Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

692 replies

autumnwinds · 02/11/2013 12:57

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...

OP posts:
gooner1956 · 09/11/2013 23:47

Exexpat, have you been to Nepal?

SuburbanRhonda · 09/11/2013 23:48

exexpat Grin

ravenAK · 09/11/2013 23:48

Hang on - just getting popcorn. settles comfortably.

Go on, Brian, we're all ears.

gooner1956 · 09/11/2013 23:50

That's it guys and girls, time for bed. Actually, March of the Day is on ...

SuburbanRhonda · 09/11/2013 23:51

Don't nod off, now, Brian, you have questions to answer.

gooner1956 · 09/11/2013 23:51

sorry, MATCH of the Day

SuburbanRhonda · 09/11/2013 23:51

And you wonder why I called you Teflon Brian.

exexpat · 09/11/2013 23:52

No, I haven't been to Nepal.

Are you about to tell me that all the poverty and social problems are because of the local religion and if everyone converted to Christianity things would improve overnight?

Or that lives are materially improved by a shoebox full of gifts?

Please go ahead and dig yourself even deeper into a hole.

If people want to address social problems in Nepal, they could support organisations like Plan which runs a scheme to rescue girls from child trafficking or possibly even better Asha Nepal which is a locally-run anti-trafficking organisation.

Sending missionaries in with shoeboxes is not the answer to Nepal's problems, and the attitude in that video to local culture is repugnant.

SuburbanRhonda · 09/11/2013 23:53

Coming back tomorrow to communicate with us, are you, Brian?

Or haven't you got an answer to my question.

Thought not.

ravenAK · 09/11/2013 23:53

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

SuburbanRhonda · 09/11/2013 23:54

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

ravenAK · 09/11/2013 23:55

We do PLAN at my school (& I sponsor a child through them). They're great.

ravenAK · 09/11/2013 23:56

Not even that, SuburbanRhonda. As far as I can see every time he opens his gob he sends half a dozen fence-sitters fleeing from OCC at speed.

It's a gift.

He should probably stick it in a shoebox or something...Grin.

SuburbanRhonda · 10/11/2013 00:00

raven Grin

That's why I'm kind of puzzled as to why he's Head of Communications. Samaritans Purse are probably printing out his P45 as we speak Smile

exexpat · 10/11/2013 00:04

I think he's probably only good at communicating with other bible-believing Christians (and maybe Arsenal fans) who won't question his fundamental beliefs.

RedToothBrush · 10/11/2013 00:04

Strangely enough communication isn't just TELLING someone something. Communication is a TWO WAY process.

So if a bunch of people on a well respected site like Mumsnet and far beyond are saying "THIS IS NOT RIGHT" then thats a bit of a clue that you should take notice of.

If you can't do that, then you really are just reinforcing half of what everyone was criticising and complaining about in the first place.

Bryan is a propagandist not a communication officer to be perfectly honest. The difference is whats flapping most; his ears or his mouth.

The saying about having two ears and one mouth is one he should take note of, more than anything else thats been said on this thread.

I am fairly confident in saying he won't though. And none of what we say to him will go between his ears.

AnyBagsofOxfordFuckers · 10/11/2013 00:05

Gooner, it's a bit galling for a Christian supporting giving vulnerable children evangelical literature to accuse others of spreading 'lies and misinformation'. There is no God, all the supernatural stuff in the Bible is nonsense that anyone past the age of puberty should be too ashamed to even admit to believing in, so if you wanna talk about lies and misinformation, let's start with the act of saying a deity exists.

BlingBang · 10/11/2013 00:05

Wow, That video is incredible. How anyone can watch it and not see that these shoeboxes are being used to get access to children to convert them is looking at a different video. If you are ok about that, fine - but many people wouldn't be.

Just be up front about what your agenda is and what kind of Christianity you are spreading and who leads you.

The children were sweet though and it was touching to see their excitement and happiness at their gifts. I would be happy to send a box as long as religion is kept put of it.

gooner1956 · 10/11/2013 00:08

Rhonda, why do you pretend you want my answers, you're mind is made up and it is clear to me that you will not be persuaded otherwise. I have tried to reason with you (and the others), I have done all that I can to respond to what you and they have thrown at me. I have been slandered and I have been ridiculed. I don't need this and, in any case, Match of the Day is on!

SuburbanRhonda · 10/11/2013 00:09

I wasn't even happy about the excitement of the children, tbh bling, especially after Brian told us how they whip everyone up into a state of frenzy at the shoebox-giving events.

SuburbanRhonda · 10/11/2013 00:10

I don't pretend I want your answer to my specific question posted at 23:47 today and many other times previously, Brian.

if I didn't want the answer, I wouldn't keep asking you. And if you had the courtesy to answer, I wouldn't keep having to ask.

exexpat · 10/11/2013 00:11

Wasn't there something you wanted to tell me about Nepal before you go and watch football, Brian? I'm all ears...

SuburbanRhonda · 10/11/2013 00:13

If you think you're having a tough time, Brian, try being a Hindu in Nepal when the OCC charabanc rolls into town.

AnyBagsofOxfordFuckers · 10/11/2013 00:15

Gooner, don't you now have to love everyone and turn the other cheek, though... ?

RedToothBrush · 10/11/2013 00:27

Bryan, when have you been slandered?

If you are a communications officer in an official capacity, you shouldn't be bringing half the stuff you do to the table. You should answer in a way that is factual and to the point. Your evasiveness is part of the problem.

Seriously, the thread where you were unable to phrase a response to possibility that children are being bullied by schools to force them to donate to your charity in a neutral but to the point way was disgusting.

There was no middle ground on that one. Whilst you can't comment on individual cases, if that is true, then your charity in no way condones it. Simple.

But you didn't. Because you endorse that kind of behaviour. You endorse using underhand, deliberately misleading (by omitting information selectively at the approach time) to manipulate a situation, where the people you are approaching are vulnerable to suggestion, and due to your overt and strategic use and shows of wealth and power make it even more difficult for those communities to turn you away.

To be transparent, you need to tell ALL people on EVERY interaction what your PRIMARY objective is. That is, you do not selectively pick one element of what you do, and then say "oh well it clearly says on the website".

Its a bit like an advert for a mortgage. Every time its advertised they have to put on the same page that your home may be at risk if you do not keep up with repayments. Why do they have to do it on every advert? Because its been decided by regulators that its such an important part of the transparency of the market and sales process (and the fact that the market couldn't be trusted to regulate itself). This helps to enables people to make an informed decision.

By effectively 'missing your small print' on occasion you mislead. Thats the issue.

If you want to go and do what you want to do then fine. But a lot of people think that you are not to be trusted and think they should regulate the situation, by providing the small print for you.

The solution would be for you to put the small print on every piece of literature, correspondence and presentation you give to schools, parents and the general public as a whole in order to be properly transparent, rather than be selective about it.