In Reply to: Re: No Strings posted by sawyer on April 17, 2009 at 20:50:13:
That was very kind of you not to string me up, and I'm glad you see my points too. I like the examples you gave, of the good ones, of genuine people embarking on journeys of genuine spiritual exchange. I know they exist.
I was careful to specify that what rubs me the wrong way is the short-term-trip missionary, the kind that goes on a Missionary Adventure Tour, you could say. I'm being sarcastic of course.
And of course, TFI "missionaries" who have a philosophy of entitlement, who leach off society and really offer nothing good or lasting other than some pipe dream, you know what I think about them!
I also specifically mentioned "simple folk," because I've seen firsthand how people get tricked into conversion, because they are simpler, naive and innocent, or not as intellectually developed, or because they have been conditioned to follow and want to be led. For example, Farmer posted some link some time ago, about how in India, unscrupulous coverters working on quotas and commissions would have bus drivers pretend the school bus has broken down, then have the children pray to Krishna and fake that the engine won't start up; then they pray to Jesus and the engine starts up; the lesson being that only Jesus answers prayer; etc.
About your point: "Should wealthy countries send money to help Aides victims? Should we be telling them that their sexual practices are killing them?"
It's one thing to talk about sexual practices and give aid to AIDS victims, and prevent the spread of HIV. I'm all for that, naturally. It would be different however, if there were religious strings attached, and the aid/service was really for Christians only, or if the advice was only targeted to potential convertees, etc. I'm sure you know what I mean. It sure as hell bugs me that missionaries would go around telling HIV sufferers they have contracted it because of their sins.