Jump to content

Religious material in caches

Geognome57

By Geognome57
in General geocaching topics

Followers 7

Recommended Posts

TrailGators

+TrailGators

Posted
Posted (edited)
If you had kept reading you would have seen that new thread data was posted. So I changed my position on that based on the new data. Weren't you the one preaching that we should change our positions based on new information? :laughing:

you simply corrected your claim after protests appeared.

We've been through this already. I don't know why you feel the need to keep grinding the axe... Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment
tozainamboku

+tozainamboku

Posted
Posted

 

I believe that in any given cache, you could find something to offend someone, somewhere. I knew a woman who was offended by a water pistol because it represented violence! I knew another woman who was offended by anything, even a picture, of a snake! She would love the Geocoin that I just nabbed that has a coiled snake on the back! It's a "Cache Critters on Patrol".

 

Just as a fun test...next time you find a cache, look through all the little trinkets and see if any ONE of them is even slightly offensive. If you can honestly say "no", then you are fortunate!

 

As for religious stuff, this country was founded on christian principles, so I tolerate them. I don't have to believe in a god to believe in the philosophies.

Here's the log from the very first time I found a cache. That's right, I was offended by a keychain I found that was a little doll wearing a large sombrero with his hands crossed over his chest and his eyes shut. Later I realized that this was probably a souvenir that someone brought back from Mexico. After that I decided to stop being offended by what I found in geocaches.

Link to comment
CoyoteRed

CoyoteRed

Posted
Posted
I believe that in any given cache, you could find something to offend someone, somewhere. I knew a woman who was offended by a water pistol because it represented violence! I knew another woman who was offended by anything, even a picture, of a snake! She would love the Geocoin that I just nabbed that has a coiled snake on the back! It's a "Cache Critters on Patrol".

 

Just as a fun test...next time you find a cache, look through all the little trinkets and see if any ONE of them is even slightly offensive. If you can honestly say "no", then you are fortunate!

 

As for religious stuff, this country was founded on christian principles, so I tolerate them. I don't have to believe in a god to believe in the philosophies.

Here's the log from the very first time I found a cache. That's right, I was offended by a keychain I found that was a little doll wearing a large sombrero with his hands crossed over his chest and his eyes shut. Later I realized that this was probably a souvenir that someone brought back from Mexico. After that I decided to stop being offended by what I found in geocaches

I don't have a problem with religious trinkets. It's the advertisements I have a problem with.

Link to comment
TrailGators

+TrailGators

Posted
Posted
I believe that in any given cache, you could find something to offend someone, somewhere. I knew a woman who was offended by a water pistol because it represented violence! I knew another woman who was offended by anything, even a picture, of a snake! She would love the Geocoin that I just nabbed that has a coiled snake on the back! It's a "Cache Critters on Patrol".

 

Just as a fun test...next time you find a cache, look through all the little trinkets and see if any ONE of them is even slightly offensive. If you can honestly say "no", then you are fortunate!

 

As for religious stuff, this country was founded on christian principles, so I tolerate them. I don't have to believe in a god to believe in the philosophies.

Here's the log from the very first time I found a cache. That's right, I was offended by a keychain I found that was a little doll wearing a large sombrero with his hands crossed over his chest and his eyes shut. Later I realized that this was probably a souvenir that someone brought back from Mexico. After that I decided to stop being offended by what I found in geocaches

I don't have a problem with religious trinkets. It's the advertisements I have a problem with.

I'm the same way.
Link to comment
wigglesworth

+wigglesworth

Posted
Posted

I saw this and got quite excited:

Today, 03:46 PM

Last post by: TrailGators

 

Then I realised that it was not the last post but the latest post.

 

Scintillating discusson about - sorry I have forgotten what the original subject was again!

 

Looking forward to the next exciting installment.

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted
So if people really want everyone to keep their personal beliefs private then they have to keep their own beliefs private.

I, for one, would be all for this.

 

One side of the belief feels that it's okay for folks to believe whatever they want, just as long as they don't try and push their beliefs on others.

 

The other side feels that it's their duty to push their beliefs on others in order to save them from certain damnation. (I thought for sure that word would be turned into "dadgumation")

 

Which side do you think is more likely to agree not to leave tracts?

 

All sides push their beleifs around. Active advocation that you should not push your beliefs on others is far different from suffering others beliefs in silence.

 

I think everone should speak up about their beliefs and be civil doing it. The one who never speaks up is bound to fade into oblivion. If they happen to be the one who is right, that sure wouldn't do the world much good. None of this "you are rude for saying what you think" crap. A tract is only one way of sharing knowledge. There is no lack of subjects and opinions that don't happen to come in tract form.

 

If someone logged "don't push your tracts on me" they are not any different than the person leaving the tract. It's all preference. Preferences are like the alternate name for a donkey. Everbody has one.

 

BTW. Not targed at your post so much as in general.

Link to comment
Mushtang

Mushtang

Posted
Posted
So if people really want everyone to keep their personal beliefs private then they have to keep their own beliefs private.
I, for one, would be all for this.

 

One side of the belief feels that it's okay for folks to believe whatever they want, just as long as they don't try and push their beliefs on others.

 

The other side feels that it's their duty to push their beliefs on others in order to save them from certain damnation. (I thought for sure that word would be turned into "dadgumation")

 

Which side do you think is more likely to agree not to leave tracts?

All sides push their beleifs around. Active advocation that you should not push your beliefs on others is far different from suffering others beliefs in silence.

 

I think everone should speak up about their beliefs and be civil doing it. The one who never speaks up is bound to fade into oblivion. If they happen to be the one who is right, that sure wouldn't do the world much good. None of this "you are rude for saying what you think" crap. A tract is only one way of sharing knowledge. There is no lack of subjects and opinions that don't happen to come in tract form.

 

If someone logged "don't push your tracts on me" they are not any different than the person leaving the tract. It's all preference. Preferences are like the alternate name for a donkey. Everbody has one.

I don't agree that all sides push their beliefs. If I don't believe in a supreme being and don't tell anyone that I don't, or try to convince them they shouldn't, that's not pushing my beliefs.

 

If Witty McWittness comes by and feels that he just has to tell me how glorious his god is, asks me if I agree, and finding out that I don't decides to tell me more and convince me to agree, that's definitely pushing his beliefs. Are you saying it's "pushing my beliefs" if I tell him I'm not interested in hearing it and to zip it?

 

So far I don't think anyone in this thread has pushed their beliefs. A lot of us have shared our opinions on how offensive religious tracts are, and a few of us have indicated what we believe in, but nobody has actively pushed their beliefs on another.

 

Tracts that tell me I should believe in something or risk a toasty afterlife are easy to ignore, and aren't all that pushy. In my experience a lot of the religious people seem to feel it's their duty to save as many non-religious people as possible, and the way to do this is to talk them into believing the same things. That is definitely pushing beliefs. Some religions even believe that people in other religions need to be saved. That seems super pushy to me.

 

BTW. Not targed at your post so much as in general.
No biggie. I do that too.
Link to comment
traildad

+traildad

Posted
Posted

 

So far I don't think anyone in this thread has pushed their beliefs. A lot of us have shared our opinions on how offensive religious tracts are, and a few of us have indicated what we believe in, but nobody has actively pushed their beliefs on another.

 

It seems that you have written what you believe and what you think people should or should not do. Placing a tract has words that they believe and say what they think people should or should not do. In my opinion neither one is actively pushing beliefs on anyone. Exchange of ideas is not pushing beliefs. Making a law is pushing your beliefs on others. Making a law or rule preventing leaving a tract would be actively pushing a belief. Making a law or rule that everyone must go to church is actively pushing a belief.

Link to comment
TrailGators

+TrailGators

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

So far I don't think anyone in this thread has pushed their beliefs. A lot of us have shared our opinions on how offensive religious tracts are, and a few of us have indicated what we believe in, but nobody has actively pushed their beliefs on another.

 

It seems that you have written what you believe and what you think people should or should not do. Placing a tract has words that they believe and say what they think people should or should not do. In my opinion neither one is actively pushing beliefs on anyone. Exchange of ideas is not pushing beliefs. Making a law is pushing your beliefs on others. Making a law or rule preventing leaving a tract would be actively pushing a belief. Making a law or rule that everyone must go to church is actively pushing a belief.

Good point. Tracts don't make people do anything. The more secure you are with your own path the less likely that they will even phase you. Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment
Mushtang

Mushtang

Posted
Posted
So far I don't think anyone in this thread has pushed their beliefs. A lot of us have shared our opinions on how offensive religious tracts are, and a few of us have indicated what we believe in, but nobody has actively pushed their beliefs on another.
It seems that you have written what you believe and what you think people should or should not do. Placing a tract has words that they believe and say what they think people should or should not do. In my opinion neither one is actively pushing beliefs on anyone. Exchange of ideas is not pushing beliefs. Making a law is pushing your beliefs on others. Making a law or rule preventing leaving a tract would be actively pushing a belief. Making a law or rule that everyone must go to church is actively pushing a belief.

Agreed, which is why I said tracts are easy to ignore and aren't all that pushy.

Link to comment
flask

+flask

Posted
Posted

The more secure you are with your own path the less likely that they will even phase you.

 

if i am secure in the knowledge that i am not an idiot, might i consider it rude if somebody takes the time to tell me out of the blue i am?

 

i wouldn't be threatened by it in the least, but it would still be rude.

 

if someone asks if such a thing is rude, they should be told that it is.

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted

None of this "you are rude for saying what you think" crap.

 

if i think you're an idiot, would i be rude for saying so, or should i keep that to myself?

 

would you rather i not leave notes to that effect in caches?

 

You have two different things rolled into one.

For the first and assuming you are with me as I'm about to open my mouth and insert my foot, yes please let me know that impending doom and idiocy is looming large in my life. I may still want to be stupid but at least you warned me should I cause all kinds of problems when I ignored your advice and said the stupid thing. If by chance I do what I wanted and it all works out...then it would be fair for you to have to hear a "told you so".

 

For the second no you should not leave a note in the cache saying "RK you are an idiot". However you are talking generic notes of wisdom that are not directed at any one person that people question at varying levels and which may or may not be right, or wise. These tracks are no more rude than your local library.

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted

...If Witty McWittness comes by and feels that he just has to tell me how glorious his god is, asks me if I agree, and finding out that I don't decides to tell me more and convince me to agree, that's definitely pushing his beliefs. Are you saying it's "pushing my beliefs" if I tell him I'm not interested in hearing it and to zip it?...

 

If it stopped there? Probably not.

 

In your view where does pushing begin and sharing end?

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted

WOW! When does the jihad start???? Religion and politics, two things that always fire people up.

You know what's funny? Republicans and Democrats have swapped places on a lot of issues in the past 30 or 40 years. How do they change philosophy in unison? Are they so dependant on each other being opposite that if they agree on something they immediatly have to shift position?

 

Too bad caching wasn't around 40 years ago. Someone would have saved political tracts from caches and we could have charted the changes.

Link to comment
flask

+flask

Posted
Posted

None of this "you are rude for saying what you think" crap.

 

if i think you're an idiot, would i be rude for saying so, or should i keep that to myself?

 

would you rather i not leave notes to that effect in caches?

 

You have two different things rolled into one.

For the first and assuming you are with me as I'm about to open my mouth and insert my foot, yes please let me know that impending doom and idiocy is looming large in my life. I may still want to be stupid but at least you warned me should I cause all kinds of problems when I ignored your advice and said the stupid thing. If by chance I do what I wanted and it all works out...then it would be fair for you to have to hear a "told you so".

 

For the second no you should not leave a note in the cache saying "RK you are an idiot". However you are talking generic notes of wisdom that are not directed at any one person that people question at varying levels and which may or may not be right, or wise. These tracks are no more rude than your local library.

 

if, in my note about idiots, i don't name you personally, but rather describe a set of characteristics that accurately represent you and in my "wisdom" explain how all people like you are mentally deficient and in need of remedial work, would that be ok?

Link to comment
infiniteMPG

+infiniteMPG

Posted
Posted (edited)
In your view where does pushing begin and sharing end?
Sharing = A sign in front of the church with letters placed on said sign stating some religious statement about something the church believes. Pass by it on the road, read it or not, your choice. You don't have to pay any attention to it at all, your choice.

 

Pushing = When driving with the windows down you stop at the intersection in front of the church and turn away, caring not to read the sign. A church patron runs up to you window and emphatically starts reciting the sign's message to you directly to your face. When you roll up your window he just starts yelling it and knocks on your window and points to the sign.

 

Intolerance = When you drive by the church you see the sign and immediately call up the local paper and start a petition to have the sign removed so you don't have to even accidentally glance at it and condem your soul to h3ll because you don't believe in their church's beliefs and feel offended somehow because they don't believe the same way you do.

 

If something offends you in a cache but it's because of something you believe or don't believe in and not something obscene or profane, they just sign the log and move along. Kick intolerance to the curb and the world would be a much nicer place. Geocaching would be, too. :anicute:

Edited by infiniteMPG
Link to comment
ReadyOrNot

+ReadyOrNot

Posted
Posted

Pushing = When driving with the windows down you stop at the intersection in front of the church and turn away, caring not to read the sign. A church patron runs up to you window and emphatically starts reciting the sign's message to you directly to your face. When you roll up your window he just starts yelling it and knocks on your window and points to the sign.

 

This happens to me *ALL* the time. I drive up to a cache, open it up and there's an annoying Christian blasting me with his religious messages.. This is becoming a HUGE problem in my area. Those bible-thumpin' Christians should not be allowed in caches. I try to trade them out, but they keep biting my fingers. I'm being repressed!

Link to comment
fivefoxes

+fivefoxes

Posted
Posted

...If Witty McWittness comes by and feels that he just has to tell me how glorious his god is, asks me if I agree, and finding out that I don't decides to tell me more and convince me to agree, that's definitely pushing his beliefs. Are you saying it's "pushing my beliefs" if I tell him I'm not interested in hearing it and to zip it?...

 

If it stopped there? Probably not.

 

In your view where does pushing begin and sharing end?

 

Well, I have to post for the first time somewhere, so why not here?

 

If someone asks me if I want some cake, they are not pushing, they are sharing.

 

If I say no, thank you, I don't want any cake, and the person insists on trying to feed it to me, they are then pushing.

Link to comment
TrailGators

+TrailGators

Posted
Posted
In your view where does pushing begin and sharing end?
Sharing = A sign in front of the church with letters placed on said sign stating some religious statement about something the church believes. Pass by it on the road, read it or not, your choice. You don't have to pay any attention to it at all, your choice.

 

Pushing = When driving with the windows down you stop at the intersection in front of the church and turn away, caring not to read the sign. A church patron runs up to you window and emphatically starts reciting the sign's message to you directly to your face. When you roll up your window he just starts yelling it and knocks on your window and points to the sign.

 

Intolerance = When you drive by the church you see the sign and immediately call up the local paper and start a petition to have the sign removed so you don't have to even accidentally glance at it and condem your soul to h3ll because you don't believe in their church's beliefs and feel offended somehow because they don't believe the same way you do.

 

If something offends you in a cache but it's because of something you believe or don't believe in and not something obscene or profane, they just sign the log and move along. Kick intolerance to the curb and the world would be a much nicer place. Geocaching would be, too. :anicute:

Good post! :cute:
Link to comment
traildad

+traildad

Posted
Posted

 

if i am secure in the knowledge that i am not an idiot, might i consider it rude if somebody takes the time to tell me out of the blue i am?

 

It would be an awfully big stretch to suggest that religious material is equal to telling you that you are an idiot. If they told you they won the lottery and they need your bank account number to claim the prize and they will split the winnings with you, you might assume that they think you are an idiot. They still are not telling you that you are an idiot. Religion is impossible to prove or disprove so you are on way weaker ground with the idiot response.

i wouldn't be threatened by it in the least, but it would still be rude.

 

if someone asks if such a thing is rude, they should be told that it is.

Rude is in the eye of the beholder. If there are opinions on both sides how do we know if it is rude or not. Do we take a poll of all people and 51% wins? What if everyone but one says it is not rude and one person says it is rude? Then is it rude or not? That is the way the world is going. One person says they are offended by a book at the school library, or a painting at a museum and the rest of us have to live by their standards.

Link to comment
traildad

+traildad

Posted
Posted

 

if, in my note about idiots, i don't name you personally, but rather describe a set of characteristics that accurately represent you and in my "wisdom" explain how all people like you are mentally deficient and in need of remedial work, would that be ok?

I really don't think your analogy fits. You seem to want to twist the description of what is being done, to make it look worse than it is.

Link to comment
flask

+flask

Posted
Posted

 

if, in my note about idiots, i don't name you personally, but rather describe a set of characteristics that accurately represent you and in my "wisdom" explain how all people like you are mentally deficient and in need of remedial work, would that be ok?

I really don't think your analogy fits. You seem to want to twist the description of what is being done, to make it look worse than it is.

 

how is informing other people that they are spiritually deficient and that you think they're in need of remediation different than informing people they are mentally deficient and in need of remediation?

 

if one is rude, so is the other. my aim is to expose this tendency for spiritual busybodies to couch this in terms of "love" for what it is: supreme arrogance and rudeness.

Link to comment
traildad

+traildad

Posted
Posted

 

how is informing other people that they are spiritually deficient and that you think they're in need of remediation different than informing people they are mentally deficient and in need of remediation?

 

Maybe if you provide an example. I don't buy your argument that anyone is claiming that others are "spirituall deficient". Those are your words and your interpretation. Just because you insist that is what they are saying doesn't, in itself, make it true.

Link to comment
fivefoxes

+fivefoxes

Posted
Posted

 

how is informing other people that they are spiritually deficient and that you think they're in need of remediation different than informing people they are mentally deficient and in need of remediation?

 

Maybe if you provide an example. I don't buy your argument that anyone is claiming that others are "spirituall deficient". Those are your words and your interpretation. Just because you insist that is what they are saying doesn't, in itself, make it true.

 

If I may ask, when a believer decides to proselytize to me, what is it about me that has made me a viable target? That is, what is it about me that makes them feel their "message" is needed and justified?

Link to comment
ReadyOrNot

+ReadyOrNot

Posted
Posted

how is informing other people that they are spiritually deficient and that you think they're in need of remediation different than informing people they are mentally deficient and in need of remediation?

 

Interesting... I think it all comes down to the motives of the person providing the "information". What motivation could I have in walking up to someone who is mentally retarded and pointing it out to them? I think it boils down to "Choice" in your example. A person's spirituality is a matter of "Choice". Mental retardation is not a matter of choice.

 

A better example would be walking up to someone who is smoking and letting them know that if they continue smoking, they may get lung cancer and die. Is my motivation to get on my high horse and thumb my nose down at them or is my motivation out of true concern and love? If I don't know the person, it would be difficult to have a true concern for them personally, wouldn't it?

 

It's always best to build a relationship with someone and then in that context share the gospel with them. I've seen many people's lives changed through that route. Rarely have I ever seen someone's life changed through someone at a booth at the state fair telling them they are going to hell.

Link to comment
fivefoxes

+fivefoxes

Posted
Posted (edited)

how is informing other people that they are spiritually deficient and that you think they're in need of remediation different than informing people they are mentally deficient and in need of remediation?

 

Interesting... I think it all comes down to the motives of the person providing the "information". What motivation could I have in walking up to someone who is mentally retarded and pointing it out to them? I think it boils down to "Choice" in your example. A person's spirituality is a matter of "Choice". Mental retardation is not a matter of choice.

 

A better example would be walking up to someone who is smoking and letting them know that if they continue smoking, they may get lung cancer and die. Is my motivation to get on my high horse and thumb my nose down at them or is my motivation out of true concern and love? If I don't know the person, it would be difficult to have a true concern for them personally, wouldn't it?

 

It's always best to build a relationship with someone and then in that context share the gospel with them. I've seen many people's lives changed through that route. Rarely have I ever seen someone's life changed through someone at a booth at the state fair telling them they are going to hell.

 

I'd agree that motivation plays a part, but only to an extent.

 

But regarding your example, when you counsel someone about their smoking, you're addressing a health issue and making a contention that is backed by veritable mountains of supporting data. There is no doubt, and there is no question, that smoking endangers your health. Even the tobacco companies have conceded as much. You're showing a concern because you know, and everyone knows, that smoking can kill. Still, how you go about expressing your concern and at what point you back off and acknowledge the other's free will and right to choose to smoke, or not, goes along way toward determining whether you're being kind or being a pushy knowitall.

 

That said, when you attempt to share your gospel with someone who you think is somehow endangering his soul, you're making a contention that is backed not by any empirical, undisputed evidence, but rather by opinion and belief. You're making an a priori assumption that you are right in your contention that this person is in some eternal danger, and that they require your intervention to avoid such a despicable fate. You're attempting to give this person guidance. If this person is amenable and accepting of your spiritual generosity, then your assertiveness is vindicated. But if they are not, and you do not back down, then and there, you are pretty much guilty of some serious spiritual arrogance, the kind that states, unequivocally, I'm right, and like it or not, you need to listen to me.

 

So while motivation can indeed play a part, so can the method and extent of delivery, as well as the degree of veracity of that which is being offered.

Edited by fivefoxes
Link to comment
fivefoxes

+fivefoxes

Posted
Posted

 

If I may ask, when a believer decides to proselytize to me, what is it about me that has made me a viable target? That is, what is it about me that makes them feel their "message" is needed and justified?

I can only guess, maybe because you are human.

 

Sorry, but that seems a tad evasive. Is it your contention that simply because I am human I am in need of some specific sort of spiritual salvation, whether I believe in it or not?

Link to comment
traildad

+traildad

Posted
Posted

Still, how you go about expressing your concern and at what point you back off and acknowledge the other's free will and right to choose to smoke, or not, goes along way toward determining whether you're being kind or being a pushy knowitall.

 

If this person is amenable and accepting of your spiritual generosity, then your assertiveness is vindicated. But if they are not, and you do not back down, then and there, you are pretty much guilty of some serious spiritual arrogance, the kind that states, unequivocally, I'm right, and like it or not, you need to listen to me.

 

So while motivation can indeed play a part, so can the method and extent of delivery, as well as the degree of veracity of that which is being offered.

Since the topic is about placing religious material in caches, I think then that you would agree that it would not fall under the label of "I'm right, and like it or not, you need to listen to me"

Link to comment
traildad

+traildad

Posted
Posted

 

If I may ask, when a believer decides to proselytize to me, what is it about me that has made me a viable target? That is, what is it about me that makes them feel their "message" is needed and justified?

I can only guess, maybe because you are human.

 

Sorry, but that seems a tad evasive. Is it your contention that simply because I am human I am in need of some specific sort of spiritual salvation, whether I believe in it or not?

If someone comes up to you to "proselytize" to you for all they know you might belong to the exact same church in a different town. I don't believe they choose you because of who you are, what you have done, what you believe or what kind of salvation you might be in need of. They choose you because of what they believe. They believe that they are commanded to show others the "light". I should add that I only surmise why they do what they do since I don't proselytize.

Link to comment
fivefoxes

+fivefoxes

Posted
Posted

Still, how you go about expressing your concern and at what point you back off and acknowledge the other's free will and right to choose to smoke, or not, goes along way toward determining whether you're being kind or being a pushy knowitall.

 

If this person is amenable and accepting of your spiritual generosity, then your assertiveness is vindicated. But if they are not, and you do not back down, then and there, you are pretty much guilty of some serious spiritual arrogance, the kind that states, unequivocally, I'm right, and like it or not, you need to listen to me.

 

So while motivation can indeed play a part, so can the method and extent of delivery, as well as the degree of veracity of that which is being offered.

Since the topic is about placing religious material in caches, I think then that you would agree that it would not fall under the label of "I'm right, and like it or not, you need to listen to me"

 

I agree completely. I am offended by religious material in caches no more than by a Bazooka Joe bubble gum comic. In fact, I find the tracts considerably more entertaining, if, by my lights, infinitely more misguided.

Link to comment
fivefoxes

+fivefoxes

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

If I may ask, when a believer decides to proselytize to me, what is it about me that has made me a viable target? That is, what is it about me that makes them feel their "message" is needed and justified?

I can only guess, maybe because you are human.

 

Sorry, but that seems a tad evasive. Is it your contention that simply because I am human I am in need of some specific sort of spiritual salvation, whether I believe in it or not?

If someone comes up to you to "proselytize" to you for all they know you might belong to the exact same church in a different town. I don't believe they choose you because of who you are, what you have done, what you believe or what kind of salvation you might be in need of. They choose you because of what they believe. They believe that they are commanded to show others the "light". I should add that I only surmise why they do what they do since I don't proselytize.

 

Well then, for those who follow the blanket-preaching plan of spiritual onslaught, I would say they are certainly welcome to their beliefs, but would be wise to be prepared to actively defend their methods if directed toward me. I consider their techniques every bit as misguided and efficacious as the Inquisitions and witch-hunts for securing the safety of souls.

 

That said, I repeat, I find tracts in caches innocuous.

Edited by fivefoxes
Link to comment
4wheelin_fool

4wheelin_fool

Posted
Posted

It's always best to build a relationship with someone and then in that context share the gospel with them. I've seen many people's lives changed through that route. Rarely have I ever seen someone's life changed through someone at a booth at the state fair telling them they are going to hell.

 

I agree.

 

The tracts are mass-produced and a form of advertising, which does not mix very well with the very personal message about a very personal topic. It is also unknown whether the person that placed them there has actually read them, or even understands them. The motivation may be to share their happiness, but it also could be out of guilt or fear, as both have historically been used as religious recruiting tools.

Link to comment
WashoeZephyr

WashoeZephyr

Posted
Posted

Lost in Reno

Looking at the entry before yours. Would you share it or push it?

LOL

 

I can't believe this same rediculous conversation has gone on for 13 pages! :D

 

LOL! Ok, in context to the original post that wigglesworth is referring to;

Sharing it in front of a church is totally appropriate. It's in front of a church, it belongs there.

 

Pushing it sucks, I have two cousins that claim themselves to be "born again" Christians. Which I am ok with...but...they have managed to turn every family get together into a revival and at Christmas they give me cards with messages telling me that I too can be saved. yup, gone too far there! A) they know nothing about my beliefs or what I do. B)What gives you the right to tell me I need to be "saved", it's none of thier business! And saved from what? :D Saved from them maybe :D To me, they are making a judgement, who are they to judge me?

 

I still do not think that "sharing" it in a cache is appropriate. To me that borders on "pushing it", sure I can choose not to read it, it's still paper, its still gets mushy when it rains. :D

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted

...what is it about me that has made me a viable target? That is, what is it about me that makes them feel their "message" is needed and justified?

 

Nothing. You need to understand that. You are human, look normal enough, and there is nothing about you that would casue you to be chosen by apperances alone. It's not personal or an indication that you have a problem. They would have to know you to know that you specificly need the word. If it's random, it's just that. Random.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 7
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...