Conversion Ethics

[Samael_Khan]

Couldn't you instead simply provide emotional and community support to that vulnerable person, to help them get back on their feet and live their own life, and let them come to your faith naturally? I feel like conversion would be superfluous when it's just about helping people, and when it's targeting vulnerable people the potential of it turning predatory seems fairly high.

Often times high control groups use their indoctrination as emotional and community support. They use their beliefs to provide the person with hope, love bomb them, spend a whole lot of time with them and make them a part of something "greater". So they become predatory through the support, as they aren't doing this without any benefit to themselves. It is as if emotional and community support has to be separated from religion and ideology in order for it not to be predatory.

 

[Samael_Khan]

See my last sentence

Oh ok. So that is what you mean by lots of conversation. I also realise that Jews tend to discourage people to convert, is that right?

 

[Samael_Khan]

If the person hasn't asked for help or advice, it seems rather rude and almost predatory. People in such states are psychologically fragile and susceptible to emotional appeals. Leave them alone, or simply offer your company or whatever support they ask for/need. If whatever you're selling is really worth it, then you should be happy to wait to chat with the person about it when they're in a clearer frame of mind.

I agree. If the religion is worth it, then appealing to a person when they are in a vulnerable state is unnecessary.

 

[Samael_Khan]

If however the victim wants to be preached to and believes it will honestly help them then no problem.

Can you provide an acceptable scenario for the above please?

 

[Heyo]

Oh ok. So that is what you mean by lots of conversation. I also realise that Jews tend to discourage people to convert, is that right?

Nah, they are only honest and up-front about what it takes to become a convert - which may be discouraging to some.

 

[Samael_Khan]

I consider conversion attempts of any variety to be unethical, but to attack someone when they're vulnerable is worse than unethical, it's despicable.

I was actually taught to partake in such despicable acts when I was religious. We were taught to look out for signs of a persons personal problems such as when we were invited into their place, so that we could adapt our preaching to capitalize on their vulnerability. We even had tracks talking about "will suffering ever end?" and one about the resurrection to provide hope for people in bad situations. But the intentions were good on our part although how we went about it was wrong.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Reason: By this logic one should not try to deconvert an extremist or a person in a harmful cult when he is having a crisis of faith. Obviously there would be emotional trauma when a person questions his long held beliefs. If, at that point he is attracted to an alternative ideology why can't he be told about that?

This is a very good point that I haven't thought of. It is a utilitarian option, which is rather convert them to something in which they will cause less harm. This becomes a blurry issue then because harmful cults would use that reasoning to validate their conversion tactics.

 

[Samael_Khan]

I don't know about "preach and convert" but if accepting Jesus into their life will help them heal (and it often does), why not? Nothing coercive, just sharing the Good News.

Well that depends on how important you think truth is, since Christianity is concerned with truth. Is it ok to join a religion just because of feelings or should one join because of objective research?

Also, depending on how one shares the Good News, it can be pretty coercive.

 

[Samael_Khan]

It depends on the person, and situation, and their already held beliefs. It also depends on the person doing the 'preaching'. Its all fine and dandy to want to hold everyone to the same intellectual standard, but truthfully, we're not all equal in this department. If a person is preaching with good intent in their heart, and they really don't know any better(a few don't), I find it hard to hold a grudge against them. However, if they're preaching with any malice, any ulterior motives, or withholding something of value(food/financial assistance/companionship) from a person in need because of their desire to convert, they are no better than what my dog leaves in the backyard.

Certainly if a person has good intentions then one shouldn't hold anything against them. But it is more the tactics promoted by the group that is of concern and the leaders can certainly be held responsible for coersion. In most cases, those trying to indoctrinate others are victims of indoctrination themselves.

 

[Rival]

Oh ok. So that is what you mean by lots of conversation. I also realise that Jews tend to discourage people to convert, is that right?

Yes, kind of. It's complicated lol.

 

[ChristineM]

Can you provide an acceptable scenario for the above please?

Not off the top of ny head, no, but it could happen i suppose.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I have placed this in the general debates section because it isn't only religions that preach and aim to convert others to their cause.

Is it ethical to preach and attempt to convert people who are in a bad place in their lives, who are in a fragile emotional state?

Examples of targets:
- someone who has lost a loved one in death
- a drug addict
- a person who has lost their job
- someone who has trauma because of abuse

It is ethical to give people choices. From my experience the motivation is to help, conversion is never part of the mindset.

It is wisdom to offer choices that have been found to work for many people and faith has proven to help with all these issues.

The first part of the process is empathy and most that will offer the choice can offer the choice as it has helped them cope with the exact same issue.

At the same time, that advice can only be offered, if the person is in a place where they are accepting of that advice.

Regards Tony

 

[Vinayaka]

I was actually taught to partake in such despicable acts when I was religious. We were taught to look out for signs of a persons personal problems such as when we were invited into their place, so that we could adapt our preaching to capitalize on their vulnerability. We even had tracks talking about "will suffering ever end?" and one about the resurrection to provide hope for people in bad situations. But the intentions were good on our part although how we went about it was wrong.

Some groups read obituaries to find vulnerable people. As far as I know, most hospitals have laws against the hospital missionaries wandering about doing their thing. You need permission first. There was a time when they could wander freely in hospitals proselytising.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I was actually taught to partake in such despicable acts when I was religious. We were taught to look out for signs of a persons personal problems such as when we were invited into their place, so that we could adapt our preaching to capitalize on their vulnerability. We even had tracks talking about "will suffering ever end?" and one about the resurrection to provide hope for people in bad situations. But the intentions were good on our part although how we went about it was wrong.

So do your experiences have to taint all religions and all peoples intent with the same brush?

Or do you think it is good you identified that conversion should not have been the intent?

Maybe that would be the better topic. What motivates us to help people suffering from the points you have raised.

Regards Tony

 

[Samael_Khan]

Nah, they are only honest and up-front about what it takes to become a convert - which may be discouraging to some.

Oh. OK. That is a step forward but I was under the impression that they were telling people not to convert.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Yes, kind of. It's complicated lol.

As complicated as everything to do with Judaism XD

 

[Samael_Khan]

It is ethical to give people choices. From my experience the motivation is to help, conversion is never part of the mindset.

It is wisdom to offer choices that have been found to work for many people and faith has proven to help with all these issues.

The first part of the process is empathy and most that will offer the choice can offer the choice as it has helped them cope with the exact same issue.

At the same time, that advice can only be offered, if the person is in a place where they are accepting of that advice.

Regards Tony

I do also think that the motivation is to help. I don't doubt the sincerity of those who preach unless I know something personal about them that is off putting.

If the goal of the preaching though is to find disciples, does your thoughts change on the matter? So if the preacher is offering advice that has helped many people but is trying to use this in order to gradually convert that person would that be ok in your mind?

 

[Samael_Khan]

Some groups read obituaries to find vulnerable people. As far as I know, most hospitals have laws against the hospital missionaries wandering about doing their thing. You need permission first. There was a time when they could wander freely in hospitals proselytising.

That is interesting. I am not surprised that they use obituaries to target people.

 

[Samael_Khan]

So do your experiences have to taint all religions and all peoples intent with the same brush?

Or do you think it is good you identified that conversion should not have been the intent?

Maybe that would be the better topic. What motivates us to help people suffering from the points you have raised.

Regards Tony

Thing is that not all religions proselytize and there are lots of non religious groups that are guilty of taking advantage of those who are vulnerable.

The issue here is a method of indoctrination rather than just helping people. I don't doubt most believers or followers who proselytize are genuine, as they believe that their religion or ideology has truth and will help people. Problem is that intentions aren't the concern but the method is. Often times helping and converting are the same thing as the believers will consider converting a person helping them. So even if the intent is good, the believer or follower are already subject to many other indoctrination methods and therefore only communicate to the target through an indoctrinated state of mind which is dangerous. They cannot help but coerce the person into their beliefs because they cannot think any other way. They aren't even conscious of their coersive methods.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I do also think that the motivation is to help. I don't doubt the sincerity of those who preach unless I know something personal about them that is off putting.

If the goal of the preaching though is to find disciples, does your thoughts change on the matter? So if the preacher is offering advice that has helped many people but is trying to use this in order to gradually convert that person would that be ok in your mind?

I see in faith one is asked to share a Message only to those that want to hear.

It does not take long to know who wants to and who does not.

Personally my faith is a way of life. My advice, if asked for, would be things that I have found helped me and would be balanced depending on the reaction to what is offered.

An example is tha I have come to have a very optimistic view of life and death and death for me is not scary or a sad event, though there will be greif for our own loss of a loved one. My advice would determine what another thought about this topic, before offering the hope I have found.

Regards Tony