Pratap Bhanu Mehta's excellent article analyses religion's demand for respect in admirable depth. But I question the notion, increasingly popular in liberal circles, that all religions deserve our respect. If this principle were consistently applied, it would require us to respect the ancient Aztec religion, whose speciality was human sacrifice.

In our day, of course, this idea has a utilitarian purpose: to prevent outbursts of social disorder from religionists who feel that their faith has been mocked or insulted. I do not advocate the mocking or insulting of any religion. On the other hand, a modicum of critical inquiry might not be a bad idea. In terms of critical inquiry, religion has been getting a free ride for a long time. No other field of discourse demands automatic respect - not the physical sciences, nor the social sciences, nor the various political and economic philosophies. All of these are open to critical inquiry, all welcome the thrust and parry of competing ideas. Only religion is the screaming baby in the building.

Insofar as any religion teaches beliefs that are reasonable, conducive to human welfare, and compatible with the established findings of modern science, that religion has the right to solicit our respect. Insofar as it teaches beliefs that are far-fetched, based on fantastic mythologies, detrimental to human welfare, and incompatible with modern science, it forfeits that right. If, in addition, it sows violence, turmoil and disruption, it acts as an enemy to civilised society and deserves, in the immortal words of Jesus, to be cast into the outer darkness, where there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Mehta's conclusion, expressed in marvellously euphemistic prose, sums up the essence of the matter: "Religious groups must overcome their sense of fragility and have more confidence in managing constructions others place upon them." Translation: religionists should be less insecure and stop throwing temper tantrums every time somebody criticises or pokes fun at them.

The fault lies not with those who disrespect religion, but with those who so easily imagine their religion to be disrespected, and react with disproportionate violence.

William Page

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appeal did not address the perpetrators of violence

Re: "An appeal to all in southern Thailand by Anwar Ibrahim, former deputy PM, Malaysia", Letters, November 29.

While Anwar Ibrahim is correct in calling for an end to the violence in southern Thailand, I don't think his attitude will lead to peace in southern Thailand or peaceful relations between Muslims and non-Muslims in general. By referring to "marginalisation" of southern Thais, Ibrahim seems to justify attacks that target innocent teachers and workers in the South, which we read about every day. If Ibrahim wants to help, he (like all of us) should unconditionally condemn the attacks perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalists and demand a cessation. Once the people of southern Thailand can resume their lives without fear of being shot or blown up as they go about their daily routine, issues such as marginalisation and past discrimination can be addressed.

Ibrahim's views also mirror the overall tension between Muslims and non-Muslims. The current Pope's view is that to truly reconcile the differences between Muslims and non-Muslims, all parties need to treat each other fairly and with respect. He has made the point that most non-Muslim countries freely allow and protect mosques, while many Muslim countries refuse to allow churches or put up barriers for non-Muslims to practice their religion. I have heard from many Chinese Malaysians that Malaysia (where Ibrahim was deputy prime minister) is hostile to Christians and discriminates against ethnic Chinese at all levels of society. Instead of faulting Thailand with how it has dealt with its Muslim population, Ibrahim should use his influence in his own country to address the discrimination against non-Muslim Malaysians. All minorities deserve to be treated fairly, and Muslims should start looking into the treatment of minorities in their own societies with the same view that they use when looking at non-Muslim societies.

Josh Baker

Thailand

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conciliatory gestures will not stop those intent on violence

Prime Minister Surayud and General Sonthi Boonyaratglin must build walls at the Thai-Malay border now. Admit your failure. Words and apologies will not stop the shootings, bombings and arson attacks in the South, never in a million years, believe me. Ten more months is shorter than you think. Don't be fooled again by the Malaysian government, like your predecessors. Don't fool yourselves - your soft approach will simply be interpreted as weakness in the eyes of the insurgents, nothing else. Just like animals, once they smell fear in their victims, they move in to kill immediately. It's the most natural animal instinct. Keep that in mind.

What happened to your military training, your strategies and courage? Or are you just trying to look good in your general's uniforms? Aren't you supposed to be relied upon to protect powerless innocent citizens in the South, especially the children and teachers there? How many more teachers have to be killed? Tell me.

Tom Yam Koong

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mind the difference between journalism and blogging

Re: "News of the people, for the people and by the people", Opinion, November 29.

I'm currently teaching critical reading of newspapers in my university class and I'm afraid of journalists' "blogging" further confusing the lines of biased writing (opinions) and the ideal of unbiased writing (reporting). Please, newspaper writers, don't blur the line in your own writing in newspapers. Already my students find only the weather to be unbiased in your paper and the other English-language paper here in Thailand.

Many philosophers argue that all writing is simply rhetoric, and I agree to some extent, but newspapers have a very special role to be as unbiased as possible. Blogs should be read with lots of space for agreement and scepticism. Newspapers, too, but please don't use your credibility as news reporters to make your biased - even if insightful and interesting and meaningful - opinions more credible. I can understand the liberation you must feel to write for a blog instead of for a newspaper. Real insight must be shared as essays, and only the opinion page can offer that kind of writing, but the opinion page never gives all topics space. Blogs can. So, my support goes to all bloggers who share their thoughts and insights. Please keep trying to be ideal reporters and insightful bloggers, but please don't mix the two.

Ajarn David

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertising ban will drive up sales of cheaper alcohol

I am all for the ban on alcohol advertising, as long as it means lower prices for me. Pass on the savings to the consumers. Sales will then go up.

Bill Cymbalsky

Bangkok

Environmentalists are barking up the wrong tree

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina last year, the Kyoto Protocol supporters blamed the destruction it caused on global warming, and even implied that the greenhouse-gas-emitting Americans were getting their just reward. In fact, it is well known that the destruction was caused not by the intensity of Katrina but by its chance landfall on a weak levee system. However, these people seemed emboldened by the destruction and warned us that the 2005 hurricane season was just a taste of greater destruction yet to come in 2006 - due to greenhouse gas emissions from our use of fossil fuels.

They were wrong. The 2006 hurricane season has come and gone without the "super hurricanes" we were told to expect. It is a wonder the Kyoto people still muster as much credibility with the media as they do.

Cha-am Jamal

Cha-am

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Self-centred urbanites keep the peasantry at bay

Re: "Giving up on democracy for Thailand", Opinion, November 27.

"Thaksin was giving political legitimacy to rural demands. If this trend were followed to its logical conclusion, it would undermine the city's undue share of government spending and public goods. There would also be a bill, which the well-off might be asked to pay."

We can count on Chang Noi to tell it like it is. As for Sondhi, I always saw him as someone who'd run around in front of the parade to "lead" it. Thanks to Chang Noi, I see he was not merely tolerated by Bangkok, but viewed as a proponent of its greed and fear.

John Francis Lee

Chiang Rai

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Latest UN mission to Burma is a total failure - as usual

UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari is clearly in denial. There is now double confirmation that his diplomatic mission to Burma has ended in failure.

During Gambari's first visit, his request for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi was not only rejected, but the dictators doubled the extension of her detention order. Subsequent to Gambari's second trip, the SPDC "pissed" on him by closing the five Red Cross offices. The junta has rejected all five criteria proposed for consideration by UN envoy Gambari. The press release on November 27, that the US will seek a UN Security Council resolution on Burma was issued by the US Mission to Nato, not by UN Ambassador John Bolton's office. This is a subtle but clear message the US will seek Nato peace-keeping troops (like in Afghanistan) if China vetoes the US sponsored resolution on Burma.

The export of Burmese heroin is a threat to America. Afghanistan and Burma are the two leading heroin exporters in the world. The opulent wedding of Than Shwe's daughter was paid for by a "retired" drug warlord.

Myint Thein

Bangkok

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to:

letters@nationgroup.com