Missionaries should be banned

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about all the (purportedly) non-religious missionaries acting under the activist label who travel throughout the world promoting and expanding various social movements that go against traditional values in many societies? Should they be banned? Or is what they do OK because people in the developed world think they are right and the traditional values they oppose are outmoded? How is that not cultural imperialism?

True- I’m sure all the people spewing hate towards missionaries for not respecting traditional cultures are absolutely fine with the organizations that go to these cultures to promote/push family planning.

You have something against family planning?

I have something against hypocrites that criticize Christians missionaries for disrespecting local culture’s while praising others for doing the same when it aligns with their values.

I think you're against family planning. Thank goodness there are organizations that will provide these urgently needed services. And no sermon about Jesus gets rammed down their throats at the same time.

I promise you that most missionaries believe just as strongly that these people are urgently in need of god as you believe they are in need of having the benefits of family planning rammed down their throat.

Um.. when you say "god," which god? Is it your god that you're going to ram down their throats? Seems like Religious imperialism to me. Why not respect their local cultures and traditions?

Why not respect their traditions that promote having large families?

You avoided answering the question, but o.k. I don't think many women of the world would agree with having large families if they had a choice, and the demand for family planning is great and is welcomed in many countries (and these services are only available in places where they are welcomed). Ramming your god down their throats is not needed and is, in fact, disrespectful and completely not needed. See the difference?

DP, but the irony that's being pointed out here is that family planning is just as much being rammed down throats, which is to say it's not in either case. People are given the option of family planning, despite it being contradictory to many traditional cultures. People are similarly given the option of becoming Christian, despite that not being a religion native to the area. (This is not how missionaries have always worked granted, but today it is). You're happy to send people to spread the good news of birth control, though. Personally, I'm fine with both, and I trust people, even poor people in developing countries to make these choices for themselves.

It's also very strange to see this set in the context of "Eastern Religions" in Southeast Asia, given that the most common Eastern religion in the region is Buddhism which spread there through missionaries.

Should we ban Buddhist proselytizers in the US? There’s nothing be at work who never stops talking about Buddhism.

What?

Thanks, spellcheck, although it was obvious anyway. There’s a Buddhist in my office who talk constantly about how great Buddhism is. Should she be sent to SE Asia? Should HR sanctioned her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m against proselytizing. But you have to admit, DCUM’s hateful anti-religion proselytizers are just as bad.

What? Proselytization by Christian missionaries has resulted in the death of millions over the course of the past few centuries. That is not an exaggeration. It has also resulted in laws which punish homosexuality by death. It has torn apart communities, separated families, imposed foreign rule and white dominance.

DCUM meanwhile is typing feverishly on a website. Hurting your feelings, I guess?

Yup, just as bad.

Atheists in Cambodia and China and elsewhere have killed many more millions. Your point?

If you want to compare the death tolls from colonialism vs. communism, colonialism will win. British imposed famines alone might get you there

The Cultural Revolution in China (talk about eradicating a local culture) led to at least 30 million deaths, some say as many as 80 million.

The potato famine caused 1 million deaths. I’m not aware of other “colonialist imposed” (as opposed to happened-during) famines, but I’m happy to be shown others. Colonialism led to many more deaths by straight-up war and oppression.

The point, though, is that many here are confusing colonialism with missionaries when they talk about millions of deaths. And none seems as bad as something like the atheist-led Cultural Revolution.

You have lost your mind - https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf

[Anonymous]

I assume people aren’t saying that Christian missionaries should be allowed to do whatever they want, harming cultures and people in the process, because followers of atheist philosophy have killed millions…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m against proselytizing. But you have to admit, DCUM’s hateful anti-religion proselytizers are just as bad.

What? Proselytization by Christian missionaries has resulted in the death of millions over the course of the past few centuries. That is not an exaggeration. It has also resulted in laws which punish homosexuality by death. It has torn apart communities, separated families, imposed foreign rule and white dominance.

DCUM meanwhile is typing feverishly on a website. Hurting your feelings, I guess?

Yup, just as bad.

Atheists in Cambodia and China and elsewhere have killed many more millions. Your point?

If you want to compare the death tolls from colonialism vs. communism, colonialism will win. British imposed famines alone might get you there

More deaths than from religion too, I suspect. Pp’s may be conflating colonialists with missionaries. Pp with the stay about millions of deaths from missionaries alone needs to give a cite for that.

Missionaries and colonists are one and the same. There is no separation between them. The purpose of Spanish missionaries in Latin/S America was to both colonize and convert the millions of native tribes. The priests and missionaries sent by Spain had that very aim in mind - in addition to claiming the land, they converted the people. When latter failed, they slaughtered them. That same thing happened in N America, including the US and Canada. An estimated 70M indigenous people have died during this conquest.

All these pro-missionary folks trying to create a separation between colonizers and missionaries are fooling themselves. It has been the same deed for centuries.

You haven’t done history, have you? Much of colonialism is secular: it’s about getting access to resources—copper and silver and gold in the last two centuries. More recently, secular colonialism has been about political and strategic needs, and about oil. What do you think explains Cuba and the US-led coups in South America? Why do you think the US overthrew Iran’s democratically elected president in the 1960s? Why do you think we keep fighting wars in Iraq?

Sure, colonizers provided an entree for missionaries in some places. But they had very different, secular/atheist motives.

Also, please explain what’s going on in the Ukraine and the role of atheist colonizers vs. (non-existent) missionaries, TIA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume people aren’t saying that Christian missionaries should be allowed to do whatever they want, harming cultures and people in the process, because followers of atheist philosophy have killed millions…

Nobody said that. Of course not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m against proselytizing. But you have to admit, DCUM’s hateful anti-religion proselytizers are just as bad.

What? Proselytization by Christian missionaries has resulted in the death of millions over the course of the past few centuries. That is not an exaggeration. It has also resulted in laws which punish homosexuality by death. It has torn apart communities, separated families, imposed foreign rule and white dominance.

DCUM meanwhile is typing feverishly on a website. Hurting your feelings, I guess?

Yup, just as bad.

Atheists in Cambodia and China and elsewhere have killed many more millions. Your point?

If you want to compare the death tolls from colonialism vs. communism, colonialism will win. British imposed famines alone might get you there

The Cultural Revolution in China (talk about eradicating a local culture) led to at least 30 million deaths, some say as many as 80 million.

The potato famine caused 1 million deaths. I’m not aware of other “colonialist imposed” (as opposed to happened-during) famines, but I’m happy to be shown others. Colonialism led to many more deaths by straight-up war and oppression.

The point, though, is that many here are confusing colonialism with missionaries when they talk about millions of deaths. And none seems as bad as something like the atheist-led Cultural Revolution.

You have lost your mind - https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf

You have no ability to reason. Indians were killed in this country for their land, and they were killed for the resources on their land (in South America, that would be copper, silver and gold). Not for religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m against proselytizing. But you have to admit, DCUM’s hateful anti-religion proselytizers are just as bad.

What? Proselytization by Christian missionaries has resulted in the death of millions over the course of the past few centuries. That is not an exaggeration. It has also resulted in laws which punish homosexuality by death. It has torn apart communities, separated families, imposed foreign rule and white dominance.

DCUM meanwhile is typing feverishly on a website. Hurting your feelings, I guess?

Yup, just as bad.

Atheists in Cambodia and China and elsewhere have killed many more millions. Your point?

If you want to compare the death tolls from colonialism vs. communism, colonialism will win. British imposed famines alone might get you there

The Cultural Revolution in China (talk about eradicating a local culture) led to at least 30 million deaths, some say as many as 80 million.

The potato famine caused 1 million deaths. I’m not aware of other “colonialist imposed” (as opposed to happened-during) famines, but I’m happy to be shown others. Colonialism led to many more deaths by straight-up war and oppression.

The point, though, is that many here are confusing colonialism with missionaries when they talk about millions of deaths. And none seems as bad as something like the atheist-led Cultural Revolution.

You have lost your mind - https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf

You have no ability to reason. Indians were killed in this country for their land, and they were killed for the resources on their land (in South America, that would be copper, silver and gold). Not for religion.

I think Ferdinand and Isabella wanted silver and gold for sure, but sent missionaries on the voyages to convert the native people to Christianity. There's no question the two went hand in hand. Consequently, this religion was imposed on the native peoples at the point of a sword. Of course, the conquistadors were much worse than modern day missionaries, but the OP is talking about what she sees going on today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about all the (purportedly) non-religious missionaries acting under the activist label who travel throughout the world promoting and expanding various social movements that go against traditional values in many societies? Should they be banned? Or is what they do OK because people in the developed world think they are right and the traditional values they oppose are outmoded? How is that not cultural imperialism?

True- I’m sure all the people spewing hate towards missionaries for not respecting traditional cultures are absolutely fine with the organizations that go to these cultures to promote/push family planning.

You have something against family planning?

I have something against hypocrites that criticize Christians missionaries for disrespecting local culture’s while praising others for doing the same when it aligns with their values.

I think you're against family planning. Thank goodness there are organizations that will provide these urgently needed services. And no sermon about Jesus gets rammed down their throats at the same time.

I promise you that most missionaries believe just as strongly that these people are urgently in need of god as you believe they are in need of having the benefits of family planning rammed down their throat.

Um.. when you say "god," which god? Is it your god that you're going to ram down their throats? Seems like Religious imperialism to me. Why not respect their local cultures and traditions?

Why not respect their traditions that promote having large families?

You avoided answering the question, but o.k. I don't think many women of the world would agree with having large families if they had a choice, and the demand for family planning is great and is welcomed in many countries (and these services are only available in places where they are welcomed). Ramming your god down their throats is not needed and is, in fact, disrespectful and completely not needed. See the difference?

DP, but the irony that's being pointed out here is that family planning is just as much being rammed down throats, which is to say it's not in either case. People are given the option of family planning, despite it being contradictory to many traditional cultures. People are similarly given the option of becoming Christian, despite that not being a religion native to the area. (This is not how missionaries have always worked granted, but today it is). You're happy to send people to spread the good news of birth control, though. Personally, I'm fine with both, and I trust people, even poor people in developing countries to make these choices for themselves.

It's also very strange to see this set in the context of "Eastern Religions" in Southeast Asia, given that the most common Eastern religion in the region is Buddhism which spread there through missionaries.

Should we ban Buddhist proselytizers in the US? There’s nothing be at work who never stops talking about Buddhism.

What?

Thanks, spellcheck, although it was obvious anyway. There’s a Buddhist in my office who talk constantly about how great Buddhism is. Should she be sent to SE Asia? Should HR sanctioned her?

Not pp but I'm not aware of any Buddhists that have their missionaries do outreach work in communities across the US. Nor Muslim, or Hindu for that matter. Do they exist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I am from South East Asia and was born into one of the eastern religions. It absolutely enrages me to see western Christians come to third-world countries to convert us, trying to destroy our local practices, languages because they think they know better than us. The absolute disdain they have towards us brown people is disgusting. I think they should just be banned by all governments. Want to do humanitarian work - enroll with non-religious AID organizations. Keep your bible and your prejudice to yourself.

np It may be racists but, just FYI there are Jehovah witness's and Moromon's that used to come to my door and try to convert me. I am white and Episcopalian. I just say "no thank you" Why do you want to censor someone? There is really no need to ban something if you have no intention of changing or joining. Are you talking about banning it in America or the other countries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m against proselytizing. But you have to admit, DCUM’s hateful anti-religion proselytizers are just as bad.

What? Proselytization by Christian missionaries has resulted in the death of millions over the course of the past few centuries. That is not an exaggeration. It has also resulted in laws which punish homosexuality by death. It has torn apart communities, separated families, imposed foreign rule and white dominance.

DCUM meanwhile is typing feverishly on a website. Hurting your feelings, I guess?

Yup, just as bad.

Atheists in Cambodia and China and elsewhere have killed many more millions. Your point?

If you want to compare the death tolls from colonialism vs. communism, colonialism will win. British imposed famines alone might get you there

The Cultural Revolution in China (talk about eradicating a local culture) led to at least 30 million deaths, some say as many as 80 million.

The potato famine caused 1 million deaths. I’m not aware of other “colonialist imposed” (as opposed to happened-during) famines, but I’m happy to be shown others. Colonialism led to many more deaths by straight-up war and oppression.

The point, though, is that many here are confusing colonialism with missionaries when they talk about millions of deaths. And none seems as bad as something like the atheist-led Cultural Revolution.

You have lost your mind - https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf

You have no ability to reason. Indians were killed in this country for their land, and they were killed for the resources on their land (in South America, that would be copper, silver and gold). Not for religion.

I think Ferdinand and Isabella wanted silver and gold for sure, but sent missionaries on the voyages to convert the native people to Christianity. There's no question the two went hand in hand. Consequently, this religion was imposed on the native peoples at the point of a sword. Of course, the conquistadors were much worse than modern day missionaries, but the OP is talking about what she sees going on today.

The point is, the missionaries weren’t the ones killing people—the killing was being done for secular reasons. I was responding to pp (you?) who claimed missionaries were responsible for millions of deaths. No, that was economically motivated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m against proselytizing. But you have to admit, DCUM’s hateful anti-religion proselytizers are just as bad.

What? Proselytization by Christian missionaries has resulted in the death of millions over the course of the past few centuries. That is not an exaggeration. It has also resulted in laws which punish homosexuality by death. It has torn apart communities, separated families, imposed foreign rule and white dominance.

DCUM meanwhile is typing feverishly on a website. Hurting your feelings, I guess?

Yup, just as bad.

Atheists in Cambodia and China and elsewhere have killed many more millions. Your point?

If you want to compare the death tolls from colonialism vs. communism, colonialism will win. British imposed famines alone might get you there

The Cultural Revolution in China (talk about eradicating a local culture) led to at least 30 million deaths, some say as many as 80 million.

The potato famine caused 1 million deaths. I’m not aware of other “colonialist imposed” (as opposed to happened-during) famines, but I’m happy to be shown others. Colonialism led to many more deaths by straight-up war and oppression.

The point, though, is that many here are confusing colonialism with missionaries when they talk about millions of deaths. And none seems as bad as something like the atheist-led Cultural Revolution.

You have lost your mind - https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf

You have no ability to reason. Indians were killed in this country for their land, and they were killed for the resources on their land (in South America, that would be copper, silver and gold). Not for religion.

I think Ferdinand and Isabella wanted silver and gold for sure, but sent missionaries on the voyages to convert the native people to Christianity. There's no question the two went hand in hand. Consequently, this religion was imposed on the native peoples at the point of a sword. Of course, the conquistadors were much worse than modern day missionaries, but the OP is talking about what she sees going on today.

The point is, the missionaries weren’t the ones killing people—the killing was being done for secular reasons. I was responding to pp (you?) who claimed missionaries were responsible for millions of deaths. No, that was economically motivated.

That's a good way to whitewash history. I bet you also say that the Civil War was primarily about the economies, right? Same same.

[Anonymous]

From the Wikipedia, about Hudson Taylor:

Taylor was known for his sensitivity to Chinese culture and zeal for evangelism. He adopted wearing native Chinese clothing even though this was rare among missionaries of that time...Taylor was able to preach in several varieties of Chinese, including Mandarin, Chaozhou, and the Wu dialects of Shanghai and Ningbo... The arrival of the largest party of missionaries ever sent to China, as well as their intent to be dressed in native clothing, gave the foreign settlement in Shanghai much to talk about and some criticism began for the young China Inland Mission. The party donned Chinese clothing, notwithstanding, even the women missionaries, which was deemed semi-scandalous at the time. When other missionaries sought to preserve their British ways, Taylor was convinced that the Gospel would only take root on Chinese soil if missionaries were willing to affirm the culture of the people they were seeking to reach. He argued, from the example of the Apostle Paul, not sinful become like the Chinese, that by all means we may save some.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m against proselytizing. But you have to admit, DCUM’s hateful anti-religion proselytizers are just as bad.

What? Proselytization by Christian missionaries has resulted in the death of millions over the course of the past few centuries. That is not an exaggeration. It has also resulted in laws which punish homosexuality by death. It has torn apart communities, separated families, imposed foreign rule and white dominance.

DCUM meanwhile is typing feverishly on a website. Hurting your feelings, I guess?

Yup, just as bad.

Atheists in Cambodia and China and elsewhere have killed many more millions. Your point?

If you want to compare the death tolls from colonialism vs. communism, colonialism will win. British imposed famines alone might get you there

The Cultural Revolution in China (talk about eradicating a local culture) led to at least 30 million deaths, some say as many as 80 million.

The potato famine caused 1 million deaths. I’m not aware of other “colonialist imposed” (as opposed to happened-during) famines, but I’m happy to be shown others. Colonialism led to many more deaths by straight-up war and oppression.

The point, though, is that many here are confusing colonialism with missionaries when they talk about millions of deaths. And none seems as bad as something like the atheist-led Cultural Revolution.

You might want to research Indian history before making those pronouncements

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Not pp but I'm not aware of any Buddhists that have their missionaries do outreach work in communities across the US. Nor Muslim, or Hindu for that matter. Do they exist?

https://money.howstuffworks.com/economics/volunteer/information/missionaries4.htm
In fact, Buddhists were responsible for the first wide-scale missionary work. The religion holds that its tenets are universal and meant for all people around the world [source: Jestice]. As early as the third century B.C., King Asoka asked Buddhist missionaries to go and spread the religion beyond India.

https://www.bu.edu/cura/buddhist-missionaries-in-the-era-of-globalization/
They provide instructive comparisons with Anglo-American Protestant missionary thinking and offer insights into the internal dynamics of Sri Lankan and Japanese missions as they make their way in Protestant and Catholic societies. Also included are nuanced studies of two major missionary figures in late twentieth-century Chinese Buddhism and a fascinating look at the present Dalai Lama’s relationships with his devotees and the American government, viewed through an exposition of the abiding tradition within Tibetan Buddhism that combines mission activity with the political goals of exiled lamas.

Probably nothing compared to LDS, but Buddhists are definitely missionaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m against proselytizing. But you have to admit, DCUM’s hateful anti-religion proselytizers are just as bad.

What? Proselytization by Christian missionaries has resulted in the death of millions over the course of the past few centuries. That is not an exaggeration. It has also resulted in laws which punish homosexuality by death. It has torn apart communities, separated families, imposed foreign rule and white dominance.

DCUM meanwhile is typing feverishly on a website. Hurting your feelings, I guess?

Yup, just as bad.

Atheists in Cambodia and China and elsewhere have killed many more millions. Your point?

If you want to compare the death tolls from colonialism vs. communism, colonialism will win. British imposed famines alone might get you there

The Cultural Revolution in China (talk about eradicating a local culture) led to at least 30 million deaths, some say as many as 80 million.

The potato famine caused 1 million deaths. I’m not aware of other “colonialist imposed” (as opposed to happened-during) famines, but I’m happy to be shown others. Colonialism led to many more deaths by straight-up war and oppression.

The point, though, is that many here are confusing colonialism with missionaries when they talk about millions of deaths. And none seems as bad as something like the atheist-led Cultural Revolution.

You might want to research Indian history before making those pronouncements

The Indian Wars and the Trail of Tears were about territory not religion.