World Vision

A few brief observations about World Vision:

i) As I've said on other occasion, there's a sense in which I think this sort of thing is a good development. By that I mean, it's good when nominally Christian institutions tip their hand. That separates the faithful from the faithless. 

ii) I expect the World Vision execs are surprised by the extent and intensity of the backlash. Surprised because, unless they were out-of-touch with the Christian community to begin with, they wouldn't change their policy.

iii) What's striking is how they capitulated in the absent of any tangible threat. They didn't have the excuse of a fine or law-suit. They just unilaterally buckled to the new social mores of the cultural elite. 

iv) Apropos (iii), big Christian organizations have a special responsibility to resist these encroachments on Christian liberty. That's because, unlike mom-and-pop Christian businesses, they have the financial resources to contest it. They may still lose, but they can at least put up a fight.

v) It's ironic that they justify their capitulation on the grounds that they just want to focus on their mission, for I expect homosexual marriage is a great affront to many Third World cultures. This is a radical chic cause in the West. 

vi) Sponsoring children through World Vision isn't all it's cracked up to be. I had a relative who used to sponsor a child in India or Pakistan. She got regular updates which mentioned what a devout Hindu he was. She wrote back to say she wasn't donating to indoctrinate a poor child in Hinduism. Hinduism is a major contributor to poverty in the first place (i.e. the caste system).