Interesting...

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Which brings me back to my point... The UPC acted unethically in not freely giving out such a list to other similar organizations that would have requested it. The reason this is unethical for a Christian organization is because they should seek to give their members every oppurtunity to find the perfect place for them and their churches to serve God. So why is everyone focusing on the other organization's ethics in obtaining the list and acting like the UPC did nothing unethical in this situation?

Mosy people that I know, including myself, have a huge issue in their information being shared with other entities. Anytime I sign up for a online magazine, store catalog, ect, I ALWAYS opt out of having my information shared! If I want communication from your company or arganization, I will let you know.

UPC is unethical for preserving the privacy of its ministers???

[LadyRev]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I agree frogger - and in the big scope of the universe and all... this is pretty small potatoes; but as you pointed out - most of these men will go ballistic if they even think someone is proselytizing one of their tithing saints, so the hypocrisy level is high.

All of your posts have expressed my sentiments exactly. If it weren't for the nonsense, I wouldn't have thought twice about receiving the magazine.

I know many of the men in that org and know them to be fine men of God. Perhaps they didn't mean for it to be viewed as proselytizing or unethical or misuse of a list of names. However, I do believe some of them would go "ballistic" if this scenario were reversed organization wise.