to ask for your help in writing an objection to Operation Christmas Child?

[autumnwinds]

Our local primary is supporting OCC and has published a piece in the village magazine explaining how wonderful it is and how much the local children enjoy it, what a difference it makes to needy children, and inviting local residents to donate too. The piece omits any reference to the evangelical christian literature that is distributed with the parcels and the way that the gifts are used as a tool to agressively convert recipients to christianity.

I would like to write a reply for publishing in next month's issue trying to give the full picture so that people can make an informed choice about whether to donate to this charity, and to suggest some alternatives that don't come with the religious baggage.

As I don't have a child at the primary yet I'm not sure about tackling the school itself about it (they are not a faith school, so not sure they should be supporting this). DC will be starting next year so I might save that fight for next xmas!

Anyway does anyone have any ideas about a few lines I could write, something succinct and unemotional? I feel quite cross about it but don't want to come across as an equally fundamentalist atheist. I've been looking for some evidence on the web for people who want to know more but most of it is not well referenced...

Sunshinemum, imagine this for a moment: ...you have nothing, you are in a vulnerable position...you are offered a rare treat of something fun, something you have perhaps not seen before in your environment, something to take away your worries for a few moments...and are "invited" to participate in an "educational" programme in exchange... ... ... ... ...it's a simple as dot to dot really....

And also, there is a huge difference between sharing the Good Word (which I honestly, as a practising Christian, still find very distasteful in such a power dynamic as offering help to those worse off than yourself) and spreading the hateful shit that extreme Right Wing Fundamentalist Christian organisations spread. I spent several years around people who have bought into their particular brand of "Christianity"....there is no word in the English dictionary that comes close to the despicable level this branch of Christianity hangs at.

Suburban and expat, there have been many people who have I'd on this thread that they were going to give shoeboxes to OCC but have come to the realisation that they don't want to be involved with them and will contribute to a different charity instead. Some of the very people who have jumped in mid-thread ignorantly saying things like "it's just presents for poor children" have gone away, read up on their homophobia, racist and culturally insensitive evangelising and come back to say they've changed their minds.

I actually haven't seen too many threads on mumsnet or other forums where so many people have actually radically changed their opinions based on learning the truth. While it may seem like going round in circles that's not really the case. I think this thread and the others that have cropped up on mumsnet have done massive amounts of good and yourselves plus Red and a lot of other posters should be very proud of that.

Then I'm afraid you don't have much of an idea of the Right Wing Fundamentalists, who they are and what their goals are. Trust me when I say that their "support" is with a price and they have little to no actual concern for the people they "help".

It's not just atheists who are disgusted by OCC and Samaritans Purse, Sunshine. Several Christian ministers have written about their disapproval of OCCs practices. Dont make the mistake of lumping all Christian organisations together with homophobic and hate-filled groups like Samaritans Purse. Not all Christian groups are the same - many are great and do good work.

My husband is a Christian and I'm an atheist. We are BOTH disgusted by Samaritans Purse and OCC!

as an atheist I have absolutely no problem with "christmas gifts" of the old "blue peter" variety
I have a mahoosive problem with the covert nature of the fundamentalist evangelism in OCC
if they were proud of it they would shout about it on the home page of their website
they don't
therefore they are ashamed
do not do things you are ashamed of
amen

I remember being at school and the £4 taped to the box was meant for 'transport' costs. So if 100 people gave a box, then they would need £400 for transport... doesn't sound right to me. Especially as others have cited the reason given that the money is needed for 'admin'... (printing off evangelical literature, in my head). So which is it?

IMO, if the charity was actually there to help in an altruistic way, they wouldn't be wasting money on these ignorant, tacky pamplets, and actually using their resources to help these children.

I'm really shocked that people are defending British state school children giving donations to a homophobic, xenophobic, right to life charity.

Really shocked.

What Talkin said. ^^

I'm an atheist and worked for a year at a large Christian charity. The help people gave on the ground was not a part of an effort to get more Christians on board - it was given in the spirit of 'love thy neighbour'. That to me is what organisations like OCC are missing - they're not being clear to the donors that the boxes are essentially tools for bringing souls to Christ.

I'm not sure they're ashamed, Talkinpeace. I think it's more likely they see us as idiots, most of whom are damned. They think as sinners ourselves were not worthy of being told the truth so we can make an informed decision - and anyway the only "truth" that really matters to them is about Jesus. They don't actually have any respect for us. But they're happy to take our money/presents to use for their own purposes.

I'm atheist although I respect a person's right to believe what they choose, I do not agree with trying to convert anyone. However I still make up one of these shoe boxes even though I know it will include a bible, I would prefer if it didn't contain any religious literature but if the children don't have much, if anything, then at least they are getting a box filled quite possibly with tat, but will make them smile and happy. That's not a bad thing. Fwiw, it's not OCC it's blythswood care or something like that.

SunshineMMum - you said "since they are essentially working in missionary work" you would make the assumption that would involve discipleship. THEY DO NOT TELL SCHOOLS THAT THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY WORKING IN MISSIONARY WORK

Sorry for shouting, but how many times do we have to repeat this: they do not make clear to schools that the main point of Operation Christmas Child is evangelism.

They present it as something nice that everyone can do to bring cheer to underprivileged children overseas. Let me repeat that - they present it as something all children can get involved in, at schools where the majority of parents may not be Christian at all, let alone subscribe Franklin Graham's extreme version of Christianity.

Can you really not see why people object to that, and support the OP in trying to get the full picture across?

houseseller the "going round in circles" thing was more in response to every new poster who came on saying "what's the problem?" without, apparently, reading the thread and missing the point entirely of the OP.

But you're so right about how encouraging it is that people have welcomed the information about OCC and have revised their plans to support this organisation on the basis of that information.

Suburban my post was more in response to you saying "I don't know why I do it, I should hide these threads" - well I'm very glad you and others do it!

VeryStressed, Blythswood is a Christian Evangelical charity that mostly operates in Scotland. I tend to think their less I studious than OCC but I'm not sure. They do give out religious literature but whether they're as intolerant and homophobic and manipulative as OCC I really don't know.

The article about OCC that was published in the Guardian in 2003 and linked to by flowery was written Giles Fraser.

Thats the Rev Dr Giles Fraser who at the time of publication at least, was the vicar of Putney and lecturer in philosophy at Wadham College, Oxford.

So, its definitely not just atheists who have a major problem and concerns about how the charity is run. If respected figures who are Christian don't seem to think that this type of evangelical teachings are appropriate and think they are imperialist in nature, then I really think you should take note of that.

There is a way to spread your teachings and a way not to spread your teachings. The difference, is just how free the people you are preaching to are to make a decision or whether they just do so through necessity or by fear.

Power and money are being used here to influence a vulnerable group, and thats what we should be keeping sight of and remembering. Its not about their welfare, but control of their behaviour. That has implications that ripple throughout the world and have consequences for international politics and indeed peace.

So why should we care and try and stop others from supporting this charity? Because it has potentially major implications for all of us. We don't live in isolation.

SunshineMMum - this is a typical local newspaper piece about Operation Christmas Child, which I would presume is basically a re-write of the press release sent out by the local reps for OCC. Operation Christmas Child needs your help (most local papers these days are 90% full of rewritten press releases).

Please read that, and tell me how anyone is meant to "get the agenda" when it does not once mention god, church, Jesus, evangelism, mission, discipleship etc etc. Presentations to schools are equally misleading.

Does that help you understand why people accuse OCC of concealing their real aims?

and The Bath Chronicle

Why should you have to click three links to discover that it is an evangelical campaign? Why does it not say that in the news story or (presumably) the press release? Do you not find it a teensy bit dishonest or misleading?

And we all know how much people go and read a political party's manifest or what their local candidate plans to do and base their voting on that above what they 'think' the party represents based on whats said in the press and what their friends say...

...the point is a lot of people simply don't bother to look below the surface and properly read up on the aims and objectives of who they support. They simply take for granted that what they are told is accurate and that the people who tell them that are trustworthy and know what they are taking about.

There are very definite ways of telling people what you are doing, without really telling them what you are doing. Its all in the presentation and where the emphasis is placed. The fact they do say what they are doing on their website is beside the point in a way - it always gives them the get out clause that they don't hide what they do.

Except they do, because these aims are not the ones stressed to people initially and when they first come in contact with the charity. They know how people behave and know that they are generally lazy and that by associating and gaining legitimacy though operating through schools, that people will make the automatic assumption that they have been vetted and found to be a 'worthwhile' cause. So they don't have to go and look them up on the internet themselves.

This is the whole point about how propaganda works. It plays on knowing and being able to use human behaviour to your advantage. This is how political communication is deliberately constructed and managed. The flow of information and its source is as important as the information itself.

exexpat, well tried with sunshinemum, but I think you might have to admit defeat.

Maybe she's really Brian

I'm kind of missing Brian. I wonder if he will come back on here and tell us that only Christians can be charitable and all gays are miserable again?