http://www.radical.net/blog/2014/08/ebola-america-ann-coulter-and-christian-missions/

I hadn't heard Coulter's comments on Dr. Brantly until this morning. This was on a David Platt site.

Here are links to other Christian responses to Coulter's comments:

Albert Mohler: Are Christian Missionaries Narcissistic Idiots? — A Response to Ann Coulter http://www.albertmohler.com/2014/08/07/are-christian-missionaries-narcissistic-idiots-a-response-to-ann-coulter/

Russell Moore: Ann Coulter and Our Mission http://www.russellmoore.com/2014/08/07/ann-coulter-and-our-mission/

Collin Garbarino: The Foolishness of an Ebola Doctor http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2014/08/the-foolishness-of-an-ebola-doctor

John Piper: A Virus More Deadly Than Ebola (poem) http://www.worldmag.com/2014/08/a_virus_more_deadly_than_ebola

J.D. Greear: Ann Coulter’s Column About the Wastefulness of Mission Sacrifice http://www.jdgreear.com/my_weblog/2014/08/ann-coulters-latest-column-about-wastefulness-of-mission-sacrifice.html

The thing with Ann Coulter is that it is difficult to determine when she is attempting to be humorous and when she is attempting serious thought (I know, I know...). She is the equivalent of a shock-jock on the American political right. She is best left ignored. Maybe then, she will fade from public view.

I don't like her column but it does make one good point. We focus a lot on foreign missions but then do little locally. However that's not the missionaries fault, it's our fault. (The ones who stay here). There is plenty of mission work to be done locally. But calling missionaries idiots for attempting to fight ebola is ridiculous.

[This message has been edited by frok (edited 8/8/2014 10:15a).]

It is an interesting point: a disease with a 90% death rate...it does seem a little pointless. Could you save more lives staying here tending to the sick? Probably.

i've always disliked her persona and approach, but after reading her opinion piece, i'm going to go ahead and say she just seems like a bad person, period.

It's harsh. Probably a little trolling. But there's a point there.

These people travelled half a world away to watch a lot of people die. Then someone spent millions to bring them back. That money might have saved more than their two lives.

People don't like to criticize these guys. They're selfless. The guy put his life on the line. But it's fair to ask if he did so wisely. And it's fair to ask if his doing so did more harm than good. Or if it was the best use of charity.

We aren't called to help only after we've done a cost/benefit analysis. We aren't called to help only if it isn't too risky. We are called to help, and that includes helping those like Dr. Brantly.

quote:

---

We aren't called to help only after we've done a cost/benefit analysis. We aren't called to help only if it isn't too risky. We are called to help, and that includes helping those like Dr. Brantly.

---

That's clearly what he believes. I believe we might question the wisdom of putting yourself in harms way if it means others will have to do so to extract you.

To pick up on a hypo from last night: suppose I see someone flailing wildly in the middle of the street. They're clearly in drugs or affected by mental illness. Am I obligated to put myself in harms way by getting them out of traffic, with either this person or traffic killing us both? Or can I call police, who are trained to help?

Ah, the neverending hypothetical game.

In your hypothetical, if the guy is truly at risk, why can't you stop traffic until he's out of harms way? Are people unable to see him? If I came across someone like that, I'd likely put my hazards on, park my car in the road at an angle and safe distance, and get out and try to talk the guy out of the road. I'm confident people will stop, or slowly pass on the side. Why would I need to call the police?

Would you be justified to handcuff the guy and throw him in a cage in your garage? Would that be moral?

quote:

---

Ah, the neverending hypothetical game.

In your hypothetical, if the guy is truly at risk, why can't you stop traffic until he's out of harms way? Are people unable to see him? If I came across someone like that, I'd likely put my hazards on, park my car in the road at an angle and safe distance, and get out and try to talk the guy out of the road. I'm confident people will stop, or slowly pass on the side. Why would I need to call the police?

Would you be justified to handcuff the guy and throw him in a cage in your garage? Would that be moral?

---

How do I stop traffic safely? Have you driven in LA? I've stopped to render aid in an accident and was almost killed.

I don't know where you live or what your experience is in a big city with homeless people on drugs or suffering from schizophrenia. But it is extremely dangerous for you to try and resolve a safety issue involving someone like that on your own.

And by the way, the cops may handcuff the person, but they'll often take them for help at an ER for psych evaluation or other medical attention.

quote:

---

How do I stop traffic safely? Have you driven in LA? I've stopped to render aid in an accident and was almost killed.

I don't know where you live or what your experience is in a big city with homeless people on drugs or suffering from schizophrenia. But it is extremely dangerous for you to try and resolve a safety issue involving someone like that on your own.

---

I live in Houston, and amazingly I haven't once came across a homeless person waiving his arms in the middle of the street.

Would you be justified to handcuff the guy and throw him in a cage in your garage? Would that be moral?

quote:

---

quote:

---

How do I stop traffic safely? Have you driven in LA? I've stopped to render aid in an accident and was almost killed.

I don't know where you live or what your experience is in a big city with homeless people on drugs or suffering from schizophrenia. But it is extremely dangerous for you to try and resolve a safety issue involving someone like that on your own.

---

I live in Houston, and amazingly I haven't once came across a homeless person waiving his arms in the middle of the street.

Would you be justified to handcuff the guy and throw him in a cage in your garage? Would that be moral?

---

Major California cities have much larger homeless populations. I've lived in Houston. It's not close.

Worse still, a large percentage of the homeless here are suffering from severe mental illness. You're dealing not just with a person. You're feeling with that.

Keep making this as simple as locking someone in a cage. It's not that. If some is mentally ill, police here can and do handle that with compassion and with regard to the rights of the person. And I say that as someone that is not generally a fan of police.

Fwiw, I live in Brentwood. And there is a poor women that basically goes catatonic in the middle of a dangerous intersection every now and then. I've seen homeless people walk diagonally across intersections in Santa Monica. That can happen when you are insane.

quote:

---

Keep making this as simple as locking someone in a cage. It's not that.

---

Why not just answer the question? I addressed your hypothetical, now I would hope you'd be willing to address this. Would you be justified to handcuff the man and either throw him in a cage or force him to get help? Would that use of force be moral, in your opinion, to use yourself?

quote:

---

If some is mentally ill, police here can and do handle that with compassion and with regard to the rights of the person.

---

Yes, Kelly Thomas can attest to that.

[This message has been edited by RetiredAg (edited 8/8/2014 12:52p).]

Just FYI: http://www.texasobserver.org/want-treatment-mental-illness-go-to-jail/

As people with mental illness filled the jails, counties like Harris were forced to act. They added mental health programs to their law enforcement agencies and jails, a humane move, but one that shifts costs from the state to local taxpayers and blurs the lines between institutions designed to punish and those meant to treat. That’s how Texas’ largest jail became its largest mental hospital. And that’s why many Texans can get better mental health treatment inside the jail than out of it.

Better treatment by being locked in a cage.

Are you going to just refuse to answer my question?

Would you be justified to handcuff the man and either throw him in a cage or force him to get help? Would that use of force be moral, in your opinion, to use yourself?

LA's services are not as good. But I've seen cops do the right thing.

Would you be justified to handcuff the man yourself and either throw him in a cage or force him to get help? Would that use of force be moral, in your opinion, to use yourself?

[This message has been edited by RetiredAg (edited 8/8/2014 1:02p).]

quote:

---

Are you going to just refuse to answer my question?

Would you be justified to handcuff the man and either throw him in a cage or force him to get help? Would that use of force be moral, in your opinion, to use yourself?

---

Had a feeling you'd ignore that article.

Here's the deal: when someone is on drugs or insane, some amount of force to get them help so they don't hurt themselves or others is compassionate.

So, I take it you won't answer the question. This isn't about the resources the state has for these people. I asked a question about the morality of the action itself.


Would you be justified to handcuff the man yourself and either throw him in a cage or force him to get help? Would that use of force be moral, in your opinion, to use yourself?

quote:

---

some amount of force to get them help so they don't hurt themselves or others is compassionate.

---

Would it be moral for you to use that force? Would it be moral for you to handcuff the man and force him to get help?

quote:

---

Better treatment by being locked in a cage.

---

The sentiment that has led to us being by far the most incarcerated country on the planet. The Russians and Chinese are shocked by the extent and severity of our police state.

quote:

---

quote:

---

some amount of force to get them help so they don't hurt themselves or others is compassionate.

---

Would it be moral for you to use that force? Would it be moral for you to handcuff the man and force him to get help?

---

If someone was affirmatively hurting themselves because they were insane, it would be moral for me to try and subdue them and calm them.

Dangerous. But moral.

quote:

---

some amount of force to get them help so they don't hurt themselves or others is compassionate.

---

So, you are okay with using force against others if you think it's to "help" them? Or is it only when they are engaging in risky behavior due to mental illness or drug use? What about prostitutes? I think we'd all agree they are engaging in self-destructive behavior. Would it be moral for you to handcuff a prostitute and throw her in a cage in your garage? You know, for her own good?

quote:

---

If someone was affirmatively hurting themselves because they were insane, it would be moral for me to try and subdue them and calm them.

---

Wait, now you are moving the goalposts. In the original hypothetical, the homeless man wasn't affirmatively harming themselves. Maybe they were engaging in behavior that placed them in greater risk, but they aren't actually harming themselves.

quote:

---

The sentiment that has led to us being by far the most incarcerated country on the planet. The Russians and Chinese are shocked by the extent and severity of our police state.

---

Exactly. "For their own good" is a dangerous mindset that has led to countless abuses.

quote:

---

quote:

---

some amount of force to get them help so they don't hurt themselves or others is compassionate.

---

So, you are okay with using force against others if you think it's to "help" them? Or is it only when they are engaging in risky behavior due to mental illness or drug use? What about prostitutes? I think we'd all agree they are engaging in self-destructive behavior. Would it be moral for you to handcuff a prostitute and throw her in a cage in your garage? You know, for her own good?

---

In my garage? No. But if believed they'd get help through law enforcement and out of a likely sex slave arrangement I'd consider that.

Are you telling me you can't see when someone is genuinely trying to hurt themselves?

You're operating well outside the Bible now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku42PPzYEqs

For his own good.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If someone was affirmatively hurting themselves because they were insane, it would be moral for me to try and subdue them and calm them.

---

Wait, now you are moving the goalposts. In the original hypothetical, the homeless man wasn't affirmatively harming themselves. Maybe they were engaging in behavior that placed them in greater risk, but they aren't actually harming themselves.

---

Standing in the middle of a dangerous intersection is not very different. Give me a break.

quote:

---

In my garage? No. But if believed they'd get help through law enforcement and out of a likely sex slave arrangement I'd consider that.

---

So, you admit it would be immoral for you to do, but somehow it becomes moral because the perpetrator wears the right costume? I didn't realize you thought morality was relative.

If an action is immoral for you, it's immoral for the cop too.

quote:

---

Are you telling me you can't see when someone is genuinely trying to hurt themselves?

---

This isn't the condition in your original hypothetical. Stop moving the goalposts.

quote:

---

You're operating well outside the Bible now.

---

How so?