Christian Children's Fund

Shrykull · Post by **Shrykull** » 2006-09-03 05:00am

I've thought about perhaps sponsoring a kid on one of these commercials, but what about secular charity?

Does a lot of effort in religious charities go towards religious indoctrination efforts, like Mother Teresa's? Do some ever require it as a condition to get thier charity?

mr friendly guy · Post by **mr friendly guy** » 2006-09-03 06:55am

Can you give us an idea of what these commercials look like or a link to the relevant site?

Generally if its a charity and just happens to be Christian (like they use the Christian line to attract funds) I wouldn't be care too much.

But you are right to be wary. I wouldn't want a charity like Mother Teresas where the sick weren't help in a physical sense, but at least they get to go to heaven.

Shrykull · Post by **Shrykull** » 2006-09-03 06:56am

http://www.christianchildrensfund.org/

Post by **Cairber** » 2006-09-03 09:26pm

UNICEF endorces Christian CHildren's Fund by a country to country basis, I believe. YOu can go to the UNICEF site and search by country. I would have more confidence in the program if they were endorsed by UNICEF, which is an organization I know is truly dedicated to children.

Boyish-Tigerlilly · Post by **Boyish-Tigerlilly** » 2006-09-03 10:17pm

If you want to know what I would do, I would donate to Oxfam. I think it's one of the best international charities for poverty relief.

I have had a very hard time with sponsoring, but I am not very aware of the CCF. I am generally wary of sponser programmes. The last time I did one of those, they tended to forget I existed, and they frequently moved the child around out of touch.

Jack Bauer · Post by **Jack Bauer** » 2006-09-03 11:58pm

What about local charities? In my experience, the charities that are closer to home always seen to be more honest, transparent, and accessible. In addition, you can sometimes see the direct effect of your donations.

mr friendly guy · Post by **mr friendly guy** » 2006-09-04 07:33am

Shrykull wrote:http://www.christianchildrensfund.org/

Had a quick skim read, and they seem decent. They don't restrict their aid to only Christian children but I can't find anything on whether they want to convert people to Christianity (one of the big things that pisses me off with missionaries is that they "encourage" you to convert in exchange for help).

However if you are unsure, they are other charities mentioned by others.

PainRack · Post by **PainRack** » 2006-09-04 10:21am

Usually, its the organisations which have to rehab people that get the kinda close contact and oppurtinities to do religious indoctrination.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2006-09-04 01:16pm

Jack Bauer wrote:What about local charities? In my experience, the charities that are closer to home always seen to be more honest, transparent, and accessible. In addition, you can sometimes see the direct effect of your donations.

Children in the Third World need it more urgently, though. And it takes much less to make a significant impact in their lives.

Nephtys · Post by **Nephtys** » 2006-09-04 01:38pm

mr friendly guy wrote:
Shrykull wrote:http://www.christianchildrensfund.org/
Had a quick skim read, and they seem decent. They don't restrict their aid to only Christian children but I can't find anything on whether they want to convert people to Christianity (one of the big things that pisses me off with missionaries is that they "encourage" you to convert in exchange for help).

However if you are unsure, they are other charities mentioned by others.

Those guys do a few less than savory practices though. Their commercials (or at least at one time) were filmed at a site built explicitly to look that way. A tourist town in northern Mexico, I suppose one could call 'Poor-Land'. Faking levels of poverty, no matter even if sometimes such is accurate, making a mockup for the camera is just plain bad.

Shrykull · Post by **Shrykull** » 2006-09-07 05:29am

I wonder why people in those countries even have children if they know they probably won't survive or get food.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-09-07 09:03am

Shrykull wrote:I wonder why people in those countries even have children if they know they probably won't survive or get food.

Sex is fun and they either don't know or don't have access to birth control?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-09-07 09:05am

Shrykull wrote:I wonder why people in those countries even have children if they know they probably won't survive or get food.

The two dominant religions in a lot of these dirt-poor countries are Catholicism and Islam.

Hillary · Post by **Hillary** » 2006-09-07 10:17am

Darth Wong wrote:
Shrykull wrote:I wonder why people in those countries even have children if they know they probably won't survive or get food.
The two dominant religions in a lot of these dirt-poor countries are Catholicism and Islam.

Absolutely right - those condoms can kill you know.

A charity I have some contact with, that tries to promote safe sex in some very poor parts of Africa, has found that they are sometimes chased out of villages as the Catholics have got there first and convinced the villagers that condoms spread disease/cause Aids.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2006-09-07 10:24am

Shrykull wrote:I wonder why people in those countries even have children if they know they probably won't survive or get food.

Create enough children, and eventually one or two will make it to adulthood.

D.Turtle · Post by **D.Turtle** » 2006-09-07 04:54pm

Shrykull wrote:I wonder why people in those countries even have children if they know they probably won't survive or get food.

The reason is very simple: They need children so that they can survive when they get older, as the children take care of you when you can no longer work. Of course, like the others said, the Catholic Church condemning the use of condoms also helps a lot (in a negative way).

Personally, I don't like sponsorship programs for children in poor countries. It is a lot more effective to use programs that enable people to help themselves.
My father works for a christian mission that does a lot of charity work.
In the Philippines for example, they had a sponsorship program for children in preschool (kindergarten). The theory behind that program was to enable children from a poor background to get better entrance exams in school, putting them into better classes, etc. (In the Philippine school system, you take a test before first grade, depending on this test you get put into "better" or "worse" classes.
Seemed like a good idea, wasn't effective though: The children were better at first, however they couldn't cope with the different style of teaching in the state schools.
That program has been pretty much abandoned, and replaced with a tutoring program. So people who are in the state schools can use after school tutoring in order to be more successful in school.

In Vietnam, they have one program (called the cow bank project) where (through donations) they buy cows. One pregant cow is then given to a family, the family raises the cow (which isn't that big a problem because there is enough green stuff around for grazing) and its calf. Once the calf is big enough they give it back to the cow bank, but they get to keep the original cow, which now belongs to them. With it they can raise more cows to sell for meat. The cow given to the cow bank is used for the next family. This is very effective in giving poor families (in rural areas) some additional income. It has been very effective with some families having several cows already.
With a program like that, you don't make people rely on you too much (which often happens with the traditional aid), but enables people to help themselves.

There is of course also room where traditional aid programs are needed (mainly catastrophes).

Hm, I think I got a bit off track there