Anonymous wrote:It's funny that these posters think criticizing mission trips is "mean".

I think it's "mean" to destroy communities, family relationships and cultural traditions just so that you can 'see first hand' how other people live.

It's selfish and mean to do harm to others so that you can act like you are bettering yourself. But wait, that's not even how mission trips advertise. They advertise that you are "saving others" that you are doing good for the the poor and poverty stricken.

So which is it? If mission trips are simply about selfish experience then advertise them like that. Something like, we are collecting money so we can go see what poverty is like in the highlands of Guatamala, thanks for the donation.

It's not like that though is it? You're going with these high horse ideals of harvesting "poor lost souls". These groups are disingenuous. That is mean.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm astonished by these responses. Have you actually been on any of these trips?

I am not religious and have never been, but was raised going to a church semi-regularly. My church partnered with others and went to Mexico every year for upwards of 25 years to build houses for homeless people in 2 specific towns, then a hospital and a school. I went on those trips for many years, starting at age 13, and they absolutely formed the person I am today and created a global, humanitarian perspective that I hope to pass on to my children. We would work alongside the soon-to-be homeowners pouring cement, raising roofs, installing windows. We developed real relationships with families and the community that continued for many many years.

Sadly, the dangers of the drug cartels stopped the trips about 5 years ago, but many participants have gone back on their own dime for short visits to maintain those friendships.

I can only hope that I'm able to offer similar experiences to my kids when they're older.

Perfect example of the rationalization that missionaries are steeped in. Because it helped YOU, it must have helped them. Not true.

I can say unequivocally that those families would disagree with you. It's amazing the difference having a solid roof over your head, instead of taped together refrigerator boxes, will do to help your present and your future. Once they had homes, nearly every single one of those families was able to have at least one member hold a job and be a productive member of his/her community. Nearly every single one of those children was able to go to school. Several of the kids I personally knew went on to college. Because they helped to build the houses and school, they were personally invested in their success. They were able to help their neighbors. They were able to feel pride in home ownership (surely something DCUM can understand). Tell them our combined efforts did not significantly better their lives.

You could have done better for those families by sending money to employ local laborers to build the houses. Then, not only would some folks have houses, but other folks would have jobs. These trips badly distort local economies by putting local builders out of work, and allow the cost of supplies to be unreasonably increased. Sure, it might work for the 3 families who get a new house, but it's overall very bad for the community.

You could do better good by getting off DCUM and going to give a sandwich to a homeless person right now but you're here enjoying being mean because it makes you feel good. Oh well, we're all human.

Joke's on you. I'm literally typing this from the developing world, where I'm handing out grant money to local organizations, since they are better situated to assess local needs and are better stewards of the funds than foreign missionaries.

No lie. Jeff can check my ISP. So, you see, I come by my smugness naturally.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm astonished by these responses. Have you actually been on any of these trips?

I am not religious and have never been, but was raised going to a church semi-regularly. My church partnered with others and went to Mexico every year for upwards of 25 years to build houses for homeless people in 2 specific towns, then a hospital and a school. I went on those trips for many years, starting at age 13, and they absolutely formed the person I am today and created a global, humanitarian perspective that I hope to pass on to my children. We would work alongside the soon-to-be homeowners pouring cement, raising roofs, installing windows. We developed real relationships with families and the community that continued for many many years.

Sadly, the dangers of the drug cartels stopped the trips about 5 years ago, but many participants have gone back on their own dime for short visits to maintain those friendships.

I can only hope that I'm able to offer similar experiences to my kids when they're older.

Perfect example of the rationalization that missionaries are steeped in. Because it helped YOU, it must have helped them. Not true.

I can say unequivocally that those families would disagree with you. It's amazing the difference having a solid roof over your head, instead of taped together refrigerator boxes, will do to help your present and your future. Once they had homes, nearly every single one of those families was able to have at least one member hold a job and be a productive member of his/her community. Nearly every single one of those children was able to go to school. Several of the kids I personally knew went on to college. Because they helped to build the houses and school, they were personally invested in their success. They were able to help their neighbors. They were able to feel pride in home ownership (surely something DCUM can understand). Tell them our combined efforts did not significantly better their lives.

You could have done better for those families by sending money to employ local laborers to build the houses. Then, not only would some folks have houses, but other folks would have jobs. These trips badly distort local economies by putting local builders out of work, and allow the cost of supplies to be unreasonably increased. Sure, it might work for the 3 families who get a new house, but it's overall very bad for the community.

You could do better good by getting off DCUM and going to give a sandwich to a homeless person right now but you're here enjoying being mean because it makes you feel good. Oh well, we're all human.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm astonished by these responses. Have you actually been on any of these trips?

I am not religious and have never been, but was raised going to a church semi-regularly. My church partnered with others and went to Mexico every year for upwards of 25 years to build houses for homeless people in 2 specific towns, then a hospital and a school. I went on those trips for many years, starting at age 13, and they absolutely formed the person I am today and created a global, humanitarian perspective that I hope to pass on to my children. We would work alongside the soon-to-be homeowners pouring cement, raising roofs, installing windows. We developed real relationships with families and the community that continued for many many years.

Sadly, the dangers of the drug cartels stopped the trips about 5 years ago, but many participants have gone back on their own dime for short visits to maintain those friendships.

I can only hope that I'm able to offer similar experiences to my kids when they're older.

Perfect example of the rationalization that missionaries are steeped in. Because it helped YOU, it must have helped them. Not true.

I can say unequivocally that those families would disagree with you. It's amazing the difference having a solid roof over your head, instead of taped together refrigerator boxes, will do to help your present and your future. Once they had homes, nearly every single one of those families was able to have at least one member hold a job and be a productive member of his/her community. Nearly every single one of those children was able to go to school. Several of the kids I personally knew went on to college. Because they helped to build the houses and school, they were personally invested in their success. They were able to help their neighbors. They were able to feel pride in home ownership (surely something DCUM can understand). Tell them our combined efforts did not significantly better their lives.

You could have done better for those families by sending money to employ local laborers to build the houses. Then, not only would some folks have houses, but other folks would have jobs. These trips badly distort local economies by putting local builders out of work, and allow the cost of supplies to be unreasonably increased. Sure, it might work for the 3 families who get a new house, but it's overall very bad for the community.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tim Kaine did exactly the same type of missionary work.

Do you find him obnoxious too?

NP.

As a matter of fact, yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tim Kaine did exactly the same type of missionary work.

Do you find him obnoxious too?

NP.

As a matter of fact, yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm astonished by these responses. Have you actually been on any of these trips?

I am not religious and have never been, but was raised going to a church semi-regularly. My church partnered with others and went to Mexico every year for upwards of 25 years to build houses for homeless people in 2 specific towns, then a hospital and a school. I went on those trips for many years, starting at age 13, and they absolutely formed the person I am today and created a global, humanitarian perspective that I hope to pass on to my children. We would work alongside the soon-to-be homeowners pouring cement, raising roofs, installing windows. We developed real relationships with families and the community that continued for many many years.

Sadly, the dangers of the drug cartels stopped the trips about 5 years ago, but many participants have gone back on their own dime for short visits to maintain those friendships.

I can only hope that I'm able to offer similar experiences to my kids when they're older.

Perfect example of the rationalization that missionaries are steeped in. Because it helped YOU, it must have helped them. Not true.

I can say unequivocally that those families would disagree with you. It's amazing the difference having a solid roof over your head, instead of taped together refrigerator boxes, will do to help your present and your future. Once they had homes, nearly every single one of those families was able to have at least one member hold a job and be a productive member of his/her community. Nearly every single one of those children was able to go to school. Several of the kids I personally knew went on to college. Because they helped to build the houses and school, they were personally invested in their success. They were able to help their neighbors. They were able to feel pride in home ownership (surely something DCUM can understand). Tell them our combined efforts did not significantly better their lives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If more people went to places like the Highlands of Guatamala and saw the poverty there there might be less Trump supporters. Its hard to have empathy for people fleeing those types of lives unless you have seen it first hand.

+1.

And that empathy does not evolve out of blindly sending money to people supposedly already "on the ground". Those people on the ground hopefully have empathy, and hopefully are fiscally responsible, but all it does for you is give you something charitable to talk about at your gala events.

So people can only be interested in something they have witnessed firsthand? And you shouldn't donate to charities just because they have produced a compelling plan, a record of success, and detailed financial records showing that they can do something for people you'll never meet?

Anonymous wrote:Tim Kaine did exactly the same type of missionary work.

Do you find him obnoxious too?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If more people went to places like the Highlands of Guatamala and saw the poverty there there might be less Trump supporters. Its hard to have empathy for people fleeing those types of lives unless you have seen it first hand.

+1.

And that empathy does not evolve out of blindly sending money to people supposedly already "on the ground". Those people on the ground hopefully have empathy, and hopefully are fiscally responsible, but all it does for you is give you something charitable to talk about at your gala events.