Does it make me a really bad person that I have a bias/prejudice to youngsters that go on mission for years at the beginning of their adulthood?
I don't know why, but i just can't imagine a problem in some third world country somewhere that could only be solved if they had just a few more inexperienced, naiive white kids with no marketable skills and zero knowledge of the problems associated with their country.
Because of that, I must conclude that they aren't really helping.
At all.
Because I can tell you right now, if I had a problem on one of my jobsites, the last thing On earth that I’d want as a solution to that problem would be “flood it with 18 year old white kids who don’t know shit about shit.”
So then, since I judge actions based on results rather than intentions, I can’t help but think that what the entire mission racket is just a method by which self-important, unaccomplished first world kids can delude themselves into feeling like they’ve done something to help, thereby adding to their self-important, deluded idea that they are actually worth something and actually did something worth doing.
Meanwhile the problems persist (of course they do, what the hell could a first world white kid know about solving drought-induced famine or malarial plagues?) and the white kids get to go home with an all-expenses paid “feel-good” vacation under their belt, during which they did nothing but puff up their own egos and pretend that they are better than the starving people in 3rd world hellholes (because what else can you conclude, when they think they are going to go there and “fix” the problem that all of the middle-aged and older, experienced men there can’t fix, themselves?)
“I’ve been on mission! I’ve been doing GOD’s work!”
How the hell do you convince such a person of the hubris and arrogance of such a statement? How many assumptions that statement makes?
Good lord, I can’t help it, but I’ve got a HUGE bias against white kids that like to talk about how great their time on mission was.
Most people who claim to be Christian, are not. They often use their claim as a preemptive shield to protect themselves from any type of scrutiny. It goes like this : If I call myself a Christian, how can you say my motives are self-serving or evil? Always be on the lookout for people who boast of their Christianity, they're usually the Devil in disguise.
As a Christian I find this loathsome and reprehensible. This is indicative of the watered-down and selfish mindset that has become all too common a plague in the 21st century.
I'm not so sure about that. Porn comes in more than one type of category/wrapper. This, IMO, falls under "spiritual perversion" porn, and it's arguably more offensive than the sexual kind.
The marginal utility of Christianity as an "expensive behaviour" or "handicap", with regard to Zahavi's handicap principle, continues its approach toward zero.
You may as well consider Christianity a form of fashion, much like the shoes you wear.
Mine are steel-toed, so I can kick this sort of walking crap to the kerb ...
9 comments:
You make a good point...but there is no way to know if she is actually a Christian or just faking it and running a false-flag type scenerio.
The comments are proggie gold if you dare.
I dared and got what was coming to me.
Actually, Cappy, she's raising money to attend law school.
Someone should tell her that she should ask God for a husband and kids.
Does it make me a really bad person that I have a bias/prejudice to youngsters that go on mission for years at the beginning of their adulthood?
I don't know why, but i just can't imagine a problem in some third world country somewhere that could only be solved if they had just a few more inexperienced, naiive white kids with no marketable skills and zero knowledge of the problems associated with their country.
Because of that, I must conclude that they aren't really helping.
At all.
Because I can tell you right now, if I had a problem on one of my jobsites, the last thing On earth that I’d want as a solution to that problem would be “flood it with 18 year old white kids who don’t know shit about shit.”
So then, since I judge actions based on results rather than intentions, I can’t help but think that what the entire mission racket is just a method by which self-important, unaccomplished first world kids can delude themselves into feeling like they’ve done something to help, thereby adding to their self-important, deluded idea that they are actually worth something and actually did something worth doing.
Meanwhile the problems persist (of course they do, what the hell could a first world white kid know about solving drought-induced famine or malarial plagues?) and the white kids get to go home with an all-expenses paid “feel-good” vacation under their belt, during which they did nothing but puff up their own egos and pretend that they are better than the starving people in 3rd world hellholes (because what else can you conclude, when they think they are going to go there and “fix” the problem that all of the middle-aged and older, experienced men there can’t fix, themselves?)
“I’ve been on mission! I’ve been doing GOD’s work!”
How the hell do you convince such a person of the hubris and arrogance of such a statement? How many assumptions that statement makes?
Good lord, I can’t help it, but I’ve got a HUGE bias against white kids that like to talk about how great their time on mission was.
Most people who claim to be Christian, are not. They often use their claim as a preemptive shield to protect themselves from any type of scrutiny. It goes like this : If I call myself a Christian, how can you say my motives are self-serving or evil? Always be on the lookout for people who boast of their Christianity, they're usually the Devil in disguise.
Give her points for creativity and marketing. She's clearly a step above the Duke porn star.
As a Christian I find this loathsome and reprehensible. This is indicative of the watered-down and selfish mindset that has become all too common a plague in the 21st century.
KRW Day
"God told me to". Yeah, right. God has nothing better to do than hold conversations with morons.
She's clearly a step above the Duke porn star.
I'm not so sure about that. Porn comes in more than one type of category/wrapper. This, IMO, falls under "spiritual perversion" porn, and it's arguably more offensive than the sexual kind.
The marginal utility of Christianity as an "expensive behaviour" or "handicap", with regard to Zahavi's handicap principle, continues its approach toward zero.
You may as well consider Christianity a form of fashion, much like the shoes you wear.
Mine are steel-toed, so I can kick this sort of walking crap to the kerb ...
Post a Comment