Missionaries should be banned

[Anonymous]

^ I admit, I do like a good Malbec

[Anonymous]

why are so many people trying to downplay the religiosity aspect of doing mission trips? Seems consistent with people nowadays who would rather say they are spiritual rather than "religious." So many comments here like "Oh no, we don't actually try to spread the gospel, we just heal sick people and maybe, you know, have a cross on the wall or something, but that's all." Right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:why are so many people trying to downplay the religiosity aspect of doing mission trips? Seems consistent with people nowadays who would rather say they are spiritual rather than "religious." So many comments here like "Oh no, we don't actually try to spread the gospel, we just heal sick people and maybe, you know, have a cross on the wall or something, but that's all." Right.

“Spiritual vs religious” poster has entered the room, still trying to make “fetch” happen.

Nobody is downplaying religious motives.

Instead we’re challenging the bigoted view that the only possible religious motive is to forcible convert people, by withholding heart surgery if necessary. No, missionaries have religious motives, but these are more likely to be religious tenets about charity and setting examples of love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about this:
-All missionaries are motivated to serve for religion reasons, varies by religion and individual.
-Some missionaries proselytize with deeds.
-Some missionaries proselytize with words.
-It's unethical to proselytize during vulnerable moments.

Anyone disagree?

Are you op? What country are you originally from? What negative impact did you see missionaries having in your country?

DP. I’d like to see answers to these questions too. What is pp’s skin in the game here?

probably the same poster who makes up scenarios about Christian proselytizing and then never answers questions about the situations.

there’s consistent posts here that follow the same pattern:

a poster posts about a situation that complains about Christian proselytizing and then when other people comment, they give vague answers or just disappear.

notice op won’t give the name of the country they are from, or answer what they saw in their country about this issue.

also posts about relatives or caregivers “proselytizing” her as a kid, and she never answers why her parents didn’t protect her from such people.

You seem to be confusing at least three different posters.

Is this a common problem for you? Confusing multiple posters? There are lots of people on the interwebs.

DP. Seems like it’s just you, over and over again.

That doesn’t matter though. You’re obviously just tossing out ad hominems in a transparent attempt to deflect from answering the questions yourself.

Go ahead, answer the questions for yourself! Instead of deflecting with ad hominems, you’re a perfect candidate for answering these questions. Are you waiting for the other 2 mythical posters like you to answer? What are you waiting for?

I haven't deflected with any ad hominens. You are confusing posters. Seems to be a common issue on here.

Your ad hominems in bold. Hope that helps.

Care to answer the questions now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op: what country are you originally from?

what was your experience with missionaries?

do you donate your time to working as a secular aid worker now?

Why do you think communist countries and countries under Sharia law ban, imprison, or kill missionaries, and why do you think that’s ok?

DP. Would you permit me to add:

What do you propose should replace the banned missionary work, given that several here have said secular aid doesn’t always exist in rural or dangerous places? (On a related note, why do you continue to maintain those pp’s were lying?) Should poor people just go without food and medical aid? (Said from the comfort of your warm couch, as you pour a third glass of Malbec.)

Why do you think poor people—in third world countries or Appalachia—are incapable of making their own decisions? (You’ve been asked this at least 20 times, still no real answer.)

I’ve been asked this. And I’ve answered multiple times.

But I’m not OP.

Supposing that’s true (which it’s not).

Care to answer the other questions about your personal experience with missionaries, whether you provide any help other than writing a check, how you think poor people will get on in places where you’ve banned missionaries and secular groups don’t go, and the rest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why are so many people trying to downplay the religiosity aspect of doing mission trips? Seems consistent with people nowadays who would rather say they are spiritual rather than "religious." So many comments here like "Oh no, we don't actually try to spread the gospel, we just heal sick people and maybe, you know, have a cross on the wall or something, but that's all." Right.

“Spiritual vs religious” poster has entered the room, still trying to make “fetch” happen.

Nobody is downplaying religious motives.

Instead we’re challenging the bigoted view that the only possible religious motive is to forcible convert people, by withholding heart surgery if necessary. No, missionaries have religious motives, but these are more likely to be religious tenets about charity and setting examples of love.

Sp religion-lite has turned into missionary-lit. I'll just repeat what I said above: Missionaries, by definition, are people who "spread the word." Those who are performing heart surgery are doing charity work. They may have been sent out by a religious organization, but they aren't doing "missionary" work, at least not the way Jesus intended it in Matthew. Paul is a classic example. And Mother Theresa tried to convert people on their death beds. So I guess she is kind of a mixed-case, because she did some valuable work also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why are so many people trying to downplay the religiosity aspect of doing mission trips? Seems consistent with people nowadays who would rather say they are spiritual rather than "religious." So many comments here like "Oh no, we don't actually try to spread the gospel, we just heal sick people and maybe, you know, have a cross on the wall or something, but that's all." Right.

“Spiritual vs religious” poster has entered the room, still trying to make “fetch” happen.

Nobody is downplaying religious motives.

Instead we’re challenging the bigoted view that the only possible religious motive is to forcible convert people, by withholding heart surgery if necessary. No, missionaries have religious motives, but these are more likely to be religious tenets about charity and setting examples of love.

Sp religion-lite has turned into missionary-lit. I'll just repeat what I said above: Missionaries, by definition, are people who "spread the word." Those who are performing heart surgery are doing charity work. They may have been sent out by a religious organization, but they aren't doing "missionary" work, at least not the way Jesus intended it in Matthew. Paul is a classic example. And Mother Theresa tried to convert people on their death beds. So I guess she is kind of a mixed-case, because she did some valuable work also.

should be: "So religion-lite has turned into missionary-lite."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about this:
-All missionaries are motivated to serve for religion reasons, varies by religion and individual.
-Some missionaries proselytize with deeds.
-Some missionaries proselytize with words.
-It's unethical to proselytize during vulnerable moments.

Anyone disagree?

Are you op? What country are you originally from? What negative impact did you see missionaries having in your country?

DP. I’d like to see answers to these questions too. What is pp’s skin in the game here?

probably the same poster who makes up scenarios about Christian proselytizing and then never answers questions about the situations.

there’s consistent posts here that follow the same pattern:

a poster posts about a situation that complains about Christian proselytizing and then when other people comment, they give vague answers or just disappear.

notice op won’t give the name of the country they are from, or answer what they saw in their country about this issue.

also posts about relatives or caregivers “proselytizing” her as a kid, and she never answers why her parents didn’t protect her from such people.

You seem to be confusing at least three different posters.

Is this a common problem for you? Confusing multiple posters? There are lots of people on the interwebs.

DP. Seems like it’s just you, over and over again.

That doesn’t matter though. You’re obviously just tossing out ad hominems in a transparent attempt to deflect from answering the questions yourself.

Go ahead, answer the questions for yourself! Instead of deflecting with ad hominems, you’re a perfect candidate for answering these questions. Are you waiting for the other 2 mythical posters like you to answer? What are you waiting for?

I haven't deflected with any ad hominens. You are confusing posters. Seems to be a common issue on here.

Your ad hominems in bold. Hope that helps.

Care to answer the questions now?

I asked questions about PP’s posting habits. Not a personal attack.

Which questions? I’ll answer - again - if you answer mine:

Agree or disagree?
-All missionaries are motivated to serve for religion reasons, varies by religion and individual.
-Some missionaries proselytize with deeds.
-Some missionaries proselytize with words.
-It's unethical to proselytize during vulnerable moments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why are so many people trying to downplay the religiosity aspect of doing mission trips? Seems consistent with people nowadays who would rather say they are spiritual rather than "religious." So many comments here like "Oh no, we don't actually try to spread the gospel, we just heal sick people and maybe, you know, have a cross on the wall or something, but that's all." Right.

“Spiritual vs religious” poster has entered the room, still trying to make “fetch” happen.

Nobody is downplaying religious motives.

Instead we’re challenging the bigoted view that the only possible religious motive is to forcible convert people, by withholding heart surgery if necessary. No, missionaries have religious motives, but these are more likely to be religious tenets about charity and setting examples of love.

Has anyone actually said this? No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op: what country are you originally from?

what was your experience with missionaries?

do you donate your time to working as a secular aid worker now?

Why do you think communist countries and countries under Sharia law ban, imprison, or kill missionaries, and why do you think that’s ok?

DP. Would you permit me to add:

What do you propose should replace the banned missionary work, given that several here have said secular aid doesn’t always exist in rural or dangerous places? (On a related note, why do you continue to maintain those pp’s were lying?) Should poor people just go without food and medical aid? (Said from the comfort of your warm couch, as you pour a third glass of Malbec.)

Why do you think poor people—in third world countries or Appalachia—are incapable of making their own decisions? (You’ve been asked this at least 20 times, still no real answer.)

I’ve been asked this. And I’ve answered multiple times.

But I’m not OP.

Supposing that’s true (which it’s not).

Care to answer the other questions about your personal experience with missionaries, whether you provide any help other than writing a check, how you think poor people will get on in places where you’ve banned missionaries and secular groups don’t go, and the rest?

There are multiple people posting so maybe you confused me with other posters.

- I'm not OP.
- I've recently addressed the question about "poor people making decisions". Again.
- I know people who were missionaries and they've shared a lot about their experiences.
- I donate globally and volunteer locally.
- I haven't said I wanted to ban missionaries. Only that missionaries shouldn't proselytize during vulnerable situations. Don't mix service & verbal persuasion.
- I didn't say people lied about presence of secular aid.
- I did ask why can't missionaries provide the same aid without religion - as a secular organization.
- I think people are capable of making their own decisions.
- I think it's unethical to try to persuade people when they are vulnerable and there is a power imbalance.
- I think killing is bad.
- I think people breaking the law in other countries do so at their own risk.
- I think countries should be able to make their own decisions about religion and missionaries - via democratic process.

For example, if Israel officially did ban missionaries (they haven't but considered it) - that would be their right if done democratically.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9707/08/israel.missionaries/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op: what country are you originally from?

what was your experience with missionaries?

do you donate your time to working as a secular aid worker now?

Why do you think communist countries and countries under Sharia law ban, imprison, or kill missionaries, and why do you think that’s ok?

DP. Would you permit me to add:

What do you propose should replace the banned missionary work, given that several here have said secular aid doesn’t always exist in rural or dangerous places? (On a related note, why do you continue to maintain those pp’s were lying?) Should poor people just go without food and medical aid? (Said from the comfort of your warm couch, as you pour a third glass of Malbec.)

Why do you think poor people—in third world countries or Appalachia—are incapable of making their own decisions? (You’ve been asked this at least 20 times, still no real answer.)

I’ve been asked this. And I’ve answered multiple times.

But I’m not OP.

Supposing that’s true (which it’s not).

Care to answer the other questions about your personal experience with missionaries, whether you provide any help other than writing a check, how you think poor people will get on in places where you’ve banned missionaries and secular groups don’t go, and the rest?

There are multiple people posting so maybe you confused me with other posters.

- I'm not OP.
- I've recently addressed the question about "poor people making decisions". Again.
- I know people who were missionaries and they've shared a lot about their experiences.
- I donate globally and volunteer locally.
- I haven't said I wanted to ban missionaries. Only that missionaries shouldn't proselytize during vulnerable situations. Don't mix service & verbal persuasion.
- I didn't say people lied about presence of secular aid.
- I did ask why can't missionaries provide the same aid without religion - as a secular organization.
- I think people are capable of making their own decisions.
- I think it's unethical to try to persuade people when they are vulnerable and there is a power imbalance.
- I think killing is bad.
- I think people breaking the law in other countries do so at their own risk.
- I think countries should be able to make their own decisions about religion and missionaries - via democratic process.

For example, if Israel officially did ban missionaries (they haven't but considered it) - that would be their right if done democratically.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9707/08/israel.missionaries/index.html

Why don’t you volunteer globally like religious missionaries do? What’s stopping you from providing secular aid to people in need in the 3rd world?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op: what country are you originally from?

what was your experience with missionaries?

do you donate your time to working as a secular aid worker now?

Why do you think communist countries and countries under Sharia law ban, imprison, or kill missionaries, and why do you think that’s ok?

DP. Would you permit me to add:

What do you propose should replace the banned missionary work, given that several here have said secular aid doesn’t always exist in rural or dangerous places? (On a related note, why do you continue to maintain those pp’s were lying?) Should poor people just go without food and medical aid? (Said from the comfort of your warm couch, as you pour a third glass of Malbec.)

Why do you think poor people—in third world countries or Appalachia—are incapable of making their own decisions? (You’ve been asked this at least 20 times, still no real answer.)

I’ve been asked this. And I’ve answered multiple times.

But I’m not OP.

Supposing that’s true (which it’s not).

Care to answer the other questions about your personal experience with missionaries, whether you provide any help other than writing a check, how you think poor people will get on in places where you’ve banned missionaries and secular groups don’t go, and the rest?

There are multiple people posting so maybe you confused me with other posters.

- I'm not OP.
- I've recently addressed the question about "poor people making decisions". Again.
- I know people who were missionaries and they've shared a lot about their experiences.
- I donate globally and volunteer locally.
- I haven't said I wanted to ban missionaries. Only that missionaries shouldn't proselytize during vulnerable situations. Don't mix service & verbal persuasion.
- I didn't say people lied about presence of secular aid.
- I did ask why can't missionaries provide the same aid without religion - as a secular organization.
- I think people are capable of making their own decisions.
- I think it's unethical to try to persuade people when they are vulnerable and there is a power imbalance.
- I think killing is bad.
- I think people breaking the law in other countries do so at their own risk.
- I think countries should be able to make their own decisions about religion and missionaries - via democratic process.

For example, if Israel officially did ban missionaries (they haven't but considered it) - that would be their right if done democratically.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9707/08/israel.missionaries/index.html

Why don’t you volunteer globally like religious missionaries do? What’s stopping you from providing secular aid to people in need in the 3rd world?

X10000. These posters complaining that there’s a void that is only being filled by missionaries—and we should ban those missionaries—don’t make a lot of sense to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op: what country are you originally from?

what was your experience with missionaries?

do you donate your time to working as a secular aid worker now?

Why do you think communist countries and countries under Sharia law ban, imprison, or kill missionaries, and why do you think that’s ok?

DP. Would you permit me to add:

What do you propose should replace the banned missionary work, given that several here have said secular aid doesn’t always exist in rural or dangerous places? (On a related note, why do you continue to maintain those pp’s were lying?) Should poor people just go without food and medical aid? (Said from the comfort of your warm couch, as you pour a third glass of Malbec.)

[b]Why do you think poor people—in third world countries or Appalachia—are incapable of making their own decisions? (You’ve been asked this at least 20 times, still no real answer.)

I’ve been asked this. And I’ve answered multiple times.

But I’m not OP.

Supposing that’s true (which it’s not).

Care to answer the other questions about your personal experience with missionaries, whether you provide any help other than writing a check, how you think poor people will get on in places where you’ve banned missionaries and secular groups don’t go, and the rest?

There are multiple people posting so maybe you confused me with other posters.

- I'm not OP.
- I've recently addressed the question about "poor people making decisions". Again.
- I know people who were missionaries and they've shared a lot about their experiences.
- I donate globally and volunteer locally.
- I haven't said I wanted to ban missionaries. Only that missionaries shouldn't proselytize during vulnerable situations. Don't mix service & verbal persuasion.
- I didn't say people lied about presence of secular aid.
- I did ask why can't missionaries provide the same aid without religion - as a secular organization.
- I think people are capable of making their own decisions.
- I think it's unethical to try to persuade people when they are vulnerable and there is a power imbalance.
- I think killing is bad.
- I think people breaking the law in other countries do so at their own risk.
- I think countries should be able to make their own decisions about religion and missionaries - via democratic process.

For example, if Israel officially did ban missionaries (they haven't but considered it) - that would be their right if done democratically.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9707/08/israel.missionaries/index.html

Why don’t you volunteer globally like religious missionaries do? What’s stopping you from providing secular aid to people in need in the 3rd world?

X10000. These posters complaining that there’s a void that is only being filled by missionaries—and we should ban those missionaries—don’t make a lot of sense to me.

??? The people saying we should ban the missionaries are saying we don't need your stinking services. Stay in your lane; we'll decide if we have a "void" and if so, who will fill it. It's not your decision to make what we "need."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op: what country are you originally from?

what was your experience with missionaries?

do you donate your time to working as a secular aid worker now?

Why do you think communist countries and countries under Sharia law ban, imprison, or kill missionaries, and why do you think that’s ok?

DP. Would you permit me to add:

What do you propose should replace the banned missionary work, given that several here have said secular aid doesn’t always exist in rural or dangerous places? (On a related note, why do you continue to maintain those pp’s were lying?) Should poor people just go without food and medical aid? (Said from the comfort of your warm couch, as you pour a third glass of Malbec.)

[b]Why do you think poor people—in third world countries or Appalachia—are incapable of making their own decisions? (You’ve been asked this at least 20 times, still no real answer.)

I’ve been asked this. And I’ve answered multiple times.

But I’m not OP.

Supposing that’s true (which it’s not).

Care to answer the other questions about your personal experience with missionaries, whether you provide any help other than writing a check, how you think poor people will get on in places where you’ve banned missionaries and secular groups don’t go, and the rest?

There are multiple people posting so maybe you confused me with other posters.

- I'm not OP.
- I've recently addressed the question about "poor people making decisions". Again.
- I know people who were missionaries and they've shared a lot about their experiences.
- I donate globally and volunteer locally.
- I haven't said I wanted to ban missionaries. Only that missionaries shouldn't proselytize during vulnerable situations. Don't mix service & verbal persuasion.
- I didn't say people lied about presence of secular aid.
- I did ask why can't missionaries provide the same aid without religion - as a secular organization.
- I think people are capable of making their own decisions.
- I think it's unethical to try to persuade people when they are vulnerable and there is a power imbalance.
- I think killing is bad.
- I think people breaking the law in other countries do so at their own risk.
- I think countries should be able to make their own decisions about religion and missionaries - via democratic process.

For example, if Israel officially did ban missionaries (they haven't but considered it) - that would be their right if done democratically.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9707/08/israel.missionaries/index.html

Why don’t you volunteer globally like religious missionaries do? What’s stopping you from providing secular aid to people in need in the 3rd world?

X10000. These posters complaining that there’s a void that is only being filled by missionaries—and we should ban those missionaries—don’t make a lot of sense to me.

??? The people saying we should ban the missionaries are saying we don't need your stinking services. Stay in your lane; we'll decide if we have a "void" and if so, who will fill it. It's not your decision to make what we "need."

So 3rd world, poverty stricken people are posting here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:op: what country are you originally from?

what was your experience with missionaries?

do you donate your time to working as a secular aid worker now?

Why do you think communist countries and countries under Sharia law ban, imprison, or kill missionaries, and why do you think that’s ok?

DP. Would you permit me to add:

What do you propose should replace the banned missionary work, given that several here have said secular aid doesn’t always exist in rural or dangerous places? (On a related note, why do you continue to maintain those pp’s were lying?) Should poor people just go without food and medical aid? (Said from the comfort of your warm couch, as you pour a third glass of Malbec.)

[b]Why do you think poor people—in third world countries or Appalachia—are incapable of making their own decisions? (You’ve been asked this at least 20 times, still no real answer.)

I’ve been asked this. And I’ve answered multiple times.

But I’m not OP.

Supposing that’s true (which it’s not).

Care to answer the other questions about your personal experience with missionaries, whether you provide any help other than writing a check, how you think poor people will get on in places where you’ve banned missionaries and secular groups don’t go, and the rest?

There are multiple people posting so maybe you confused me with other posters.

- I'm not OP.
- I've recently addressed the question about "poor people making decisions". Again.
- I know people who were missionaries and they've shared a lot about their experiences.
- I donate globally and volunteer locally.
- I haven't said I wanted to ban missionaries. Only that missionaries shouldn't proselytize during vulnerable situations. Don't mix service & verbal persuasion.
- I didn't say people lied about presence of secular aid.
- I did ask why can't missionaries provide the same aid without religion - as a secular organization.
- I think people are capable of making their own decisions.
- I think it's unethical to try to persuade people when they are vulnerable and there is a power imbalance.
- I think killing is bad.
- I think people breaking the law in other countries do so at their own risk.
- I think countries should be able to make their own decisions about religion and missionaries - via democratic process.

For example, if Israel officially did ban missionaries (they haven't but considered it) - that would be their right if done democratically.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9707/08/israel.missionaries/index.html

Why don’t you volunteer globally like religious missionaries do? What’s stopping you from providing secular aid to people in need in the 3rd world?

X10000. These posters complaining that there’s a void that is only being filled by missionaries—and we should ban those missionaries—don’t make a lot of sense to me.

??? The people saying we should ban the missionaries are saying we don't need your stinking services. Stay in your lane; we'll decide if we have a "void" and if so, who will fill it. It's not your decision to make what we "need."

So 3rd world, poverty stricken people are posting here?

Well, the OP did say something very similar to that, so I'm not sure.