not to contribute to the Shoebox Appeal

[teamboleyn]

because it has a Christian message 'attached'? I have nothing against Christianity but can they not do a charitable act without having an ulterior motive?

As I said earlier, I don't have much money but I have a monthly standing order set up to the NSPCC and the Red Cross as obviously a monetary donation is a better option. The shoebox and the selection boxes are just what I like to do at Christmas, they are Christmas gifts.

These are my choices, and I shall continue to do them. I've really had enough if justifying what I do now.

I generally give sensibly but once a year I like to do something frivolous and fun for the child, on top, it is just an extra and not either/or.

Raven, i realise the thread has moved on but my main point was that some critics don't care to differentiate between a charity that -allegedly - dresses up a propaganda drive as charitable giving and other, also Christian, organisations that provide help unconditionally to those who need, and can benefit from, it because they think that all Christian charity that involves sharing the Christian message is wrong by definition. I was disagreeing. There are, indeed, alternatives. I am taking more or less on trust that the one I support (not OCC) is one of the good ones that has a positive effect, while sharing the Good News without condition or expectation.

Apart from one or two posts I think that most people have been fairly vocal that it is the Samaritan's Purse charity which they disagree with, in particular the fact that they are a bit selective with their information on evangelising. This is particularly relevant because so many schools organise collections and it may be against equal equality policies and many parents who may not otherwise agree with the charity or the religion give because it is sanctioned by the school.
Most people have stated that if you want to give a shoebox knowing this then it is of course your choice. We have pointed out some alternative methods of giving. (Some of these are indeed religious organisations-Mary's Meals for example.)Some of us have pointed out that there may be better ways of giving. I don't think it was made personal and I am sure some people have put a lot of thought into it-however many people do fill them with tat which seems to be unfair to the children who receive them.
The original AIBU was along the lines of " not to give to OCC?" and that was what I and many others answered.

YANBU - it is personal choice. I do think it unfair to call it tat- I'm sure that most people give it thought.

If propaganda/ advertising didn't work, organisations wouldn't use it. This particular scheme seems to have it sewn up in that they are getting people to donate the medium in order that they can deliver their highly dubious message! And if you don't want to join in your obviously a heartless bastard who wants to deny poor kiddies a Christmas present. It's marketing genius and it's absolutely despicable.

I suppose the problems of pester power and the ethics of marketing religion to children don't apply to poor children in other countries like they do to our children here. Surely genuine charity is given freely, with no strings?

MsH, I prefer the charity I support not to come with any sharing of the donors's beliefs in the direction of the recipients.

I think there's such a power imbalance that it could not EVER be ok to be saying 'Here's some stuff which I'm sure will come in useful. Now I'm going to tell you about my beliefs. You can, of course, tell me where to shove my culturally inappropriate leaflet, but there'll be more presents if you & your children humour me'.

So I'm still pondering on what to support instead, and I think I'm going to donate to Crisis at Christmas, giving the homeless something this Christmas, now to sell it to the boys

Or the other idea I had was the local food bank.

How about Oxfam online, Willaby?
They have things that are practical for the recipients but fun for the giver, like goats

Also, there are soup kitchens/food parcel services springing up all round the country as the recession bites.

And the shoebox schemes that aren't OCC seem OK.

Many charities need time rather than things at Christmas. If you've got any time to give, contact your local volunteer centre, which will put you in touch with somewhere...

I've just bought some lovely things to finish off my box, I've nearly done now.
I bought a nice doll (to cuddle) Haribos (to eat, yum and some felt tips and colouring books.
Just need a hat and gloves to go in now and I'm done.
How the bleedin' heck sweets and warm hats and gloves counts as a box of tat baffles me

Raven, I see no justification in assuming that any such message is communicated, explicitly or implicitly, in schemes like this (leaving OCC aside). You also assume that the message is "culturally inappropriate" with no obvious basis.

Just checked the occ website. Really don't understand the objections.

It's organised by Christians as part of celebrating Christmas.
Christmas is the celebration of Jesus being born. It's a Christian celebration. Seems like occ do a lot of good.

Yes, but that is the point. Why send a 'Christian' message to a Muslim (or other) Child? Why send a message at all. How about just doing something nice?

Not really saying any more here-people will either read the links or they won't. Can I just say though that Haribo are often made with pork gelatine so Muslim/Jewish children often are not allowed them. If the boxes are liable to be going to them it may be wise to check.

The boxes for the scheme we're using are to be handed over unsealed so that the contents can be checked to make sure that they meet all the conditions. I don't check this myself but I expect the charity to act in a sensitive and appropriate manner which would include not giving anything that the recipient would be offended by, whether Haribo or a bible story.

The school did not reply to my email.

Today we got a letter and it was for Samaritans Purse. The letter implies it is being run by the school and the pta, but the contact is someone from the pta. I dont want to be a killjoy, and I guess its too late to change now they have sent the letters out.

If the school had replied saying they had looked into it, but were going ahead I might have gone along with it. But they ignored my email.

And the pta are implying that the school endorses it.

Think it is pretty poor not to reply-and really sad that you then feel like a killjoy because you are concerned. Can you phone the school? They shouldn't just ignore your POV.

Whizzpop:

^I've just bought some lovely things to finish off my box, I've nearly done now.
I bought a nice doll (to cuddle) Haribos (to eat, yum and some felt tips and colouring books.
Just need a hat and gloves to go in now and I'm done.
How the bleedin' heck sweets and warm hats and gloves counts as a box of tat baffles me^

Have you checked if there is Pork Gelatine in the Haribo?
What ethnicity is the doll?
Do you know what country the box is going to? Is there a need for warm hats and gloves in that country?

Not tat, no, but pretty thoughtless if the box goes to a warm, Muslim, ethnicly diverse country.

LtEve you make a really good point about cultural relevance. DH worked for a charity that does shoeboxes. Every shoebox contained a toothbrush and toothpaste. We discovered some time later that they are not used in the country where most of the boxes were sent.
We do tend to look at all this from a western point of view.
Another valid point is the cost of transporting the boxes. In some countries it is easier and cheaper to get things locally, and without the added cost of the lorry taking the items.
And not all children receive their gifts gleefully. DH remembers the scrum at one place to get boxes and then some of the children throwing the items they didn't like on the ground.
It is really important to have someone local who knows the culture. Operation Christmas Child is American, and has an American world view, whether they promote Christianity or not.

*Have you checked if there is Pork Gelatine in the Haribo?
What ethnicity is the doll?
Do you know what country the box is going to? Is there a need for warm hats and gloves in that country?

Not tat, no, but pretty thoughtless if the box goes to a warm, Muslim, ethnicly diverse country.*

As somebody has already pointed out upthread and you must have missed, the boxes are all handed in unsealed so that they can be checked.
No, there's no pork in the sweets I have bought.
WTF does the dolls ethnicity have to do with whether they can be played with or not?! Are we only allowed to play with dolls that look exactly like ourselves now?!
Strange viewpoint there!
The OCC actually ASK and put in the recommended things to put in the box list these things - sweets, dolls/teddies to play with (regardless of their ethnicity) and warm hats and gloves.
Stop trying to pick ridiculous holes.

Whizz I didn't think it was ridiculous. The charity DH worked for were very well-intentioned but not very well-informed. We used to check the boxes, but we were equally ill-informed.

The fact that they are a charity does NOT make them in any way, shape or form experts.
Neither am I-all I am saying is that people should do their own research, being a charity does not make one the Oracle!

trockodile I agree, but you don't always know which country the box is going to. In our case we did and should have done more research, but some, OCC for example seems to cover a large number of countries.