my house builder was amish. He OWNED all the equipment (huge tractors, cranes, etc.), he will ride in them but he WONT drive them. He hired someone else to drive. And he would stand on the crane to reach the roof. And he has no TV and stitches his own clothes etc.

So, while I am not against or for their way of life, one can plainly see them adapting to new way of life but still denying something as basic as vaccinations when they feel like it.

It's not uncommon to see Amish stands at farmers' markets in parts of Pennsylvania, far from anywhere a horse and buggy could reasonably get them to. I asked some friends in college about it (farmers themselves) and it kind of blew my mind when they told me the Amish just get a ride with someone else.

The article explains it this way:

"We don't have any internet or computer. We don't have a car," Ivan Miller, an Amish furniture store owner in the community struck by measles, explained. "It's not that we feel a car is wrong. It's our choice because we feel if we had a car, it would bring us to a lot more temptations in the world. [emphasis mine]"

Anything that's convenient for them, I guess?

What it boils down to, is whether or not taking advantage of a technology puts them under the influence of those outside their community. For example, if they use electricity then they have to be involved with the affairs of the town, and not self-reliant. But they can choose to use a diesel engine to power equipment for their farms, as they have the ability to make their own bio-fuel. And they use modern refrigeration and battery-powered lights on their carriages for safety reasons.

In short -- does a technology pull them away from their faith, or is it needed for a greater good? Not to mention, that each Amish community is independent and sets their own rules (there is no central Amish version of the Pope, for example).

Very good explanation! I'll also add that some Amish (and somewhat more Mennonite) communities actually OK laptops and cellphones, while desktop computers and landlines are eschewed. (Or, to use a somewhat older example, some communities accepted phones that were located outside the house, leading to phones mounted on poles placed suspiciously close to the kitchen window.)

I'm betting the desktop/laptop thing is a good example. Desktops require power grids, which the Amish prefer not to be tied to. Laptops are easier to run independently of the rest of the work since you can charge them when you can in a variety of ways.

Likewise, flying on airplanes or taking the occasional train on a one-off trip isn't really that big of a problem, either: you aren't tying yourself to the rest of the world. If you go on a mission this year via airplane, it doesn't compel to do the same thing next year. On the other hand, buying into automobile culture to commute to work ties you pretty hard to everything.

It seems to me using a plane would be a bit of a slippery slope then. A commercial airplane's main purpose is to access somewhere beyond one's own community, and the experiences of international travel to a foreign land will change you (not to mention, I'm curious why they would target the Philippines vs any modern local American city). But people will do as they do, I suppose.

They aren't opposed to an experience changing them. And most things are guidelines to make choices, not absolutes. In this case, going on a mission was a higher priority, and the most effective way to get to the target was via air travel. If there was an alternative then they would take it.

This decision matrix isn't unique to the Amish -- people do it every day. For example, I want to save money. But I also want to work at a job. To get to the job I have to travel. I choose to drive to the job (incurring vehicle expenses), whereas I have the alternative of walking (would take several hours) or cycling (too lazy, too cold). Therefore I choose to spend money on gas instead of either not working or walking to work.

>They aren't opposed to an experience changing them. And most things are guidelines to make choices, not absolutes. In this case, going on a mission was a higher priority, and the most effective way to get to the target was via air travel. If there was an alternative then they would take it.

It's not so much the experience change I'm pointing out, rather that that will bring foreign influence from outside (and obviously foreign influence has occurred because they are using tractors and diesel from the other comments.)

And if we're considering a decision matrix that tries to minimize outside influence, that still doesn't explain why the Philippines vs any where in North America, really.

Minimizing outside influence is only a portion of the decision matrix. They want to maintain their community and their religion. Minimizing outside influence might be part of that, or it might not. As said above, there is no absolute rule - the community decides are a group which technologies/changes they want to use or discourage.

Yes, that does lead to some oddities.

I think going on a mission would be more about influencing the outside, than about outside influences.

Maybe they considered, quite correctly, that poorer people in disaster stricken areas are easier to influence.

Sure, that is the explicit goal, but throughout history, missionaries/explorers have always brought something back with them, be it physical items or ideas. That's just part of the nature of "exploration". Unless someone impressed those laptops, cranes, and telephone poles upon the Amish, I imagine they saw them when they ventured out and decided the "goal posts" of their beliefs could be fiddled with to accommodate them.

They generally don't electrify their homes.

That doesn't seem like it is a contrived choice designed to enhance convenience.

(My understanding is that the choices tend to hinge on whether something creates an ongoing reliance on the greater world)

Hence, why I asked, smarty.

You also could have read the article:

In the Ohio case, "patient zero" had traveled to the Philippines on a missionary trip. (In case you were wondering, he took a plane. Miller explained, "Some Amish fly. Some don't.")

Yeah, and I could have Googled it, too, but I asked here instead. But you got me. I went back to work after the section where they talk about not having a car, internet, or computer.