[quote name='alonzomourning23'] *snip* ... I wouldn't say your opinion has any more basis in experience than mine, possibly less. Either way, your "credentials" are no reason for anyone here to accept your opinion. Personally, I think it's a baseless claim, only supported by credentials I doubt anyone cares about.[/QUOTE]
Hey, I was giving a frame of reference (and making a point that I'm not randomly bagging on some group of people who have no personal connection to me), not listing "credentials." If you feel you have more experience in the matter, that's fine: you're probably right. But so what? Like I said: this is going to all be anecdotal evidence one way or another. It isn't a matter of "expertise."
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Also, my catholic school's campus minister was a protestant woman (ordained as a priest I believe), and 1 of the male priests (out of 3) was also protestant. *snip*… [/QUOTE]
That's great. But religious schools indoctrinating students (in the US) isn't really my point, nor would it be, since I found the schools I went to largely unconcerned about such things.
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Personally, I find the suggestion that the majority of religious charities are done to convert people blatantly wrong, and disgusting. I share your disgust with missionaries, and I have no interest in defending them. But many religious charities genuinely help people.[/QUOTE]
Yes, many religious charities genuinely help people. But the issue is whether that's the primary goal, and your disgust aside, the available evidence makes me skeptical. I also find it ironic that you can share my distaste for missionaries, and yet accept local charity work -- where there's often great overlap in organization, staffers, and MO with missionary work -- at face value.
[quote name='alonzomourning23']There are charitable organizations which, due to demographics, the vast majority of aid recipients are of that religion or even denomination. The vast majority of homeless shelters (which boston has an extensive network of, more than any other major city I've been to) are overwhelminly run by religious organizations. Same with soup kitchens. [/QUOTE]
I think that makes perfect sense for somewhere like Boston, where the demographics simply are what they are ... and less sense in, say, many parts of Africa, where the locals certainly didn’t start off Christian, and the only available education comes with the mandatory Catholic view of birth-control, which has been doing nothing to cut down on the rampant HIV infections they’re experiencing. Now you tell me: are they genuinely interested in helping the local populace?
Are they forcing the populace to convert at gunpoint? No. But their charity is doled out on their terms, the implication being that if you don’t behave how they want, then you don’t get the help. It’s coercive at the very least, and certainly not genuine charity.
For every Tom Fox, who seems to want nothing more than the best for other people as different from him as people can be, there’s a Mother Theresa, who seems to prefer to look pious and holy – bringing recognition to her order -- to actually doing all the good she can.
Here’s another classy example:
http://www.catholic-extension.org/
They made pillows for victims of Hurricane Katrina. Great. What’s their goal?
“The Catholic Church Extension Society exists to sustain and extend the Catholic Faith in poor and remote mission areas of the United States where diocesan resources are insufficient. Catholic Extension builds national awareness and raises funds for the Church's needs in these communities so as to enable the essential mission of Catholic evangelization.”
Charity work and missionary work go hand in hand.
[quote name='alonzomourning23']And in Islam, charity is essential (compulsory actually, even if not everyone does it, they're supposed to) to that religion. And, if the goal was simply to gain converts, then you wouldn't see charities in afghanistan, Iran (about 97% muslim) etc. If christians main goal was to gain converts, then you wouldn't find charities in places such as italy, where about 97% are catholic. … Also, many religions are not evangelical. Islam and christianity are, judaism, buddhism (the majority) etc. are not. [/QUOTE]
Fair point about evangelical religions. But I think you’re off base otherwise. First of all, even when we look at groups whose direct goal is conversion, it’s not like they shy away from places where the people already have a religion. After all: “Of course, our basic Christian doctrines are universal and must be taught everywhere and at all times. Muslims do need the redeeming grace of Jesus Christ just like the rest of us.”
http://bgc.gospelcom.net/emis/special articles/middleeastsignals.html
They’re also doing it in Iraq.
http://www.boston.com/news/packages/iraq/globe_stories/042003_mission.htm
So no, a 97% Muslim population doesn’t mean anything where conversion is concerned. And why would they attempt to “convert” people who already follow their religion? The same reason the Catholic Extension people spend their time in the Bible Belt: many people just aren’t serious ENOUGH about their religion, or so the mentality says. You know: they might start tolerating gays or something, unless we show up periodically to remind them how much they need us.
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Though the topic here is about bigotry towards members of a sexual orientation. They have no problem adopting to muslims, hindu's, jews etc. The issue isn't religion, it's sexual orientation. Whether the gay couple is hindu, atheist or catholic won't change the fact they're gay. That's what this is about. Not religion. They erroneously believe its harmful to children.[/QUOTE]
Those aren’t different topics. Sexual orientation is a matter of religion to these people. You might see it differently, but to them it’s a sin, and that’s that. Whether you want to believe that they don’t discriminate against, say, Hindu couples, because the issue isn’t religion, or whether you believe they damn well WOULD discriminate against Hindus, gays, and everyone else they disapprove of if they thought for one second that they could get away with it … that’s up to you. You can guess where I fall.
EDIT: I probably should have taken that to e-mail or PM. Sorry everyone who had to scroll through all that crap.
, I forgot that every gay man (and woman, even though none are pictured, but apparently that doesn't matter) marches down the street in leather.
