G V

'There is a place' Only one? An illegal monopoly?

'in Bangkok' Only Bangkok and nowhere else? Is there no place like that anywhere else in the world?

'where for about three hundred dollars American'
When? Have you checked if the exchange rate has changed ? Do they have cost of living increases?

'a man' They don't take women's money?

'can have three beautiful' Beautiful is in the eye of the beholder? Were you sober? Did you get your pick?

'of age' Thai age law, US law or your law?

'(but very very young) thai women' Don't you know enough about Thailand to know they abuse/sell underage boys and girls ?

'as his sex servants for several hours.' Have you called the International Labor Organization, WTO, COYOTE or the Thai labor leaders, it sounds like they need a union or labor conditions inspections?

'Consenting adults all.' How do you know? Did you speak Thai well enough to verify their age and consent?

Why are you worried about only one place, in one city, in one country? Are you so guilt ridden that you don't care about the millions of other children, teens, young adult male and female victims of sexual abuse ?????

MadMordigan

There is a place in Bangkok where for about three hundred dollars American a man can have three beautiful of age (but very very young) thai women as his sex servants for several hours.Consenting adults all. Now that's perfectly okay according to secular humanist standards right?

There is a place in Vancouver where for about three hundred dollars American a woman can have a funny looking, of age (not too young) Canadian guy as her sex servant for several hours. Consenting adults all.

Why would I refuse someone else the same activity I'd take part in if someone offered it to me?

Pomp

MadMordigan,

There is a place in Vancouver where for about three hundred dollars American a woman can have a funny looking, of age (not too young) Canadian guy as her sex servant for several hours. Consenting adults all.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!

Sojourner553

lcb: I am a secular humanist. I would argue that very few young girls--or for that matter woman-- would consent to sexual exploitation if they could find another profession that would provide them with a decent living.

I do appreciate that you have changed your attitudes towards prostitutes. Was it really religion that changed you? ie weren't you also a Christian when you purchased time with these young prostitutes?

For myself, I remember well the moment when I came to a realization that God was not real: The thought came to me that I could lead a wild lifestyle as there would be no powerful being to punish me.

Going through this internal dialogue with myself, I responded back, "No, it was I who never wanted to be a bad person -- it wasn't from fear of any punishment from a divine being."

I have never had ANY desire for getting drunk, doing illegal drugs, or engaging in illicit sex -- before or after this time. Any Christian would be happy to embrace the lifestyle I have chosen for myself.

You see, for me, this decision wasn't related to religion -- it was from the desire to do what is best for myself, my progeny -- and all current and future generations. That IS what makes me a secular humanist!

Sojourner

[ September 01, 2002: Message edited by: Sojourner553 ]</p>

Bubba

What we have here is perhaps the evolution of morality. I believe (I'm not really sure) that in the ancient world young girls and young boys were regularly made into prostitutes. Seems to me that modern understanding of psychology and the damage that this does to children has perhaps reduced the trade in young children for sex. Probably more than religion has.

Bubba

Theli

Would you rather have him buying a new car for the money, leaving the girls to starve?

Queen of Swords

lcb, is this safe sex? Is the man in question encouraged to use some form of barrier contraceptive?

Sojourner553

From a historical perspective, such movements (including child welfare and allowing women to enter professions) came out of the philosophies of the Enlightenment-- whose followers were primarily deists, atheists, and LIBERAL Christians (such as Unitarians, Methodists, etc)/Jews.

(note: lcb if interested, some background on this can be found in Section V (Chapters 14,17), and Section VI, Chapter 9. at

<a href="http://mac-2001.com/philo/crit/index.html" target="_blank">http://mac-2001.com/philo/crit/index.html</a>

Sojourner

[ September 02, 2002: Message edited by: Sojourner553 ]</p>

abe smith

What, you're BAAACK, LCB? I thought you'd left the Eye-Eye site in a rage, back up there @ feedback? Can't bear to shut-up, enh?

Sojourner553

Be nice to LCB. I thought he had a thought provoking lead question.

You see, I debated someone like LCB once who told me that they were an honest person ONLY because they believed in Jesus.

I listened sympathetically. You see, I have no issues with people being deists. It is fundamentalists who "claim" they "know" God's will and therefore have authority for XYZ that I object to (because it is usually a smokescreen for THEIR power...) I also worry when people use God for an excuse not to think, to trash the earth (by voting for George Bush for starters etc)

Anyway I got of track... What I responded to this religious individual was as follows: If I am to accept as evidence that your belief in Jesus has made you as a better person -- then to be consistent -- you must extend this same courtesy to believers of ALL other religions. That is, you must accept the testimony of Moonies, Muslims, Buddhists, etc that their beliefs kept them from a life of crime/made them a better person -- as evidence for THEIR religion as well. {I read a story once how a jail prisoner read Socrates and Plato and this inspired them to give up crime. I don't know if this qualifies Greek philosophy as a religion, though.}

Sojourner

[ September 04, 2002: Message edited by: Sojourner553 ]</p>