permanent health changes for RMs church's liability?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.

Should the church be held liable for health of RMs for disease received on missions?

 
Total votes: 0

_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Post by _moksha »

So what is the policy on helping with health care for missionaries?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_solomarineris
_Emeritus
Posts: 1207
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:51 am

Post by _solomarineris »

Sethbag wrote:
Runtu wrote:
bcspace wrote:
Maybe that's what Jesus had in mind in Mark 9:44, 46, 48 when He said, "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."


I think that's a Tequila (con gusano) worm.......


In my mission, almost every missionary has at least one picture of a worm he or she passed, usually next to a ruler or a pencil. Ewwww.


It was missions like yours that I feared as a teen. And so I was positive God would send me there, just to teach me humility. But it turns out God doesn't actually send anyone anywhere, and the LDS church apparently was in need of German speakers, so I got to go to Switzerland instead. Sorry, didn't get any stomach worms there. Just didn't baptize anyone either. I guess they all had their tradeoffs. About the worst food I ever had to eat was cold corn with some kind of vinegar sauce. The Europeans got corn from the Americas, but they didn't get the memo that came with it explaining how it ought to be eaten. Cold freaking corn with vinegar sauce. Ick.


Don't complain just because god sent you to sterile Switzerland. It is not funny at all coming back from one of those godforsaken lands with a debilitating parasite or a bug as excess baggage. I heard some serious horror stories from S. america, Brazil mostly.
Don't feel bad you couldn't baptize anyone in CH; that is because they (Europeans) are like George Carlin's cousins, lacking his humor only, they carry BS detectors as sidearms there.
_Sam Harris
_Emeritus
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:35 am

Post by _Sam Harris »

I voted yes, because if the church willingly sends these people into places where they know they can be infected with such diseases, they should be responsible for the care of these individuals. Plain and simple.

It's like the U.S. refusing to take care of injured war vets.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
Post Reply