Yes, but does it have potential as a movie treatment? Or perhaps a reality show?

Daniel ITLD,
Is that really you? If so, just what have you been smoking?
Posted by: arminius3142

And why are you bogarting it?

"Wow! You don't understand anything about Christianity. And they let you write about it. What a country!"
Posted by: PhilChenier

And what would your suggestion be, PhilChenier? Not "allowing" Ms. Jacoby to write? Censorship? Wow, that would sure be an improvement...how American of you. And why do I get the distinct impression that you think "understanding" Christianity means sharing it's beliefs?

Ms Jacoby has a good grounding in the basic beliefs of Christianity. She just doesn't share them. That's the whole point of blogs like this, to get viewpoints of other people. You don't have to agree. I often don't. If people are civil, the exchanges can be quite interesting. If they aren't (too often, I admit) you can still learn something. If you don't want to read what other people think, why are you here?

Arminius

I think it is all the snow and cabin fever.

Spring has gotta come soon!

Daniel ITLD,

Is that really you? If so, just what have you been smoking?

Dedicated to Lady Liberty, Part I:

Her Grand Majestic Imperiousness, Queen Marie Antoinette awake early that afternoon, after a night of tossing and turning on the gigantiloid hoops of her fastidiously fashionable night gown. She called in her personal maid, Monique la Salle d’Humas d’Itee, and said,

“Monica, sweetie, I, Mother of the World, do not feel well, and have decided to stay in bed for the rest of the day. Do call the house maid to call my hair dresser to convey to my Wig Maitresse that she must bring me a fresh wig. I shall be entertaining my many gentleman callers, paramours, and lovers, and also, I shall be taking confession, as well, later in the afternoon, with Father Pierre Jean Luc Framboise. He has the most divinely beautiful red vest, dyed with the blood of blind nuns from Provence. And make sure that my Wig Maitresse gets the message, or from this day forward, you shall be banned from emptying my chamber pot.

Monica shrieked, “Oh please Madame! Don’t send me back to shoveling manure in the stables. My life will forever be a misery if I can no longer handle the royal fecal matter.”

“Very well,” replied Marie. “There is nothing to worry about. If my Wig Maitresse arrives with my fresh wig, I shall put your name in the lottery to help me change my underwear next week.”

“Oh, thank ya, thank ya your Mighty Gross and Inflated Imperiousness,” said a grateful Monica.

Dedicated to Lady Liberty, Part II:

Presently, the door of the Queen’s apartment slowly creaked open, and there standing under the ridiculously ornate transom was Jane, the Wig Maitresse, wearing her dowdy checkered bathrobe and pink fluffy, but dingy slippers, with a cigarette dangling out of the corner of her mouth.

“You called Madame,” she said to the Queen.

“Yes, Jane, bring me my fresh wig.”

Jane handed the Queen the fresh wig, hacked up some phlegm, and said, “Marie, we’ve got RATS in the cellar.”

“Rats!, Oh dear me,” exclaimed Marie, a little nervously.

Jane walked back to the apartment door, then turned around and said, “Oh yes, Madame, I forgot, your comb.”

The Queen put the wig on her head, took the comb from Jane, and began to comb the wig. When suddenly, out of the incredibly gnarled curls of the stylized wig, tumbled a dead rat. The Queen shrieked in horror, as the dead rat rolled down into the massive folds of satin, silk, and velvet of her multi-layered and hooped night gown.

“Oh don’t worry, Madame,” said Jane. “That rat is so far down into that gown you’re wearin’, we’ll likely never see it again.”

Then Jane shuffled back towards the apartment door, and began to laugh.

The Queen sucked in a gulp of air in paralyzed horror. “Jane, you wouldn’t treat me this way if I weren’t trapped in this bed, incapacitated and spoiled by indolence and laziness so that I do not even know how to work a simple door knob to escape.”

“But’cha are, Marie! Ya are stuck in that bed” said Jane as she laughed and closed the door behind her.

The Queen felt a chill run through her, as she curled up in a royal fetal position.

I love how sweeping generalizations are made about Christians because of the actions of a few. Just because someone calls themselves Christian or Baptist or is affiliated with the SBC, that doesn't mean they are congruent with the beliefs of those establishments. It's like the atheist who's asked if he's really an atheist and he says, "yeah, swear to god!"

Wow! You don't understand anything about Christianity. And they let you write about it. What a country!

""I thought the topic was "Haiti's children and an overdose of Christian charity"?""

There was hardly a risk of such an overdose when Haitians were next to LBGT people in the most-likely-to-be-accused-of-spreading-AIDS department for the past decades.

Abducting children to 'save' them without bothering to find out if they're *actually* even orphans yet...?

Same kind of stupid bigotry.

It's not as if they've been short on people to help, lately.

I thought the topic was "Haiti's children and an overdose of Christian charity"?

Also, I'd ask you don't dignify that troll's perversion of the name 'Lady Liberty' with a direct quote.

That poster is anything *but.*

Not to put a damper on the celebration or anything, but being identified, and potentially-counted, in the census, doesn't mean every single same-sex-couple in America doesn't have to weigh whether or not they can withstand the possible consequences of such exposure, without having civil rights to back them up..

Before checking that box.

Without our civil rights, for many, it's the worst of both worlds.

This is an historic opportunity to show who we are! For the first time, the 2010 US Census will count married same-sex couples, in addition to counting same-sex couples living in the same household.
We're winning!
Posted by: Schaum

I'm breaking out champagne - everybody get your glasses!

"

This is an historic opportunity to show who we are! For the first time, the 2010 US Census will count married same-sex couples, in addition to counting same-sex couples living in the same household.

We're winning!"

That's good news, Schaum, now all decent people, straight or otherwise, are winning.

This is an historic opportunity to show who we are! For the first time, the 2010 US Census will count married same-sex couples, in addition to counting same-sex couples living in the same household.

We're winning!

Now - to this column. We would not condone any group coming to our country and breaking the laws regarding our children and their welfare, no matter the crisis. Why should Haiti?

Ignorance is no excuse. The arrogance of this group is unbelievable, and that includes the nine who supposedly did not know the laws of Haiti regarding children. Did they blindly just follow the leader? Did they take one person's word as truth? If so, they were not only arrogant but also too stupid to be trusted with children in any way.

The crime was committed in Haiti and should be prosecuted in Haitian court.

So I guess the "liberty" that ladyliberty is promoting is only for her small group of "real Americans"? Where have I heard that before? Oh, right - when Palin said that the "real Americans" are those in the small, rural areas of our country.

Get over it - there are "real Americans" in big cities, too.

Lady of Liberty of Death

Scaum said that you are a typical Christer narcissist. Just because he called you a typical Christer narcissist does not mean we all think you are a typical Christer narcissist. Me for example, you can read and read my posts about you and you will never see those words typical Christer narcissist in any of my posts. The last person in this world who would call you a typical Christer narcissist is me; just ask anybody; that phrase, typical Christer narcissist is just not me; typical Christer narcissist is not a phrase that I would ever choose, and typical Christer narcissist is a phrase that I would never use; so let's just get this straight, once and for all, I have never thought of you as a typical Christer narcissist, I have never said that you are a typical Christer narcissist and typical Christer narcissist are words that you will ever see in a post to anyone.

(But let's not dwell on it).

Onofrio

It is late. Obviously, my sin-opsis, are becoming all unravelled, and the little telephone operators inside my head are plugging the wires into all the wrong slots... don't you hate it when that happens? ... so I guess I have to go to bed.

... I meant to say "you know what I mean"

(now I have to proof read VERY carefully before clicking)

... I mean "Pandora's box ... " you what I mean ...

Onofrio

Stop! You're going to make her head explode.

That would like opening Pandodora's box, I am afraid.

I cannot condone what the Baptists did. However, I thought it might be interesting to post on what seems to be a common view among Haitian Americans: God bless them.

What is occurring in Haiti is unimaginable to most Americans. A desperately poor country, one of the poorest on earth, has less now than it did before, and predators are everywhere. Some of the children, if not all, are not orphans. Their parents or caretakers gave them away to give them life, not uncommon in desperate circumstances, not uncommon worldwide. This kind of sacrifice is not one that most of us can imagine.

Are the children better off now? Again, I neither condone nor support these Baptists' activities in Haiti. However, the issue is far from simple.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/07/AR2010020702851.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Dear Susan,

They were following the ignorant-example of the Television Crew(s) who took an underage girl on a motorcar trip to have her tell her view of the calamity... Everybody in America knows it's wrong to pickup underage children unless they're legally related, -parents and teachers and youth-group coordinators primarily-....

Ray.

Nongod guides the open hand, and cavils not at vodoun, nor seeks to broker creeds.

Sorry for the tricksy terms, O straight-talkin' Lady. Clearly, I am not American.

LadyLiberty,

Most lovely, august lady, all verdant and colossal; you of the sharp nimbus and noble frown: For whom do you hold your torch?

I never knew you bore a cross on your steely heart, beneath your copper stole. I had thought you more ancient - Isis via Hellas; Hokmah via tricolore.

Now I've learned of your Galilean gaze, I must cleave the more to Marianne's fearless décolletage.

"Charities: The American Red Cross has raised the most money, with nearly $137 million in donations as of Wednesday, the Chronicle of Philanthropy said.

Partners in Health had received more than $25 million by Monday, and the U.S. Fund for UNICEF had raised $22.5 million as of Tuesday.

Catholic Relief Services had brought in $17.4 million in gifts and pledges by Wednesday, according to the Chronicle of Philanthropy, rounding out the top four in the survey.

Other charities surveyed by the Chronicle of Philanthropy including the William J. Clinton Foundation, World Vision U.S., Save the Children USA and Oxfam America had all received more than $8 million as of Tuesday."

But the big donor, as always, is the USA taxpayer i.e. $379 million and counting

Lady Liberty

I am a Methodist, and our church donated about $5,000.00 in cash just to the Haiti emergency. We were all a little suprised that we actually gave so much on such short notice. I cannot imagine that there is any Methodist Church in the entire world that would have the resources to donate $700,000.000. Are you talking about the entire denomination?

It is really pretty petty to try and tabulate who gave the most, and put a cash value on belief and faith to try and prove which is better or more worthwhile. I jsut don't get you at all. If you hate atheists, or anyone else who does not agree with you, then just say, and give your reasons why you think you are better than all the rest of us, but why exploit this moment of extreme human suffering to make your brownie points? Are you so absolutely blind that you cannot see what that makes you, and how other people see you?

Dear Lady Liberty of Death

I am the one who called you an obnoxious bag of wind. I did not say that to be spewing vile and hatred as you say, but merely making an observation of fact.

If you do not want people to say that you are obnoxious, then stop BEING obnoxious. It is as simple as that.

I also am an American, probably more American than you, and this is the internet, which is international and doesn't have any borders. Shocker! What about that is so hard for you to understand?

I think Schaum is an American who uses Christer as a term of derision, not because he is a foreiner with mangled English. But aside from that, we have no way of knowing what your nationality is; and until you can prove you are an American with a birth certificate, I think you should just shutup about that subject, before you embarrass yourself, even more.

Schaum calls you a Christer, but I would call you a Christianist, which is a Christian who uses Christianity to motivate a political agenda to acquire power and money and to control society, that goes far afield from the personal teachings of Christ.

Yes, and what about Arminius's shockeing announcement that not everyone here is an atheist? Or are you too dumb to figure that out?

(And I do not call you dumb out of hatred, but in a light-hearted and mocking sense).

Oh yes, one more thing, why are you so dour and humorless? I don't think Jesus has done anything for you.

One last thing, then I need to let this go. Why, LadyLiberty1, do you think non-Americans should identify themselves? The web has no national identity. No one is lesser or greater because of their place of birth. And you, certainly, are not the arbitrator of web-etiquette.

Do you really believe you have nothing to learn from anyone not born in the states? That you need to have non-Americans identify themselves so you can shove their ideas into some kind of idea-ghetto, to be safely dismissed? The whole idea of blogs is for people of differing opinions, ideas and experience to be able to share those things freely. I know you feel you are being picked on. Again, if you are unpleasant, you will be treated unpleasantly. It really is just that simple.

LadyLiberty1, you responded to my rough total of aid from Muslim-majority countries, only focusing on the cash aid, the most tiny portion. Why did you focus on just that? Did you miss part about the 2 field hospitals, the 55 tons of emergency shelter supplies, 260 tons of food and general aid supplies, the 10 jets? Why did you ignore the vast amount of aid in your response? Again, it seems deceptive. The Methodists and Presbyterians fund-raising is laudatory, but not out-of-scale with the aid from Muslims quoted above. You try to make things appear out of balance by focusing only on cash aid. Again it's deceptive. I doubt either Christian group would appreciate your deception on their behalf.

As to your response, regarding your perception that only a few Christian individuals in relief organizations are guilty of demanding conversions in exchange for aid. If that is true, the groups in question should be glad to be informed of these few "bad apples" so they can address the problem, and make sure their representatives understand they are there to render aid FIRST and only offer spiritual advice after the basic needs of the people they are there to serve have been met. Where is the problem discussing the situation?

As to your nutty comments regarding individuality, the only one grouping anyone not "American" enough for you into groups is YOU! I see Muslims, gays, Christians, Pagans, liberals, conservatives, French, Irish, Iraqi, and whoever all as individual people. The only one grouping all Muslims as violent, all Atheists as evil, all liberals as anti-American, is, again YOU! I have offered this advise to many people, and taken it myself several times, but never have I felt it is more needed. Take a hard look in a mirror. You need to see yourself clearly.

Yet more of the pseudochrister LadyLiberty's flummery:

"Countries that are Communistic see everyone as part of the whole.

With her limited intellect, the pseudochrister LadyLiberty is unable to see that this is, actually, an excellent description of the United States, as provided for both by the Constitution and by the Bill of Rights.

OK 'Ladyliberty', I've about had it with your crap.

I am an American, and damned proud of it.
I am Christian, and proud of that too.
Further, I am a US Army veteran, and proud of that.
I have no problem with people from other countries, whether they identify themselves or not.
I have no problem with people of other faiths, or no faith at all, so long as they are polite and not overly critical.

YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?!?

You are neither a true American, nor a true Christian. Actually, you make me want to vomit.

The difference I see is that I am not offering you needed aid, and expecting you to listen to my message before you can be helped. I, personally, have no problem with Christian missionaries offering their beliefs to those they work with. I just don't want to see them making recieving aid contingent on listening to or agreeing with that message.
____________________________

This is a false premise; therefore, the conclusion is wrong.

The whole stream of comments that conclude that Christians demand that one listen to a message before giving aid is absurd!

This a strawman argument, and is not worthy of consideration. It is designed to provoke an argument by the one posting such absurdity.

One person or even a group who would do such, does not represent everyone.

Many of the posters here seem to have never known what it is to be an individual. They see everyone in collective terms. One White person represents all White people. One Black person represents all Black people. One Asian represents all Asians. Why do people subscribe to that way of thinking? Do they come from countries where the form of government makes no distinction for the individual? Countries that are Communistic see everyone as part of the whole. Perhaps that is the background of these posters. Or, do they come from countries who only see themselves as Muslims? Everyone else is outside their group, so they group everyone else.

The thing that is unique to Americans is their sense of individuality. Of course, the rugged individualism that began this great country, has changed considerably with the indoctrination in academia and the multi-culturalism that says "embrace everyone" but, in fact, sees people as a member of a group.

Yet more flummery. Ladyliberty thinks real Americans should all be restricted to the narrow and limited vocabulary of which s/he is capable.

As I say...just more flummery.
Posted by: Schaum
___________

flummery - 1 a) a soft jelly or porridge made with flour or meal

b) any of several sweet desserts

2 a) something trashy

b) empty compliment

Schaum, your use of the word "flummery" only makes sense to you. It is meaningless to anyone else. There is no point in speaking if you cannot use words that make sense to the hearer.

did a quick-and dirty total on the aid he listed. It included (roughly) 6 tons of medical supplies, 2 field-hospitals, 55 tons of emergency shelter supplies, 260 tons of food and general aid supplies, 5 million dollars cash, and 10 jets to ship said supplies and personnel in. Your town did that? Really? Please supply the name of this paragon of communities, so we can sing its praises
__________________

The fact that you think $5 million dollars and supplies coming from SEVERAL countries all combined, is a major contribution shows your inability to comprehend or measure the amount given compared to the number, size and wealth of the countries making the contributions.

Yesterday, from our local paper there was an article where the contributions from the Methodists and the Presbyterians was about $700,000. That was just two denominations. There have been stories of school children who have raised thousands of dollars. There are donations to the Red Cross at many grocery stores. There are children using the arts to raise money. There are personal contributions to favorite charities such as Samaritan's Purse and World Vision. There are teams of medical doctors and pilots from our local area going to Haiti. There are churches where the members are adopting Haitian children. There are those gathering food and water to send. The contributions of this medium sized town are certainly as much if not more than all the Middle East countries.

BTW, most people who contribute to Christian organizations are people who live with a budget. It is a sacrifice for them to send in $25 a month. Many contribute monthly and throughout their lifetime.

The countries of Kuwait and Bahrain and Dubai are wealthy. One million dollars each is nothing compared to their vast amount of wealth. It is a drop in the bucket. The only reason they are helping is for image. If America wasn't in Haiti helping, I can guarantee they would not be there helping.

Yet more flummery from LadyLiberty, the pseudo-christer.

She has adopted Joseph McCarthy's philosophy: "Real Americans think and speak the way I do. If they don't they are not Real Americans."

She negates the fact, of course, that Real Americans are allowed to say what they want, in the words they want, when they want.

As I say...just more flummery.

Foreigners really should identify themselves as foreigners and not pretend to be Americans. No matter how good their language skills, there is a shibboleth that gives them away. Some little quirky phrasing, or some archaic term, or a word like "flummery" improperly used, always gives them away.

Now, when they repeatedly use phrases like "Christer" for "Christian" or "Zionist Zealot" they are revealing their hatred for the ones that they are using the derogatory term against. In fact, as *Schaum" used the phrase "Christer" at every opportunity when posting yesterday, though I corrected him, his hatred for Christians was obvious and the intensity of his hatred was revealed in the number of times he used the phrase. In fact, he seemed stuck on the phrase like a vinyl record with the needle stuck. But I digress, continuing on...

We often receive scam mail. The writer has no idea that no one is fooled with the appeal for money or whatever with phrasing that would never be used by an American. It is like me if I were to speak Mandarin - which I don't. I would never fool a true Chinaman.

Gimpi

This person, Ladyliberty is really getting to you, and to us all, because she is passive aggressive. I do not know a whole lot about psychology but I think a passive aggressive person is someone who portrays themselves as good, meek, and kind, with only the best of intentions and goodwill, and then lowers the boom on you, for imagined wrongs that you don't even know about, and for slights that you did not even know you were doing.

Sometimes they do it on purpose, and sometimes it is part of their personality and they can't help it. I am not sure which is Ladyliberty. But you can be sure that no matter what you say, and no matter how well-intentioned your remarks towards her, she is going to dream up a way to portray you as an evil Godless agent of Satan. Just the mere fact that you are a woman makes you a worse person than regular people, for some reason. But of course, all of her arguments are in bad faith, which is to say, not sincere. Every statement has a different and ulterior meaning, than than the seeming intent.

I suspect that even in the bosom of her little Sunday School class, she is regarded as a pill.

Nearly all of the posters on this comment board are anti-American and anti-Christian, in all probability, are not even American.

Much of my commentary has been hyperbole for effect. However, the commenters have been enraged with my posts. Their personal attacks reveal their true nature.

These are just a few of the names that I have been called:
"Christer" (numerous times and as a derogative)
"Bigot"
"Liar"
"Manipulator"
"Delusional"
"typical christer narcissist"
"vapid"
"obnoxious bag of wind"
"bitter nasty rancor"
"hate-worthy"

The slurs and insults have been intensely personal, malicious, vicious and repetitive. The above list includes just a few of the dozens of insults hurled.

These posters act like unreasoning animals. The more they can sink their teeth into their evil opponent (evil because their prey has a different viewpoint) the more rabid they become. They smell blood with every attack and it drives them into a frenzy.

The maliciousness of the posters hurling their invectives leaves one to wonder if they are Americans, or do they live in countries where they blow each other up? Are they use to attacking and bloodying their opponents? Certainly they lack even the basic mannners necessary for functioning in the world. Personally, I have never known people who speak like these posters speak. They only appear on comment boards.

Since they profess to be atheist is it any wonder that they treat other people with contempt? They are without God. They live in darkness. They serve the prince of darkness revealing themselves to be his followers by the insults that they hurl on the sons of light. The sons of Satan have always persecuted the sons of God. It began when Cain slew Abel in the Garden of Eden, and it continues today, most evident in the persecution of the Jewish people and Christians.

So (I reiterate) Ladyliberty and her ilk would have no problem with Pakistani Muslims for Vancouver converging on Boise after an earthquake and scooping up white children there and taking them back to Canada to teach them "the Love of Allah"?

She wouldn't have these hypothetical kidnappers arrested and imprisoned?

What would happen to these Haitian children after the Baptists returned home?
They would be orphans in the Dominican Republic, notorious for child trafficking and the little boy sex trade (they can ask their Republican Leader Limbaugh who knows all about the Dominican Republic first hand)

Like rabid anti-abortionists more concerned about the life of a fetus than the survivors, these Baptists are ignorantly short-sighted in what is best for these children. They probably believe education and health care for them later would be "godless socialism"

Gimpi

You? sarcastic towards LadyLiberty?

She has dumped about 50 tons of sarcasm on this thread.

So I hardly think that your vanilla extract dose of sarcasm is out of place or offensive.

... and another thing ...

News stories are gradually emerging from Haiti that the leader of the Baptist kidnappers had misled the group of people who are now claiming that they only went to Haiti to volunteer, and were completely unaware of her plan to whisk orphans out of the country. And people from the mother church in Idaho are acknowledging that there have been some dissension within the congregation.

And for Ladyliberty, you probably do just fine in your prayer group and in your Sunday School class where you repeat the same plattitudes to each other, and where everyone agrees with each other, and anyone who has a feeling of doubt is bucked up by the group and made to believe.

But you do not really have very good manners to engage in the world outside of your cloistered experience. You are not really fit to engage people here in conversation. I think it is obvious that most of the people who post here are Americans, but of course not everhyone is, because ... can you guess why???

There are many people of foreign birth who are in America, and also, because the internet is available to people everywhere in the world, and there is no rule or law that controls from which country a comment may come. So, if you are not aware of that, and you do not buy in to that, perhaps such a worldwide forum as this is not the place for you, no offense to you and your freedom of speech, which I do also choose to excercise.

I swore I was going to let this go, but it's like potato chips. I just can't seem to stop.

LadyLiberty1, in response to Schaum's post remunerating aids contributed by Moslem-majority societies, you stated, "Our medium sized town donated that much. Don't you see the hypocrisy? That's like Bill Gates giving $10 to the homeless."

I did a quick-and dirty total on the aid he listed. It included (roughly) 6 tons of medical supplies, 2 field-hospitals, 55 tons of emergency shelter supplies, 260 tons of food and general aid supplies, 5 million dollars cash, and 10 jets to ship said supplies and personnel in. Your town did that? Really? Please supply the name of this paragon of communities, so we can sing its praises!

Yes, I admit to a bit of sarcasm here. Willfully misrepresenting facts to try to make people look bad when they are sincerely doing something good, (just because you don't like them,) does that to me. It seems to me that your "my little town" statement is the best demonstration of false witness I have seen in a long time.

This is the kind of thing that makes people not take the message you offer seriously. If you want to be believed, you have to be believable, and honest.

ladyliberty1

I did not say that I hate you. I do not think that I have hatred in my heart.

But if anyone does, you would be likely to bring it out in them.

What kind of weird Christian freak are you, to go around striking people on the cheek, to see if they past the Christian test, by turning to you the other?

"This absurd logic is maybe why you never hear of any humane institution, such as an orphanage, a school or hospital built by an atheist individual, group or organization. They are busy doing more important things such as trying to tear down the ideology that resulted in the ethics that made our country the most powerful in the history of the World and also the greatest ever!"
Posted by: abhab1

Abhab1, there are numerous atheist and secular charities doing the good works you name, already posted on this thread and others. I won't bore anyone by remunerating them. I'm sure you have read the lists, anyway. That's just a straw man argument that gets tossed into the mix over and over. Please retire it. It's just getting silly.

Now, how is disagreeing with your beliefs trying to tear them down? No atheist I have ever read wants to stop anyone from holding their beliefs, they just don't want certain beliefs held as superior before the law. You seem to be very proud to be American. Surely you must then understand that most American of concepts, equality before the law.

Please don't bother posting about how, in the past, Christianity held an informal position that placed it above other beliefs. In those days, we also either enslaved or legally discriminated against folks based on the pigment of their skin. We denied the most basic rights to over half the human race, those of us with two X chromosomes. We stole land on a massive scale, again based on skin color and beliefs (and a massive imbalance in power). Manifest destiny anyone?

For much of the history of this nation, we did not live up to our constitution. We are trying to do better now. It's called progress. Why do so many conservative Christians see racial, gender and belief equality as a bad thing? Frankly, it's one of the things that I find a bit frightening about that belief-system.

"4) Gimpi, no need to identify yourself as female. Females tend to be much more insolent and cutting than males. Males tend to be crude with their insults"
Posted by: ladyliberty1

Again, Huh? Insolent? Cutting? Wow, you have a low threshold for what you regard as insults. LadyLiberty1, I have tried to go out of my way to be civil to you. I don't agree with you, but I have worked very hard to refrain from just dismissing you as the crank you appear to be.

I have tried to provide you with what I felt might be usefuly information about how you come across to others, so you could present your beliefs in a better light. You aren't interested. Fine.

I bow to your profound psychological insight in identifying my gender. However, if that's the case, why did you refer to me in an earlier post with the pronoun "he"?

Oh, and are you for some reason under the impression only Americans should post on this blog? Or that only Americans can have valid information, interesting ideas, or worthwhile opinions? How, exactly, is a person's country-of-origin relevant? It's apparent you don't think Muslims or Atheists have any valid ideas, but that's another story. As is your odd assumption that Americans don't use certain English words, what do you have against "flummery?"

To close, you state, " Americans, at least those raised in homes with good parents would never insult others with the repetitive frequency that those from other countries use. Those not American seem to only know how to insult. Civil communication seems to be a real challenge for some ethnicities." If you are correct, you leave the reader with no choice but to conclude either you are the product of bad parenting, or or not from the States.

There, that's an insult, albeit a mild one. Perhaps now you can tell the difference.

I posed this question earlier, "Yo, out there, who would you want to sit next to you on a long bus trip, LadyLiberty1 or Gimpi?"

arminius3142 responded, "NO contest - Gimpi wins! Given the choice of sitting next to LadyLiberty on a 1st class flight, and sitting next to Gimpi on a slow bus, Gimpi wins every time."

Thanks so much arminius3142! In fairness, however, to take myself down a bit, I don't imagine it to be a hard choice. Virtually anyone I've read here would be better company than LL. (Well, maybe not (Spidy...)

"Gimpi, you are officially invited to my house tomorrow for jambalaya, mustard greens, and cornbread. I understand there's some sort of ball game going on as well."
Posted by: lepidopteryx

Thanks, Lepidoptreyx! I'll bring a applesauce cake for dessert! It may be a bit stale, me coming from Seattle and all...

"Here's a suggestion for the posters on this forum who want to advance their cause for atheism or Islam or who just like to be argumentative or who are just filled with hate."

I'll take "just filled with hate" for $100, Alex.

"1) Don't pretend that you are American. Your language gives you away. "Flummery" just isn't a word used by Americans."

I do not now, nor have I ever, used the word "flummery". D'oh!

"2) Don't insult constantly. Americans, at least those raised in homes with good parents would never insult others with the repetitive frequency that those from other countries use. Those not American seem to only know how to insult. Civil communication seems to be a real challenge for some ethnicities."

So, we can still insult occasionally?

"3) Grow up. Your childish insults and attacks makes even a patient person impatient."

Whatever...

"4) Gimpi, no need to identify yourself as female. Females tend to be much more insolent and cutting than males. Males tend to be crude with their insults."

Huh?

"5) Changing your moniker doesn't fool anyone."

Perhaps not, but it does help cut down on the odor.

Here's a suggestion for the posters on this forum who want to advance their cause for atheism or Islam or who just like to be argumentative or who are just filled with hate.

1) Don't pretend that you are American. Your language gives you away. "Flummery" just isn't a word used by Americans.

2) Don't insult constantly. Americans, at least those raised in homes with good parents would never insult others with the repetitive frequency that those from other countries use. Those not American seem to only know how to insult. Civil communication seems to be a real challenge for some ethnicities.

3) Grow up. Your childish insults and attacks makes even a patient person impatient.

4) Gimpi, no need to identify yourself as female. Females tend to be much more insolent and cutting than males. Males tend to be crude with their insults.

5) Changing your moniker doesn't fool anyone.

Lady Liberty
Just because someone hates you does not mean they hate all Christians. You are, after all, very hate-worthy.
But even if someone here does hate all Christians, that should not threaten you, who after all, control just about everything. Even in your position of extreme advantage and dominance, you portray yourself as the Jews that Hitler persecuted. If I were seeking to minimize the horror of the Holocaust with silly and flippant comparisions, I would certainly put the persecution of the gays ahead of the persecution of the Christians.
You are a perfectly ridiculous person.
Posted by: DanielintheLionsDen
_______________________

Your acknowledgement of hating someone you do not even know, but because of reading some comments, you now have hatred in your heart, suggests that your heart is inclined to hatred.

A heart of hatred is a heart enslaved. Satan holds the whole world enslaved. The whole world lives in darkness.

Love on the other hand, is not easily angered, is patient when wronged, does not take into account a wrong suffered, is quick to forgive.

Jesus is the Light that overcomes the darkness of the world. He opens the eyes of the blind, and sets prisoners free.

America's Founders knew freedom in their spirits. They had been set free, and they constructed a Constitution that provided for that same kind of freedom. They established a country where we as Christians would have the freedom to worship, and others would have freedom to worship or not.

Christianity is not compulsory. It is the Love of the Father given and the sacrifice of the Son on the Cross whose blood "cleanses us from all our sins." It is a gift. A gift is received, not forced. Love is received, and reciprocated, not mandated. Love mandated would not be love.

Gimpi, you are officially invited to my house tomorrow for jambalaya, mustard greens, and cornbread. I understand there's some sort of ball game going on as well.

LadyLiberty vs Gimpi:

"Yo, out there, who would you want to sit next to you on a long bus trip, LadyLiberty1 or Gimpi?"
NO contest - Gimpi wins! Given the choice of sitting next to LadyLiberty on a 1st class flight, and sitting next to Gimpi on a slow bus, Gimpi wins every time.

"Kindness inspires others, both to be kind, and to want to understand the one inspiring them."
Absolutely, Gimpi! And the attitude of LadyLiberty is arrogance, which is neither kindness nor politeness in anyone's book.

Charity according to Ms. Jaoby is not a charity if the donor finds any gratification in the act of giving, whether short or long term. Rescuing a miserable wretched orphan and giving him a home in a country that many much more fortunate from around the world would risk life and limb to reach its shores is considered by her and others of her ilk as a crime. This absurd logic is maybe why you never hear of any humane institution, such as an orphanage, a school or hospital built by an atheist individual, group or organization. They are busy doing more important things such as trying to tear down the ideology that resulted in the ethics that made our country the most powerful in the history of the World and also the greatest ever!

"Ahh, Gimpi, it is incumbent upon the better (in this case, yourself) to humour the one of lesser nature(that would be me, according to you). Where is that patience that comes with one who my superior in every way?"
Posted by LadyLiberty1

Where the heck did that come from? I never claimed to be your superior. I do believe I have behaved with more civility, restraint and reason than you have shown on this blog. However, if you disagree, we can ask the correspondents. Yo, out there, who would you want to sit next to you on a long bus trip, LadyLiberty1 or Gimpi?

I was trying to suggest you might want to moderate your tone, but obviously you feel no need to present yourself in a more pleasant way. Fine. Be aware, however, if people don't respond well to you, you are not being persecuted, you are being treated the way you have chosen to be treated.

In response to my statement, "The best witness one can offer is to be kind and caring in bad times. Civility, respect, and genuine caring just might interest others in the philosophy that inspires such behavior."

You then say, "The above poster has a belief system, and freely shares his message.
This is no different than a Christian making a similar comment while delivering food and medical services as a member of a charitable organization."

The difference I see is that I am not offering you needed aid, and expecting you to listen to my message before you can be helped. I, personally, have no problem with Christian missionaries offering their beliefs to those they work with. I just don't want to see them making recieving aid contingent on listening to or agreeing with that message.

I also believe that the best testimony anyone can give for their beliefs is to do good for others. Kindness inspires others, both to be kind, and to want to understand the one inspiring them. But, if some folks can't manage the restraint involved with that approach, fine. Just don't essentially "sell" your assistance in exchange for someone adopting your beliefs, (or pretending to.)

Now, in the above statements, please note my use of the phrases "I believe," "As I see it," and such. I speak for no one except myself. I don't claim to hold a truth you must accept. I'm simply presenting my views. Using variations on "I believe," instead of "This is how it is," is something I do to try to be more open to other views. I think it makes people more responsive in a discussion. Oh, just as an aside, I'm a woman.

Lady Liberty

Just because someone hates you does not mean they hate all Christians. You are, after all, very hate-worthy.

But even if someone here does hate all Christians, that should not threaten you, who after all, control just about everything. Even in your position of extreme advantage and dominance, you portray yourself as the Jews that Hitler persecuted. If I were seeking to minimize the horror of the Holocaust with silly and flippant comparisions, I would certainly put the persecution of the gays ahead of the persecution of the Christians.

You are a perfectly ridiculous person.

Lady Liberty

I think that you do not realize how obnoxious you are. You give a distinct sense that you are superior to the people posting here.

You are a very, very good example of what a Christian is not, so if you are seeking to inform people of Christianity, then in that sense, by providing such an excellent opposite example, you may be doing some good. But more likely, you are tainting the whole system of Christianity, as well as the name of Jesus Christ, with your mean and sarcastic attitude. Whatever strange things you may think about Jesus, he certainly does not seem to be doing you any good.

You say that you are "sharing" your beliefs. Come on? Isn't that YOUR PC term for proselytizing? Proselytizing is NOT sharing. No one would possibly object to sharing your beliefs in an appropriate setting, which would not be in the chaoitc midst of a catastrophe.

Proseltyzing is a poitically hostile practice, and if you defend it, then you show yourself, not to be loveingly sharing your beliefs, but rather, that you forcefully and aggressively impose an alien culture on people at the time of their greatest need and deepest suffering.

You are a person full of words.

Yet, actions speak louder than words.

Arminius:

"You also said that not all Christians are the same. I am an example of that. Please see my earlier post. We're not all businessmen."

Of course not all are business men. There is a difference between those (VERY VERY few) who follow the philosophy and teachings of Jesus, and those (VERY VERY many) christers whose "religion and beliefs" are in no way related to the teachings of Jesus. To know the true Jesus, one must read the Gnostic gospels. While I agree with his philosophy, I do not think him to be a god, a son of god, or a resurrected jew. Those myths, and the ones about salvation, virgin birth, miracles, etc., are all stolen from earlier religions, principally Mithraism. Everyone is entitled to believe what he wants. The issue is the provable reality and facts of those beliefs.

I will take this latest of your deflections to mean that you cannot prove your assertions. Reliance upon smokescreens and flummery are all you have to offer.

You are indeed a liar and manipulator and typical christer. I expected nothing more, and you have delivered exactly what I expected.

Now I have, indeed, finished with you. I feel a need for a hot shower.

I am ashamed that you belong to the same nation as I. posted by Schaum

_________________

And, herein, is the BIG difference between you and I, Schaum - You see yourself as one of a collective. I know myself as an individual. America was established by people who knew themselves to be individuals, FIRST. That is why we have the government that we have with "individual rights." Before the law, the unimportant person has the same rights as the so-called "important" person. The poor person has the same rights as the rich person. That comes out of Christianity. Everyone has equal access to God through Jesus Christ. There is no differentiation. The talent one, the faithful one, the handicapped, the weak, are all equal at the foot of the Cross.

Does it surprise you that, as a former Baptist, Catholic, and Episcopalian, I should be aware of his teachings?

I certainly see the hypocracy of withholding food, shelter and medical care from people until they have first subjected themselves to your propaganda?

Prove your claim that your hometown donated as much as Arabs have done. First, you will have to prove that it IS your hometown. Until you do, I'm calling you just another delusional christer who lies through her teeth.

You are exactly what Christ taught AGAINST. posted by scaum

_________________

You have declared yourself to be an atheist, yet you say Christ taught against????

LadyLiberty:

"Sounds like you are the one searching, going from Southern Baptist, to Roman Catholic, to Episcopalian, to.....where are you now?"

I am an athiest. I thought you were capable of understanding that. Searching? Yes, I was. Until I realized that the christer "religion" is a void delusion.

I have read all you have had to say, and I can clearly see your emptiness, your hollowness, your delusions. I am ashamed that you belong to the same nation as I. You are exactly what Christ taught AGAINST. You are, in every sense, false. You are a bigot, a liar, and a manipulator. You are, in the end, a christer.

I have finished with you.

Bahrain: donated $1 million to relief efforts.
Jordan: A Jordanian air force plane carrying a military field hospital and 6 tons of food and supplies left Amman on January 14. A second plane carrying Jordanian medics left the following day.
Iran: Iran's Red Crescent society sent 30 tons of humanitarian aid, including food, tents and medicine, on January 16.
Kuwait: Kuwait donated $1 million to relief efforts; the Red Crescent is preparing 100 tons of food, medical supplies, tents and blankets to fly to Haiti.
Lebanon: Lebanon is loading a plane with 25 tons of tents and 3 tons of medical supplies; it leaves tomorrow.
Morocco: Two planes carrying 24 tons of aid left the city of Kenitra on January 16. The Moroccan government has pledged $1 million in aid to Haiti.
Qatar: A Qatari C-17 aircraft loaded with 50 tons of aid left for Port-au-Prince on January 14. The Qatari government also sent a rescue team to set up a field hospital; the Red Crescent will sent another $100,000.
Turkey: Three cargo planes -- carrying search-and-rescue teams, a mobile hospital and aid materials -- left for Haiti on January 16. Another two planes left yesterday. Turkey has also donated $1 million in cash.
United Arab Emirates: The UAE sent two planes loaded with tents, and a team from the UAE's Red Crescent will arrive in the Dominican Republic tomorrow to buy $500,000 worth of supplies and truck them to Haiti. Another 50 tons of emergency supplies will be air-lifted from Abu Dhabi tomorrow.
Posted by: Schaum

_________________

Our medium sized town donated that much. Don't you see the hypocrisy? That's like Bill Gates giving $10 to the homeless.

As a former Southern Baptist, then Roman Catholic, then Episcopalian, I deny this absurdity.
Posted by: Schaum

Southern Baptists, Episcopalians and Catholics are certainly all christers, but of very different stripes. posted by scaum

___________________

Sounds like you are the one searching, going from Southern Baptist, to Roman Catholic, to Episcopalian, to.....where are you now?

Schaum,

"christers expect response for the "goodness" that they bestow...but they expect that "response" BEFORE they "bestow goodness" -- and only IF that "response" is forthcoming. christers are businessmen, and should be taxed as such."

You also said that not all Christians are the same. I am an example of that. Please see my earlier post. We're not all businessmen.

You find fault with one human heart responding to the physical needs of another human without demanding that he first subject himself to torrents of propaganda? You are the typical christer narcissist

christers expect response for the "goodness" that they bestow...but they expect that "response" BEFORE they "bestow goodness" -- and only IF that "response" is forthcoming. christers are businessmen, and should be taxed as such.
Posted by: Schaum
______________________

The above poster shows the hatred in his heart with his slurs toward Christians. His name calling suggests the inability say the word "Christian."

Why should we believe that this person could extend kindness to anyone if he cannot extend respect for a certain person of faith? We should not. Both bitter and sweet water do not flow from the same fountain.

More than likely, the above poster is of the liberal left or a Muslim. These two groups of people do not just dislike Christians, they hate them with a rabid hatred much like Hitler hated the Jews. In my lifetime, I have never seen such hatred as occurs on these boards from such posters.

The hate because they are full of hate. That is the only explanation.

LadyLiberty:

"1) You show your disdain for Christ and His followers by calling them "christers". This is characteristic of Muslims who think the Jews and Christians are inferior, which your naming of Christians with an intended slur, proves. You probably refer to all Jews and those who support Israel and the Jewish right to the land as Zionist zealots. If I were to read your comments elsewhere, I am sure that that intended slur would be found."

Coulda, woulda, shoulda...unfortunately for you, you cannot read those remarks elsewhere. Your manufacturing of "facts" that you would "expect to be true" is another suggestion of your christer unrealities, and entirely consistent with your christer narcissism.

If you imagine that all christers are the same, you are a vapid as you seem.

It is christers who have a long history of murder, torture, burning, mutilating of those who disagree with them. Again, nobody is trying to lure you away from your christer deleusions...you are free to enjoy as many delusions as you wish, and your narcissism to the fullest. Nobody cares. Because everybody sees you for what you are.

You are, after all, an outsider here...this is an atheist blog. If you hope to sell your christer bs here, or to find sympathy for your christer propaganda on this thread, you may find yourself very disappointed.

"Southern Baptist and Episcopalian and Catholics are considered Christian denominations."

Southern Baptists, Episcopalians and Catholics are certainly all christers, but of very different stripes. It is you who publicly displays your ignorance.

"Specifically Muslim posters use the vilest of slurs in their posting."

As is their right. They are as entitled to their delusions as are you. We call this 'freedom of speech' and 'freedom of religion. I know those concepts irritate christers, but there you are.

" This is because they consider all others as less than themselves,"

I doubt that you are in any position to pontificate on or about what "they" consider with regard to "all others" -- but to accomodate your hubris and narcissism, lets say you are right. The same thing applies: it is their right to do so. I repeat, they are as entitled to their delusions as are you, and for the same reasons.

"and this is also the reason that we don't see the Muslim nations rushing to help others in times of crisis, such as in Haiti."

More of your bigotry, lies, and obfuscation. You expose yourself for the morally bankrupt christer you are. In the first 10 days of the crisis in Haiti:

2.
Bahrain: donated $1 million to relief efforts.

Jordan: A Jordanian air force plane carrying a military field hospital and 6 tons of food and supplies left Amman on January 14. A second plane carrying Jordanian medics left the following day.

Iran: Iran's Red Crescent society sent 30 tons of humanitarian aid, including food, tents and medicine, on January 16.

Kuwait: Kuwait donated $1 million to relief efforts; the Red Crescent is preparing 100 tons of food, medical supplies, tents and blankets to fly to Haiti.

Lebanon: Lebanon is loading a plane with 25 tons of tents and 3 tons of medical supplies; it leaves tomorrow.

Morocco: Two planes carrying 24 tons of aid left the city of Kenitra on January 16. The Moroccan government has pledged $1 million in aid to Haiti.

Qatar: A Qatari C-17 aircraft loaded with 50 tons of aid left for Port-au-Prince on January 14. The Qatari government also sent a rescue team to set up a field hospital; the Red Crescent will sent another $100,000.

Turkey: Three cargo planes -- carrying search-and-rescue teams, a mobile hospital and aid materials -- left for Haiti on January 16. Another two planes left yesterday. Turkey has also donated $1 million in cash.

United Arab Emirates: The UAE sent two planes loaded with tents, and a team from the UAE's Red Crescent will arrive in the Dominican Republic tomorrow to buy $500,000 worth of supplies and truck them to Haiti. Another 50 tons of emergency supplies will be air-lifted from Abu Dhabi tomorrow.

LadyLiberty:
"a Christian is a Christian is a Christian..."
As a former Southern Baptist, then Roman Catholic, then Episcopalian, I deny this absurdity.
Posted by: Schaum
________________

1) You show your disdain for Christ and His followers by calling them "christers". This is characteristic of Muslims who think the Jews and Christians are inferior, which your naming of Christians with an intended slur, proves. You probably refer to all Jews and those who support Israel and the Jewish right to the land as Zionist zealots. If I were to read your comments elsewhere, I am sure that that intended slur would be found.

2) Southern Baptist and Episcopalian and Catholics are considered Christian denominations.

You reveal your true identity by your lack of knowledge on the subject.

3) Specifically Muslim posters use the vilest of slurs in their posting. This is because they consider all others as less than themselves, and this is also the reason that we don't see the Muslim nations rushing to help others in times of crisis, such as in Haiti.

"a Christian is a Christian is a Christian..."

An elephant is a mouse is a wombat... what the hell, they're all mammals.

A true Christian will feed the hungry first and foremost. No sermon necessary, preach by example.

"Preach the Gospel every day of your life, but use words only when necessary."
- St Francis

"If you Christians would live like your Christ instead of just talking about him, then everyone would want to be a Christian."
- Gandhi

Walk the walk!

LadyLiberty:

Obviously, unlike the wicked Christians with motives for giving, the above poster attributes only pure motives to any act of kindness that he does"

I have not spoken of any "act of kindness" that I do, nor have I attributed any motive, pure or otherwise, to it. More of your deflection.

"When he gives to charity, it is because he does so from the goodness of his heart."

You find fault with one human heart responding to the physical needs of another human without demanding that he first subject himself to torrents of propaganda? You are the typical christer narcissist.

"When he brings his wife flowers, he does so, expecting no gratitude from her."

Is the expectation of gratitude your motive for expressions of love and admiration? You need to read Martin Buber's "Thou and I". You will find a precis of it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ich_und_Du

" And, he has no message in doing so. The flowers do not represent love or commitment."

More flummery. Of course they represent love and commitment. Why would they not? But if one "loves" with the expectation that love must be expressed in return... well, more christer nonsense.

"They merely attest to the goodness of the person giving from a pure heart untainted by evil and with no human motives whatsoever."

No. They attest to my appreciation of the goodness that the person to whom I give them brings into my life. Your narcissism is beginning to overwhelm you.

"This poster has evolved beyond that of mere mortal. He no longer shares a heart that has any desires of the flesh or expects any response for the goodness that he bestows upon mankind."

christers expect response for the "goodness" that they bestow...but they expect that "response" BEFORE they "bestow goodness" -- and only IF that "response" is forthcoming. christers are businessmen, and should be taxed as such.

As I previously stated quite clearly, what I find offensive is that christer charities do not meet the needs of the hungry and homeless unless those people listen first to their propaganda. The christers are not interested in people's needs, they are interested in what THEY think is the priority.
Posted by: Schaum
________________

The above poster has a problem with typing the correct term for those who follow Christ. "Christian" is the correct term.

Obviously, unlike the wicked Christians with motives for giving, the above poster attributes only pure motives to any act of kindness that he does. When he gives to charity, it is because he does so from the goodness of his heart.

When he brings his wife flowers, he does so, expecting no gratitude from her. And, he has no message in doing so. The flowers do not represent love or commitment. They merely attest to the goodness of the person giving from a pure heart untainted by evil and with no human motives whatsoever.

This poster has evolved beyond that of mere mortal. He no longer shares a heart that has any desires of the flesh or expects any response for the goodness that he bestows upon mankind.

The above poster has an image of himself as god, and all others, especially Christians are seriously flawed because they can't do anything without ulterior and nefarious motives. These Christians are in fact wicked in their very acts of attempted kindness. Hmmmmm....there seems to be a verse that states that in the Bible..."The heart is deceitful above all else, who can know it?"

And, it is true that Christians are wicked and desperately in need of a Saviour. In order to be a Christian, one has to recognize his own wicked heart, and that there is nothing that he can do to make himself acceptable to a holy God. He must repent, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved from his sins, and to be brought into the family of God. He must be born again, and God in His Great Mercy forgives the sinner.

Just like all children reflect their parents values, Christians may reflect well or badly on their Heavenly Father. Sometimes like King David who had a heart for God, yet committed adultery and then murdered to cover up his sin, or like Peter who denied our Lord and Saviour, and who wept bitterly over his denial, Christians do really bad things that reflect badly on their Heavenly Father. Yet, He says that "if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

Condemning Christians doesn't offend at all. They have already acknowledged that they are sinners and that their only hope is in the atoning work of Jesus Christ on the Christ.

So, to the posters who think they are offending Christians by character assassinations, they are only confirming what Christians already know about themselves. They are not what they were, and they are not what they will be, but, Thank God, they are better than they were.

LadyLiberty:

"a Christian is a Christian is a Christian..."

As a former Southern Baptist, then Roman Catholic, then Episcopalian, I deny this absurdity.

LadyLiberty:

"What is your suggestion? Should Christian Charities dissolve because you are offended? Should they abandon all efforts to...

I have answered this question. They should be taxed as a business.

Ladyliberty:

"Just as a leopard cannot change its spots, neither can a Christian cease being a Christian. A true Christian is born into the family of God. There is no way to be unborn into a family. I could not change my heritage of being in the family of God anymore than I can change my natural eye color."

Yet again, more obfuscation and deflecting from the subject. Do you think anyone objects if you want to be a christer? I have never known an atheist who thought anyone should be denied his beliefs. Did someone suggest that you should change your beliefs? That your beliefs are delusional has nothing to do with your right to hold them.

Ladyliberty:

"Obviously, you find it offensive that a Christian Charity shares their belief system with those for whom they provide food and medical services."

Again you assume facts not in evidence, and continue your obfuscation.

As I previously stated quite clearly, what I find offensive is that christer charities do not meet the needs of the hungry and homeless unless those people listen first to their propaganda. The christers are not interested in people's needs, they are interested in what THEY think is the priority.

Now you are changing the question and asking another. Nowhere in your original question was there any question about satisfaction sufficient to curtail criticism, or as you phrased it, griping. Nor did you reference any "solution" to a "Problem". You asked only what we thought should be done with christers who withold food from the needy until those persons have listened to their propaganda.
No, it would not be sufficient.
Posted by: Schaum

_______________________

I must remind you that you answered my post by saying, "tax them."

But, let's dispense with the tit for tat.

Obviously, you find it offensive that a Christian Charity shares their belief system with those for whom they provide food and medical services.

What is your suggestion? Should Christian Charities dissolve because you are offended? Should they abandon all efforts to help people because you think their motives are impure? Should they combine their efforts with others because you think they should. But, you see, a Christian is a Christian is a Christian, and even when they pay tax dollars which goes into the government funding for helping others, those tax dollars still come from Christians, not people separate from who they are. Just as a leopard cannot change its spots, neither can a Christian cease being a Christian. A true Christian is born into the family of God. There is no way to be unborn into a family. I could not change my heritage of being in the family of God anymore than I can change my natural eye color.

The best witness one can offer is to be kind and caring in bad times. Civility, respect, and genuine caring just might interest others in the philosophy that inspires such behavior. Posted by gimpi
_____________________

The above poster has a belief system, and freely shares his message.

This is no different than a Christian making a similar comment while delivering food and medical services as a member of a charitable organization.

Here's a personal story of my own. A woman comes running up to me crying and saying she needs to get to another state because her mother has died. She is distraught and drunk and in need of gas money. Her boyfriend drives up. I give the couple money for gas. When they thank me, I don't want them to think that I am such a good person that I have come to their aid. I want them to know that God has loved me and shown me His mercy by saving me from my sins, so I give glory to God. I also tell the boyfriend that the woman should not drive. I had a message. I met a need.

According to many commenting here, my motives were impure because I made the woman and man listen to me. But, you see, my giving wasn't contingent upon them listening. I gave first. Then I told them why I gave, which is what most Christian charities do. They do not demand one sit or stand and listen to a message before they give of their services. It is ridiculous to think that a doctor lets a
patient suffer until a message is delivered and the person converts to Christianity before the doctor cares for the wound. Or, that one providing food to one dying of hunger, demand the person listen to a message and convert before he/she receives food. That is a strawman argument.

Again, EVERYONE has a message. It is insane to think that people should deliver food and medicine without communicating with the recipients on a personal level. Everyone talks, and we talk about what we know. Christians know Jesus, so they talk about Him. Christians who serve with Christian organizations would naturally be givers to meet both physical and spiritual needs. To take the message out of Christians and ask them to serve food without talking of their love for Christ, is like giving people food without calories. Impossible!

LadyLiberty:

"So, you would be satisfied if these Christian organizations paid taxes? Would take resolve the problem? No more griping about Christians taking their message with them when they deliver food and medical care?"

Now you are changing the question and asking another. Nowhere in your original question was there any question about satisfaction sufficient to curtail criticism, or as you phrased it, griping. Nor did you reference any "solution" to a "Problem". You asked only what we thought should be done with christers who withold food from the needy until those persons have listened to their propaganda.

No, it would not be sufficient.

1.
Spidermean:

Again, with your infantile rantings, you prove the short span of your intelligence, and confirm the suspicion that you either were born without a left brain, or it has liquefied. I know you love to roam the internet, looking for snips and cuts that you can use to reinforce your argument. But you should understand that the internet is full of people who live in gross error as profound as your own.

Thomas Jefferson, my personal hero, was not a christer. He, like others of his time –including some other founding fathers—was a deeply flawed man. Among other things, like colonial christers he kept slaves, and he used them for his sexual fulfillment. Such was his commitment to biblical living.

What Jefferson really SAID:

Say nothing of my religion. It is known to my god and myself alone.
-- Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams, 11 January 1817, in Lester Cappon, ed. The Adams-Jefferson Letters, (1959) p. 506, quoted from Jeremy Koselak, "The Exaltation of a Reasonable Deity: Thomas Jefferson’s Critique of Christianity"

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. -- Thomas Jefferson, to the Virginia Baptists (1808) ME 16:320.
I am for freedom of religion, & against all maneuvres to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another. -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Elbridge Gerry, 1799 (see Positive Atheism's Historical section)

Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one-half the world fools and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781-82

2.
It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of

Virginia, 1781-82 (capitalization of the word god is retained per original; see Positive Atheism's Historical Section)

I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Ezra Stiles Ely (June 25, 1819), quoted from Dickinson W Adams, ed, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Second Series (Princeton University Press, 1983; note that attributions saying "Ezra Stiles, president of Yale University (June 25, 1819)" are incorrect, as that Ezra Stiles died in 1795)

Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson, considering three different explanations for why sea shells would be found at higher elevations than one should reasonably expect an ocean to have existed, in Notes on the State of Virginia

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add "within the limits of the law" because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Isaac H Tiffany (1819)
The most sacred of the duties of a government [is] to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens.
-- Thomas Jefferson, note in Destutt de Tracy, "Political Economy," 1816. ME 14:465

To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse."
-- Thomas Jefferson, to Hugh White, 1801. ME 10:258

3.
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be lawful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate which would be oppression.
-- Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes."
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814

"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

But don’t let facts prevent you from continuing to display your ignorance.

You're just irritating people. Is that your goal?
Posted by: gimpi | February 6, 2010 11:12 AM
________________

Ahh, Gimpi, it is incumbent upon the better (in this case, yourself) to humour the one of lesser nature(that would be me, according to you). Where is that patience that comes with one who my superior in every way?

Ladyliberty1, I'm not telling you what to believe. I'm telling you how you come across. I'm telling you that you represent your beliefs badly. I'm saying you appear to be rude, arrogant, unreasoning, snippy and mean. I'm saying that if you come across badly, people will think badly of both you and the beliefs you are presenting. If you want people to be interested in what you have to say, you need to say it in a civil, interesting, and kind way. That has has nothing to do with respecting your beliefs. I regard it as the internet equivalent of telling someone they have spinach in their teeth.

"Origin of the word "Mercy" - Mercy is not something that can be bought or sold, but the word mercy is derived from Latin merces, which means "the price paid for something", "wages", "reward", or "recompense". The roots of what is now the primary sense of mercy are to be found in the Latin of Christian writers of the 6th century, who begain to use merces for the spiritual reward that comes from kindness to those who do not necessarily have a claim to such mercy and from whom no recompense is to be expected."
Posted by ladyliberty1

As I'm sure you know, the Latin language predates Christianity by many centuries. The concept of mercy shows up in every human society. Kwan Yin, she who hears the cries of the world, is the traditional Chinese Goddess of Mercy. Her concept was folded into Buddhism, but predates it again by many centuries. Are you claiming the ancient Chinese and Tibetans were influenced by Christianity centuries to millennia before the birth of Christ. If you want to influence people, your arguments should be at least roughly reasonable. You have dismissed several rational arguments with arguments almost as weak as the one quoted above. Again, you are not representing your faith or yourself well. You're just irritating people. Is that your goal?

If you want people to come to know Christ as you have, you have to BE the sort of person the people you want to reach will want to emulate. posted by Gimpi
___________________

Gimpi, Are you telling me what to believe? Are you judging me? You who do not want others to proselytize? You who do not want Christians to judge?

Of course, it is Thomas Jefferson's single "wall of separation" letter that most secularists leap to cite as evidence of a "secular" Republic. It should go without mentioning that the phrase "separation of church and state" itself never appears in the U.S. Constitution but was extracted from Jefferson's "wall" comment, yet it has been the root cause of innumerable modern problems. Jefferson, certainly no Christian by any acceptable definition, nevertheless wrote the Virginia sabbath law and penned ordinances sanctioning days of prayer and fasting. It was Virginia's incorporation of the Protestant Episcopal Church that caused Baptists and Presbyterians to complain about state ties. By that time, most colonies (then states) had constitutions that established religious liberty (i.e., not regulating against the practice of religion). This was a far cry from prohibitions against religious activities in public places or with official government sanction. Mark Noll, one of the leading scholars of American religion, acknowledges that "the colonial background of the new states was so overwhelmingly Protestant that it was simply assumed that such things as Sunday legislation, laws prohibiting atheism and promoting public morals, and the regular use of Christian language by government officials were appropriate. The simple fact is that the new United States was so overwhelmingly Christian in its outlook that there was never any consideration given to non-Christian groups such as Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists in the deliberations about the law or constitutions. Jews, while never numerous enough to attract attention, were quietly allowed to practice their faith and, over time, accepted openly." From "48 Liberal Lies about American History" by Larry Schweikart, page 75.

"... How can we deal with people who want to do charity work but link it to a message? Should we ban them altogether? Should we take away their right to speak? Should we punish them for mixing their charity work with a message? Should we forbid them the right to do charity work? Should we incarcerate people who think like this? Should we put duct tape over their mouths when they are distributing food or tending wounds? How can we stop them from talking about their faith? Please give us the solution."
Posted by ladyliberty1

Ladyliberty1, no one is proposing any such thing, as you know. They are simply commenting on a behavior they consider reprehensible. As do I.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have donated time and labor to World Vision, a Christian charitable organization, but one that has a good reputation for "letting their work be their witness," i.e., doing good things for people in crisis to show the virtue of their belief, rather than demanding lip-service be paid to their beliefs before offering aid. I would be disappointed to find out I was wrong about them, and would look for another organization to aid. My choice.

The best witness one can offer is to be kind and caring in bad times. Civility, respect, and genuine caring just might interest others in the philosophy that inspires such behavior. Arrogance, rudeness, mean-spirited attacks , deliberate distortions and demanding behavior has the exact opposite effect. The missionary organizations that know this will not run afoul of local people, but will inspire genuine interest in what they have to say. I really feel, from reading your posts, that this is a lesson you need to learn.

If you want people to come to know Christ as you have, you have to BE the sort of person the people you want to reach will want to emulate. I can say, as an outsider to most faiths, your target-audience, so to speak, you fail.

What should we as a society do to people who think like this?"
Since food is the item they "sell" to those in need, by charging a fee by refusing to meet their needs until a specific commercial is listened to, they should be charged a business tax.
Posted by: Schaum
________________

So, you would be satisfied if these Christian organizations paid taxes? Would take resolve the problem? No more griping about Christians taking their message with them when they deliver food and medical care?

"What should we as a society do to people who think like this?"

Since food is the item they "sell" to those in need, by charging a fee by refusing to meet their needs until a specific commercial is listened to, they should be charged a business tax.

To the idiots who are ignorant of American history, here's Jefferson's letter to the Baptists at Danbury acknowledging their support for Separation of Church and State.

If you can understand the letter, he is NOT a believer of evolution, idiots, as he called God as the CREATOR of man.

Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists
The Final Letter, as Sent

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

BELIEVING WITH YOU that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or PROHIBITING the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and CREATOR of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

I'm well aware that not all Christians, perhaps not even most Christians, agree with him, but that mindset is there for a lot of the gorups that send out missionaries. Their primary purpose is to convert the "heathens," feeding them is a secondary priority.
________________________

What is the solution for people with mindsets like this? What should we as a society do to people who think like this? How can we deal with people who want to do charity work but link it to a message? Should we ban them altogether? Should we take away their right to speak? Should we punish them for mixing their charity work with a message? Should we forbid them the right to do charity work? Should we incarcerate people who think like this? Should we put duct tape over their mouths when they are distributing food or tending wounds? How can we stop them from talking about their faith? Please give us the solution.

And yet the Christian charities are discriminating against the voudou practitioners for aid. Or forcing people to listen to a sermon before feeding them.
When I donated, I made sure that it was to non-sectarian organizations like Doctors Without Borders or Mercy Corps.
Posted by: Athena
_______________

Origin of the word "Mercy" - Mercy is not something that can be bought or sold, but the word mercy is derived from Latin merces, which means "the price paid for something", "wages", "reward", or "recompense". The roots of what is now the primary sense of mercy are to be found in the Latin of Christian writers of the 6th century, who begain to use merces for the spiritual reward that comes from kindness to those who do not necessarily have a claim to such mercy and from whom no recompense is to be expected.

So, the poster's disdain for Christian organizations, and contribution to anything other than Christian, goes to an organization that has its name rooted in a term specific Christianity. The poster probably didn't know that. It is God's mercy to us in Jesus Christ that offers Redemption to fallen/accursed/sinful man.

Maybe we should simply have all Haiti relief be paid for by we the secularist US taxpayers eliminating all the problems with religious, evangelizing "do-gooders"?
Posted by: YEAL9
________________

That sounds good. Our local Methodist and Presbyterian Churches need to know so that they can take the $344, 715 and $409,000 that they have just collected and do something else with it. Maybe they can send their children to summer camp.

Because of the Constitution, the federal government of the USA is definitely secular. We the taxpayers/citizens of the USA are therefore secularists when we assist those in need with our federal tax dollars...posted by a someone in need of help....
_____________________

This is an example of extremely flawed logic. It is the kind of thinking that makes the reader wonder about the mental health of the one posting. Is the poster capable of rational thinking? Evidently not.

For those that missed classes in Civics and US History, here's a refresher. It was the illustrious Thomas Jefferson that referred to the 1st Ammendment as effectively creating a wall of separation between Church and State.

He was no lover of organized religion in the halls of congress. As for his religious views, see the Jefferson Bible.

More education = less stupidity later in life. And don't forget those important science classes that teach the fundamentals of evolutionary theory.

Otherwise, children may never learn that they share a common ancestor with other hominids i.e. the great apes.

Without the proper eduction, they may come to believe the myth that their ancestors Adam and Eve appeared fully formed one fine day in the Garden of Eden, committed the sin of aquiring knowledge, and were thus comdemned by a mortally offended and childishly vengeful fathergod to a miserable life everafter.

Early education can't be overemphasized!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state

"Ms. Jacoby,
For your next article, write about World Vision. I've met two people who worked in different parts of Africa and claimed that World Vision wouldn't feed the children unless they listed to the Christian message first. In addition, if you look at one of their job postings overseas, a person has to profess their Christianity. This organization receives huge amounts of US federal tax dollars. Anyway, please do a story about them, too."
Posted by: mmreay

Mmreay, I find your charges upsetting. I have done pro-bono work for World Vision, and considered it a charitable act. Through this work (mostly print and web design assistance) I met quite a few people employed by World Vision. They seemed to be genuine, caring folks. I can't imagine any of them demanding anyone in need listen to the pitch or go without assistance. However, I have been wrong before.

It would be disappointing to discover your charges are correct, and I would definitely want to look for another group to donate my time to. Do you have any specific evidence you can post?

mtlyorel, all of your points are well-made, with the possible exception of the last one. Remember, the vast majority of people are affiliated with a religion. Sheer weight of numbers mean that the majority of charitable organizations will be religious. Several posters have cited a number of secular organizations that are involved in the relief effort. I won't bother to repeat the information here.

I think you're right that people need to calm down. We really know very little. I, personally, believe (with no more grounding in fact than anyone else) that these folks were well-intended, but simply did not believe that they needed to follow all the rules of Haitian "inferior" society, that because of their good intentions, God would clear the way. And I think the Haitian government is upset at having it's dysfunction displayed for all the world to see, and has latched on to a convenient scapegoat. A bad situation for all concerned.

Perhaps it would be wise for all here to remember that most belief-systems discourage judgmental behavior, (perhaps because we generally stink at making such judgments,) and let the judicial process take its course. Unlike the nonsense one poster made up, they won't be executed. They most likely won't be imprisoned. The U.S. still has massive influence. And, perhaps this can be a learning experience about the need for humility and hubris of belief for us all.

Yeals wrote "Because of the Constitution, the federal government of the USA is definitely secular."

Separation of Church and State was put forward by Christians so that the government do not interfere with religion.

America was a deeply religious country right from the start.

Why are atheists so idiotic and ignorant? They don't seem to understand that those traits will lead them to their downfall.

"A great downfall" in the words of Jesus.

Reading the posts of many atheists here, you get a glimpse of what kind of people Sodom has before it was burned to dust.

You get to understand also why communist states are ruthless. Atheists act like wild dogs that need to be caged.

I truly hope that there will be a law that would ship all atheists here to North Korea. There's no religion and God there so there's no question that they won't fit.

At least that would save parts of America from the burning.

China and the U.S. relationship is souring. Just in time to the few years that I've been saying when Doomsday is coming.

In just a few years, Jacoby and her ilk would be shouting in unison for help burning in an eternal fire, and guess what? No help is coming.

Something to keep in mind:

Because of the Constitution, the federal government of the USA is definitely secular. We the taxpayers/citizens of the USA are therefore secularists when we assist those in need with our federal tax dollars.

And we secularist taxpayers are doing our share in Haiti.

From: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2010-01-27-Haiti-aid_N.htm

"Less than two weeks after President Obama announced an initial $100 million for Haiti earthquake relief, U.S. government spending on the disaster has tripled to $379 million at the latest count. That's just over $1 each from everyone in the United States. (Actually there are 128 million taxpayers in the USA so make that about $3 per taxpayer going for Haiti relief so far).

Then there is this added secularist bonus:

"The House of Representatives has unanimouly passed H.R. 4462 on January 20 — legislation that allows individuals who make charitable contributions to victims of last week's earthquake in Haiti to claim an itemized deduction on their 2009 tax return instead of waiting until 2010. "

Maybe we should simply have all Haiti relief be paid for by we the secularist US taxpayers eliminating all the problems with religious, evangelizing "do-gooders"?

@Alex 511

I think - and this goes to the majority of people who have posted here - you guys have been drinking the politically-correct cool-aid far too long.

In response:

1. No there is no evidence that has been brought up in court, not yet. 'Caught traffiking' is what the police alleges.

2. Any lawyer will tell you that a pattern of past action or behaviour especially that of a criminal act is important in taking into consideration what is the intent.

3. Agree. Laura S should have run a bona fide agency before coming to Haiti. Same logic, the Haitian government should have been a government of good standing and of good governance to have had social programs and facilities in place to take care of its people decades ago.

And if we use the same logic, all aid agencies and aid personnel should have waited for the Haitian government to give them documentation and stamp of approval - in writing - before allowing any aid or aid personnel to flow into Haiti.

And all rescuers and medical doctors should have applied for entry visa. And the aid and medical supplies should have been tested by the Haitian government labs before being distributed.

And all the medical personnel should first be certified by the Haitian medical board to determine their qualifications. Haiti needs to determine if foreign medical credentials are on par with the standards of the Haitian medical board before allowing foreign doctors to practice medicine in Haiti.

4. A lifetime of trauma being taken to a foreign land?!? So all adopted kids in the US are suffering from a lifetime of trauma...

5. Don't try to inflame the discussion by deliberately bringing the Islam religion and Muslims into play. This shows your own prejudice. The Agah Khan foundation does a lot of charitable work.

And no, the hypothetical is preposterous and not at all germane to the discussion. First of all, the US is more than capable of taking care of its citizens from the 9th ward (theoretically yes). Comparing US and Haiti is laughable.

Furthermore, half of Haiti was destroyed. The destruction by a hurricane is categorically different from that of a undulating wave earthquake of the magnitude 8.5 with continuous very strong aftershocks.

6. Do you have any proof that they were indeed trafficking children?? Any money changed hands?? Any contract or documentation pointed to this fact?? Pretty stupid for any trafficker to transport 30 children in broad daylight in a bus and to pass through Haiti immigration at the border...

7. Look, they will have their day in court. Until they are proven to have committed a crime, we should reserve judgement. No one knows the complete story.

For all the complaints against Christian aid agencies, where are all the secular agencies?? Seems like there are more religious aid agencies in Haiti...

Doomsday is coming. It's a pity that these people will self-destruct. But God is wise. If they don't self-destruct then life on earth with be filled with idiots for a very long time.

These Baptist fanatics and their actions in Haiti show they are kindred spirits with Scott Roeder, who murdered a doctor who performed abortions. They all believe that they can ignore the law as it suits them. Call them what they are: common criminals.

Even tackier than the Idaho child-kidnappers is the group - Samaritan's Purse, maybe? - that's giving thousands of solar-powered, glow-in-the-dark Bibles to the Haitians to read. Yeah, because they don't need food, water, shelter, or medical care - they need to read the Bible!

And yet the Christian charities are discriminating against the voudou practitioners for aid. Or forcing people to listen to a sermon before feeding them.

When I donated, I made sure that it was to non-sectarian organizations like Doctors Without Borders or Mercy Corps.

...not to burst your bubble, but the international red cross is a christian organization, along with the red crescent and magen david adom (red star of david) Posted by: johnqpublic1

Despite the existence of decidedly non-Christian religiously-based iterations of the Red Cross symbol (which is apparently simply a reversal of the colors of the Swiss national flag), the organization couldn't seem to be more secular in its mission.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Red_Cross_and_Red_Crescent_Movement

What is even more atrocious by this "Christian act of charity" is that they took these kids to the Dominican Republic, their Leader Limbaugh's vacation-land notorious for child trafficking and little boy sex trade without regard to what will happen to them after they return to their Happy Valley in Idaho.

What, in God's name, were they thinking when they took children who had not only parents but phone numbers for their parents? Huckabee "Christians" are WAY OUT OF LINE on this one and can only punt with lame excuses in the name of poor old Jesus.

OMBUDSMAN WROTE:

The reality is that the most effective charities in the world are Christian based.

---------------------------------------
Ummmmm? Where did you pull that one out from?

So if Pakistai Muslims converged on Boise after and earthquake there and "only trying to do good" scooped up white American children there and took them back to Canada to teach them the love of Allah, would you Huckabee "Christians" make the same lame excuses for them?

The Baptist group violated international law, but since they are already in lock-step with their Lord Cheney, they automatically have the God given right he claimed to "get around the law"

Schaum

This is in reply to your citation from one of Timmy's posts.

In posting my ideas, I am stream-of-consciousness-ing; my thoughts are bubbling up from within, and not really well thought out in advance. In reading your replies, and then replying to you, it is helping me to work out my thoughts. For example, my choice of the words "artful judgement" might not be right; I will try to think of another way to say it.

In specific reply to you, I am not promoting any kind of theism, and I am not objecting to objective and scientific thought, so I cannot see anything in Timmy's post to disagree with.

In a more general reply to you, I am not seeking to define any kind of formal philosophy of truth and knowledge. Whenever I read the writings of real philosophers, I get an ice-cream headache, and have a difficult time following. What I am really trying to do is figure out what is truth and knowledge for the everyman who may not be a philosopher, but who is just trying to get along and understand these things while living a busy life.

After saying all of that, I would further say:

Truth is what actually is.

Knowledge is a reflection of truth, in our minds.

Belief is the acceptance of knowledge that is true, but can also be the acceptance "facts" and principles which are not true, and can also be the accpetance of speculations, and hopes that may not necesarily be true. In other words, belief is the disordered and mangled meaning that human beings attribute to truth and knowledge.

Thank God these children weren't allowed to be rescued.

Clearly they're better off just wandering around starving to death.

The reality is that the most effective charities in the world are Christian based. That what these folks did was probably the best thing for the kids.

But hey, at least your whining is entertaining. Did you stomp your feet as you typed?

I have a feeling that I must be the biggest cynic of all. If this leader of the group was experiencing so much debt isnt it also possible that in her "great religious zeal" she saw the opportunity to have these "orphans" (which many were not) adopted to Christian parents for a fee? -- clearly of course only to cover her COSTS. I am not as convinced that this person was just arrogant or misguided in her deep beliefs. I wonder at exploitation and the darker side.

Prossers7...not to burst your bubble, but the international red cross is a christian organization, along with the red crescent and magen david adom (red star of david)

One has to hope that the Haitians shoot these invaders. What insane Christian goop!

Hooray for Susan Jacoby! I love it when people stick it to the Xtians and their insane piety.

Why isn't this woman on the front page? Or, failing that, on the editorial page above Will and Krauthaamer?

Gimpi,

I read the essay you gave me the link to. To say I was revolted to the core is to say it too politely. Apparently the battle lines are being drawn.

I am guessing that the orphanages in Haiti have been devestated. I am guessing that alot of the people who operate, sponsor, and run the orphanages have been injured or even killed. And I know there are lots more orphans now than before the earthquake.

After emergency health care, and food assistance, what Haiti needs most is help with the orphanages and the orphans. People who would offer assistance in this would probably be welcome. In addition to getting the existing orphanage back to normalcy, they need the construction of new orphanages, lots of them.

Then, after all of the status of the homeless children and orphans has been sorted out, I am sure that people will be allowed to adopt them. Some of the people will be Christians from America, but probably not very many.

God, save us from your people. The problems we have aren't with those who don't do as their God commands. It's with those who do what they want because they say it's what their God wants, whether it's flying planes into buildings, blowing up airplanes, or scooping up dazed orphans on the pretext of saving them. In the Haiti case, some of those kids weren't even orphans!

Yikes, people! Simmer down!

You on the left: Please remember that many, many Christian charities proclaim their faith in God and then go and do good, charitable work without requiring any sort of 'conversion' or 'belief' whatsoever.

You on the right: Christianity is not the end-all be-all of perfection, so get over yourselves. If Christianity helps you to be the best person you can be, then more power to you - but you must be terribly threatened or insecure in your religion if you have to foist Christ on everyone else, too, to prove that you're better. Live and let live, why don't you?

Susan you really aren't qualified to comment about those 10 church people who have been arrested in Haiti. You don't understand the Christian faith because you have never lived it. Let me first say that there is truth in your column, but it is a narrow truth that speaks of only one kind of Christianity. Some Christians are motivated by self. There are others who suffer more than they gain, not because they want to get into Heaven, they already have a life sustaining connection with God. But because God has grown in them the kind of love that attempts to place others above themselves. I would be willing to bet that some of those arrested are that kind of Christian. And the truth is that life in Haiti was so bad even before recent events, that some parents were giving their children away to live in America. I think if you had to live in those kinds of conditions you might have more sympathy for those who were trying to give the 30 children a better life. Maybe the way they went about it was wrong. But life in Haiti has been wrong for a long time. As a Christian I don't give charity. I don't think of others as less than myself. I just grieve for those who suffer. And hope that somehow even through my sinful self, I can bring some hope and love into the world.

monty keeling

I have never read Ms Jacoby's work before so I am surprised at her animosity towards these people of faith. They may have acted illegally or hastily or naively, but there is only Ms Jacoby's opinion that they acted to impose their God upon others. Charity by a religious group does not equal imposition of belief. It seems that Ms Jacoby wants no one in America to have a religious belief structure. However, our country founded to establish that freedom and long may it prevail. Ms Jacoby's intolerance is disturbing and eclipses any other thoughts she has to offer.

ALEX511,

They might have swooped, but they did not sneak, in fact they had an orphanage lined up to take these kids. These kids were in an orphanage to begin with that was destroyed by the quake.

Things are really bad in Haiti, Did you see the news coverage of flies buzzing around those children's heads. No electricity, no communications, no "Is this really an orphan investigation agency."

When I heard these people were arrested I thought the American people will not stand for this. These folks dropped everything to go help the Haitians in their time of need are arrested by a corrupt government.

And to my surprise, all I can find in the media is a snarky column bashing them for their efforts because they are Christians, and a bunch of accompaning Christian bashing comments.

Unreal!!

Cornbread2:

"Virtuous? That seems open to question."

Right. Lets not forget that Washington and Jefferson, among others, and while married, indulged repeatedly in sexual union with their slave women, producing offspring. Benjamin Franklin's behavior, while ambassador to France, was so scandalous (to the French, no less!) that he was nearly thrown out of the country. Good christer morality, fresh from the founding fathers.

Having been raised in Virginia, I am familiar with the Southern Baptists. The Baptist Church is a congregational church, meaning that they are not connected to each other by any business, political, or even theological bonds; they meet once a year in a convention, The Southern Baptist Convention, which is just that, a convention, where they socialize, party, and discuss the crises of the day like abortion and the gays. Each Baptist Church is a little island, and you may encounter one that is as nutty as a fruit cake, and then the next one will seem ok.

I have also been to Idaho, which I call the land of the backslid Mormons. I suspect some of the Southern Baptists in Idaho are Mormon apostates, who have been cast out by being a little too enthusiastically Mormon, and who have alit in a different religious setting. I can only imagine what kind of mania these people suffer under, but by trying to sneak Haitian children out of the country, I think they ahve given us a glimpse.

Of Susan's essay, I took special note of the following:

"The only volunteers who ought to be headed for Haiti right now are doctors, nurses, experienced givers of child care, and workers who know how to build houses, sewers, and an electrical grid. Anyone else is a nuisance."

"Nuisance" is a very good word. Because poor Haiti is literally hobbled by this disaster, I suspect that these people will not be prosecuted. They will probably be deported back to the United States, where they will be let go. I do not put them in the same catgory as real "kidnappers" but rather Susan's word "nuisance" describes them, exactly.

arminius3142, Thanks for the complement. You might want to check out the thread on this cite regarding a Baptist pastor's upset at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, long noted for harassment of non-Christians, finally acknowledging (and providing worship space for) Pagan service members. His opinions, and some of the ones supporting him, are almost unbelievable. Here's the link.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2010/02/air_force_academys_pagan_mistake.html

America at the time of the Revolution was extremely religious and Protestant. They were a virtuous people, and their legacy provided us with a firm foundation. -- ladyliberty1

I often wonder how many of the Founders were slave holders. And, of course, they were all living on land formerly occupied by native Americans. Religious? Certainly. Virtuous? That seems open to question.

But thanks for responding.

Quinn and Meacham have given up all pretense of this being a forum for faith. It is a forum to bash Christianity and America,, was so even before the Atheist took it over

Ladyliberty1

Please take no offence, but I think that if I would be forced to endure your rude and disrespectful sarcasm in person, it would be very difficult to keep from spitting in your face. Are you trying to test Jesus's instruction, "turn the other cheek" by being as obnoxious as you possibly can be? I do not think that was his intent.

This walk of a Christian that you speak of does not seem to describe you, as you have posted here. Your comments have been almost without exception, snide, sardcastic, and haughty.

Where do you get any instruction from Jesus to be a sarcastic and snide heckler?

If you have something serious to say, then just say. Otherwise, please leave.

(Just excercising my freedom of speech, as you are yours).

DITLD:

" I guarentee your bitter nasty rancor only diminishes the reputation of Christianity even more, and you, personally, are driving even more people away."

It is entirely possible that this is "her" intent.

Thank you for a well written and thought provoking commentary on the folly of these missionaries. They may mean well, but they are often just mean.

LEPIDOPT:

"Lady Liberty, get off your high horse before you get a nose bleed."

I'd say she has been bleeding for a while, but from another orifice.

This is just too ripe an opportunity for some rightwing republican politician to pass up. They'll "rescue" these people from Haitian justice. You wonder who'll be the first, Palin, Gingrich, Boehner?

It reminds me of the comment I got one day from a beggar on the street. I asked if he couldn't be fed at a religious organization, and he rolled his eyes and said, "only if I sit through a half-hour sermon first." And that's from a man who grew up with evangelical Christianity..posted by THMAS
___________________________
There is a saying that is apropos in this case: "Beggars can't be choosey."
He wasn't hungry enough, was he?
Posted by: ladyliberty1

So a hungry man doesn't deserve to be given bread simply because he is hungry? He must be preached at first?

Prossers7:

"Name the top five atheist charities. Uh-huh..."

I can't speak for my fellow atheists, but my personal top five are:

People For The American Way
American Civil Liberties Union
The Red Cross
Doctors Without Borders
Amnesty International

I also give to Project Peanut Butter, and the Human Rights Campaign.

Sue me.

Lady Liberty, get off your high horse before you get a nose bleed.

No one is saying that it's wrong for Christians or anyone else, for that matter, to offer a hungry person bread.
What's wrong is to make the offer of bread simply as bait to get that person to convert to your religion.
I have HEARD certain evengelists say, "It's useless to give a poor child a pair of shoes if you don't also give him the gospel. If you don't give him the gospel, he just has a new pair of shoes to wear to hell."
I have also heard this same evangelist say, "It is MORE important to give a hungry man the gospel than to give him bread."
I'm well aware that not all Christians, perhaps not even most Christians, agree with him, but that mindset is there for a lot of the gorups that send out missionaries. Their primary purpose is to convert the "heathens," feeding them is a secondary priority.

As for this particular group of Baptists, they attempted to take children across a national border without documentation showing that they had legal custody of these children. They had NOTHING to prove that they weren't attempting to kidnap these children. In a country where child trafficking is a major problem, that's a HUGE red flag. The authorities had every right to detain them.

OK, so what if I am a Buddhist and don't believe in a Christian God? Or what if I am a Muslim and believe in a God called Allah? Or an atheist? Am I then suppose to be condemned to rot in hell unless you "save me." The arrogance of so-called Christians is unbelievable. And, apparently that same arrogance thinks nothing of going to another country, grabbing kids off the street, and trying to spirit them away out of that country. Fools say, yes but the living conditions are so deplorable in Haiti. OK, but what does that matter? You still cannot take the law into your own hands and kidnap children. Not only that, who even knows what these Idaho missionaries were trying to do? Perhaps they were going to "sell" the kids to families back in Idaho to raise money for their church. Or worse.
Rich kids or poor kids, kidnapping is still kidnapping, and it's a crime. A felony in the United States. As well it should be.

ladyliberty1:
A hypothetical for you:
If you were granted unlimited power and could permanently change our Constitution in any way you wanted, would you make Christianity the official religion of our country?
Posted by: cornbread
_______________________

No, absolutely not. The Founding Fathers definitely got it right. There should be no established religion by government. Our forefathers fled the Old World because they wanted the freedom to worship. They knew the oppression of state established religion.

I would not change the Constitution. There are none wiser today than our Founding Fathers were when they wrote our exceptional Constitution.

America at the time of the Revolution was extremely religious and Protestant. They were a virtuous people, and their legacy provided us with a firm foundation. Benjamin Franklin said, our government was established for a virtuous people. Without a virtuous people, laws must increase, and freedoms are lost.

Christianity is about individual freedom. Each person is set free from his/her sins when he/she trusts in Jesus Christ for Salvation. Individually, we are accountable to God. The walk of a Christian should reflect His walk with Lord. We should walk as He walked. This produces men and women with virtues of honesty, integrity, transparency, responsibility, all of which produces a society wherein there is peace and order and subsequent prosperity. OTOH, when a society is dishonest, lacks integrity, lacks transparency, needs laws to keep one honest, there is distrust, and society suffers with increased laws that cause oppression and loss of freedom and less prosperity.

Spidermean2 says:
"This mirrors the stupidity of Obama administration and the Haiti government. If these people are not told the right thing to do, the 10 missionaries would end up in the death chambers."

I'm sorry but what has this git to do with President Obama's administration??

What "people" are you referring to to be told what to do? Are you speaking of the sovereign nation of Haiti? You know they have laws and courts as well. It is this kind of hubris that got these morons into the trouble they are in.

I am still waiting to see an atheist charity rescuing children in Haiti.

Spidermean2 says:
"This mirrors the stupidity of Obama administration and the Haiti government. If these people are not told the right thing to do, the 10 missionaries would end up in the death chambers."

That's the thing: they were told. They knew, and have admitted, that they did not have the proper paperwork.

What's more, the group's leader, Silsby, is a thief and a liar. She's facing 8 civil cases in the US, her house is in foreclosure, and she has a history of failing to pay her employees the wages they were promised.

I wonder how much profit is in the adoption industry for the person arranging the union? Just how much money did Ms. Silsby stand to make from the resale (and that is what this adoption scam is, selling children) of these thirty-three children?

Name the top five atheist charities. Uh-huh...

I hope the Haitian courts send them away for a very long time.

Their action in trying to STEAL these children was not only illegal but immoral and arrogant.

At a time when your fellow humans are in dire need all you can do is try to take their children away from them to convert them!!! That is low! Maybe every religion needs to go in their to get new converts now that the Haitian people are desperate and destitute.

And for those saying they will not donate to Haiti, you can go choke on your donation!! There are Thousands of people ready to provide honest, genuine assistance for every one of your kind!!!

Hi, Gimpi and Daniel ITLD,

Thanks to both of you for good replies to the so-called 'Ladyliberty'. For sure, she is neither a lady nor aware of the nature of liberty. I am seriously wondering what planet she is from, as well as what her religion might be - it is not Christianity.

If there is a God, a heaven and a hell then I wonder how smug all those dead atheists are? Posted by: JCM-51

No discussion On Faith would be complete without the implied threat of eternal torment at the hands of an all-merciful and all-loving god.

I don't see this as a problem with religious charities per se as much as a problem with "cultural paternalists", which can be found on both the left and the right and in both religious and non-religious organizations.

Their basic assumption is that they are "improving your life" by stripping you of your free will and allowing you to partake in their own supposedly superior culture.

This is no different than if a group of wealthy Upper West Siders from Manhattan went down to Mississippi to liberate babies and bring them back to New York City so they could bask in the glow of cultured Manhattan rather than be "stuck" in the Mississippi mud with their actual parents in their actual homes.

Different geography, same basic smug sanctimonious busybody mindset. The religious element is superfluous at best.

Posted by: spidermean2
“This is the problem with Jacoby. She's a fool tasked to critique something she's ignorant of.
Imagine a place where 20 million people think exactly like Jacoby. There is one such place and it's called North Korea.
Stupidity is self-destructive. One day when Susan needs help, no Christian would help this woman. It will happen in the afterlife.
This woman would be shouting for help for eternity and no hlep would arrive. SAD.”
*********************************************************************************
Jacoby likely knows more about the “Bible” and Christianity than you do.
Few statements could be more foolish and downright stupid than yours about 20,000,000 North Koreans who think “exactly” like Jacoby.
I strongly suspect that her sense of ethics and concern for human beings is far superior to yours.
She . . . and none of the rest of us will be “shouting for help for eternity”. Once you are dead, you are dead . . . Period. That applies to Hitler and all Popes, Kings, you and indeed all humans and other mammals! People who believe that they have communicated with ghosts are either on LSD, or are charlatans, or just ignorant and gullible, like the fools who watch (and actually believe?) SiFy channel’s “Ghost Hunters”.

An atheist opining on faith is like a self-licking ice cream cone. An atheist has no faith, simply a smug self assurance that there is no God, no aferlife. If there is a God, a heaven and a hell then I wonder how smug all those dead atheists are?

These missionaries were certainly impetuous -- they should have gone through the legal system. Perhaps they simply didn't think it necessary since the country is so torn up by the disaster. Who knows. They were a bit naive. However, my criticism of your opinion piece is in your hasty generalizations (logical fallacies) in painting all Christians in such bad, broad strokes. They were well-meaning and well-intentioned. The parents of these Haitian children who relinquished their children wanted to give them a better life. These missionaries wanted to give orphans a better life. Sure, they should have done it better, but that doesn't make them loathsome, arrogant 'zealots' because they didn't go through the proper channels nor does it take away from the fact that there are many Christian charity orgs which do great work in poor, impoverished countries.

I despise "missionaries". Nothing angers me more than a do-gooder who does good in the name of his god. And, no entity on the planet has demolished beautiful cultures faster than the "christian" missionary.

You can parse words and argue that these people are not missionaries ... and, you would be deluding yourself. Nothing is more important to religion then converts and nothing is more important to a missionary than brainwashing someone into believing that their deity is the "right" god. These people are no more interested in rescuing children than they are in helping the poor in their own neighborhood. They only care about exploiting the emotions of people in dire need to build their membership.

Missionaries are terrorists by another name ... and, it boils down to the sales pitch ... doesn't it?

"There is a saying that is apropos in this case: 'Beggars can't be choosey.'
He wasn't hungry enough, was he?"
Posted by: ladyliberty1

Well, if Christian charity is personified by you, ladyliberty1, it is neither charitable or Christian. And you, madam, are no lady. Nor do you understand the meaning of liberty. For your future information, liberty means people following their own beliefs, not conforming to yours. Also, the quote I believe you mean is "Beggars can't be choosers." A small point, I know, but I try to get things right

To let anyone, child, adult, man, or woman, suffer hunger, pain or want while you have it in your power to relieve it, to force them to conform to your views, is frankly despicable. Charity is given to comfort the one recieving it, not to congratulate the giver.

I think these ten missionaries were well intentioned. I'm sure those in relief organizations who try to pressure suffering, confused people into a religious conversion have good intentions. and we know the road good intentions can put you on.

Christians should not stand idly by. Except for their help on children, they should stop all help towards Haiti until the Haitian government is reformed.

The teaching of Christ is to leave the 99 to save the lost one. We can't turn a blind eye on this stupidity.

Dear Ladyliberty1

What an obnoxious bag of wind you are!

Are you really a Christian? If so, Jesus Christ doesn't seem to be doing you any good.

Just keep telling us what a good person you are; otherwise, no one would know.

Is this little schtick you're running designed to get Christian converts? Because, I guarentee your bitter nasty rancor only diminishes the reputation of Christianity even more, and you, personally, are driving even more people away.

It reminds me of the comment I got one day from a beggar on the street. I asked if he couldn't be fed at a religious organization, and he rolled his eyes and said, "only if I sit through a half-hour sermon first." And that's from a man who grew up with evangelical Christianity..posted by THMAS
___________________________

There is a saying that is apropos in this case: "Beggars can't be choosey."

He wasn't hungry enough, was he?

Ms. Jacoby,
For your next article, write about World Vision. I've met two people who worked in different parts of Africa and claimed that World Vision wouldn't feed the children unless they listed to the Christian message first. In addition, if you look at one of their job postings overseas, a person has to profess their Christianity. This organization receives huge amounts of US federal tax dollars. Anyway, please do a story about them, too.
Posted by: mmreay
__________________

How dare these people require children to listen to a message before they feed them. I say bring back the guillotine! Off with their heads!

Furthermore, a Christian organization should have no business requiring one to profess their faith! What are they thinking???

Yes, Ms. Jacoby, please do intensive investigative research. In an organization of thousands, with a long history of service, and many millions of dollars to be looked at, surely there is some discrepancy somewhere.

Oh, and, could you take a closer look than you did when researching our President's background before he was elected?

kimmsr,

You are an idiot. Read the whole paragraph and not just one sentence.

Cornbread:

"If you were granted unlimited power and could permanently change our Constitution in any way you wanted, would you make Christianity the official religion of our country?"

I understand the point you are making, and my answer of course is "no". However, if I had unlimited power, which (thank mythical god) I do not, I would not need the constitution which would, in fact impede me, and I would simply ignore it rather than change it. What would be the point?

"One day when Susan needs help, no Christian would help this woman"
Ah, but that woul not be what Christ taught us, would it.
Many things have been done over the years in Christ name that were, and are, not christian. Many people, grossly misinterpreting what has been written in the Bible, have given the rest of those of us that try to follow the teachings of Jesus a bad name, and many people that should know better paint all of us with a that broad brush of misinformation.
"Love the Lord your god with all your heart, mind and soil, and love youyr neighbor as yourself" is what Jesus taught, as did Moses, Samuel, Isiah, Ezekial, Amos, Mathew, Mark, Luke, John,Paul, and many others.

I said it before that just to highlight the stupidity of the Obama administration, these 10 Americans may end up in the death chamber.

There was a news item in which a young boy was called to the principal's office for playing with a 2 inch plastic lego gun. If it were not for the smart parent, the child would have end up suspended for days.

This mirrors the stupidity of Obama administration and the Haiti government. If these people are not told the right thing to do, the 10 missionaries would end up in the death chambers.

Jacoby, these are the kind of people you describe you are. IDIOTS to the highest degree. Blind and crazy.

You don't know the mind of God. He's the most unmerciful to the merciless. Prepare for that day.

Although you made some valid points but your Godless attitude makes the article an attacking vehicle on all Christians. Christians are not perfect, we are sinners saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and because some of us have acted illegally does not mean that all Christians act illegally in doing charity. As an American with roots in Africa, I thank God for the Baptists that came to my native country in the mid 18th Century. Because of them, my grandparents were converted and they handed that to my parents who in turn early on started to take me to Baptish Churches and schools. I am a saved soul today and had quality education in the process.

If there was a "god", this type of action by a delusional group from the U.S. of Arrogance would never have happened. TFL, Ken

I lived in NC town for 21 years in which a large seminary was located. The clueless arrogance of most of them was beyond belief. The seminary wanted to sell some of their land to build a Walmart, but with sentiments in town running high against the superstore, it was voted down by the town board. In a childish response, the seminary clear-cut acres of beautiful pine and oak trees.
Once, a lay preacher told me that my Catholic freind, a fireman who died running into the second tower on 9-11, was not going to heaven because he was Catholic.
What color is the sky on their planet?
Another time, the head of the seminar was quoted in a newspaper that "the town had graciously offered to donate a road to the seminary so it could be turned into a parking lot". When later told that the town could not donate state property he threatened to replace the entire town board in the next election.

Donald Trump tries to take your kids. He tells you he makes more money than you and can give them a better life. He says he is doing God's will.

Difference between that and the case of the Idaho Baptists in Haiti?

There are people who call themselves Christians but are NOT Christians. I suspect the leader of the group may not be a true Christian but his companions are.

This is the problem with Jacoby. She's a fool tasked to critique something she's ignorant of.

Imagine a place where 20 million people think exactly like Jacoby. There is one such place and it's called North Korea.

Stupidity is self-destructive. One day when Susan needs help, no Christian would help this woman. It will happen in the afterlife.

This woman would be shouting for help for eternity and no hlep would arrive. SAD.

Ms. Jacoby,

For your next article, write about World Vision. I've met two people who worked in different parts of Africa and claimed that World Vision wouldn't feed the children unless they listed to the Christian message first. In addition, if you look at one of their job postings overseas, a person has to profess their Christianity. This organization receives huge amounts of US federal tax dollars. Anyway, please do a story about them, too.

WOW! You are one unhappy lady.

AMEN, sister!

Wow, methinks many of the posters protest too much.

The original comment made a valid point: some Christian charities, especially missionary ones, cloak themselves in astonishing hubris in countries where they are really clueless. And despite some of the snide comments here, this is a particular failing of Christian charities, because some consider themselves "elect."

It reminds me of the comment I got one day from a beggar on the street. I asked if he couldn't be fed at a religious organization, and he rolled his eyes and said, "only if I sit through a half-hour sermon first." And that's from a man who grew up with evangelical Christianity.

Much as you (and Spanish royalty in 1492) may think you have a precious gift to convey to the heathen, the fact is that many of the heathen -- and in Haiti, they're principally Catholic -- don't want it, and believe that their basic human needs should trump your selfish desire to be a "savior."

From the news accounts, it does appear as if 1) the leader of this group is a charlatan, 2)m ost of the kids were taken from loving families with the full knowledge of someone in this group, and 3) the group as a whole seemed more interested in "saving innocent souls" -- prefereably at an adoptable age -- than in helping fellow human beings who had just endured a terrible tragedy.

Haiti is entitled to defend itself from what appears to be exploitation by this sort of disaster groupie. And the United States should try to discourage this coffee klatch arrogance by its citizens, it does neither us nor the Haitians any good.

Have you been to those countries? Would you want to live in any of those countries? Poverty, death, and destruction, oppression, lack of freedom....if you think those countries are models for other nations to aspire to, then you have a distorted perspective.

posted by ladyliberty1

========

So, to how many of the listed countries have you been? Another list of countries meeting some or all of the criteria you cite for being undesirable in which to reside would be the Philippines, Zaire, Haiti, Guatemala, Rwanda, Uganda (a nation contemplating a law to execute gays), Serbia and Peru. The majority of the populations of all of these countries claim to be Christian. This list is not all inclusive. Muslims do not have a monopoly on ignorance, hatred, prejudice, etc. as Christians do not have a monopoly on knowledge, love, enlightenment, etc. The Christian nations, i.e., nation in which the majority claim to be adherents, that are socially progressive and provide for personal freedom don't owe this distinction to the predominate religion of the nation, but, rather, to the fact they are secular democracies, which is galling to fundamentalists, Christain as well as Muslim.

"I have always been troubled by the exaltation of paternalistic charity in general and Christian charity in particular"

I'm curious as to Ms. Jacoby's opinion of the paternalistic welfare system administered by state and federal governments. Is she troubled by that as well or is she perfectly okay with a paternalistic government?

ladyliberty1:

A hypothetical for you:

If you were granted unlimited power and could permanently change our Constitution in any way you wanted, would you make Christianity the official religion of our country?

@barferio:

I didn't know your feelings were so easily hurt. If you read her article, she's painting with a broad brush. Nobody in their right mind feels that 10 folks shouldn't be held accountable. But then again, nobody in their right mind takes their isolated actions and applies them to all Christian charity in the way that Jacoby does. If you'd read, and understood, her writing, you'd get that - I'm sorry it's such a tall order to ask you to do so.

Take the following sentence of hers: "The problem with the charity of missionaries, whether Christian or non-Christian, has always been that it comes with religious strings." This is patently incorrect to anyone who actually knows the first thing about what most Christian charities do. But when Jacoby says it, her idiot sheep nod their heads as if it's canon. Anyone who believes her lies deserves their own resultant bigotry.

Then again, if your reasoning is anything like your grasp of basic English, it's no wonder you don't quite get why Jacoby's writing is so rhetorically flawed. She's lying to you - it's your own fault that you're buying it. Christians aren't perfect (duh), but their imperfections can be portrayed without resorting to dishonesty. It's too bad that she, and you, can't quite get to that point.

This incident reminds me so much of the Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver, seemingly well-intentioned American missionaries who completely disrespect the culture of those they profess to help. Wonderful book! Except in this case, as more details emerge, I'm beginning to doubt that this group was well-intentioned and honest.

What biggotry. Perhaps, these Christians in Haiti broke the law. We have to wait until due process is applied, right?

But, this is troublesome that Ms. Jacoby paints all Christians with the same brush. My wife and I adopted 2 children....in a long, legal fashion. Does she think we are tainted too?

From what came out today, it appears that the lady leading the group has money problems. It seems as if she has failed at a couple of businesses and has several suits against her for unpaid wages and bills. As several members of the group were recruited by her to help her effort at the last minute it seems they may have been too gullible and were taken in by someone that may turn out to have orchestrated a scam to gain relief from her debts. Unfortunately there are always wolves ready to shear the sheep.

Separation of church and state is an impossiblity in Islam. Islam is the complete intertwining of religion and state.
======
Impossible? Please tell that to Turkey, Bosnia, Albania, Egypt, Malaysia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenestan, Chad, Lebanon, Kosovo etc.
Posted by: Kaeleku
___________________

Have you been to those countries? Would you want to live in any of those countries? Poverty, death, and destruction, oppression, lack of freedom....if you think those countries are models for other nations to aspire to, then you have a distorted perspective.

According to the writer, these ten people and their choices represent all Christians. Would the writer think that one atheist speaks for all atheists? Or, that one Jew speaks for all Jewish people? Or, that one Muslim speaks for all Muslim?

If one used the same logic, one would conclude that the writer speaks for all Jewish people everywhere, and the consensus is that all Christians are represented by the poor choices of people in the article. That's how the writer sees it, isn't it?

When one can group people, as did Hitler, people can be eliminated because they are offensive, or illiterate, or just plain stupid. Hitler eliminated the mentally ill, the retarded, and others before he went after the Jews. Beware of seeing people as collective groups!

"Lots of atheists long to adopt children, and they have a tougher time of it in America than people who belong to churches."

Maybe if the atheists got together and did some charity work and formed legal adoption agencies and/or social work organizations, they could then cater to atheists customers.

Luckily religion has no corner market on stupid, there is plenty to go around. And yes, these guys will have to face the music. Luckily there are only 10 of them out of the thousands providing relief in Haiti.

Separation of church and state is an impossiblity in Islam. Islam is the complete intertwining of religion and state.

======

Impossible? Please tell that to Turkey, Bosnia, Albania, Egypt, Malaysia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenestan, Chad, Lebanon, Kosovo etc.

"The foundation is neither a registered adoption agency with the state of Idaho nor an accredited international adoption agency. Yet the group members arrested at the Haitian-Dominican border claimed, directly contradicting their own site, that they had no plans to make the children available for adoption. Many of the children, according to published reports, were not orphans and, in any case, the group had no legal authority to remove them from the country."

Wow. Well, I suspect they'll be tried and convicted in Haiti. I would hope that the US would also have a dim view of this sort of plan. If they're looking for children to save, aren't there plenty of children in the foster care system throughout the US, who are less and less likely to be adopted due to their age?

Doctors, nurses, and engineers are what Haiti needs right now. Were any of these people trained and prepared to provide those services? Were they doing so?

It's not rocket science. If you go into another country, and try to take children across the border without proper documentation that you have been granted custody of these children, then, you are subject to arrest for child trafficking.
Silsby was apparently warned that her half-cocked approach was going to put her and her group at risk, and they proceeded anyway. It's hard for me to muster sympathy for them. Taking kids from their homes without authorization is kidnapping - period.

To the person who said the kids would be better off in Idaho than staying with their families in Haiti. That isn't the point. When my daughter was growing up, I was poor, although not nearly as poor as the folks in Haiti. There were plenty of people who could have given my daughter a life filled with financial and social advantages that were beyond my ability to provide. The fact that she would have had "a better life" with them did not mean that they could simply come and take her from me and keep her as their own.

The difference between America and Saudi Arabia, say, is not that Christianity is morally superior, it's just that the Saudis have no separation of church and state to protect them. Posted by CatKen
__________________________

Interesting....that "separation of church and state" was meaningless to the Ft. Hood terrorist and killer, American born, of Muslim faith, Major Hasan.

Separation of church and state is an impossiblity in Islam. Islam is the complete intertwining of religion and state. Your thinking that Saudi Arabia only needs separation of church and state reveals a lack of understanding of Islam.

fr skbeeline:

>The good folks were not on a proselyting mission, they were providing DISASTER relief. Remember, Haiti had a 8.0 earthquake, which resulted in orphans in the streets and greater than 100,000 dead....

Providing disaster relief does NOT include swooping up any child you find and trying to sneak them out of the country without bothering to find out if the child is truly an orphan.

Q: Is there evidence that she physically kidnapped the kids?

A: Evidence? You mean other than the fact that they were caught attempting to remove the children from the country, many without ID and none with adoption papers? Or does that sort of concrete evidence not hold up in God's court?

Q: Is there a track record of her church 'trafficking and selling' children?
A: Evidence of "trafficking and selling" kids before? What does that have to do with the fact that they were kidnapping now? What, we cant arrest a crack dealer for selling crack because we dont have evidence he did it before? Crazy!

Is it such a crime to give these kids an education or a better life?

A: No. But it is a crime when a group that is not a bona fide international adoption agency with all of the oversight to prove that the children are indeed orphans, are adopted legally, and go to good homes comes and just rounds up a bunch of the first kids they see and high tails it to the border as they did.

Q: Is a life of poverty and misery and family neglect with a parent better than a life of second chances?
A: I would say that that life would be preferable to the lifelong trauma of haven been stolen from your family and taken to a foreign land to live with strangers.

Here is a hypothetical for you. What would you have done if after Katrina a Muslim mosque from Saudi Arabia had sent missionaries to NO, scooped up a bunch of kids whose parents they didnt see nearby, and tried to leave the country? Saudis are often much richer and enjoy better quality of life than those in the 9th ward and the kids could have gone to very religious families. Im sure you would not be asking for "more evidence" or pondering whether or not the kids were going to a better living environment. I would be surprised if you were doing anything other than calling for war.

As for the poor christians who are now incarcerated in poor conditions, what the hell did they expect? They were attempting to traffic children internationally from the poorest country in the hemisphere after a natural disaster. Did they think God would intervene and have them doing time at the Hilton? What american and christina arrogance!

I hope the book is thrown at them and an international example is made!

The Southern Baptist Convention (International Mission Board--www.imb.org), like many other Christian denominations as well as aid groups of other religions and non-religious groups, HAS OPERATIONS AT WORK IN HAITI, and has for a long time. Did these particular 10 people contact the mission board of their own denomination and ask how they could best help?

No. There have been no reports that they ever contacted the Southern Baptist aid programs that are already in Haiti to ask for guidance or advice. They assumed that they knew best and went on their own, wasting their resources on an ill-guided quest. This should not be the basis of distrust for all Christian missions in Haiti, but a textbook example of how NOT to help.

DATDUMWUF2,

The good folks were not on a proselyting mission, they were providing DISASTER relief. Remember, Haiti had a 8.0 earthquake, which resulted in orphans in the streets and greater than 100,000 dead.

Christians are taught, that to be selfless and serve others, especially those in need is to serve Christ.

Why would anyone have a problem with that?

charlesbakerharris, disagreeing with your religion makes everybody and idiot, silly, moronic, and evil.

Or more intelligent than you. You don't spend a second considering what she has actually said here, all you notice is that some christians are being held to task and therefor it means all christians are being blamed.

Not the truth. These christians are being blamed. You're the one painting with the broad brush. And while your're at it, stick it up yerass.

The poor missionaries have no AC... oh, the horror.
They better get used to it; kidnappers are generally supposed to rot in hell for eternity, according to baptists.

Thank you for reminding me that atheists can be just as narrow minded and stupid as self-proclaimed Christians, Jews, Hindus, Wiccans and agnostics. Was there a point in this "article" or were you just getting paid by the word. Next time a Wiccan does something stupid I suppose you'll support the re-institution of the witch trials?

OH WP shame on you for killing electrons in support of this garbage.

@terencef100:

Her issue with Christianity is the same as all of the salient religion-haters these days: She cherrypicks the worst examples, takes Biblical quotations as are convenient for her (and often WAY out of context), and says what she knows will satisfy the other religion-haters like herself.

She doesn't understand Christianity any more than a third grader understands quantum chemistry, but for whatever reason, the WaPo pays her to pretend as if she does, which is why her columns repeatedly piss people off - people who actually know what goes on in the front lines of faith-gone-good, rather than the (sadly frequent) examples of faith-gone-bad. For Jacoby, faith-gone-bad is the end of the story, and is proof of atheism, which is among the most shallow, stupid, thoughtless conclusions one could draw.

Thus is the basis of the atheist movement these days - cherrypicking, stereotyping, false generalization, straw men, and dishonesty.

Ms Jacoby,
It is intellectually dishonest to reach conclusions based on one case, no matter how juicy a column it gives you. A court of law will determine if the 10 defendants are guilty (i) of a crime or (ii) of being just naive.
Also, I disagree with your point that true charity should involve no gain for the giver. This may be a desired situation for athiests, but not for Christians, who view charity (i) as following Jesus' example and (ii) living out God's commandment to love one another. That can give feelings of love and joy. Quite what your problem is with those feelings is not clear.

@Barferio - Susan's point is that the actions of a few nutjobs reflect on the millions of people who share their faith.

She's an idiot, and you should put a more critical eye to her writing, which is facile at best, banal at worst. The 10 people who screwed up here are not representative of the thousands of Christians are there, now, giving their time and money, and in many cases putting their own lives on the lines, to help feed and hydrate and clothe the people of Haiti.

Of course, your lightweight interpretation of what's going on over there doesn't include those people, which is why you see eye to eye with Jacoby and her cherrypicked infantilism.

Atheists are no better than people who are religious, and charities are no holier than for-profit companies. Crooks come in all shapes and sizes.

Before we jump to the emotional conclusion that religious charities are the bane of all evils, we must understand that a lot of religious charities operate in places no other foundation or organization will touch. An ulterior motive may be there, but that is human nature. There is no free lunch, so to speak.

Laura (the 'zealot') Silsby may have bent a few rules in trying to get children out of Haiti, but do we know the full facts behind the story other than what is sensationally reported by CNN? Is there evidence that she physically kidnapped the kids? Is there a track record of her church 'trafficking and selling' children?

Let us not forget that Haiti is a basketcase with a non-functioning government and non-existing legal system ravaged by corruption and wars. Let us not forget that some of the kids were handed over by their own parents. Let us also not forget that these kids left in Haiti would languish in orphanages or left to their own devices to fend for their own survival. Is it such a crime to give these kids an education or a better life? Is a life of poverty and misery and family neglect with a parent better than a life of second chances?

"The sad thing is that these zealots from Idaho are just part of a larger movement that seeks to turn the United States into a Christian theocracy."
___________________

I suggest that c-span should be in every house of worship in the U.S. We can hear the preachers, the Imams, the Rabbis, and all the others give their messages.

Preachers of the Bible should have no fear. It was the preachers of the Bible who were instrumental in the founding of this nation. The Declaration of Independence was sent to every church to be read from the pulpit, and many ministers served in the war, so that the congregations were without a pastor. Of course, Harvard and Yale were established to train young men in the gospel, and Colonial America was filled with the preaching of the Bible.

many of these christians are simply trying to bribe their god to get into their heaven. But many are not, as many or more are actually trying to help.

These people committed a crime, kidnapping. Trying to excuse it by saying these children would have a better life after the kidnapping is avoiding the point - we are a nation of laws, and to a lesser extent so is Haiti.

I believe Susan's point is here is that these people committed this kidnapping, so self-involved in their attempted bribery, that they gave themselves permission to do the crime. And that's what religion does - it gives the believer permission to do all sorts of things they woudln't do without it. Both good and bad.

If you feel your chistian charitable feelings have been hurt because these particular people did something wrong and we're noticing it ... tfb. Are you going to hold your breath now? Are you going to refuse to help if the people you pay to help aren't allowed to stuff a bible down these children's throat along with the pea soup?

Would you help if your god story didn't tell you to help? I wonder.

"The sad thing is that these zealots from Idaho are just part of a larger movement that seeks to turn the United States into a Christian theocracy."

Is it difficult, spewing dumb transparent invective, or does it come naturally to you?

The sad thing is that these zealots from Idaho are just part of a larger movement that seeks to turn the United States into a Christian theocracy.

"You nailed it Susan, the problem with missionaries is that giving aid is only a pretext to convert those they are helping to whatever religion they are from."

You're a remarkably misinformed moron, and you're contributing to the divisive bigotry that's making this nation stupid and partisan. Stop it.

(After all, look what Christians did before there was separation of church and state - and look what American Christians have done...killing gays..in Uganda..CatKen
__________________________

Yeah, those Colonial Christians killed homosexuals every Sunday. That's how the Sabbath was celebrated!

Wow, if America did not have that law of separation of Church and State, we'd still be killing homosexuals on Sunday. The only thing that keeps Christians from killing homosexuals is the "law of separation of church and state." Those people really are monsters!

You nailed it Susan, the problem with missionaries is that giving aid is only a pretext to convert those they are helping to whatever religion they are from.

Quote: "The Lausanne Congress of 1974, defined the term, related to Christian mission as, "to form a viable indigenous church-planting movement." Evangelist Billy Graham led the conference, a Christian missionary is focused primarily on conversion to their faith, any help they provide is focused on that task and none other.

To all those who are coming down hard on all Christian Charity, please cool your jets. I will not judge all atheists by the worst and stupidest of them, and I would not expect you to do so to Christians. One of my best friends is a devout Christian and he has been running an organization that supports an orphanage and also drills wells for clean drinking water in Haiti for years. That is far more typical of Chrisitan charity than the odd balls in this story. Haitians have told my friend that the lion's share of the aid through the years comes from American Christians. If you like, go ahead and dig up the statistics. Christians give far more time and money to charity than secular folks. It's a fact, not self-aggrandizement. Of course, my friend brings the love of God with the water, food, and housing. Better and more true to tell the young ones that this food, shelter, and clothing comes from God, through us, to them because God loves them than say, "You are the product of matter, plus time, plus chance, in a cold uncaring universe, and you have no eternal value other than what exists in the chemicals that make up your body...Now, sleep tight and don't let the bed bugs bite."

Unreal, Good people go to a disaster zone that had orphans wallowing in their feces, with flies buzzing around their heads and Susan sitting in the comfort of her home in the U.S. wonders at their motives.

There is truly evil in this world.

Lady Liberty - "Good riddance of those Christians with their food and help." How would you feel if we suffered a natural disaster, and people offered you help - but only if you forswore your God and your religious beliefs and converted to Hinduism, Islam, or Buddhism? Would you not find their "help" somewhat egotistical, even downright cruel and manipulative?
Posted by: Catken1
________________

I have personally supported Christian relief organizations for a lifetime, and, NEVER, did they discriminate based on the beliefs of those needing help. NEVER did the one receiving help have to convert. NEVER was there a demand for anything for gifts given or help extended. It was done freely and without strings.

"Yeah, these religious people trying to rescue these hungry children really should suffer for their stupidity."

So if there's a terrorist attack or natural disaster in the DC area, and your home is destroyed, we can invite a group of Muslim fundamentalists here to "rescue" your children by taking them away from you, taking them back to Saudi Arabia and raising them in the Wahhabi sect of Islam? Those Haitian children HAVE LIVING PARENTS. There is a clear difference between "kidnapping" and "rescue," and the first does not become the second because the kid's parents are "only" non-Christians or "only" black or "only" poor people - i.e. "only" second-class people who don't REALLY matter in your eyes, not as much as you special Christian types.

Very often is true that " no good deed will go unpunished". So, beware, because what is good deed for you is the opposite for others.
Laura Silsby felt (erroneously) that her god gave her the blessing to be above the law.
She needs jail time and also therapy, a lot of therapy.

"Frank should live where he is not oppressed by Christians. He'll like Iran or Saudi Arabia or Somalia or Yemen."

I see. So we have a choice - either be told what to do by one totalitarian religion or by another.

Many sects of Christianity are no better than fundamentalist Islam. Both want to control what everyone does even in their most private life. The difference between America and Saudi Arabia, say, is not that Christianity is morally superior, it's just that the Saudis have no separation of church and state to protect them. (After all, look what Christians did before there was separation of church and state - and look what American Christians have done in another government, that of Uganda, where they have convinced that government to execute people just for being gay. If America lacked the wall between church and state that protects us, the same organization would be trying for that right here, you can be sure.)

Yeah, these religious people trying to rescue these hungry children really should suffer for their stupidity. Haven't they learned that in America if you arrive on the scene of a horrible car accident, you'll be sued for trying to help? The law says, "Let them die."

Meanwhile, those children will be at the mercy of pedophiles and criminals. The UN workers can offer them food for sex as they have been known to do elsewhere. Those little children can learn to sell their bodies for food. Yep, that's much better than letting these religious people intervene.

Well, they would rather do without. Thank you very much! It's their way or the highway! Good riddance of those Christians with their food and help.
Posted by: ladyliberty1 | February 5, 2010 2:35 PM
------------------------------------------

This martyr routine is really tired. Oh woe is me, I'm being persecuted! Me, me, me. Grow up.

Some (deliberate?) confusion on the place of good works in the Christian firmament. The Gospels’ identification with the poor and suffering is total and in addition to caring for the most needy in their own community, early Christians were notable for freeing their slaves. But the place of good works in Christian theology goes further than that. The early Christian Church held that Christians’ faith was shown primarily through good works (aside, of course, from martyrdom).

This was lived out in the Middle Ages by the Seven Acts of Mercy—and note as Europe was entirely Christian the missionary impulse was not involved in good works. The Reformation differed: faith alone was necessary. But Catholics held firm to the place of good works in a fully lived Christian life. Again, missionary zeal was something separate. This remains so to the present.

"If religion is just a game of Russian Roulette, and according to your view, there is no way to know which one is better than any other, at least in this life, "

And what rational evidence do you have to suggest that your faith is better than anyone else's?

"you can't argue (persuasively) that the person being taught Christianity is any worse off. Any choice is apparently as good as any other, in your view."

Except that in your belief, if you make the wrong choice, God will burn you in horrible agony forever and ever. And you will deserve it, for having the gall to be born to non-Christian parents, taught by non-Christian teachers and religious leaders, and not disregarding everything you're told in your most impressionable years, by everyone you love and respect and look up to, in order to follow a religion preached by strangers. Your God tortures good people, decent people, kind people, even children, possibly (according to whatever sect of Christianity you believe in) even little babies, just because they were born in the "wrong" place at the "wrong" time and heard and believed the "wrong" message.

I can and do argue that someone taught Christianity is worse off than someone taught either no faith or a faith that doesn't preach that God burns the majority of his children in Hell forever and ever, just for not being Christian (or any number of arbitrary crimes that wouldn't get a slap on the wrist in a human and humane law court). To be taught that a) God tortures kind and decent people, your brothers and sisters, forever and ever - or allows the torture, at least and b) that God is infinitely good and loving and must be praised and flattered and fawned on (lest he burn you too) is to be taught the philosophy of the abused child enabling the abuser. "Yes, Daddy! My brothers and sisters were Bad because they called you by the wrong name! (married the wrong person, wore the wrong clothes, attended the wrong church, etc.) You were right to set them on fire! Good Daddy! (Now please don't hurt me, too...)"

I'd rather by far know that my moral sense came as a side product of some other feature naturally selected for in my brain than to think I had my moral sense instilled in me by a god like that.

Lady Liberty - "Good riddance of those Christians with their food and help." How would you feel if we suffered a natural disaster, and people offered you help - but only if you forswore your God and your religious beliefs and converted to Hinduism, Islam, or Buddhism? Would you not find their "help" somewhat egotistical, even downright cruel and manipulative?

For Frank57:

Dear Lord,
Frank would like a world without Christians.

Answer: He can be free from Christian oppression in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan....

Frank should live where he is not oppressed by Christians. He'll like Iran or Saudi Arabia or Somalia or Yemen.

When Muslim terrorists want to attack America, they try to blow up our planes. When Christian terrorists try to attack other countries, they try to steal their children. As for those who say these zealots were simply do gooders gone bad, just how foolish can they be? No papers, passports or identification on these children. Just pick them up and then try to take them out of the country. And for what purpose? To be sold to locals in Idaho for money to "help the Church." Who even knows?

Religious zealots poison everything they touch. It's almost comical how, if they had succeeded in abducting these children they would be praising their God, but they don't take the fact that they ended up in jail charged with kidnapping instead as a sign of their God's contempt.

That's why I will never feel sorry for people like this. They think THEY are God.

As far as I can see, there is no better charity anywhere than Doctors Without Borders.
Posted by: arminius3142 |
--------------------

Like I said in an earlier post, Christian organizations should immediately cease any help to those people who do not want their help.

The UN and Doctors Without Borders and the local Haitian government wishes to handle the crisis situation on their own.

So, for all who refuse to denounce their Christian faith, the advocates for the Haitians want you to GO HOME! That message is for World Vision, Samaritan's Purse, and all Medical teams servicing Haitians. Since your mission statement includes a pronouncement of the Christian faith, and your supporters are of the Christian faith, your services are no longer wanted or needed. The Haitians do not want your food, or medical services because you do not have motives detached from your Christian beliefs. You want to entrap Haitians into believing the way you believe by bringing food and medical services. Well, they would rather do without. Thank you very much! It's their way or the highway! Good riddance of those Christians with their food and help. Bravo atheists who give without proselytizing!

Now, where can Christians give all the hundreds of millions that they have donated to these organizations? They should only give to Christians who want/need their help.

I think Laura Silbury's actions were contemptuous. But it's pure hubris to think that these attitudes are isolated to Christianity or religion. Secularists are quite able to have this kind of contempt.

The main sin here is righteousness. Probably, those of religious views can fall into this trap more easily than secularists. They do have the "word of God" backing them up, after all. But it's the righteousness that is the problem, not religion, keep that in mind.

Such righteousness is something we all, both religious or secularists, need to be wary of.

To those of you have who quoted and responded to my comment, I'm honored. Thank you for the debate. A few responses:

1. Catken1

Regarding Russian Roulette: If religion is just a game of Russian Roulette, and according to your view, there is no way to know which one is better than any other, at least in this life, you can't argue (persuasively) that the person being taught Christianity is any worse off. Any choice is apparently as good as any other, in your view.

Re: atheists being "good": You provide lots of practical reasons for an atheist to be good, but I don't see any scientific, rational basis for a godless human to help another human, apart from a desire for self-preservation and advancement. You don't seem to identify any. If you say that you want to help Haiti because it could happen to us and you would want Haitians to help us if it did, then no, you are not being a delusional atheist. I would argue that this rational is not very compelling and would probably not motivate most people, atheists included, to help Haiti. But in any case, my quarrel is with atheists who say they want to be good for goodness' sake. That simply isn't a rationale argument. In any case, your list of reasons for being good appear to be at least as selfish as the "selfish" motives Susan attributes to Christians in the column. Of course, what many non-Christians don't understand is that Christians strive to do things, not out of a selfish effort to save ourselves or rack up "converts", but out of a growing love for a real God. Even John Lennon recognized that the foundation of Christianity is self-sacrifice and self-denial. (And, as a rational atheist, he thought was ridiculous.)

2. Schaum

Re: good in a physical sense. I meant that Christians have a worldview in which God is a real physical entity that created the universe (and, for what it's worth, most people agree with us on this point). We believe that the desire to good, which is found in every human, including atheists, springs at least in part from how we were made by God. We believe that morality, our understanding of what is good and what is bad, flows from God. Please don't bother debating me on this point. I understand that you disagree and I am not trying to convince you that I am right (and I wasn't in my original post). My point was that a non-delusioanl atheist must recognize that human ideas of "good" are really grounded in self-preservation, advancement, something that flows and developed during our evolution -- for a good example, see Catken1's comments -- but "good" does not exist as a true moral concept grounded in a real physical entity, a God-figure. So, I do think that atheists that engage in "good" for goodness' sake are deluding themselves.

3. Frank57

If you believe "good" does exist in a real physical sense, I am open to hearing you explain why. (For what it's worth, I don't watch Glen Beck.)

History repeats itself in never-ending cycles... not too long ago, my grandparents were "rescued" by Christians and taken to a better life at Indian boarding schools... this is no different except that those attempting to "rescue" the Haitian children forgot to get the government's endorsement... but the long-term effects could be as disasterous

I am always amazed at the inability of some people who call themselves Christians to use critical thinking. The column isn't anti-Christian. It's about people who use their "faith" to make themselves feel good. How would you like it if there was an earthquake in your home town and a group of do-gooders rushed in to "rescue" (e.g., kidnap) your children?

Time to rename this blog for what it is:

[Attack] On Faith

"And if millions of people died of white man's diseases imported by the missionaries..."

This is a spurious claim. This only makes sense if you define all of the perpetrators of the Spanish Conquest and similar violent expansions as missionaries. True they brought priests in their wake, but Cortez and Pizarro had less holy thoughts in mind.

I am Christian, Episcopalian, but an appalled at what those horribly misled Baptists have done. Even my own small parish, not a rich one either, has some people on the ground there, with strict orders to HELP and NOT to preach.

Why the in-your-face religious nuts can't look at the great works of those like us, and more, by such non-religious groups as Doctors Without Borders, and profit by these examples, mystifies me. As far as I can see, there is no better charity anywhere than Doctors Without Borders.

How delightful that we now have someone in this space who is not an apologist for religion. Keep up the good work.

I'm not going to paint all christians with the same brush. Wouldn't be truthful or fair.

Just take the case of these alleged baptist kidnappers. Let Haiti investigate the case, and if necessary, try them for kidnapping. If they get a conviction, then the sentence is simple; punish them and then evict them from Haiti. Since it is against the Haitian's best interests to incarcerate them in the country, and they have plenty of labor with their own law abiding citizens, there's no reason the punishment should be anything other than either execution, or fine and deportment.

Putting them across the border to the Dominican Republic isn't an adequate punishment; and unfair to the Dominicans. And giving them a free plane ride back the the U.S. is equally inadequate. Nope, the solution to punishment is actually very simple. Take them to the western end of the island, point them in the proper direction, and have them start swimming.

How dare those Christians motivated by love for their Saviour, and gratitude for forgiveness of their own sins, bringing their message of freedom from guilt and shame and the power of sin, and salvation in Jesus Christ when they rush to give of their time and money and talent to relieve the suffering of the afflicted!

I mean, why can't those Christians take their cue from the atheists, rushing in to tend the wounds of the afflicted, rescuing those who need rescuing, adopting the orphans, with pure motives? Haven't the atheists set the example for all others to follow in caring for the suffering? Aren't they the first to arrive on the scene with help during a crisis? Aren't the atheists the largest donors for the world's hungry?

Ah, well, maybe all Christians should just step aside and let the atheists bring solace to the world's hungry and suffering. World Vision, Samaritan's Purse, Red Cross, Goodwill, Salvation Army, all Churches, all faith based hospitals, all faith based pilots and medical teams, step aside. The world doesn't need your help! They don't want your help if you have a message of the love of God for a lost and suffering world, and a Redeemer who came to save and to give Eternal Life.

So, unless you Christians can keep your mouths shut, and deliver your money and food and services, just stay at home and let the atheists do the work! Suffering people are only flesh and only need food for the body. Everyone knows they have no soul!

You were brave to write this. Vainglorious seems quite apt. These folks are either quite daft or very calculating. It is hard to feel sorry for them with so much misery in this life that is not self-inflicted. Perhaps Haiti should just let them swim home.

I am looking for a follow-up news article about John Travolta's trip to Haiti. Apparently, he flew into the country to "help out"--arriving in his huge personal jet, handing out boxes of supplies. The report included that he was accompanied by several other scientologists, including himself. Was giving charitably his only intention of going over there?

I'm so glad you atheists have this little site so you can gather in a circle and bash Christians every time one of us makes it on the news. I can tell that it makes you feel good, and puffs you up. You lash out because you don't have the peace deep down that comes from embracing your creator, and knowing Him. It is human nature to fear what one doesn't understand, and you can't figure out how or why people can believe something with such clarity.

This blog and these comments here are only the surface of what could be. This is hate talk. Substitute the word "Jude" (Jew) for Christian in the entire article and you could have a newspaper article written in Germany in 1937. Don't delude yourself that human nature actually changes over time or by location. It is our society, and our laws, not our human nature that protects us from scenes like the Roman persecution in the first three centuries. The loudest among you would only be a part of that in a different century.

It is extremely unfortunate that this group did what they did. It is a classic example of botched good intentions, and unfortunately 10 people are going to pay dearly for it. But it really provides a great example of how imperfect the church really is. I used to be an atheist myself because of this stuff- all the wars, the Inquisition, etc. I thought, if only nobody believed in God we would have a peaceful planet. But then I came to one simple realization: the church is only a human expression of God's will. It is not perfect. In fact, it is often very imperfect, vain and destructive. But every human institution is like that. Just because people make mistakes doesn't mean that God does.

The arrogance of Christian charity? What a freaking load of steaming B.S.

You can be sure that charities like World Vision and the Christian Childrens Fund have done more in one year to further the cause of humanity than ALL the heathen members of the church of atheism, the liberal "progressive" movement have EVER done combined.

Just a really nasty article written by an ignorant heathen

There's almost no doubt that the 100 children would have had a better fate here than in Haiti. While others decry the effort of some religious zealots to seize a new generation of converts, the fact remains that every legitimate effort to provide material help cannot be denied.

Haitians are harmed far less by those who act mistakenly than by those who act not at all. Notice that Jacoby's solution is to turn all of Haiti into a medical ward and she welcomes your participation only as a check-writer. She's just a shill for mega-charities who believe that your contribution belongs to them even before you've decided give.

Haiti was all screwed up before the earthquake. Haiti will be all screwed up for some time to come. If Jesus tells you to gather up some orphans, bring them back to the USA, and raise them in the land of the rich, then by all means do it (but follow the rules). The worst that could happen is that you spend three to fifteen years in a Haitian prison.

Whether the zealots are set free tomorrow or set free in fifteen years, when they get out there will still be 100 Haitian orphans who desperately need their help.

I wonder what the lives of the 100 who didn't make it to Idaho will be like on that day.

CNN just ran an interview of a guy from Idaho who knows the woman who put this mission together....might have been her brother, or maybe a fellow Church member. At any rate he said, to paraphrase:

She was told and knew she needed paperwork to do this and that at the least she had to register as an international adoption agency. She also knew that without registering she could end up facing prosecution and jail. But she went ahead and did it anyway. This is the same lack of foresight she shows in her business life, and it came back to bite her just like it always does in business.

Maybe she's just a well intentioned moron

Typical Jacoby banality spread with too broad a brush for her to hold.

This is the first time, perhaps, that I have agreed with George Bush. Just send cash. The cost of transporting the 10 from Idaho should have gone to helping Haitian parents feed and clothe and educate their children.

For "Saint" Paul, charity had some restrictions.

1 Corinthians 11:8-10 (King James Version)

8For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.

9Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

10For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

Typical Jacoby. Cast the actions of 10 relatively thoughtless people as typical of the thousands of Christian aid workers who flocked there. Most of them, by the way, are digging wells, providing medical assistance, doling out food, giving grief counseling, and somehow managing not to whap people over the head with Bibles.

If Susan Jacoby had any real idea of what goes on with most Christian churches, her articles would be completely different, but far less satisfying to the religion-haters. Oh well, I guess she has her schtick and is sticking to it.

They should do at least 2 years in prison to set an example that you can't do what they did. If they had plans to bring these kids to the USA they should be sentences to 10 years minimum. The last thing the USA needs is Hatian refugees brought here against their will. We are paying dearly already for the many brought here against their will over hundreds of years. You don't transport people against their will and when they are children it is by its very nature against their will.

"Organised religion in Germany 1933-1945

Christianity in Germany has, since the Protestant Reformation, been divided into Catholicism and Protestantism. As a specific outcome of the Reformation in Germany, the large Protestant denominations are organized into Landeskirchen (roughly: Federal Churches). The German word for denomination is Konfession, however, this translation has been considered misleading, since it might suggest that the context of religion in Germany could be described with the common parabola of the religious marketplace, which is not the case.[13] In Germany, "to this day religion nominally remains a state affair."[13]

For the large churches in Germany (Catholic and evangelisch) the German government collects the church tax, which is then given to the Churches. For this reason membership in the Catholic or Protestant (evangelische) Church is officially registered.

It is important to keep this 'official aspect' in mind when turning to such questions as the religious beliefs of Adolf Hitler or Joseph Goebbels. Both men had ceased to attend Catholic mass or to go to Confession long before 1933, but neither had officially left the Church and neither of them refused to pay his church taxes.[13]

Accordingly, Hitler and Goebbels can be classified as nominally Catholic;[13]"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

Steigmann-Gall, Richard (2003), The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521823715 .

"But how is it delusional for Christians to give the poor and needy a shot at eternal life when handing them a plate of rice and beans?"

But what if you've guessed wrong in the Religious Russian Roulette game, and by teaching them Christianity as opposed to some other religion, you're really dooming them to eternal torture in Hell?

Oh, right, because you KNOW you're right because YOUR holy book says so. Never mind that everyone else's holy book says so, too, and that other religions are chock-full of people who KNOW they're right. That's the egotism, and the delusion. You're saying that you know better than those children or their parents what they should believe, you know better what their religious practices ought to be, and you're saving them from their own helpless, stupid ignorance because you are Wiser and Better than they are.

"It is atheists who are being irrational (and inconsistent with their own worldview) when they delude themselves into thinking there is a reason to be charitable." "(in a world that, according to atheists, does not have "good" in any real physical sense)."

Both these statements assume that it is inconceivable to have or develop a moral sense without it being handed to you by some Great Parent in the Sky. Would you really be a serial killer or a rapist or a thief if you suddenly stopped believing in God? Nonsense (and if it's not nonsense, you're not a decent person or a moral person, you're just a cowardly would-be criminal kept in line by the force of a Super-Cop). Morality is, quite simply, what makes life better for oneself and others. Kindness, compassion and love make a better world for all of us, and for our kids. We don't need to be threatened with hellfire or promised pie in the sky when we die in order to be motivated to do good. We just have to want to make a better place for us, and for our kids, to live in. We help out Haitian earthquake survivors and Katrina flood survivors and Indonesian tsunami survivors and others who need it, because we know that we, too, are not immune to natural disaster or terrorist attack or other great tragedy, and we know that in that case, we would like others to help us out, too. But mostly because we are people, and they are people, and in the best possible world, people help each other in times of trouble.

Frankly, I don't feel like giving them the benefit of the doubt.

I am appalled that these folks would think that it was okay to just "take" kids from their parents, like promising them a dish of rice easily replaces the parent child connection. I am appalled that they thought they could simply disregard the laws and these children's emotional well being. Only those whose self interests take precedence over anyone else's would do that.

They were snatching children up like it was a big clearance sale of poor kids. The so-called picture of where they were taking them they and using as their cover was a building not even prepared to be used as a working orphanage, it was, simply, an empty motel building. And, of course, they are doing all this nonsense in the name of a "god." Please, I am so sick of people hiding behind a god or religion in order to do their "questionable" acts, if not downright criminal acts.

I would suggest that folks getting an "earfull" from their god make sure "god" is abiding by the laws of man otherwise they could end up as these folks did in man's hell of a jail cell.

What is interesting is that Israel had 2 planes sent,land and set up a modern field hospital in Haiti within 72 hours of the earthquake...and they are not about to convert the Haitis to be Jews!!!

From Patanjali Yoga Sutra
* pramana: 1.7 pratyaksa anumana pramanani: Perception inference/ measurement and testimony are valid cognition
* viparyaya: 1.8 viparyayo mithya jnanam atad rupa pratistham; misconception is false knowledge without a forming stand(ing)
* vikalpa: 1.9 sabda jnanaanupati vasto sunyo vikalpah; words, knowledge falling away (from) objects, is coneptualization
* nidra: 1.10 abhava pratyaya alambana vrittir nidra: nonbeing presents (phenoms) foundation (in) fluctuations (of) sleep
* smrti: 1.11 anubhuta visaya asampramosah smrtih: experienced objects not lost (forgotten) (constitute) memory

hariaum

Your comments in the US are pretty tame.

Up here in Godless Canada, it seems they should be shot, run over, and burnt.

"Presumption of innocence" it seems, does not apply here.

Posted by: Schaum | February 5, 2010 11:28

Grzthewash:

"in a world that, according to atheists, does not have "good" in any real physical sense"

I know of no atheists who say any such thing. Please support your assertions with some proof.
------------------

Probably some utterance from Glen Beck or similar, which, as usual, contains no knowledge, no evidence, no truth, but is the typical knee-jerk reaction of those who find it uncomfortable to actually think for themselves.

I've heard worse -- "Einstein worshiped god" (he was an atheist) "Atheism is a religion" (this is an oxymoron) "Science is a religion" (another oxymoron) "Hitler was an atheist." (false -- he was a devout Catholic) "Atheists have no emotions or feelings." (false) "Atheists worship the devil." (yet another oxymoron) and on and on.

It just shows how deeply ill-educated many Americans truly are and why we have so much, otherwise inexplicable, angst in this country.

I donated money to Haiti through UNICEF. Never again.

Susan you are too kind.

These profoundly arrogant people believe that "their god" is the one and only, and that these children would be better off with them and their delusional gaggle of cretins -- forced to live in obeisance to the Luddite, anti-human, Baptist dogma.

It's absolutely sickening that such people believe they have the right to roam around the world abducting children in the name of their religion. What incredible hubris -- what unforgivable arrogance.

But we all share some fault in the actions of these dolts.

It is the permissiveness we in the USA afford such religious wingnuttery that allows them to believe they are entitled to do whatever and, at worst, get their wrists slapped and sent home with the equivalent of a parking violation fine.

What I wonder, with some alarm, is what these so-called "missionaries" have gotten away with in the past. How many children from various parts of the world have been funneled through their network?

They need to be fully investigated and then disbanded and labeled as the dangerous cult they really are.

Grzthewash:

"in a world that, according to atheists, does not have "good" in any real physical sense"

I know of no atheists who say any such thing. Please support your assertions with some proof.

Susan, it is hard to pin down your central argument(s) in this columns but you seem to be making two arguments, neither of which make much sense to me.

First, you seem to argue that religious charity is bad because it may involve people that are irrational or delusional. But how is it delusional for Christians to give the poor and needy a shot at eternal life when handing them a plate of rice and beans? It is atheists who are being irrational (and inconsistent with their own worldview) when they delude themselves into thinking there is a reason to be charitable. So should we just pack up the thousands of religious charities helping millions of people each day in hope that a small percentage of atheists will delude themselves into thinking they should waste their time on the poor?

Second, you seem to argue that religious charity is bad and non-religious charity is good because the former involves the selfish goal of getting converts, which makes Christians feel good and self-important. Even assuming that is the case, which it is not, you seem to concede that the same selfish motiviation underlies non-religious charity. As an atheist, you must believe that humans have some self-gratifying reason to help others, even if it is just the emotional buzz of feeling "good" (in a world that, according to atheists, does not have "good" in any real physical sense). That being the case, you have not provided a reason why religious charity is any different than non-religious charity, other than the fact that one involves religion, and the other does not. And you are clearly not a fan of religion.

DITLD:

I lifted the following from a post on another thread, written by Timmy2. I do it, because he is right and states it very well. Perhaps this will be clearer to you than I have been able to be:

" Everything is a placeholder until new information arises. Science spends all of it's time trying to prove itself wrong. What can not be proven wrong, is considered a theory. Not even scientific laws are considered "truths".

"Only the theist claims to hold the truth. The atheist is just the person who doesn't believe the theist knows the truth, or if there is even such a thing as "The truth"."

Remember the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon where Calvin has a lemonade-like stand set up with a hand-lettered sign "A Swift Kick in the Butt -- $1.00"

Hobbes (walking by): How's business?
Calvin: Awful
Hobbes (snickers): I can't imagine why.
Calvin: Me, either. Everyone I know needs what I'm selling.

Most Christian charity is like that.