Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JumpinJesus
Nope, "little poor kids."
Remember, intent matters. My wording implies a certain amount of cynicism directed at those who think that these kids are in such dire straits that they just beam when us upper middle class philanthropists give to them so altruistically. Hell, I'll bet they're just happy knowing we acknowledge them. We don't need to give them toys. But this is far off topic, and a lot of people at TFP hate semantic debates, sooo....
|
Intent matters, you say? Fine then. Prove that they had some alterior motive for distributing the toys. The bottom line is that you can't, as intent is nearly impossible to prove. What we do know is that they toys were donated to TFT for distribution on/around Christmas. Anything else you want to add beyond that is pure speculation and holds about as much water as a cup with no bottom.
Oh. And I also hate semantics.
Quote:
To answer this, I defer to Charlatan's post since this is pretty much what I would say but I would like to add:
Would it be okay if I donated thousands of Anton LaVey talking dolls that spouted things like, "There is no heaven; there is no hell, except here on earth"? I'm sure there would be no uproar at all over that. Would I be allowed to act surprised and disappointed when they were returned to me?
|
They're sure to be some people offended by the doll while others aren't. Of course, if you're offended by the doll and don't want your child to have it, then take it away from them.
Simple, eh?
I would also like to reiterate a point which has been brought up a few times. What's wrong in receiving a doll of Jesus on a holiday with explicit ties to Christianity? Jesus is one of the staples of Christmas, the other being Santa Clause.