My husband and I are living in India right now and face a similar dilemma. Handlers and/or parents often maim children in an effort to use them to gain money. The church we attend has recommended that we give food instead of money. Giving money only encourages the system. More children will be maimed or tortured if those in charge know they can get money through this avenue. Instead, the church has come up with ways to reach out to the poor on the street. Money from the church helps to feed the lepers/beggars on the street. Through these outreaches, they are also preaching the gospel. Obviously West Africa is different than India, but the premise is the same. Giving money only encourages those who are torturing to take more boys/children for their evil gain.

There ARE other options to help these children. I don’t know the situation, but there are always options to help exploited children. Usually the problem is that the ones who can help the children do not want to take the time, energy, money or the risk to their reputations/lives to do it.

Fatherless children are God’s children and if we seek him in prayer, he can show us how to genuinely help them and show them his love.

Giving them money is NOT showing them God’s love.

First, while we are instructed to love our enemies, we must have a correct definition of “love”. Love is not willy-nilly indiscriminate giving of material goods. Rather, God’s love, the love the Bible describes, can be defined as giving oneself even unto death for the spiritual well-being of another human. With that definition in mind, funneling resources to appease the blood-lusts of terrorists helps no one in anyway. Growing terrorism doesn’t draw the terrorists closer to Jesus Christ. If it did, I’d be all for funding them! Funding terrorism is not showing love, and if we have not love, isn’t it all for nought? So while we may be “caring” (in some strange sense of the word), we are not really loving.

Second, as Americans, we are obligated to loyalty of our nation. The current political situation of our nation aside, we are not to encourage the destruction of our own nation. That would be “aiding and abetting terrorism”, a breach in national loyalty. Provided, we’re not to follow blindly the will of Washington, but that is not what I am suggesting. All I am saying is that as citizens of the United States, we are to love our nation.

Third, we are not doing the kids any favor either. This goes back to the above definition of love. Helping them aid terrorists is not love.

Others have already voiced their wish that the missionaries could simply remove the children from that horrid situation. Would that they could! However, I will assume that such acts are impossible, and could even lead to worse punishment and even death. In some ways, this seems to be out of the missionaries’ hands. If this is international terrorism that they’re dealing with, unfortunately, there is not much that can be done. As just a 15-year-old, I’m utterly unqualified to offer suggestions to the missionaries. Further, I know very little of the situation. Can the US Embassy be contacted? How armed are the terrorists? What kind of stand can the missionaries make? These questions remain wide-open, and, depending on their answers, change my position.

As per the boys, it seems that giving them money helps them not at all. Remember the movies where the bad guys have the hostage? The bad guys always threaten to do something horrific to someone the hostage loves. More often than not, the hostage finally gives in (see Star Trek for just one example), thinking to have done a noble deed. Yet as soon as the bad guys are confident of the information, they proceed to do exactly what they’d threatened. I always groan at such scenarios—I know what the hostage will do, I and I know what the bad guys will do. The point is this: bad guys are bad guys. You can’t bargain with them. They feign sincerity at the parley table one day, and the next day are back to war. In this case, they’ll beat the boys if they don’t bring back money, and if they do, they may very well beat them anyway! And at any rate, there’s precious little chance that they’ll look on at some industrious little kid, be moved with compassion, and release him. The wicked are never satisfied, so why would we assume such in this case?

Just some thoughts. Joshua Owens

Their title talibe doesn’t necessarily mean they’re linked to the Taliban.

Most are just being used by corrupt Imams looking to get wealthy.