Don't Waste Your Money On the Salvation Army

[hipeter924]

I'm all for marriage equality, but the Salvation Army does a lot of good. They feed hungry people, they provide a lot of help to poor families.

So I'm willing to give them a mulligan on this one.

I am just getting amused at all the rubbish posts in this thread.

Apparently calling the SA a religious cult or socialist organization at 10, is 'moronic'. According to a few posters, broad generalizations are only okay when they do it. Now that sums up the hypocrisy of a few posters i.e. If they call all Democrats Communist it is 'intelligent'.

 

[Two Thumbs]

The SA does more to help the poor than damn near anyone or org, and b/c they don't support gays, you want to hurt them.


faggot, your self pity and hate is harming poor people you ignorant self righteous poser

Catholic Church does far more, as does the Mormon Church. Don't need to endorse fringe Christianity to help the poor.

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I haven't given them a cent in years.

Busted Leaked Salvation Army Document Shows It s Still Homophobic Allison Hope

What's more annoying than the constant ringing of bells by Salvation Army donation-bucket volunteers during the holiday season? The organization's longstanding, outspoken homophobia, of course!

Last year the Salvation Army did a media blitz claiming that it no longer believes same-sex lovin' is a sin.

Turns out they were lying. An internal document was recently leaked, and it reveals the dishonest disconnect between what the Salvation Army was telling the public -- that they are more LGBT-friendly than their checkered past would indicate -- and the fact that they are actually still just as homophobic as ever.

If that's true then I'm going to triple my donation.

 

[theHawk]

I haven't given them a cent in years.

Busted Leaked Salvation Army Document Shows It s Still Homophobic Allison Hope

What's more annoying than the constant ringing of bells by Salvation Army donation-bucket volunteers during the holiday season? The organization's longstanding, outspoken homophobia, of course!

Last year the Salvation Army did a media blitz claiming that it no longer believes same-sex lovin' is a sin.

Turns out they were lying. An internal document was recently leaked, and it reveals the dishonest disconnect between what the Salvation Army was telling the public -- that they are more LGBT-friendly than their checkered past would indicate -- and the fact that they are actually still just as homophobic as ever.

So they don't want leaders in their ministry to contradict what they are preaching, and the queers are having a hissy fit over this?

All you progressive zealots are the same, you don't hesitate to force your values (or lack of them) on others. Case in point, the OP is implying that the SA should change their beliefs to satisfy his own, and if they don't convert, they should be 'put down' as an organization as punishment.

Carry on with the phoney outrage, the Agenda must be pushed!

 

[hipeter924]

The SA does more to help the poor than damn near anyone or org, and b/c they don't support gays, you want to hurt them.


faggot, your self pity and hate is harming poor people you ignorant self righteous poser

Catholic Church does far more, as does the Mormon Church. Don't need to endorse fringe Christianity to help the poor.

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

Overwhelmingly false: America s Top 50 charities How well do they rate - CSMonitor.com

1 YMCA of the USA - Christian - Income: $5986.1 million
Spends: 87.4%
2 Goodwill Industries International - Unaffiliated/Christian - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 89.0‡‡%
3 Catholic Charities USA - Catholic - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 79.6% or 3412 million
4 United Way - Income: 4,422.8 million
Spends: 90.6%
5 American Red Cross - Unaffiliated - Income: 4,139.9
Spends: 92.2%
6 The Salvation Army - Christian - Income: 3,203.8 million
Spends: 84.0% or 2691 million
7 Habitat for Humanity International - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,490.6 million
Spends: 83.7%
[...]11 Feeding America - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,185.0 million
Spends: 97.2%

Salvation Army is the 6th most effective charity in the US, my claim that other church groups (including the Catholic Church) do more than the Salvation Army is correct.

 

[WinterBorn]

The SA does more to help the poor than damn near anyone or org, and b/c they don't support gays, you want to hurt them.


faggot, your self pity and hate is harming poor people you ignorant self righteous poser

Catholic Church does far more, as does the Mormon Church. Don't need to endorse fringe Christianity to help the poor.

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

Overwhelmingly false: America s Top 50 charities How well do they rate - CSMonitor.com

1 YMCA of the USA - Christian - Income: $5986.1 million
Spends: 87.4%
2 Goodwill Industries International - Unaffiliated/Christian - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 89.0‡‡%
3 Catholic Charities USA - Catholic - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 79.6% or 3412 million
4 United Way - Income: 4,422.8 million
Spends: 90.6%
5 American Red Cross - Unaffiliated - Income: 4,139.9
Spends: 92.2%
6 The Salvation Army - Christian - Income: 3,203.8 million
Spends: 84.0% or 2691 million
7 Habitat for Humanity International - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,490.6 million
Spends: 83.7%
[...]11 Feeding America - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,185.0 million
Spends: 97.2%

Salvation Army is the 6th most effective charity in the US, my claim that other church groups (including the Catholic Church) do more than the Salvation Army is correct.

Whether they are the most efficient charity or not isn't my point.

That the only complaint the gays have is that the Salvation Army will not abandon their beliefs (regulating internal matters only). The claim has always been that they are not against anyone's religious beliefs if those religious beliefs are not forced on them. In this case, the beliefs are not being forced on anyone. The charity is a ministry. To expect them to live a Christian life, while working as a Christian ministry is pretty basic stuff.

 

[Vigilante]

Didn't Howey post the same kind of GAY BULLSHIT about Chick Fil-A?.... I see where that got the little queers!

 

[Vandalshandle]

...and yet, if two gay partners come in seeking shelter, at least one of them will be turned away.

I don't call that "Internal only". I call it "religious bigotry".

Also, The some of the shine came off of the Salvation Army, for me, at least, when I learned that many of them are paid.

No matter. The SA can keep their policies, and I will give my money to groups that don't discriminate against gays. I call that "freedom for everyone".

 

[Vigilante]

One radio station 970 The Answer has raised over $500,000 for SA since Dec. 1 and the RED KETTLE campaign goes on until New Years! But, hey, that channel is a RIGHT leaning channel!

 

[hipeter924]

The SA does more to help the poor than damn near anyone or org, and b/c they don't support gays, you want to hurt them.


faggot, your self pity and hate is harming poor people you ignorant self righteous poser

Catholic Church does far more, as does the Mormon Church. Don't need to endorse fringe Christianity to help the poor.

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

Overwhelmingly false: America s Top 50 charities How well do they rate - CSMonitor.com

1 YMCA of the USA - Christian - Income: $5986.1 million
Spends: 87.4%
2 Goodwill Industries International - Unaffiliated/Christian - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 89.0‡‡%
3 Catholic Charities USA - Catholic - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 79.6% or 3412 million
4 United Way - Income: 4,422.8 million
Spends: 90.6%
5 American Red Cross - Unaffiliated - Income: 4,139.9
Spends: 92.2%
6 The Salvation Army - Christian - Income: 3,203.8 million
Spends: 84.0% or 2691 million
7 Habitat for Humanity International - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,490.6 million
Spends: 83.7%
[...]11 Feeding America - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,185.0 million
Spends: 97.2%

Salvation Army is the 6th most effective charity in the US, my claim that other church groups (including the Catholic Church) do more than the Salvation Army is correct.

Whether they are the most efficient charity or not isn't my point.

That the only complaint the gays have is that the Salvation Army will not abandon their beliefs (regulating internal matters only). The claim has always been that they are not against anyone's religious beliefs if those religious beliefs are not forced on them. In this case, the beliefs are not being forced on anyone. The charity is a ministry. To expect them to live a Christian life, while working as a Christian ministry is pretty basic stuff.

Let people decide who they give their donations to, but don't expect people to always give money to groups they don't agree with.

Would
I stop donating on the basis they believe something I don't? Depends on the context, and where they put their money. It is the same with every charity.

I am not saying giving money to the SA, is not helpful or welcome. Certainly they do a lot of things in the community.

Though helping the community doesn't make them more beneficial to the community than the Red Cross and other charities.

Some in this thread want to play politics, attack liberals, and not discuss whether or not a view of people within a charity should preclude a donation. I wouldn't donate to a charity on basis of their views, but their work in helping others.

 

[Howey]

...and yet, if two gay partners come in seeking shelter, at least one of them will be turned away.

I don't call that "Internal only". I call it "religious bigotry".

Also, The some of the shine came off of the Salvation Army, for me, at least, when I learned that many of them are paid.

No matter. The SA can keep their policies, and I will give my money to groups that don't discriminate against gays. I call that "freedom for everyone".

This is true, WinterBorn.

The Salvation Army is active in anti-gay activities worldwide.

The Salvation Army s History of Anti-LGBT Discrimination Zinnia Jones

In recent years, the Salvation Army has come under fire for its lengthy history of anti-LGBT political maneuvering and other incidents. The church has publicly articulated its belief that homosexuality is unacceptable, stating:

Scripture opposes homosexual practices by direct comment and also by clearly implied disapproval. The Bible treats such practices as self-evidently abnormal. ... Attempts to establish or promote such relationships as viable alternatives to heterosexually-based family life do not conform to God's will for society.



While such statements were recently removed from the Salvation Army's website, the church has yet to repudiate any of its explicitly anti-gay beliefs. And though these positions may seem to be limited to the group's internal doctrines, they've become a persistent element of the church's overtly political activities -- activities which have negatively impacted the Salvation Army's ability to provide charitable services, and have aimed to limit the rights and benefits of LGBT citizens in multiple nations.

1986 — The Salvation Army of New Zealand collected signatures against the Homosexual Law Reform Act, which repealed the law criminalizing sex between adult men. The Salvation Army later apologized for campaigning against the Act.

1998 — The Salvation Army of the United States chose to turn down $3.5 million in contracts with the city of San Francisco, resulting in the closure of programs for the homeless and senior citizens. The church backed out of these contracts due to San Francisco's requirement that city contractors must provide spousal benefits to both same-sex partners and opposite-sex partners of employees. Lieutenant Colonel Richard Love stated:

We simply cannot agree to be in compliance of the ordinance.



In 2004, the Salvation Army in New York City also threatened to close down all of its services for the city's homeless due to a similar non-discrimination ordinance.

2000 — The Salvation Army of Scotland submitted a letter to Parliament opposing the repeal of Section 28, a law prohibiting "the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship". Colonel John Flett, the church's Scotland Secretary, wrote:

We can easily envisage a situation where, due to active promotion of homosexuality in schools, children will grow up feeling alienated if they fail to conform.



The Salvation Army of Scotland has never retracted or apologized for its suggestion that homosexuality would be promoted in schools or that children would be encouraged to become gay.

2001 — The Salvation Army of the United States attempted to make a deal with the Bush administration ensuring that religious charities receiving federal funding would be exempt from any local ordinances banning anti-gay discrimination. Church spokesman David A. Fuscus explained that the group did not want to extend medical benefits to same-sex partners of its employees.

The deal fell through after it was publicized by the Washington Post.

2012 — The Salvation Army of Burlington, Vermont allegedly fired case worker Danielle Morantez immediately after discovering she was bisexual. The church's employee handbook reads, in part, "The Salvation Army does reserve the right to make employment decisions on the basis of an employee's conduct or behavior that is incompatible with the principles of The Salvation Army."

Later that year, Salvation Army spokesperson Major George Hood reaffirmed the church's anti-gay beliefs, saying:

A relationship between same-sex individuals is a personal choice that people have the right to make. But from a church viewpoint, we see that going against the will of God.



2013 — The Salvation Army continues to remove links from its website to religious ministries providing so-called "ex-gay" conversion therapy, such as Harvest USA and Pure Life Ministries. These links were previously provided as resources under the Salvation Army's section on dealing with "sexual addictions."

 

[hipeter924]

One radio station 970 The Answer has raised over $500,000 for SA since Dec. 1 and the RED KETTLE campaign goes on until New Years! But, hey, that channel is a RIGHT leaning channel!

I wouldn't be surprised But when you donate to a charity, do you really consider the hat they wear or their beliefs?

The vast majority just donate to help the poor and struggling families over the Christmas season. What they believe doesn't come into play.

I never to be honest looked at their beliefs, when I donate to things. Never did when I donated to World Vision or the Red Cross.

 

[Howey]

Log In - The New York Times

 

[Vandalshandle]

The Red Cross gets first priority in my book, every time. They, alone, got me through the first few weeks after Katrina, when there was nowhere else to turn.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The SA does more to help the poor than damn near anyone or org, and b/c they don't support gays, you want to hurt them.


faggot, your self pity and hate is harming poor people you ignorant self righteous poser

Catholic Church does far more, as does the Mormon Church. Don't need to endorse fringe Christianity to help the poor.

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

Overwhelmingly false: America s Top 50 charities How well do they rate - CSMonitor.com

1 YMCA of the USA - Christian - Income: $5986.1 million
Spends: 87.4%
2 Goodwill Industries International - Unaffiliated/Christian - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 89.0‡‡%
3 Catholic Charities USA - Catholic - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 79.6% or 3412 million
4 United Way - Income: 4,422.8 million
Spends: 90.6%
5 American Red Cross - Unaffiliated - Income: 4,139.9
Spends: 92.2%
6 The Salvation Army - Christian - Income: 3,203.8 million
Spends: 84.0% or 2691 million
7 Habitat for Humanity International - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,490.6 million
Spends: 83.7%
[...]11 Feeding America - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,185.0 million
Spends: 97.2%

Salvation Army is the 6th most effective charity in the US, my claim that other church groups (including the Catholic Church) do more than the Salvation Army is correct.

Whether they are the most efficient charity or not isn't my point.

That the only complaint the gays have is that the Salvation Army will not abandon their beliefs (regulating internal matters only). The claim has always been that they are not against anyone's religious beliefs if those religious beliefs are not forced on them. In this case, the beliefs are not being forced on anyone. The charity is a ministry. To expect them to live a Christian life, while working as a Christian ministry is pretty basic stuff.

Let people decide who they give their donations to, but don't expect people to always give money to groups they don't agree with.

Would
I stop donating on the basis they believe something I don't? Depends on the context, and where they put their money. It is the same with every charity.

I am not saying giving money to the SA, is not helpful or welcome. Certainly they do a lot of things in the community.

Though helping the community doesn't make them more beneficial to the community than the Red Cross and other charities.

Some in this thread want to play politics, attack liberals, and not discuss whether or not a view of people within a charity should preclude a donation. I wouldn't donate to a charity on basis of their views, but their work in helping others.

However it's not the Salvation Army that's playing politics here. Rather, this private organization has been meeting needs well before homosexuality had found it's place as a hot topic issue in the political arena. Now that it has become a major issue, you are demanding that a private organization pass a form of litman's test to see if they can legitimately satisfy your ideological political view. It doesn't matter whether the Salvation Army's focus has, and continues to be, using those resources it obtains towards meeting the needs of the less fortunate. I would rather that an organization not get mixed up with the latest politics but simply gives out of necessity. Why is it, along with those nativity scenes and wishes of Merry Christmas that take place during this time of year, that liberals always take issue with views that happen to be contrary to their own? As if they feel the need to force others into conforming to the same ideological view.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Catholic Church does far more, as does the Mormon Church. Don't need to endorse fringe Christianity to help the poor.

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

Overwhelmingly false: America s Top 50 charities How well do they rate - CSMonitor.com

1 YMCA of the USA - Christian - Income: $5986.1 million
Spends: 87.4%
2 Goodwill Industries International - Unaffiliated/Christian - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 89.0‡‡%
3 Catholic Charities USA - Catholic - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 79.6% or 3412 million
4 United Way - Income: 4,422.8 million
Spends: 90.6%
5 American Red Cross - Unaffiliated - Income: 4,139.9
Spends: 92.2%
6 The Salvation Army - Christian - Income: 3,203.8 million
Spends: 84.0% or 2691 million
7 Habitat for Humanity International - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,490.6 million
Spends: 83.7%
[...]11 Feeding America - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,185.0 million
Spends: 97.2%

Salvation Army is the 6th most effective charity in the US, my claim that other church groups (including the Catholic Church) do more than the Salvation Army is correct.

Whether they are the most efficient charity or not isn't my point.

That the only complaint the gays have is that the Salvation Army will not abandon their beliefs (regulating internal matters only). The claim has always been that they are not against anyone's religious beliefs if those religious beliefs are not forced on them. In this case, the beliefs are not being forced on anyone. The charity is a ministry. To expect them to live a Christian life, while working as a Christian ministry is pretty basic stuff.

Let people decide who they give their donations to, but don't expect people to always give money to groups they don't agree with.

Would
I stop donating on the basis they believe something I don't? Depends on the context, and where they put their money. It is the same with every charity.

I am not saying giving money to the SA, is not helpful or welcome. Certainly they do a lot of things in the community.

Though helping the community doesn't make them more beneficial to the community than the Red Cross and other charities.

Some in this thread want to play politics, attack liberals, and not discuss whether or not a view of people within a charity should preclude a donation. I wouldn't donate to a charity on basis of their views, but their work in helping others.

However it's not the Salvation Army that's playing politics here. Rather, this private organization has been meeting needs well before homosexuality had found it's place as a hot topic issue in the political arena. Now that it has become a major issue, you are demanding that a private organization pass a form of litman's test to see if they can legitimately satisfy your ideological political view. It doesn't matter whether the Salvation Army's focus has, and continues to be, using those resources it obtains towards meeting the needs of the less fortunate. I would rather that an organization not get mixed up with the latest politics but simply gives out of necessity. Why is it, along with those nativity scenes and wishes of Merry Christmas that take place during this time of year, that liberals always take issue with views that happen to be contrary to their own? As if they feel the need to force others into conforming to the same ideological view.

Not at all. More power to them. I would just rather give my money to the Red Cross. They don't turn away people because they don't approve of their lifestyle.

 

[Howey]

Catholic Church does far more, as does the Mormon Church. Don't need to endorse fringe Christianity to help the poor.

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

Overwhelmingly false: America s Top 50 charities How well do they rate - CSMonitor.com

1 YMCA of the USA - Christian - Income: $5986.1 million
Spends: 87.4%
2 Goodwill Industries International - Unaffiliated/Christian - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 89.0‡‡%
3 Catholic Charities USA - Catholic - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 79.6% or 3412 million
4 United Way - Income: 4,422.8 million
Spends: 90.6%
5 American Red Cross - Unaffiliated - Income: 4,139.9
Spends: 92.2%
6 The Salvation Army - Christian - Income: 3,203.8 million
Spends: 84.0% or 2691 million
7 Habitat for Humanity International - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,490.6 million
Spends: 83.7%
[...]11 Feeding America - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,185.0 million
Spends: 97.2%

Salvation Army is the 6th most effective charity in the US, my claim that other church groups (including the Catholic Church) do more than the Salvation Army is correct.

Whether they are the most efficient charity or not isn't my point.

That the only complaint the gays have is that the Salvation Army will not abandon their beliefs (regulating internal matters only). The claim has always been that they are not against anyone's religious beliefs if those religious beliefs are not forced on them. In this case, the beliefs are not being forced on anyone. The charity is a ministry. To expect them to live a Christian life, while working as a Christian ministry is pretty basic stuff.

Let people decide who they give their donations to, but don't expect people to always give money to groups they don't agree with.

Would
I stop donating on the basis they believe something I don't? Depends on the context, and where they put their money. It is the same with every charity.

I am not saying giving money to the SA, is not helpful or welcome. Certainly they do a lot of things in the community.

Though helping the community doesn't make them more beneficial to the community than the Red Cross and other charities.

Some in this thread want to play politics, attack liberals, and not discuss whether or not a view of people within a charity should preclude a donation. I wouldn't donate to a charity on basis of their views, but their work in helping others.

However it's not the Salvation Army that's playing politics here. Rather, this private organization has been meeting needs well before homosexuality had found it's place as a hot topic issue in the political arena. Now that it has become a major issue, you are demanding that a private organization pass a form of litman's test to see if they can legitimately satisfy your ideological political view. It doesn't matter whether the Salvation Army's focus has, and continues to be, using those resources it obtains towards meeting the needs of the less fortunate. I would rather that an organization not get mixed up with the latest politics but simply gives out of necessity. Why is it, along with those nativity scenes and wishes of Merry Christmas that take place during this time of year, that liberals always take issue with views that happen to be contrary to their own? As if they feel the need to force others into conforming to the same ideological view.

Wow. Since way before homosexuality huh????


Damn that's a long time.

Tell us...just when did those pesky homos show up?

 

[hipeter924]

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

Overwhelmingly false: America s Top 50 charities How well do they rate - CSMonitor.com

1 YMCA of the USA - Christian - Income: $5986.1 million
Spends: 87.4%
2 Goodwill Industries International - Unaffiliated/Christian - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 89.0‡‡%
3 Catholic Charities USA - Catholic - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 79.6% or 3412 million
4 United Way - Income: 4,422.8 million
Spends: 90.6%
5 American Red Cross - Unaffiliated - Income: 4,139.9
Spends: 92.2%
6 The Salvation Army - Christian - Income: 3,203.8 million
Spends: 84.0% or 2691 million
7 Habitat for Humanity International - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,490.6 million
Spends: 83.7%
[...]11 Feeding America - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,185.0 million
Spends: 97.2%

Salvation Army is the 6th most effective charity in the US, my claim that other church groups (including the Catholic Church) do more than the Salvation Army is correct.

Whether they are the most efficient charity or not isn't my point.

That the only complaint the gays have is that the Salvation Army will not abandon their beliefs (regulating internal matters only). The claim has always been that they are not against anyone's religious beliefs if those religious beliefs are not forced on them. In this case, the beliefs are not being forced on anyone. The charity is a ministry. To expect them to live a Christian life, while working as a Christian ministry is pretty basic stuff.

Let people decide who they give their donations to, but don't expect people to always give money to groups they don't agree with.

Would
I stop donating on the basis they believe something I don't? Depends on the context, and where they put their money. It is the same with every charity.

I am not saying giving money to the SA, is not helpful or welcome. Certainly they do a lot of things in the community.

Though helping the community doesn't make them more beneficial to the community than the Red Cross and other charities.

Some in this thread want to play politics, attack liberals, and not discuss whether or not a view of people within a charity should preclude a donation. I wouldn't donate to a charity on basis of their views, but their work in helping others.

However it's not the Salvation Army that's playing politics here. Rather, this private organization has been meeting needs well before homosexuality had found it's place as a hot topic issue in the political arena. Now that it has become a major issue, you are demanding that a private organization pass a form of litman's test to see if they can legitimately satisfy your ideological political view. It doesn't matter whether the Salvation Army's focus has, and continues to be, using those resources it obtains towards meeting the needs of the less fortunate. I would rather that an organization not get mixed up with the latest politics but simply gives out of necessity. Why is it, along with those nativity scenes and wishes of Merry Christmas that take place during this time of year, that liberals always take issue with views that happen to be contrary to their own? As if they feel the need to force others into conforming to the same ideological view.

Wow. Since way before homosexuality huh????


Damn that's a long time.

Tell us...just when did those pesky homos show up?

Ancient Rome during the 2nd-3rd century BC has noted cases of homosexuality: Homosexuality in ancient Rome - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[WinterBorn]

He did not say "Before homosexuality". What he said was "...well before homosexuality had found it's place as a hot topic issue in the political arena.".

Is there anyone here who thinks homosexuality has been a hot topic in the political arena since ancient Rome?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

when school is about to open, you can see tons of kids getting supplies at the SA. Other churches? no, not unless you are a member
Christmas is the same
during hurricanes or other disasters, your local SA will be nearly empty, your local church....

so yea, keep your assumptions to yourself

Overwhelmingly false: America s Top 50 charities How well do they rate - CSMonitor.com

1 YMCA of the USA - Christian - Income: $5986.1 million
Spends: 87.4%
2 Goodwill Industries International - Unaffiliated/Christian - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 89.0‡‡%
3 Catholic Charities USA - Catholic - Income: 4,437.0 million
Spends: 79.6% or 3412 million
4 United Way - Income: 4,422.8 million
Spends: 90.6%
5 American Red Cross - Unaffiliated - Income: 4,139.9
Spends: 92.2%
6 The Salvation Army - Christian - Income: 3,203.8 million
Spends: 84.0% or 2691 million
7 Habitat for Humanity International - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,490.6 million
Spends: 83.7%
[...]11 Feeding America - Unaffiliated - Income: 1,185.0 million
Spends: 97.2%

Salvation Army is the 6th most effective charity in the US, my claim that other church groups (including the Catholic Church) do more than the Salvation Army is correct.

Whether they are the most efficient charity or not isn't my point.

That the only complaint the gays have is that the Salvation Army will not abandon their beliefs (regulating internal matters only). The claim has always been that they are not against anyone's religious beliefs if those religious beliefs are not forced on them. In this case, the beliefs are not being forced on anyone. The charity is a ministry. To expect them to live a Christian life, while working as a Christian ministry is pretty basic stuff.

Let people decide who they give their donations to, but don't expect people to always give money to groups they don't agree with.

Would
I stop donating on the basis they believe something I don't? Depends on the context, and where they put their money. It is the same with every charity.

I am not saying giving money to the SA, is not helpful or welcome. Certainly they do a lot of things in the community.

Though helping the community doesn't make them more beneficial to the community than the Red Cross and other charities.

Some in this thread want to play politics, attack liberals, and not discuss whether or not a view of people within a charity should preclude a donation. I wouldn't donate to a charity on basis of their views, but their work in helping others.

However it's not the Salvation Army that's playing politics here. Rather, this private organization has been meeting needs well before homosexuality had found it's place as a hot topic issue in the political arena. Now that it has become a major issue, you are demanding that a private organization pass a form of litman's test to see if they can legitimately satisfy your ideological political view. It doesn't matter whether the Salvation Army's focus has, and continues to be, using those resources it obtains towards meeting the needs of the less fortunate. I would rather that an organization not get mixed up with the latest politics but simply gives out of necessity. Why is it, along with those nativity scenes and wishes of Merry Christmas that take place during this time of year, that liberals always take issue with views that happen to be contrary to their own? As if they feel the need to force others into conforming to the same ideological view.

Wow. Since way before homosexuality huh????


Damn that's a long time.

Tell us...just when did those pesky homos show up?

Well the Salvation Army was founded in 1865, this would place it before President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863 and just before the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868. So the establishment of the organization came right when the country needed them most, after the distraught of the bloodiest battle in American history to date. Now perhaps you can tell us where the political discussion surrounding the issue of sexual orientation can be found, when Congress was deliberating and finalizing the wording that was to be the14th Amendment? I just don't seem to recall hearing about this big political push and movement for gay rights back then, even during the time of the women's suffrage movement for voting wights? I mean, if there was to be found a movement, there were two open door opportunities right there. Was there a real big concern when the Salvation Army was established, or did it BECOME a huge hot topic political in the very late 20th century, you tell me? Did the Salvation Army simply choose it's own course from the very beginning while the entire Unites States went completely in another direction regarding homosexuality? Judging by your response, you seem to know something about this organization and our nation's history that I missed.