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...

Exexpat

Totally agree with you. That video is probably nothing shocking or unusual in the states where there often seems to be a much stronger, more conservative practicing of that brand of Christianity. My husband works a lot in the states and he has said they are a much more Christian and stricter Christian nation than the UK (ok know that this is not everyone n the US). If Brian adheres to this more evangelical or fundamentalist type of Christianity he sees life totally different to how the average person in the UK does. He totally believes in what he is doing and thinks that it has to be shared to help us - even if we don't want it - they know better.

That kind of video would probably have the opposite effect in the UK - therefore we should thank them for making it so it can be shared to show what misgivings some folk have about OCC.

Dear all, it's hard watching Arsenal and TWO threads at the same time. If I've missed anything in here while responding to the SAME PEOPLE in the other thread, I'm sure you'll tell me ...

Mind you, Alemci has been doing a good job in my absence - thank you!

Brian,

You have been quite patient and good natured through this. But, don't you understand that that Nepal video sums up all of our issues with OCC - that we find it quite creepy and offensive, a fundamentalist type of Christianity that most people in the UK have no truck with?

People, I need to go, my wife is feeing neglected. Catch you all tomorrow ...

It's a bit of a worry if Brian thinks alemci is doing a good job in his absence. Here's one of his / her gems from upthread, by way of justifying OCC going into Nepal to convert children away from Hinduism to Christianity:

someone must have brought Hinduism to them originally. maybe they followed budhism before or are of no religion

why make it personal rhonda ? I thought that it was a fair point. I can see both sides of t6he4 discussion.

perhaps the dc may prefer Christianity. if you are one of the lower castes then Hinduism may not be so great for you?

What, that trying to convert people to other religions using power and wealth is fine because its been done for centuries.

Good argument that one.

I think the word 'progress' is one I'd like to point out.

The caste system is not restricted to Hinduism. It appears in other religions - including, you've guessed it Christianity!

If you do a little reading on the subject, the influence of the British Colonial System on the system in India, made it a lot more rigid and structured than it previously was.

It seems it was our imperialistic interference that contributed to the problem; it wasn't just religious beliefs.

But yes do carry on peddling ignorance and inaccurate information.

Oh and socially, Christians would also traditional shun a Hindu untouchable, as much as a Hindu would. Because its just as much a social 'problem' as a religion one.

I wasn't aware of it in Christianity. do you mean the hierarchy in the church. you are probably right about the British empire.

all I am saying is is it so bad to hear about another religion.

ooh may be occ is too heavy handed.

It wasn't personal, alemci, sorry if it came over that way.

I was quoting one of your posts, and it concerned me that Brian felt you were a good second-in-command when you seemed to have a tenuous grasp on the issues being discussed.

Have a read of this:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casta

Then think about its impact on the social history of America (including slavery) and how it might have influenced even modern day thinking.

I see much irony here.

it's ok Rhonda I appreciate that. I regularly post on mumsnet.

yes red interesting and not very nice especially the taxation.

all I am saying is is it so bad to hear about another religion.
No, not if you are an adult able to make an informed decision. But that's not what is happening here, is it?

I've just looked at the Nepal video linked to earlier- really, if there is anyone who doubts these boxes are simply a means to a damaging end have a look.
Amongst other things it fails completely to say HOW 'bringing gods love' is going to stop trafficking.
I wonder how much influence Brian has with the US Samaritan's Purse and whether he can get them to take down that video as it completely shows them up for what they are

Better for the video to be left up then.

quite

I don't think Samaritan's Purse in the US would want to take the video down, as it presumably appeals very much to the US market, which is much bigger than the UK one.

I'm sure you're right, Exex. A few miserable heathens wittering on in the UK aren't going to bother the US operation. Having realised that the video was on Youtube (thanks to the PP who pointed that out!) I have spent a few minutes looking at the other SP videos - pretty grim but nothing to compare with that Nepal one.

What's ironic is that I, for one, would never have viewed the Nepal video if Brian Bennett from DP hadn't linked to another OCC video that I viewed, and then had a browse at similar videos while I was there.

What do we think videos like that one do for world politics?

I can not watch it without thinking about just how much it fuels fears throughout the world about American imperialism. And there has not been one word said by Brian about what quality standards the charity employs to measure local feeling and sentiments, nor how it might be interpreted further afield. The wider implications are actually very important and should not be underestimated.

Without clear guidelines and standards that Brian can pull out instantly, the charity effectively has NO written guidance of what constitutes the limits of where they should evangelise. This is very basic stuff. The absence of it is a clear turning a blind eye and passing responsibility to individuals on the ground when the control should lie within the core of the charity.

A communications officer should be able to detail and describe sensitivity in great detail if the issue is taken seriously. Otherwise judgement on the ground is left up to people who a) may not have had adequate training and education on cultural sensitivity b) may deliberately disregard local feelings in the blinkered belief that they are always doing right 'because it is God's work'.

I note at this point Brian's telling post at 19.07 on the other thread.

So why are there no written guidelines?

This abdication of responsibility is quite obvious conscious and quite deliberate as its not rocket science to see the need to clarify the situation and make sure you are constant in the way you operate smoothly and efficiently on an international scale. Particularly since its clear that Brian is quite used to hearing the criticisms (or has clearly not feed this back to the charity to action - something that I don't hold him responsible for actually given that, that article in the Guardian would have been available for the entire organisation to easy see and know about and is now 10 years old).

Without these essential guidelines, anything the charity says about cultural sensitivity is quite honestly totally worthless and again deliberately misleading.

Care to comment Brian?

Thing is, it is a huge responsibility to provide the tool used to possibly convert a child to a different religion. You hear about countries where the minority Christian population are descriminated against and even hurt or killed. This isn't just providing some little treats fr a poor child.

Quite, bling and Christians are always the ones shouting loudest at any perceived hint of "persecution". Hypocritical doesn't even come close.

Red, I've been asking Brian since I first found him on here in September to clarify the circumstances, and give examples, of when OCC would consider it inappropriate to give out bible booklets with the shoeboxes.

He repeated over and over (and actually got quite cross!) that it was down to the local partners to decide, but would not give specific examples. I even asked him whether the fact that a child was traumatised following war or natural disaster would be sufficient reason to hang fire with the evangelising, but he constantly hid behind the "local partners" line, and insisted they were imbued with enough cultural sensitivity to make the right decision.

Clearly, once the shoeboxes have reached their target, OCC back here in the UK washes its hands of any duty to treat the recipients and their beliefs with even a modicum of respect.