Finally Someone Asked the Question..."Are Missionaries Safe"

[Guest]

We worked in some pretty bad areas and I am sure there were even worse ones that ours. The water was bad, the sanitation was bad, and I fought diarrhea constantly.

Yeah, in Cuzco we lived in such a shithole that my entire body was covered in flea bites. I can't recall how this got out, but the last week of my six-month stint in Cuzco we were moved to a pretty nice apartment.

I also remember eating at our pension, and the dude's house was so dirty that his kitchen wall would be covered in cockroaches, grease, old food remnants, smoke... Not sure how that one got out either, but we ended up switching to a Sister's home and the food and cleanliness were outstanding. She was a fantastic person.

I suppose my Peruvian companions must've complained because I never said a word (didn't want to seem ungrateful; wanted to stay humble and appreciative to serve the Lord, etc...).

Man.. Memories. I also remember having to cross the Cuzco river every day to get to our tracting area, and it was full of trash and sewage. One of my more vivid memories was that of a pig eating a dead dog half submerged in the river, and one of the indigenous types was retrieving water from the same spot presumable to use for cooking.

- Doc

ETA: Oddly enough I never got sick. Most of my American contemporaries at one time or another went through some sever illnesses. One fella got sent home (he was assigned to the Amazon region), and I was his follow-on replacement. Never got sick. Go figure...

[_maklelan]

Missionaries live in hovels. Mission Presidents live in high rises and in a couple cases mansions.

See any disconnect?

I see many. For instance, missionaries are young and single people who rarely have any independent living situation of their own. Mission presidents are older established men with families to care for. Missionaries sign up to go and live for two years off a grand total of $10,000. Mission presidents are asked to serve, and often miss out on a good income for two years.

The church loves its self paid sales force.

Right.

[_maklelan]

In what ways?

I'd love it if that were true.

Mission presidents are supposed to ensure that missionaries have safe living conditions. Some take that charge more seriously than others.

[_son of Ishmael]

We worked in some pretty bad areas and I am sure there were even worse ones that ours. The water was bad, the sanitation was bad, and I fought diarrhea constantly.

Yeah, in Cuzco we lived in such a s***hole that my entire body was covered in flea bites. I can't recall how this got out, but the last week of my six-month stint in Cuzco we were moved to a pretty nice apartment.

I also remember eating at our pension, and the dude's house was so dirty that his kitchen wall would be covered in cockroaches, grease, old food remnants, smoke... Not sure how that one got out either, but we ended up switching to a Sister's home and the food and cleanliness were outstanding. She was a fantastic person.

I suppose my Peruvian companions must've complained because I never said a word (didn't want to seem ungrateful; wanted to stay humble and appreciative to serve the Lord, etc...).

Man.. Memories. I also remember having to cross the Cuzco river every day to get to our tracting area, and it was full of trash and sewage. One of my more vivid memories was that of a pig eating a dead dog half submerged in the river, and one of the indigenous types was retrieving water from the same spot presumable to use for cooking.

- Doc

Good times...good times. I actually got to go back to South America this summer. Not the same country I served in but one next to it. I had such a blast. People can be really friendly when you are not judging them or trying to convert them.

[Aristotle Smith]

For instance, missionaries are young and single people who rarely have any independent living situation of their own.

Independent living is not the issue. These young men lived in a nice home with their family.

Mission presidents are older established men with families to care for.

And missionaries were part of a family unit with all the support and amenities family life provides a young man or woman.

Missionaries sign up to go and live for two years off a grand total of $10,000.

You use the term, "sign up" quite loosely. They majority are leveraged into serving missions through an overwhelming amount of pressure. This pressure comes from parents, relatives, future marriage prospects, and the general church community in which they reside.

Mission presidents are asked to serve, and often miss out on a good income for two years.

If a prospective mission president declines the offer, it is a private matter. A missionary also loses income or education for that time span. The biggest difference, which evades you Mak, is that the Elders live in squalor, work like dogs, lose their family unit, and are chained to a "companion" who is not of their choosing, for every waking hour of this two year existence.

I think I about nailed it, no?

Edit: And to keep things fair, we should probably keep a running tab of all the perks Mission Presidents receive, like free college tuition for their kids who are of eligible age.

[_Hermoine]

ETA: Oddly enough I never got sick. Most of my American contemporaries at one time or another went through some sever illnesses. One fella got sent home (he was assigned to the Amazon region), and I was his follow-on replacement. Never got sick. Go figure...

That's good! Glad you didn't get sick.

[_Hermoine]

So is the LDS Church somehow responsible for everybody who dies on one of its missions? If so, why do you think so?

Yes, the LDS Church is ultimately responsible. While the missionaries are on their missions for the LDS Church, the Church has a responsibility to take care of them.

[_maklelan]

Independent living is not the issue. These young men lived in a nice home with their family.

Utterly irrelevant. Young and single people without families or their own foundations sacrifice little compared to established older people with families and careers. The fact that they live in their families' nice homes (I left a two bedroom apartment that I shared with two siblings and my parents to go on a mission) is a red herring. Are colleges cruel and unfair for making them share tiny little dorm rooms and shower together after growing up in nice middle class homes?

And missionaries were part of a family unit with all the support and amenities family life provides a young man or woman.

So the Church is a jerk for having grown men move out of their mommies' homes?

You use the term, "sign up" quite loosely. They majority are leveraged into serving missions through an overwhelming amount of pressure.

The majority? And on what is this statistic based on? Surely it's not just an assumption you've plucked from your own head.

This pressure comes from parents, relatives, future marriage prospects, and the general church community in which they reside.

So without the Church 18 year-old men don't have the pressure of any expectations?

If a prospective mission president declines the offer, it is a private matter. A missionary also loses income or education for that time span.

The income sacrificed by a single 18-25 year-old (that evidently is just living with their parents anyway) is nothing compared to that of a middle-aged or older man with a family and a career.

The biggest difference, which evades you Mak, is that the Elders live in squalor, work like dogs, lose their family unit, and are chained to a "companion" who is not of their choosing, for every waking hour of this two year existence.

And that's an absolutely asinine mischaracterization of a mission. Did you serve a mission? Did you whine like a little baby then, too?

I think I about nailed it, no?

No, you didn't. You just tried to make it sound as miserable as possible because that's what serves your rhetoric. If you served a mission at all, you certainly didn't think of it like that. If you did think of it like that, I hope you managed to grow the hell up.

Edit: And to keep things fair, we should probably keep a running tab of all the perks Mission Presidents receive, like free college tuition for their kids who are of eligible age.

At BYU? That college tuition amounts to around $4,000 a year. I got more from BYU to travel to conferences to present papers. Whoopdie-doo.

[_maklelan]

Yes, the LDS Church is ultimately responsible. While the missionaries are on their missions for the LDS Church, the Church has a responsibility to take care of them.

Yes, and they meet that responsibility to as high a degree as can be expected. To suggest that they have failed or neglected that responsibility because there are the rare injuries or deaths is disingenuous or ignorant.

[_Hermoine]

Yes, the LDS Church is ultimately responsible. While the missionaries are on their missions for the LDS Church, the Church has a responsibility to take care of them.

Yes, and they meet that responsibility to as high a degree as can be expected. To suggest that they have failed or neglected that responsibility because there are the rare injuries or deaths is disingenuous or ignorant.

I didn't say that the Church screwed up. I said they were responsible in answer to Kevin's question.

My previous statement about it being important as to whether one missionary is lost or twenty was just that. What I was trying to say is that every life is important.