rubbish, In your case you are honest about your dealings with others having never made promises of commitment.

buddhists will not engage in any act that hurts another, such as cheating without her knowledge, thats due to khama.

im talking about people doing it behind peoples backs, those without the balls to be up front.

Edited November 11, 2012 by payak

[TommoPhysicist]

buddhists will not engage in any act that hurts another, such as cheating without her knowledge, thats due to khama.

im talking about people doing it behind peoples backs, those without the balls to be up front.

Under Buddhist rules,

Cheating would be OK as long as spouse didn't find out (and therefor not hurt by it). So doing it behind her back would be acceptable, and being upfront about it wouldn't.

Under Christian rules,

Lying is bad, asking forgiveness is good. So the opposite applies.

(You're still using Christian rules, despite claiming Buddhist)

Edited November 11, 2012 by TommoPhysicist

[payak]

if its not wrong, go tell your wives what you have done, if its right it will not be a problem.

that does not apply to open relationships, only to cowards who hide in the shadows why there wife is unaware.

[payak]

buddhists will not engage in any act that hurts another, such as cheating without her knowledge, thats due to khama.

im talking about people doing it behind peoples backs, those without the balls to be up front.

Under Buddhist rules,

Cheating would be OK as long as spouse didn't find out (and therefor not hurt by it).So doing it behind her back would be acceptable, and being upfront about it wouldn't.

no because the act itself would cause pain, dont do behind her back what you would not do in front, dont play games you know what i mean.

[TommoPhysicist]

no because the act itself would cause pain,

How can something you do cause a person pain, if they never knew you did it?

[payak]

you have heard the saying, if a tree falls in the forest, and your not there to hear it did it really make a noise.

same applies, your lying to someone who has given herself to you, just stay single.

[TommoPhysicist]

same applies, your lying to someone who has given herself to you, just stay single.

Mine didn't give herself to me, I had to pay.

[TommoPhysicist]

double

Edited November 11, 2012 by TommoPhysicist

[payak]

no because the act itself would cause pain,

How can something you do cause a person pain, if they never knew you did it?

one, you will feel guilt one day.

two, she may find out, causing pain, would anyone who loves risk hurting there woman.

three, you don't get it.

[payak]

double

go troll elsewhere

[BigJohnnyBKK]

Devout Buddhists are pretty darn conservative about sexuality, despite the pretty vague pronouncements on the topic by the happy fat guy.

rubbish, In your case you are honest about your dealings with others having never made promises of commitment.

buddhists will not engage in any act that hurts another, such as cheating without her knowledge, thats due to khama.

im talking about people doing it behind peoples backs, those without the balls to be up front.

I'm not saying my type of behavior is going against the principles of fairness and harmlessness, which indeed I do my best to observe.

However the scriptural guidelines for "right action" include prohibitions against sexual misconduct, which my understanding does look for an emotional component in sexual relations, if not a strong commitment.

I doubt you'd find too many practicing Abbots who would sanction my own patterns over the past decade - thousands of partners, sometimes many at a time, months at a time with never the same partner twice and so on - and in fact I'm pretty sure most would frown upon the whole concept of sex as sport or pleasure only, outside of any emotional attachment, much less explicitly in exchange for material benefits.

But I suppose I could be wrong, don't claim to be an expert.

[BigJohnnyBKK]

How can something you do cause a person pain, if they never knew you did it?

You don't have control over whether she finds out or not, and there are often unintended consequences, not only to her but to your happiness that may well outweigh any temporary pleasures.

Note you're talking to someone for whom sex is far more important than most people would be willing to admit or allow in their own lives.

But I do consider my own ability to keep my word far more important, and feel by betraying your own integrity you do your own self harm - which of course is your right, but again, beware unintended consequences you may find it difficult to keep important promises to yourself.

Not preaching or judging, just stating my own beliefs.

[TommoPhysicist]

But I do consider my own ability to keep my word far more important, and feel by betraying your own integrity you do your own self harm -

I never promised my wife I would be faithful, why would you do that in Thailand?

I promised to protect, she promised to serve ......... normal Thai wedding vows.

[payak]

But I do consider my own ability to keep my word far more important, and feel by betraying your own integrity you do your own self harm -

I never promised my wife I would be faithful, why would you do that in Thailand?

I promised to protect, she promised to serve ......... normal Thai wedding vows.

and what about your children, if they find out. or is that not important to you.

[TommoPhysicist]

But I do consider my own ability to keep my word far more important, and feel by betraying your own integrity you do your own self harm -

I never promised my wife I would be faithful, why would you do that in Thailand?

I promised to protect, she promised to serve ......... normal Thai wedding vows.

and what about your children, if they find out. or is that not important to you.

You're right, not important to me.

Do Thai children even think about such things?

Edited November 11, 2012 by TommoPhysicist