they offer AIDS medication and food when no one else does. well i personally don't. it's one of the few good intentioned faces of religion but obviously it's completely misguided. they should build new cities on the highlands where the mosquitoes aren't as abundant when they hatch. when the European man first began to rape the mighty african nation he thought he could go down to the river and farm just like he did back in europe. in africa there is malaria, which kills more children than AIDS, and the settlers found out the hard way why none of the previous occupants set up shop on the delta. it didn't stop them though, they just built cities around the same areas while they harvested the native populations from the highland. the original venomous hatred of the slave-holder is still wreaking havoc while the inability to leave the urban centers creates conditions ideal for the spread of malaria, which in turn makes it easier for the spread of AIDS, which in turn makes it easier for the age structure to resemble a pyramid, which in turn makes it easier to perpetuate social unrest, which in turn makes it easier for kind hearted religious folk to want to go there and DO SOMETHING because no one else gives a fuck.
they give aids medication and food as part of a larger package, an advertising package. they're not going to give these things out because they want to help people, although that might be a part of it. but they want to help people in the name of christianity or a specific church... they aren't interested in going around and doing good things (at least not on the organized level) without attaching their name to it. it is a pursuit of new customers. it is an untapped market. just like nike will search for untapped markets to advertise to, to get new customers. this isn't to say it might be good (in the short term) for some aids treatment and food...but i'd rather that come from someone who doesn't intend to create an army of christians in some african country. it's a strange thing. but it isn't as if religious organizations are the only people there. groups do exist which do things on the level of 'i want to help people here.' and that's all. thinking short-term/long-term is key here.
it's individuals going there and actually doing things, not some big faceless tyrant. ask robin or burleigh. i was being very serious and thinking long-term when i said the community needs to be moved away from the malaria delta. whatever long-term plan you come up with isn't going to stop people with good hearts though. Some people look at suffering children and feel moved to go help under the banner of whatever they or someone else believes in. maybe they can't shrug it off as easily as you and i because they don't sit and write about it enough...
I don't see why these individuals need to be under the christian umbrella to help those in need. Maybe they feel that church tax exemptions are the best way to fund these efforts, or maybe they feel that the vapid religious dogma is key in establishing "civilized" societies. They want to be seen as "kind-hearted" and they want you to think that they are doing the good deeds that you are too fucking lazy to do. AIDS medication and food is one thing, but preaching your values on someone who is on the brink of death is another. These potential "new customers" will accept whatever religion you present them with, because they don't have the option of rejecting your resources. Is that a fair way of passing on good christian values? And if an individual wanted to help, couldn't they just find an organization without any religious affiliation to use as a vessel for their kind hearted efforts? As for the delta, let those soaking up the joys of glorious civilization take the repercussions of malaria with them, and those thriving in rural areas can enjoy their ignorant bliss and longevity. And in the long run, what are they left with, a minimal supply of food, and some medicine, to help with one of many possible diseases? They steal their souls in photographs and replace them with the bible.
most religious organizations are probably ok. probably a lot of people helping out in ways they can. probably a lot of help is no good, but i suspect more people go there cuz they want to help, than go there to spread christianity.
i also have to disagree with ally on the ease of going with an org not affiliated with a church.
taymoor mentioned this, but not explicitly: micky and robbie were both helping to build a house and other things in south africa... they didnt care much about religion, but it was the available option for them to volunteer.... many are probably like them.
5 comments:
they offer AIDS medication and food when no one else does. well i personally don't. it's one of the few good intentioned faces of religion but obviously it's completely misguided. they should build new cities on the highlands where the mosquitoes aren't as abundant when they hatch. when the European man first began to rape the mighty african nation he thought he could go down to the river and farm just like he did back in europe. in africa there is malaria, which kills more children than AIDS, and the settlers found out the hard way why none of the previous occupants set up shop on the delta. it didn't stop them though, they just built cities around the same areas while they harvested the native populations from the highland. the original venomous hatred of the slave-holder is still wreaking havoc while the inability to leave the urban centers creates conditions ideal for the spread of malaria, which in turn makes it easier for the spread of AIDS, which in turn makes it easier for the age structure to resemble a pyramid, which in turn makes it easier to perpetuate social unrest, which in turn makes it easier for kind hearted religious folk to want to go there and DO SOMETHING because no one else gives a fuck.
they give aids medication and food as part of a larger package, an advertising package. they're not going to give these things out because they want to help people, although that might be a part of it. but they want to help people in the name of christianity or a specific church... they aren't interested in going around and doing good things (at least not on the organized level) without attaching their name to it. it is a pursuit of new customers. it is an untapped market. just like nike will search for untapped markets to advertise to, to get new customers. this isn't to say it might be good (in the short term) for some aids treatment and food...but i'd rather that come from someone who doesn't intend to create an army of christians in some african country. it's a strange thing. but it isn't as if religious organizations are the only people there. groups do exist which do things on the level of 'i want to help people here.' and that's all.
thinking short-term/long-term is key here.
it's individuals going there and actually doing things, not some big faceless tyrant. ask robin or burleigh. i was being very serious and thinking long-term when i said the community needs to be moved away from the malaria delta. whatever long-term plan you come up with isn't going to stop people with good hearts though. Some people look at suffering children and feel moved to go help under the banner of whatever they or someone else believes in. maybe they can't shrug it off as easily as you and i because they don't sit and write about it enough...
god used to be a good company
I don't see why these individuals need to be under the christian umbrella to help those in need. Maybe they feel that church tax exemptions are the best way to fund these efforts, or maybe they feel that the vapid religious dogma is key in establishing "civilized" societies. They want to be seen as "kind-hearted" and they want you to think that they are doing the good deeds that you are too fucking lazy to do. AIDS medication and food is one thing, but preaching your values on someone who is on the brink of death is another. These potential "new customers" will accept whatever religion you present them with, because they don't have the option of rejecting your resources. Is that a fair way of passing on good christian values? And if an individual wanted to help, couldn't they just find an organization without any religious affiliation to use as a vessel for their kind hearted efforts? As for the delta, let those soaking up the joys of glorious civilization take the repercussions of malaria with them, and those thriving in rural areas can enjoy their ignorant bliss and longevity. And in the long run, what are they left with, a minimal supply of food, and some medicine, to help with one of many possible diseases? They steal their souls in photographs and replace them with the bible.
most religious organizations are probably ok. probably a lot of people helping out in ways they can. probably a lot of help is no good, but i suspect more people go there cuz they want to help, than go there to spread christianity.
i also have to disagree with ally on the ease of going with an org not affiliated with a church.
taymoor mentioned this, but not explicitly: micky and robbie were both helping to build a house and other things in south africa... they didnt care much about religion, but it was the available option for them to volunteer.... many are probably like them.
Post a Comment