 |
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
I donīt know how it is handled in other countries,
but I think in Germany these Missionaries could be tried for "failure to render assistance",
if as a result of their Inaction any of the villagers dies
(for example of starvation, or because a villager didnīt get a medicine which these missionaries had but refused to distribute)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
aneeshm
|
 |
Indore , Madhya Pradesh
Jul 2001
time: 11:00
|
|
When upper caste Hindus forced lower caste ones out of government-run relief camps , I condemned them . According to the upper-casters , the lower ones were unclean , and would add to the Karmic burden of the upper-casters . If I were Shi , I would defend them , saying that , from their viewpoint , what they were doing was justified . I did not . I consider myself secular , and that is why I condemned their behaviour . I frankly don't care what they think , and I condemn these Christain bigots equally , because my viewpoint is a secular one .
As a note : What the upper-casteists did was illegal , because they did not own the aid . What the Christains are doing is not , because the aid they are giving is theirs to give . Nobody can force me to give aid to a Hindu , Muslim , or Jew , or stop me from denying it to any of these communities , because I own the aid I give . It would be , however ( and , in this case , is ) , repulsive and disgusting .
@ Oredin
Atal Behari Vajpayee was not the Hindu nationalist . His party stayed in power due to a coalition of allies , and one of his allies was the Hindu nationalist party , the VHP and the RSS . Thus , he had to bow to some of their decisions . He was , in fact , the person who tried his best to curb this tendency ( and mostly succeeded ) . It was the rest of his party members who were more vocal Hindu nationalists . And Hindu nationalism had died down quite a bit after the election .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
A former leftist who wrote an expose on Mother Theresa a few years ago. He's currently a major critic of the left for his perception (not entirely inaccurate) of the left's opposition of the War on Terror. He has a column in Harper's and has for many years. His critiques are generally quite thoroughly researched. He also wrote The Trial of Henry Kissinger which fairly well lays out the claim the Kissinger was a war criminal, and Kissinger has don nothing except to say that Hitchens is wrong. No libel suit. His book on Mother Theresa was written while she was alive, and she didn't sue him either.
His two main accussations agains ther were the denial of care for those who wouldn't convert and the acceptance of money from questionable sources. |
Was there ever any corraboration of his story? I find it difficult to believe that an Indian government would have let this happen without a protest.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:30
|
|
Here's an interview with Hitchens if you want to read it.
http://www.secularhumanism.org/libr...chens_16_4.html
An article by Hitchens:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2090083/
From another site:
http://www.skreed.com/life/mother_theresa.html
quote:
Examining Mother Theresa's morality more closely, we should consider the facts that she supported the brutal dictatorship of Duvalier in Haiti; she "accepted over a million dollars from Charles Keating, the Lincoln Savings and Loans swindler, even though it had been shown to her that the money was stolen" (Hitchens); she vigorously campaigned to prevent divorce from becoming legal in Ireland; she squirreled away millions of dollars of donations in bank accounts while the children she was supposedly attempting to save starved to death; she stated on many occasions that human suffering was intrinsically good; and perhaps most damning of all, she was a tireless birth-control opponent who used her power against the humanists of India struggling to end the vicious cycle of over-population, poverty, and misery. |
Last edited by chegitz guevara on 18-01-2005 at 19:20
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Thinking you might get bad press isn't the same as feeling guilty. Believing (correctly) that others will disapprove of your actions isn't the same thing as believing your actions to be immoral, at least for those who don't believe that morality is tied to what the mob thinks. When a public figure avoids a reporter known to be hostile, it isn't because they are ashamed, but because they don't want to provide fuel for their attackers. |
Yeah, that's a great apologist answer. Or maybe they knew what they were doing was suczzy and fled to avoid getting questioned by the media? After all, they could have just stayed and given out the food to avoid this "hostile" press you cited.
That you would consider their actions moral is pretty bizarre. The bottom line is that when they left with their truckload of food, the men, women and children of the town were still starving. If you entered a village with a bunch of food, dangled it in front of starving people for any condition, and then fled with the food, leaving the people in hunger, I would say you were behaving plenty damned immoral.
Tell me, what moral good was done by leaving those people to starve?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:30
|
|
shi, by your logic showing up to a fire, with equipment to put it out but not putting it out would be a moral action.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:30
|
|
'Most of the 200 people here are homeless or displaced , battling to rebuild lives and locating lost family members besides facing risks of epidemic,disease and trauma.
Jubilant at seeing the relief trucks loaded with food, clothes and the much-needed medicines the villagers, many of who have not had a square meal in days, were shocked when the nuns asked them to convert before distributing biscuits and water. [....]
Disappointed and shocked into disbelief the hapless villagers still await aid.
"Many NGOs (volunteer groups) are extending help to us but there in our village the NGO, which was till now helping us is now asking us to follow the Christian religion. We are staunch followers of Hindu religion and refused their request. And after that these people with their aid materials are leaving the village without distributing that to us," Rajni Kumar, a villager said.'
The 'spirit' of Christianity? I think not.
' " And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward." '
Gospel According to Matthew, Chapter 10, v.42
' "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.
"Woe to you, blind guides! You say, `If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.'
You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred?" '
Gospel According to St Matthew, Chapter 23, v.15-17
and finally:
"Then he will say to those on his left, `Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' "They also will answer, `Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' "He will reply, `I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
Needless to say, Matthew again, Chapter 25, v.40-45.
I'd usually use the Authorized King James Version, but management speak English suffices, I think.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Here's an interview with Hitchens if you want to read it.
http://www.secularhumanism.org/libr...chens_16_4.html
An article by Hitchens:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2090083/
From another site:
http://www.skreed.com/life/mother_theresa.html
quote:
Examining Mother Theresa's morality more closely, we should consider the facts that she supported the brutal dictatorship of Duvalier in Haiti; she "accepted over a million dollars from Charles Keating, the Lincoln Savings and Loans swindler, even though it had been shown to her that the money was stolen" (Hitchens); she vigorously campaigned to prevent divorce from becoming legal in Ireland; she squirreled away millions of dollars of donations in bank accounts while the children she was supposedly attempting to save starved to death; she stated on many occasions that human suffering was intrinsically good; and perhaps most damning of all, she was a tireless birth-control opponent who used her power against the humanists of India struggling to end the vicious cycle of over-population, poverty, and misery. |
|
I think I'd like corraboration from a neutral source. For instance it's unlikely that she would have gotten such a large amount of money from Keating after it was known that he had committed fraud. I'm pretty certain that the US froze his assetts when they indicted him. Furthermore, if she squirreled away millioins of dollars what did she do with the loot. Surely she didn't spend it on herself.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Shi Huangdi
|
 |
Pittsburgh, PA
Apr 1999
time: 00:30
|
|
"When upper caste Hindus forced lower caste ones out of government-run relief camps , I condemned them . According to the upper-casters , the lower ones were unclean , and would add to the Karmic burden of the upper-casters ."
An example having absoluetly nothing to do with what happened here. These missionaries didn't force anybody to do anything, they made an offer. The upper-casters example in your exmaple did force, and in your case it was government run camp menaing it would be for all the people.
"And under the good samaritan law (remember your seinfeld?) it'd be illegal as well. Do you also side with George, Elaine, Kramer and Jerry?"
There is a Key difference here between the missionaries and between happened on Seinfeld. The Seinfeld stayed and laughed and were not helping anybody. A better example would be is if someone passed by someone in need of assistance because they were rushing to help their child who was also in need of assistance. In this case, the missionaries passed by people to help others who were facing the same need but also they felt more special ties to (their coreligionists).
Your point about the psychological harm is well taken, and is another reason why this wasn't the correct action, as this action was tactless. But it isn't likely that any harm was intentional, and in the end this was a private aid group and they have the right to distribute it as they want.
"Especially since she could have taken him and his publisher to the cleaners for even more money. "
Lawsuits are more time consuming and expensive then any of the activities you mentioned, and libel laws are very difficult to the enforce in the USA because of free speech considerations.
"
Yeah, that's a great apologist answer. Or maybe they knew what they were doing was suczzy and fled to avoid getting questioned by the media?"
We don't know, but there is no evidence as to that being the case. I would tend to think though that you wouldn't go off on a big religious expedition if you thought what you were doing was wrong as the point of religion is to do right. Now, in a case where we don't know their inner motivations, we could refrain from judging, be charitable, and assume the best(particularly when it deals with aid workers), but I guess it would be to wrong to ever expect such charity here.
"Tell me, what moral good was done by leaving those people to starve?"
If they prevented other people from starving.
" I find it grave insult that these christians are even allowed to operate."
So because they aren't distributing aid how you want, they aren't allowed to distribute aid at all, so even more people starve? What a moral position Gian.
"I don't give a damn about some made up heaven or some stupid damnation some stupid conservatives make up to scare people.. you have no right, no right at all, to reject ANYONE aid when they were afflicted with such a massive natural tragedy. If they want to go there to help, they should help every single person they can, christian.. muslim.. buddhist or otherwise.
What happens if it occurs in the US.. will I rejected aid because I'm gay and atheist? Answer that."
If you are giving aid, you have the right choose who you give it too. Now, if it is the case that you have enough aid to help everybody, it would be immoral to not do so. But if you have a finite amount of resources, it's not immoral to distribute it on whatever criteria you like, so long as you distribute it.
"shi, by your logic showing up to a fire, with equipment to put it out but not putting it out would be a moral action."
If there were two fires(In this case there are countless starving villages), and you only had enough resources to put out one, it would not be immoral to choose one over the other.
"
The 'spirit' of Christianity? I think not."
Your quotes demonstrate why you should help the needy, but not why the help is required to be random or else your are worse then people who don't give any help at all.
"Would you have been just as understanding if those weren't Christians but Muslims, Shi? Somehow, the word "terrorist" comes to mind."
Well IIRC, I remember hearing much of the moslem aid was directed specifically towards helping other moslems in the region. My position on that is the same as this: It would be better if they helped everyone, but so long as they are helping needy people, I have no right to morally condemnt that.
"
Now if those nuns had only gone to villages they knew were Christian and given their aid there, you'd have a more reasonable comparison "
They might not have had perfect knowledge of where this CHristians were, or they could have even been trying to find a convert community as Straybow mentioned and pulled up the wrong village by mistake.
Look, I know this an extremely tasteless act, and the image of driving away from starving villages with food is sickening. That the act does this is another reason why they absolutely should have delivered the aid. But what stirs our emotions isn't always a perfect guide to judging people, which is something we ought to be careful about it. Now this would be wrong on their part if either the donors who contributed were not reasonably aware the aid would but used liked this, or if as a result of this they weren't giving the aid to anybody. We have no evidence that either of these is the case, and so we are left with the fact that these people are on the ground with aid, presumably to help the needy. And so long as they are helping needy people, we don't have a basis for condemnation here.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
It still was an un-Christian thing to do.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
|
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
"The 'spirit' of Christianity? I think not."
Your quotes demonstrate why you should help the needy, but not why the help is required to be random or else your are worse then people who don't give any help at all.
|
No, my quotes show that these supposed 'Christians' offered blackmail- convert or you don't get aid.
Perhaps you should actually re-read the Gospel of St Matthew and point out to me the relevant passages where Jesus says
'Don't heal, bless, feed or clothe until they sign on the dotted line boys!'
It seems to me you're confusing your saviour with the likes of L. Ron Hubbard, Sun Myung Moon and Oral Roberts, or possibly the less reputable kind of realtor.
`I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
Perhaps you're mistaking Christianity with the Tempter in the wilderness?
Matthew 4:1-11
"Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungered. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If you be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
Note- it doesn't say apply this dietary regimen to victims of a disaster if they don't like the flavour of the snake oil you're peddling.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Giancarlo
|
 |
Los Angeles
Apr 2000
time: 02:30
|
|
quote:
If you are giving aid, you have the right choose who you give it too. Now, if it is the case that you have enough aid to help everybody, it would be immoral to not do so. But if you have a finite amount of resources, it's not immoral to distribute it on whatever criteria you like, so long as you distribute it. |
Wrong. If the people could die from starvation, it is very immoral. And if there is a hell, I hope these so called christians rot in it. They must help everybody they can and not discriminate on the basis of religion. What if a person is starving, and he is a muslim.. but the christian missionaries will not give him food because of his religion? Does he have to convert? I think you are trying to find excuses and that's just sick. There are more then enough groups on the ground, however that does not give any of these groups a reason to not give assistance out to those who need it.
quote:
they aren't allowed to distribute aid at all, so even more people starve? What a moral position Gian. |
Give the money and food to a secular organization who will not mess around with the religion of those effected. I think secular organizations (with the exception of the UN) are pretty good about this. And so according to you, only the damn christians are good enough to survive and others are not?
quote:
If you are giving aid, you have the right choose who you give it too. Now, if it is the case that you have enough aid to help everybody, it would be immoral to not do so. But if you have a finite amount of resources, it's not immoral to distribute it on whatever criteria you like, so long as you distribute it. |
If I was giving aid, I would give it to all that I can regardless of their religion, race or background. However, I believe in this case there was enough assistance and resources because of the massive international outcry and pouring of assistance. One group, Doctors without Borders, even said it had more then enough money. Like it or not, resources are not in inadequate supply. The entire world got down to business.
You still didn't answer my question. Because I'm atheist and gay is a reason for a group not to give me assistance if a disaster were to strike?
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-01-2005 12:05
|