X-Message-Number: 26429 Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:44:17 -0400 From: Thomas Donaldson <> Subject: To David Stodolsky and others, too To David Stodolsky and others who object to what I said about the Salvation Army: Your comments are beside the point. Yes, preachers in New Guinea wanted to convert those who heard them to their religion. That does not mean that they didn't also do some good things for these people too. And frankly, when I thought about it, even converting these people to 7th Day Adventism gives them ideas and beliefs 10,000 years in advance of what they used to believe. I wrote my message for Rudi Hoffman, who was bothered by his association with the Salvation Army because he gave them money for their charitable work. I do not think that he was doing anything wrong by his association, and I was explaining why not. Some (but hardly all) religions do charitable work not just in New Guinea but also in the US and Australia. They may well be doing so to get converts, but giving beds and meals to the homeless still helps them --- nor do I know of any religion which first requires a homeless person to convert BEFORE giving them shelter and meals. Some of you may prefer the State to do such charity. I promise you that any government doing so will ask far more of those to whom it gives charity than any religion. And if you do want to give something to those who are unfortunate, doing so through a church is more likely to get to them with minimun cost. Nor are there any societies of atheists, agnostics, or of those who are nonreligious which have taken up this kind of charitable work. (This needs more discussion, but basically I say that it's true). So if you are a layman and wish to donate a bit of time and money towards helping others, you find yourself with the Salvation Army (or some other religious group). Sorry, but that seems to be the way the world now runs. Best wishes and long long life for all, Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26429