Lap Dancing Clubs

[Furrowed Brow]

Ok just had a night out on the town.

Questions:

Is it immoral to be a dancer in lap dancing club?
Is it immoral tol be a waitress or waiter or doorman for a lap dancing club?
Is it immoral to be a punter in a lap dancing club?

[JoeyKnothead]

From Page 6 Post 54:

With respect to one who's opinion I value...

Joey, just some friendly advice here - if you're going to be arguing against this point, it's generally not a good idea to compare a man marrying a woman to him buying a car.

LOL I didn't quite consider that whole "feelings of others" angle. I stand corrected in my poor use of analogy, but contend it is an apt one anyway.

I have some fairly strong Heideggerian objections to such an analogy, because it has implications that are misogynist and degrading to women.

Again, apologies.

Are women property to be bought?

No, but I've leased a few. This would include the one I married that I thought I "owned", but came to find out it was just a lease.

Do you only keep them for three years before divorcing them?

Currently I like my "no one says the M word policy". So, I prefer to lease.

Are 'used' women worth less?

>opinion based on a lifetime of amateur study, presented as reasonably and logically derived<
In terms of evolution, it could be said a virgin is more worthy, in that there's a guarantee that one is having the first chance, and so his sperm is the sole competitor for the egg. This does fail to take into consideration that those with more experience may offer a more pleasurable ride.

That said, of course, it is possible for people to view the nude female body in ways that are respectful and even reverent. Or Megaboomer, would you ban all classical art, Baroque paintings and la Liberté guidant le peuple along with 'gentlemen's clubs'?

Women shouldn't be compared to cars, but comparing them to pictures on paper is okay?

I suppose one man's art is another's Lamborghini.

[MagusYanam]

Well, when you're discussing an issue like this, perception does become everything - just so you understand, Joey, it wasn't anything specific to your argument to which I was taking issue, but car analogies get on my nerves sometimes. Whenever someone compares the human body to an engine, I come off thinking - 'is that all we do, consume fuel, produce exhaust and move?' Heidegger argued that such comparisons are incredibly confining and limiting to how we allow ourselves to exist (Dasein) in the world; I would tend to agree with him on that one. It's the difference between Hamlet's views of man 'in action, how like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god!' and 'this quintessence of dust'.

Women shouldn't be compared to cars, but comparing them to pictures on paper is okay?

Ah, and I suppose comparing women to jazz ensembles you would object to my use of random acoustic vibrations? That's your right, I suppose, given my hangups on this issue. I just thought painting and sculpture might be a more humanising and liberating analogy than a used car purchase, but that could be my mistake.

After all, Lamborghinis are beautiful, beautiful machines.

[Goat]

No, but I've leased a few. This would include the one I married that I thought I "owned", but came to find out it was just a lease.

Ah.. could it be this attitude that changed the 'ownership' into a 'lease'. I figure people like partnerships, not being owned.

[Megaboomer]

---yes, your correct, lust is the cause of sin and twisted things. but there's a problem with the logic, of the view, that you can publicly view a womens naked body in a respectful way.
---#1. the big one is you've got to admit the most men struggle with lust and seeing a naked body can arouse lust. it's funny that even though atheists are a minority, and most people in the world believe in a god/gods, and most religious people feel that sensuality is wrong, there is many exotic dance clubs and prostitution world wide. lol bunch of hypocrites..

I believe you are mistaken. It's really only the Abrahamic religions that are afraid of sex and lust. The rest of us are comfortable with the fact that it's a natural, healthy, human thing. And fun too.

---#1. (Buddhism- one of the five precepts) Do not misuse sex. For monks and nuns, this means any departure from complete celibacy. For the laity, adultery is forbidden, along with any sexual harassment or exploitation, including that within marriage.
---#2. (Hinduism-ten yamas of restraint)�The fourth restraint, Sexual Purity (brahmacharya) - divine conduct, controlling lust by remaining celibate when single leading to faithfulness in marriage.�
---#3. (Confucianism-Ethics of Confucius) sexual propriety – “these two passages illustrate the sages insistence upon sexual continence, among other virtues.�
---#4. The popular belief of African Traditional Religion about sex is that it is sacred;
that is, it has religious flavour. (Kayode 1986:51) The sacredness of sex is
exemplified in the fact that – for ex: it must be performed mainly by husband and wife. Hence, there is no room for premarital and extramarital sex. Anything that relates to romance and sex is to be done secretly.
---#5. (Scientology) For most members- including new members- Scientology teaches that sex is a part of healthy adult married life, particularly as it relates to having children.
--- And so on and so on… need I say more? You’re pretty much by yourself if you’re an atheist on this issue.

----#2. God knows how we are because he made us. therefore it is written about king David in 2 Samuel 11 about Davids fall with Bathsheba. he first gazed upon her taking a bath probably innocently at first, probably multiple times in interest and lust. he soon was bound by sin to commit acts of adultery.

I have a problem with this terminology "Bound by sin". Are you saying that if I look at naked women I am bound to cheat on my wife? There is a difference between seeing and doing. Sin doesn't make anyone do anything (Whether or not sin even exists is another matter entirely.). People do things because they want to. Whether it be a premeditated and purposeful act, or a loss of self-control.

--- yes I know, the bound - I’m talking about- refers to the act of sin taking hold of you not it making you do something like a robot.
----I referred this, pretty much directing this to Magus, you can’t understand spiritual things if you don’t believe in the possibility of Jesus Christ.
---(1 Corinthians 2:14) But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
--- (Jesus said) (Mathew 13:13-15) Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says: 'Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, and seeing you will see and not perceive; for the hearts of this people have grown dull. [Their] ears are hard of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with [their] eyes and hear with [their] ears, Lest they should understand with [their] hearts and turn, So that I should [fn] heal them.' [fn]
--- But for example here’s a story that might help:
There was a young man who went to spend time with his friend the old man. The old man knew the young man was on a diet but he had the most glorious portrait of an Inn and Out burger hanging on his wall. The portrait was a limited addition that was worth a great deal, and the old man did not want to take it down. When the young man came over he saw the portrait and did not say anything to the old man. After about a week the old man found the young man at Inn an Out and asked him why he did not hold true to his diet. The young man said “well I just couldn’t resist with that juicy burger on your wall every time I came over.�

----#3. it's compromising to say " let us just look at it, because God made us this way, why would he be angry"? Romans 3:6 says and why not say "let us do evil that good may come" as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. their condemnation is just. Paul is telling the Romans in this passage about the people who have a philosophy about affirming God through things that God forbade because " God said that man was naturally sinful.
--- Gods heart is that you don't even put before you any temptation. for example is it easier to resist a women if your in public? or if your in her house?
---- food for thought.

The problem is your still looking at sexuality as being something shameful or dirty. If one believes that God created us, then he created us as we are, with all of our natural drives and needs.

-Either God created us as sexual creatures, and sexuality is a need as base as being loved or being part of a community, and thus god intends us to fulfill these needs.

Or...

-God created us, with all of our needs and desires, and then denies of these... Why? To what point or purpose?

Or...

-God didn't create us, and we're just highly developed animals with our needs, and our needs are simply needs, and nothing more. So why fear them?

--- I’m not thinking sex is dirty, I think it’s a wonderful thing; I just believe that God created sex for marriage. Otherwise what’s the point of marriage?

[JoeyKnothead]

No, but I've leased a few. This would include the one I married that I thought I "owned", but came to find out it was just a lease.

Ah.. could it be this attitude that changed the 'ownership' into a 'lease'. I figure people like partnerships, not being owned.

That's why I put quotes around "owned" - I didn't know another apt term. I found out that one was a lease because no amount of money I made was sufficient to ensure she stayed "mine".

[Megaboomer]

From Page 4 Post 32:

there is actually immense amount of evidence supporting the bible as Gods word...

Care to offer some for analysis?

#1. there is Sodom and Gomorrah, archeology has proven that that story happened just as it says in the Bible. except for the inconclusive time period. and also Lee Strobel states this fact in his research along with countless other archaeological finds that do nothing but support the bible. http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48931527.html

Since you are unwilling to quote your own source, I will not consider it my responsibility to wade through a site to seek what evidence you propose that site has. I will be glad to entertain what evidence you yourself are willing to present here from that site. I ask this because the page I went to was so long and I seek to ensure what you consider evidence is presented by you.

A quick glance on my part said nothing about evidence of fire and / or huge stones and boulders laying about, but that an ancient city was unearthed.

--- look at my response to goat maybe it’s be a little easier to see with pictures and there is many more sources that I’ve seen proving many places and events in the Bible. How many would you like me to post I’ve got hundreds from hundreds of different people. I don’t see how any atheist still can’t admit that the Bible is not the best, most accurate and truthful thing in archeology and History

#2 the very life of Jesus. the messianic prophecy about Jesus's life where told about 400 years before his birth including the crucifixion which was prophesied about 800 years before it was ever practiced.

The Jews don't agree with your take on their prophecy.

Have you established these tales are true? If we don't know they're true, why bother trying to fit them into the Tanakh?

---no but they can’t deny the meaning of the written word of the Old Testament. The religious leaders knew what Jesus meant when he quoted those scriptures. That’s why they had Him killed. It was for continuous blasphemy and stating that He had fulfilled the prophecy which they could not refute. They only denied His deity.
--Check out what I said to goat... cause there’s no question that Jesus lived out many prophesies foretold in the Old Testament. Even the Talmud gives evidence of this.

#3 the nations how they would come, how they would be judged, and how they would effect the world. and other such prophecies at http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml

I 'preciate the link, but I'd rather you present what you consider evidence. I can check it back to your source and to my sources, and our sources'll do lunch.

All I've ever known most of these prophecies to be are thin as a model with a tapeworm.

---1#- Genesis 12:2. God said He would make Abraham’s name great and make him into a great nation. Although God spoke to Abraham about 2,000 B.C., and Moses, by revelation, wrote this prophecy down about 1,450 B.C., today the people of three great religions of the world, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all know about and honor Abraham.
--#2-1 Kings 14:15. The prophet Ahijah foretold around 940 B.C. that the country of Israel (the ten Northern Tribes; the southern kingdom was called “Judah�) would be deported and scattered beyond the Euphrates River. The Assyrians did exactly that about 720 B.C.
--#3-When Isaiah foretold the rebuilding of the Temple, it had not even been destroyed yet! It was still standing, and it continued to stand for more than 100 years after his prophecy. In 586 B.C. it was burned to the ground by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. God told Isaiah what the future had in store for the kingdom and people of Israel, and even told Isaiah that a man named “Cyrus� would command that the Temple be rebuilt.-Isaiah 44:26-45:6. Isaiah prophesied between 776-696 B.C. because Isaiah 1:1 says Isaiah lived in the time of Uzziah (who started reigning in 776 B.C.), Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (who ended his reign in 696 B.C.). Cyrus was a king of the Persian Empire, and he came to the throne in 559 B.C., almost 150 years after Isaiah died. In 538 B.C., he entered Babylon and shortly thereafter commanded that Jerusalem and the Temple be rebuilt (Ezra 1:1-4).
--#4-760 BC: Amos predicts Israel would be restored as a nation and would never be uprooted again (Amos 9:15)
Fulfilled in 1948.
---#5-732 BC: Isaiah predicts the Medo-Persian empire will conquer Babylon [Isaiah 13:17-18] and Babylon would become a wasteland. Fulfilled in 538 BC when the Medes took over Babylon and 275 BC when the Seleucids forced all of the inhabitants to leave.
--#6-Predicted ca. 543 BC: Daniel tells of a great Grecian king who would conquer the Persian empire but would have his kingdom divided four ways after his death (Daniel 8). Fulfilled in 330 BC when Alexander the Great defeats Persia and 281 BC after the Greek generals who succeed Alexander reach an agreement after years of war to split the kingdom four ways.
---I have many more…..

and also Lee Strobel makes evidence of these by asking well known scholars.

I don't know what evidence can be made by asking scholars.

---Well if the scholars are creditable then they can give an accurate account of: what translations are in context, what was recorded by historians, and also accuracy of archeological evidences for example.

Lee Patrick Strobel (born January 25, 1952 in Arlington Heights, Illinois) is a writer, Creationist

Hold up on that carwash gentlemen. A Creationist? He's got some 'splaining of his own to do.

---Alls I got to say is, wow, you get your info from wikipedia?

He is the author of several books...
and a series which addresses challenges to a Biblically inerrant view of Christianity.

Biblically inerrant?

And you're pitching in with this dude? Really?

---He’s one of many people that have looked into Christianity as an atheist with a reasonably skeptical but open view towards it and came out finding little to argue. And your getting your info from a illegitimate site.

Strobel received a journalism degree from University of Missouri and a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School

Please explain how these are qualifications for determining the veracity of scientific concepts involved with biblical tales?

I've seen enough to know I wouldn't use this guy for support if I couldn't walk and I had a twelve pack I had to get home.

---He didn’t do the research on scientific data and archeology or history, personally. What he does do is applies a series of guidelines that a lawyer would go with in a court of Law. Hence the law degree.
--- do you get all your info from wikipedia?

there is over a hundred fulfilled prophecies of Christ...
#1 His coming at a set time.
#2 As the seed of David.
#3 His being born in Bethlehem of Judea.
#4 The slaying of the children of Bethlehem.
5# His being called out of Egypt.
6# His being preceded by John the Baptist....

1 the Jews disagree, and they are the "prophecy holders".
2 I don't think you've established this is the case.
3 I'll give ya
4 Nothing like the slaying of children to say "I've arrived". I hear ya though.
5 Who hasn't been called away on business at one point in time?
6 Yeah, and I was named after George Washington.

Honestly, I don't think you can establish any of these as fact, but go on and give 'er a whirl.

---#6 means that he would be announced by john the Baptist.
---There is many more prophecies and it’s not so much the significance of the individual prophecy but the odds of anyone man fulfilling all of them or even some of them in one life. Most of them have been proven
---please refer me to any evidence on the contrary and I will show you the discrepancies.

#2 as for the proven works of Jesus that's indisputable because nobody can discredit the author of Luke (Luke) as a historian of impeccable accuracy by secular and Christian scholars.

Are we talking Strobel level scholars, or folks who might actually know something about the fields they speak of?

I think that the law degree from Yale is pretty good, but no, historians all through history have stated that Luke is one of the most nit picking historians when it comes to details and if you have another view I’d like to know about it.

Luke gives the duration of John's preaching in terms of the reigns of various religious and secular authorities: In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar–when Pontius Pilate was Procurator of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene– during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas... (Luke 3:1-2)

However, there are problems reconciling these dates to the same year[21].

Tiberius ruled 14 - 37
Pilate was Prefect 26 - 36
Herod Antipas was Tetrarch 4 BC - 39
Philip was Tetrarch approx 4 BC to 34
Lysanias was executed in 36 BC
Annas was High Priest 6 - 15
Caiaphas: was High Priest 16 - 37

No debate?

Um Wikipedia again… for shame

and there are many sources that are not bias to Christianity that tell the truth in history about Jesus and His miracles.

Truth according to whom?

Present your evidence and your sources and we'll sort 'em out.

Truth that he lived, truth that he died by crucifixion, truth that he influenced many to his cause even immediately after his death, truth that he claimed to be the messiah.
#1.- Tacitus- mention of the rise of Christianity
#2. – Josephus- execution of Jesus, testimony of miracles and referral to his claim to be Christ.
#3. Thallus-(a Samaritan-born historian) – the darkness that came upon the land at the time of Jesus execution.

all that i am saying is that there is a moral law that is given and that going to strip clubs is immoral any non- christian with morals and intellegence would agree.

I object to your questioning my intelligence because I disagree.

Does your religious training require you insult all those with whom you disagree?

Show me some means to verify you know the mind of God.

well that's a whole another discussion in itself because you would have to have a basis on some word of God yourself in order to judge my words.
ps....................sorry i'm kinda new at these threads and i'm not sure how to write in between quotes.

So, you'd rather continue the insult than chalk it up to miscommunication?

Okay, if your God tells you to be rude I guess I gotta deal with it.

All I was asking for was an apology for a slip of the tongue, or a miscommunication. If you're unwilling to reach my outstretched hand I will withdraw it to the safety of my person.

----I’m just saying that a whole lot of people that are seen as intelligent agree. In fact atheism is a minority in the world view. And most religions believe in a moral law of sexual purity. Also I don’t care for anything posted on wikipedia, it might as well be a blogspot. if college professors won’t except it neither will I.

[MagusYanam]

No, but I've leased a few. This would include the one I married that I thought I "owned", but came to find out it was just a lease.

Ah.. could it be this attitude that changed the 'ownership' into a 'lease'. I figure people like partnerships, not being owned.

That's why I put quotes around "owned" - I didn't know another apt term. I found out that one was a lease because no amount of money I made was sufficient to ensure she stayed "mine".

'Saright, Joey. I know a joke when I read one.

Well, second time around anyway.

[Megaboomer]

From Page 4 Post 33:

yes, because it is degrading to women.

Says you.

say's a majority of the women in the world

This doesn't address the folks who don't think its wrong. Since the majority of women believe in the Bible or some other religious ideology it stands to reason most'll abide. The challenge is showing God thinks so.

---Ha, it’s in the Bible the Bible is believed by Christians to be the Holy word of God. This is one example -(1 Corinthians 7:1-2)Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: [It is] good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.
(Jesus said)(Mark 7:21-23) For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lewdness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within and defile a man."

how would you like it if you had a daughter and she said she wanted to be a stripper when she grew up.

I'd deal with it. Once an adult she is her own person.

obliviously there is exceptional answers by people who don't have daughters or don't care about their future.

First you insult my intelligence, now you're saying I don't care about a daughter's future.

Is this really necessary?

Please, either argue the case on its merits or just don't post.

--Well no, I’m just saying obviously you don’t have a daughter because I know what a father would say. And there was no Intentional insult.

One family's take doesn't show a god has an opinion on the matter.

no but where do you think they learned morality from..... where did it originate from in the first place?

I've only ever seen morality presented by humans or other animals. I have no evidence whatsoever showing a god gives two hoots about the carryings on of humans.

--Well that all depends on first, if you believe there is a god. Then secondly do you believe that the Bible is his word. If the answer is no, then you can’t account anything good to be from God. If yes then you can affirm, as it say’s in the Bible, that love, joy peace, patience kindness, truth, forgiveness, hope, comfort, are all things of God.

so what is your definition of decency?

I consider it a subjective term, open to personal whim. I consider it most decent that folks are allowed as much freedom of expression as possible.

Decency: conformity to the recognized standard of propriety, good taste, modesty, etc.
Indecency: impropriety or immodesty.
Modesty: regard for decency of behavior, speech, dress, not displaying ones body. etc.
….These are all definitions in the dictionary.

besides, what works is not always ethical.

I just don't see how you've shown lap dances are unethical, except as your own opinion. That's fine, you're entitled to it, and let it guide you, however there are many folks that are going to disagree.

---Looks like by the world views I’ve expressed in religions and the English language that you’re wrong. (See my discussion with Coyotero)

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 66:

I had a long rebuttal prepared till I got down to the end...

All I was asking for was an apology for a slip of the tongue, or a miscommunication. If you're unwilling to reach my outstretched hand I will withdraw it to the safety of my person.

I’m just saying that a whole lot of people that are seen as intelligent agree.

So, you still won't offer a simple apology for insulting me?

My fourth point of contact.

You offer nothing but empty claims and insults, I have no use for you.

Why do some Christians think insulting folks is "debate"?

all that i am saying is that there is a moral law that is given and that going to strip clubs is immoral any non- christian with morals and intellegence would agree.

You can't even spell intelligence correctly, and you dare question mine!

(edit in example of "intellegence")

[Megaboomer]

lol everybody spells stuff wrong sometimes and i did say "i didn't intend to insult" but it's not my fault if the truth is offensive.