Using toy drives to proselytize to needy families

[lilith]

Sorry to keep going with personal anecdotes, but I want to reiterate something.

The year I needed help at Christmas time for my children I was referred to a charity organised by a group of different churches.

If I had been forced to take evangelical literature with the toys for the kids I would have been offended. I would have felt used, like my poverty and worry about my kids was being used to draw me in, but that the actual concern of the organisation was evangelising,not helping my children celebrate Christmas, which was the need that had brought me to their door.

However........

After a lovely group of volunteers helped me select presents for my children in a very generous and caring manner, and urged me to accept a gift for myself, and told me to take all the kids books I could carry because apparently most parents weren't taking any, after all that unconditional help I was offered a bible, a children's bible and a childrens book telling "The Christmas Story". And I accepted a copy of The Christmas Story that is still on my children's bookshelf. If they have an interest in Christianity, that book is there to start a conversation about Jesus. And they all have asked at various points, and for now they accept my explanation that he was an exceptional man who lived long ago and that because he was so exceptional many people thought he must be the son of God, but since I don't believe in a god I don't think that.

But the point is that the book is in this most secular of homes, that if the kids feel led to learn more after reading it they can, and it was given in a way that I didn't resent or feel was intrusive or dismissive of my lifestyle and beliefs. The help I needed wasn't dependent on accepting it, and the actual needs that brought me to the organisation were filled with care and empathy before I was offered religious materials, so there was no sense of having to accept them. It can be done with grace, but an unsolicited chick tract is not graceful, and it's sure as hell not what Jesus would do.

[JesusFightClub]

What if it were people handing out pornographic leaflets to kids on Halloween?

I think there's this underlying assumption that everyone surely must find gospel tracts harmless because somehow deep down we're all supposed to be some flavor of generic Christian, even if perhaps backslidden.

But it's not that way.

This.

I say again to evangelical Christians, I STRONGLY doubt you'd want your kid to find a leaflet from me convincing them of the joys of Communism (or attempting to) in their present. So you would think my nieces (being brought up by an atheist) would like to see an agitational leaflet by Christians why?

[lilith]

This.

I say again to evangelical Christians, I STRONGLY doubt you'd want your kid to find a leaflet from me convincing them of the joys of Communism (or attempting to) in their present. So you would think my nieces (being brought up by an atheist) would like to see an agitational leaflet by Christians why?

And some tracts, especially the comic book ones, are more offensive than pornography. I would much rather my children saw pictures of naked people than the graphic horror, horrible racism and paranoid visions of demons and the occult that some Christians feel are appropriate to hand out unsolicited.

[formergothardite]

Sex is actually easier to explain to a child than "Some people believe you are going to a place of eternal torture because you don't believe like them."

[MarthaMarcyMayMarlen]

I do agree the violent demon bullshit ones are inappropiate. But I go through my kids bags to check the candy anyway so if there is something I don't approve of I remove it. No big deal.

[formergothardite]

All of them are, Martha. Any tract given to a child to try and get them to convert to a religion is innapropriate.

[MarthaMarcyMayMarlen]

Nobody is forcing you to go door to door to complete strangers for candy. You could just throw the tracts away but if the mere presence of a tract within 3 feet of you or your child will make you break out in hives then stay home. Damn.

[formergothardite]

Um I thought we were talking about churches using situations where poor children need help to try and give them tracts. Like OCC or the churches that will provide clothes/toys/food, but also insist on giving the children Bible booklets, tracts and tell them the gospel story. Did I miss the change in conversation?

There is no situation in which it is appropriate to give a child a religious tract without getting the consent of the parents.

[Guest Anonymous]

Is she on the wrong thread? :lol:

[MarthaMarcyMayMarlen]

Someone mentioned getting tracts on halloween.

But I still don't see the problem with them handing out materials with the Christmas gifts. Same thing applies. If you don't like it then throw them away.

[MarthaMarcyMayMarlen]

Um I thought we were talking about churches using situations where poor children need help to try and give them tracts. Like OCC or the churches that will provide clothes/toys/food, but also insist on giving the children Bible booklets, tracts and tell them the gospel story. Did I miss the change in conversation?

There is no situation in which it is appropriate to give a child a religious tract without getting the consent of the parents.

If a parent is going to a CHURCH for gifts then they should expect that. Common sense is not so common.

[Witsec7]

If a parent is going to a CHURCH for gifts then they should expect that. Common sense is not so common.

Consent is an operating factor here. Just because the adults in a family consent to receiving gifts from a religiously affiliated group doesn't mean the parents gave their consent for their children to be preyed upon.

[formergothardite]

Someone mentioned getting tracts on halloween.

But I still don't see the problem with them handing out materials with the Christmas gifts. Same thing applies. If you don't like it then throw them away.

Because you are forcing needy families who don't want their children to recieve such info to choose between their children going without or having to expose them to religious beliefs that they don't want their children to be exposed to.

A lot of these things are handed to the children as if they are gifts or even wrapped as gifts. If they handed them to the parents, it would be different, but often they don't.

[formergothardite]

Sure churches GET to do that, but if they can't help the poor without also seeing it as an opportunity to try and force their religion on others, well, they suck and it isn't love or compassion, it is actually selfish because they are putting their desire to win converts over the wants of the people they are helping.

[countressrascal]

They come for the freebies and never come back until the next give away. At least some kids are going to have toys for Christmas, which is a good thing.

[MarthaMarcyMayMarlen]

Sure churches GET to do that, but if they can't help the poor without also seeing it as an opportunity to try and force their religion on others, well, they suck and it isn't love or compassion, it is actually selfish because they are putting their desire to win converts over the wants of the people they are helping.

It is love and compassion because they are trying to save their souls.

[formergothardite]

It is love and compassion because they are trying to save their souls.

Isn't real love, though. It is selfish, my religion is the only way and I'm going to exploit this opportunity where you need my help to try and get to to convert, love.

I know it is probably hard for you to see this since you are a Christian, but I was able to see it when I left religion. Real love is saying I will help you because you need help. That is it. Period. Not using it as an opportunity to win one for Christ. Just helping because someone needs help. That is true love and Christians would probably win more souls if they practiced it.

[Kaylee]

It is love and compassion because they are trying to save their souls.

OK, I'll bite. My husband is a bisexual atheist who leans more pagan than Christian if he was forced to choose a religion.

I'm sort of ambivalent right now - I don't believe anymore, t part of me still wishes I did, until I look around me and see all the crap being said in done in the name of Christianity. Oh, and I am willfully sinning in at least a couple ways on an ongoing basis, even by some of the most liberal interpretations of the Bible. Anyway, by most people's reckonign, we're going to hell - me probably doubly so because I was a fundie Christian for years and should know better.

So how is it loving and compassionate to tell my son that his parents are going to Hell and he'll never see them again when, even as an adult, I stressed out and had nightmares and panic attacks because I believed that about my own husband?

[MarthaMarcyMayMarlen]

Just helping because someone needs help. That is true love and Christians would probably win more souls if they practiced it.

[Anxious Girl]

It is love and compassion because they are trying to save their souls.

Hypothetical scenario: Let's say you said this to someone, and they reply with, "Oh, I already believe in God/Gods/and/Godesses. I'm an Anglican/Baptist/Calvanist/Evangelical/Eastern Orthodox Christian/Lutheran/Mormon/Protestant/Roman Catholic Christian; and I already believe in God and Jesus, so I don't need your religion? If somebody called the religion you're proselytizing false? If they said they were atheists that don't need saving because fundies are hypocrites, or spiritual people that believe in God/Gods/Godesses, Jesus and Heaven but don't want to join a religious subgroup because organized religion is seen as playing the persecution card when they're really the ones persecuting others?

Have you considered that not everybody is your brand of Christian, and that other people in the world may be Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Jews, Muslims or Sikhs who want to keep their religion and think that Christians want to take their religion from them? If they say that they don't like your prosleytizing 'cause that's equivalent to salesmen and is rude and why would you need to sell your religion in order to gain believers? Because, after all, if your religion is the most bestest and truthist, why do you need missionaries and tracts and such? Get my drift?

[gardenvarietycitizen]

It is love and compassion because they are trying to save their souls.

So you will be fine when the atheists come to tell your children why Christianity is not real and their parents are actually deluded fools?

That's the part it seems people don't get - to plenty of people, having their kids brainwashed with not only fairy tales but fairy tales specifically aimed at making them feel guilty for merely existing (original sin), suspend logical evidence based reasoning, and feel that their culture and parents are wrong, is not okay, and it's offensive. Intent is not magical.

Granted, if you're going to an actual church event, you might expect some preaching (and you can tell your kids it's all BS beforehand). But often the gift events aren't at actual churches, they're at clubs or other less easily able to detect events, or there's a middleman involved (as with the one that started all this). So sometimes the givers don't KNOW that their gifts are going to be bundled up with offensive tracts, and the parents of attendees don't know there will be preaching or tracts. That's complaint #1.

Complaint #2 is just calling out the proselytizing behavior for what it is - proselytizing. Yeah, it's giving gifts, but you're also trapping people in a hard situation (parents who can't afford to buy gifts for their kids) and pushing a message on them that they don't want, for what is ultimately your benefit (you get to do your duty of spreading the word). The kids aren't going to get hives, but you're making the parents feel uncomfortable, and while sure, they'll put up with it (as they put up with so much else already, being poor) it's just one more sting. Sure, it's easy to say "don't take the gifts then" but it's hard to look your kid in the face and say no, they can't go to the party that everyone is going to, or they won't be getting any gifts, when you know they're already pretty down just from day to day. And that just rubs in the guilt again, that you can't provide for your own kid.

Actual charity is done for the good of the recipient. There should not be strings. They should not need to "change" to get it, and the givers should (ideally) be anonymous.

I get that people handing out tracts often do sincerely mean well, too, but they really should think about the shoe being on the other foot.

Also I don't mean to imply that religious people aren't doing real charity, either - plenty do, just providing services day in and day out, and often it's to THEM that people start to ask, how can you do this all the time? And then find out, those people are inspired by philosophy or religion, when it really has a bigger impact.

[MarthaMarcyMayMarlen]

OK, I'll bite. My husband is a bisexual atheist who leans more pagan than Christian if he was forced to choose a religion.

I'm sort of ambivalent right now - I don't believe anymore, t part of me still wishes I did, until I look around me and see all the crap being said in done in the name of Christianity. Oh, and I am willfully sinning in at least a couple ways on an ongoing basis, even by some of the most liberal interpretations of the Bible. Anyway, by most people's reckonign, we're going to hell - me probably doubly so because I was a fundie Christian for years and should know better.

So how is it loving and compassionate to tell my son that his parents are going to Hell and he'll never see them again when, even as an adult, I stressed out and had nightmares and panic attacks because I believed that about my own husband?[/

quote]

I don't think it is loving to tell a kid his parents are going to hell. What I'm saying is that the church thinks its being loving by introducing the kid to Jesus.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

I should add too that messages along the line of "WE believe Christmas is Jesus' birth and so we give gifts to others to celebrate his generosity to us" or similar don't bother me, really, because it's a statement about the giver and not making any demands on the recipients. I'm fine with people giving me something as part of their celebration of their holiday, or attending events for groups I don't belong to. I just don't want them converting me - let me remain an outside observer, is all.

[MarthaMarcyMayMarlen]

I meant to put the word "church" in italics not the word "its"

[Anxious Girl]

The really sick thing that I realized since being here at FJ - it's I don't think that fundies/missionaries do charity work to feel good about themselves or to gain people for the Christian army. I think they do it 'cause they think if they give charity to "heathens" while handing out graphic comic tracts "preaching" the gospel, it'll give them more tickets to get their souls close to Heaven, which is what Martin Luther thought was sick (I forget what those tickets were called). They probably think that every time they proselytize the saving a soul for Jesus, which makes them close to Heaven because they're not like those heathens who aren't their brand of Christianity and don't proselytize themsleves, thinking that they're better than people who don't believe in their particular brand of Christianity because they're not in the group and haven't started (yet) to prosleytize their new tracts' beliefs. You should give to give, be nice to be nice, and care just to care, not do it for some spiritual award that your cult promises you.