Can we please at least talk about World Vision accurately?


Recently a leftist blogger complained that 10,000 kids lost their sponsorships in 2 days because fundamentalist Christians yanked their support from World Vision.

But before you swallow that, two things to ask and consider here:

1. Is there proof that 10,000 kids are now abandoned? 2. Do "sponsorship fees" really go to the kids?

Nope and nope. First, WV president Richard Stearns this week gave out this figure via phone conference to a small group of hand-picked bloggers who are pro-gay marriage. The blogger with the biggest audience is Matthew Paul Turner. He works for World Vision. 'Nuff said.

Now consider this: "According to their own FAQ page, ”A child does not receive direct cash benefits.” But they use the same public relations and marketing material to draw new donors in. In other words, when 10,000 people drop their sponsorships, that does not mean 10,000 kids suddenly lose their money. That would be a horrible, insecure, and cruel model to use for charity and development — for any organization! So whether you talk positively or negatively about World Vision in the future, please, please remember: you aren’t actually sponsoring kids." Can we please at least talk about World Vision accurately?