Missionaries should be banned

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

DP: No, it’s not. Forcing one culture’s view of shame, self-hatred and misogyny onto another people in another culture is not “ok with me”. Using “religion” to justify it makes it even less “ok”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Discuss...

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

Wow. So, are you fine with the boarding schools and the genocide of Native American tribes and the Bible waving justifications for slavery in the US? Perhaps you could address the planks embedded in your own eyes. Everything that you’re railing against as “local traditions” has very clear parallels on Christian European cultures. It seems that you might know quite a bit about being “juvenile and I’ll-informed at best” and even more about being hypocritical. DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

Wow. So, are you fine with the boarding schools and the genocide of Native American tribes and the Bible waving justifications for slavery in the US? Perhaps you could address the planks embedded in your own eyes. Everything that you’re railing against as “local traditions” has very clear parallels on Christian European cultures. It seems that you might know quite a bit about being “juvenile and I’ll-informed at best” and even more about being hypocritical. DP

Boarding schools native American genocide was the government, not missionaries

[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:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

None of that justifies missionaries from forcing themselves and their beliefs on the Hawaiian people.

I wonder how you feel about authorities and governments “forcing themselves and their beliefs” on practitioners of FGM in the modern age.

Local governments have the authority to change their own communities.

Foreign people trying to play "savior" don't.

DP. The Uighers in China have zero authority to change their plight. I wonder if you’re as concerned about them and, if so, where is your DCUM thread on it?

Meanwhile, people being visited by missionaries can always say “no.” Or they can say “yes” for as long as it takes to get the medical care or get the well built, and then they can say “no” again.

Seems to me you have the relative burdens mixed up.

The last thing the Uyghurs need is for missionaries to go "help" them.

They don't need a bible. They need a powerful country like the US to use diplomatic pressure to force China to stop oppression and genocide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

Wow. So, are you fine with the boarding schools and the genocide of Native American tribes and the Bible waving justifications for slavery in the US? Perhaps you could address the planks embedded in your own eyes. Everything that you’re railing against as “local traditions” has very clear parallels on Christian European cultures. It seems that you might know quite a bit about being “juvenile and I’ll-informed at best” and even more about being hypocritical. DP

Boarding schools native American genocide was the government, not missionaries

+1. It was already pointed out (by me) above that the Indian Wars, the Trail of Tears, and more were the work of soldiers and whatever the equivalent of the Department of Interior was at that time.

It’s almost like you ignore anything that doesn’t comport with your position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

Wow. So, are you fine with the boarding schools and the genocide of Native American tribes and the Bible waving justifications for slavery in the US? Perhaps you could address the planks embedded in your own eyes. Everything that you’re railing against as “local traditions” has very clear parallels on Christian European cultures. It seems that you might know quite a bit about being “juvenile and I’ll-informed at best” and even more about being hypocritical. DP

Boarding schools native American genocide was the government, not missionaries

It wasn't just the government.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/us-churches-reckon-traumatic-legacy-native-schools-78994651
https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2021/10/08/methodist-lutheran-episcopal-native-american-residential-schools/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

Wow. So, are you fine with the boarding schools and the genocide of Native American tribes and the Bible waving justifications for slavery in the US? Perhaps you could address the planks embedded in your own eyes. Everything that you’re railing against as “local traditions” has very clear parallels on Christian European cultures. It seems that you might know quite a bit about being “juvenile and I’ll-informed at best” and even more about being hypocritical. DP

Boarding schools native American genocide was the government, not missionaries

+1. It was already pointed out (by me) above that the Indian Wars, the Trail of Tears, and more were the work of soldiers and whatever the equivalent of the Department of Interior was at that time.

It’s almost like you ignore anything that doesn’t comport with your position.

Custer and Andrew Jackson weren’t exactly missionaries. They were out for the territory, not God.

Why does anti-missionary pp post here if she’s not going to read any of the replies?

[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:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

None of that justifies missionaries from forcing themselves and their beliefs on the Hawaiian people.

I wonder how you feel about authorities and governments “forcing themselves and their beliefs” on practitioners of FGM in the modern age.

Local governments have the authority to change their own communities.

Foreign people trying to play "savior" don't.

Especially when they bring their bible with them. And make no mistake, that always comes along with any assistance they provide.

Some beliefs and practices don't die unless they are replaced by new beliefs
In India widows are no longer burned alive at their husbands funerals, but female fetuses are aborted, dowry system is alive and well
China has it's own problem with baby girls
Saudi Arabia is still a brutal place for a woman to be in

None of those "problems" are solved by forcing another religion on those people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

Wow. So, are you fine with the boarding schools and the genocide of Native American tribes and the Bible waving justifications for slavery in the US? Perhaps you could address the planks embedded in your own eyes. Everything that you’re railing against as “local traditions” has very clear parallels on Christian European cultures. It seems that you might know quite a bit about being “juvenile and I’ll-informed at best” and even more about being hypocritical. DP

Boarding schools native American genocide was the government, not missionaries

+1. It was already pointed out (by me) above that the Indian Wars, the Trail of Tears, and more were the work of soldiers and whatever the equivalent of the Department of Interior was at that time.

It’s almost like you ignore anything that doesn’t comport with your position.

DP. There are multiple bad actors.

It is true that the US government oppressed/killed indigenous people.

It is also true that religious people forced their religion, language, and traditions on indigenous people. (and injured/killed them along the way)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

Wow. So, are you fine with the boarding schools and the genocide of Native American tribes and the Bible waving justifications for slavery in the US? Perhaps you could address the planks embedded in your own eyes. Everything that you’re railing against as “local traditions” has very clear parallels on Christian European cultures. It seems that you might know quite a bit about being “juvenile and I’ll-informed at best” and even more about being hypocritical. DP

Boarding schools native American genocide was the government, not missionaries

It wasn't just the government.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/us-churches-reckon-traumatic-legacy-native-schools-78994651
https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2021/10/08/methodist-lutheran-episcopal-native-american-residential-schools/

Nobody is saying missionary schools were good—they weren’t.

You’re incapable of staying in the present, though. OP is criticizing present-day missionaries. But all you can come up with is past history. If you’re going to do that, then bringing up secular oppression of groups like the Uighers is absolutely on point and, what’s more, it’s relevant today.

You STILL haven’t condemned China’s role, let alone started a thread about the Uighers. You don’t seem the least concerned about Wahhabi and ISIS proselytizers who are oppressing people TODAY. Why not?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

None of that justifies missionaries from forcing themselves and their beliefs on the Hawaiian people.

I wonder how you feel about authorities and governments “forcing themselves and their beliefs” on practitioners of FGM in the modern age.

Local governments have the authority to change their own communities.

Foreign people trying to play "savior" don't.

Especially when they bring their bible with them. And make no mistake, that always comes along with any assistance they provide.

How many people in this thread have told you that’s not always the case, especially today. Please read all the responses, not just the ones from people you already agree with.

If you are merely bringing welcomed assistance with zero religion is that really "missionary" work? Maybe just call it charity work?

A big part of testifying is by example. So giving welcome assistance in itself is missionary work. A few posters above have said that about some Christian missionaries, and a Muslim poster above makes that point very clearly.

Given the nefarious history of "missionary work" it might be worth rebranding. And leave the bibles at home.

[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:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

Wow. So, are you fine with the boarding schools and the genocide of Native American tribes and the Bible waving justifications for slavery in the US? Perhaps you could address the planks embedded in your own eyes. Everything that you’re railing against as “local traditions” has very clear parallels on Christian European cultures. It seems that you might know quite a bit about being “juvenile and I’ll-informed at best” and even more about being hypocritical. DP

Boarding schools native American genocide was the government, not missionaries

It wasn't just the government.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/us-churches-reckon-traumatic-legacy-native-schools-78994651
https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2021/10/08/methodist-lutheran-episcopal-native-american-residential-schools/

Nobody is saying missionary schools were good—they weren’t.

You’re incapable of staying in the present, though. OP is criticizing present-day missionaries. But all you can come up with is past history. If you’re going to do that, then bringing up secular oppression of groups like the Uighers is absolutely on point and, what’s more, it’s relevant today.

You STILL haven’t condemned China’s role, let alone started a thread about the Uighers. You don’t seem the least concerned about Wahhabi and ISIS proselytizers who are oppressing people TODAY. Why not?

There are multiple people posting.

The oppression of Uyghurs is completely off-topic and a blatant deflection, but since you bring it up I am actually involved in supporting Uyghurs IRL.

Back to the topic of this thread:
Do you think missionaries at any point in history - even today - should be pushing religion on vulnerable people? Forcing them to change their language or culture or traditions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Discuss...

Why?

And who? And where? And when?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the OP is talking about those who come to her part of the world to "convert us." I don't thinks she's talking about the ones who just duig wells, provide medical services and, you know, spread the love. So to stay on topic the responses should be about those missionaries who try to spread the word, tell the people how to obtain eternal salvation and so forth.

Does “spreading the love” mean encouraging indigenous people to “let go” of traditional beliefs?

you should ask the person who said that. I don't think anyone really believes that's all missionaries do.

Is that ok for any missionaries to do?

It depends on what you believe I guess. The missionaries in Hawaii got the females to cover up their toplessness because the Bible (from the midd-east) deemed it immoral. Is that ok with you?

The missionaries shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
They certainly shouldn’t have have forced any changes to local traditions & customs & religion.

At the same time, some local traditions would have prevented them from catching up to the modern times.
They needed to learn to read and write, do away with the custom of walking topless and the taboo of men and women eating together.
A new century was on their doorstep and they needed the skills to navigate it in order to survive as a people

“Local traditions” in the Hawaiian culture included the abandonment/exposure of infants deemed “defective.” Also the maintenance of a caste system that included a slave caste others considered disgusting. Incestuous marriages among the elite, death penalty inflicted at whim by the ruling class, and human sacrifice were also traditional practices.

In other parts of the world, “traditional practices” to this day include “honor killings,” forcible concubinage, involuntary servitude, and the murder of homosexuals, among other things.

The notion that “traditional practices” represent some sort of divine Eden that must never be interfered with is juvenile and ill-informed at best.

None of that justifies missionaries from forcing themselves and their beliefs on the Hawaiian people.

I wonder how you feel about authorities and governments “forcing themselves and their beliefs” on practitioners of FGM in the modern age.

Local governments have the authority to change their own communities.

Foreign people trying to play "savior" don't.

Especially when they bring their bible with them. And make no mistake, that always comes along with any assistance they provide.

How many people in this thread have told you that’s not always the case, especially today. Please read all the responses, not just the ones from people you already agree with.

If you are merely bringing welcomed assistance with zero religion is that really "missionary" work? Maybe just call it charity work?

A big part of testifying is by example. So giving welcome assistance in itself is missionary work. A few posters above have said that about some Christian missionaries, and a Muslim poster above makes that point very clearly.

Given the nefarious history of "missionary work" it might be worth rebranding. And leave the bibles at home.

Deflection. Try again and address the point.