[lucasjung]

I wouldn't have downvoted you, but then your edit included some incredibly bigoted and unwarranted stereotypes:

>...fundamentalist christian [sic] ignorant half retarded hillbilly sex fiend town...

>Typical small town american [sic] fundamentalist hillbillies...

>Southern Bible Thumping Fundamentalist

>The fundamentalist missionaries infected them with the peculiar sort of madness, entitlement, laziness and corruption that comes with that belief system.

This last one takes the cake. Even if I take it at your word that the Saipanese are as lazy and corrupt as you make them out to be (which seems to be the general consensus here and on Wikipedia, so I'll accept that for now), you have absolutely zero proof that they became that way because of "fundamentalist missionaries," rather than being that way to begin with. You say that these negative attitudes come "with that belief system." What belief system? It sounds like you're blaming the problems of Saipanese culture on some chimerical theology that doesn't really exist.

If those missionaries were protestants (especially if they were Calvinists) in the 17th, 18th, or 19th centuries, they most likely did their best to instill the indiginous people with a solid work ethic[1], exactly the opposite of the vices you are trying to pin on "fundamentalism."

Here's my anecdotal evidence: In college, I briefly dated a Samoan girl who was working on a graduate degree at a nearby university, with her research subject being the colonial history of the South Pacific. Samoa was proselytized by Calvinists in the 19th century, and she told me that when the missionaries first arrived, the Samoans were pretty much the way you describe Saipan today, and that the Calvinist influence helped bring about a more egalitarian and less corrupt culture (with unscrupulous European traders often at odds with the missionaries because they sought to profit from the native corruption). Samoa isn't Saipan, but it is an example of "fundamentalist missionaries" having exactly the opposite effect on a South Pacific culture from what you blame them for in Saipan.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic

[cookiecaper]

Same, had no problem until I read the edit. I'm not an evangelical and certainly have my qualms with them, but I have some serious issues with bugsy's characterization. Living in the (mainland) US, you are exposed to many Christians of many denominations, and I don't know of a significant group yet that can be characterized as entitled, lazy, mad, etc. That may be an appropriate characterization for some of their oppressive false priests, but it definitely doesn't apply to the generality of congregants of any major religious group in the US of which I am aware.

[watchandwait]

Saipan is inhabited by the Chamorro, who are mostly Roman Catholic. Quite the opposite of Calvinists.

[lotharbot]

Keep in mind that "Christian Fundamentalism" didn't even exist until the end of the 19th century. Trying to pin anything that happened in the 17th or 18th century on "fundamentalism" is a mistake.

[lucasjung]

In the modern sense of the term, that is true. However, one could certainly make an argument that Oliver Cromwell, et al were fundamentalists, as well as the original settlers of Plymouth. You could go back even further in time and apply the term to various Catholic orders at certain points in history.

All that being said, I was just using his term (in quotes) for the sake of continuity of conversation, and it was not my intent to lend credence to his application of the label "fundamentalist" to 18th- and 19th-century missionaries.