Friday, December 02, 2011

Don't Contribute to the Salvation Army?

I wanted to make you aware of 2 things today. One naughty. The other nice.

Naughty.

He says, "Skip the bell." Why? "Because the Salvation Army has a history of discrimination against gays and lesbians."

Bil (yes, Bil with one l) Browning says he and his boyfriend had a bad experience with the Salvation Army. They wouldn't let them live intimately together at a shelter. He says they tried to "break them up." I don't know if his story is true or not, but his attack on the Salvation Army has over the past couple of years gotten some traction this year.

His website is circulating a lengthy message which essentially attacks the Salvation Army for being discriminating and hypocritical in their practice.

They are neither. They do, however, have a biblical view of homosexual behavior.

He, evidently, is not part of the peaceful, passive group Joel Connelly described in his Seattle PI column I referenced yesterday.

I don't speak for the Salvation Army, nor do they need me to do so, but I do contribute to them regularly. I have also known some of the leadership in the past and have actually rung a bell for them one year when I was on television.

I have linked to Wikipedia - Salvation Army here. Notice they have been helping people since 1865.

Also notice under "beliefs," their biblical positions on homosexuality, euthanasia and the sanctity of life.

I would encourage you to hear the bell, find a Salvation Army "pot" this weekend and put money in it.

Nice.

Nathan Karren, a freshman at Issaquah High School, is making life a little better during this Christmas season for hundreds of sick and injured kids at Overlake Hospital in Bellevue.

Working toward becoming an Eagle Scout, he decided to direct his service project toward the kids at Overlake.

KOMO news reported that Nathan collected 652 stuffed animals for the kids. He delivered them to the hospital this past Tuesday night.

Debbie Luttman, Overlake Director of Emergency Services, told KOMO that stuffed animals are very therapeutic for the kids.

"It's usually very stressful," she said, "frequently they're very uncomfortable and in pain, and a stuffed animal to hug just gives them so much comfort."

I would note that the Boy Scouts organization has also been attacked in similar fashion, but as the Salvation Army, continue to contribute to so many lives in so many ways.

God bless them both. And God bless you. Have a great weekend.

Thanks for your support of this ministry.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Informed. Be Active. Be prayerful. Be Blessed.

:: Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

12 comments:

  1. You got it Gary. Contributing to both.

    So sorry for someone's 'bad' experience but I don't see bringing down a whole and very helpful organization because they don't agree with your aberrant philosophy. Very inclusive of Bil, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. When you are homeless or hungry, the last thing you need is moral judgment from the hands that could feed you. Unfortunately, the Salvation Army does just that, and it applies this judgment only to gay people. When's the last time you heard of the SA turning away a single mom? A re-married couple? Or even those who engage in pre-marital sex? Right... never.

    There are plenty of organizations who'll help all people without pressuring them to fit the organization's moral framework before receiving aid at a time when they are most vulnerable.

    And, Gary, where's the honesty? If you're going to misquote Bil Browning (Google his story) then at least provide a link. He did not seek to live "intimately" with a boyfriend at a shelter. Here's the relevant text: "When a former boyfriend and I were homeless, the Salvation Army insisted we break up before they'd offer assistance. We slept on the street instead and declined to break up as they demanded."

    Nice work, Salvation Army!

    Tony

    ReplyDelete
  3. I wonder if Gary would believe that a secular organization that refused to offer aid to Christians unless the renounced their faith would also not be discriminating?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Does anyone else think it's ironic that @9:35 is accusing Bil of not being "inclusive" for calling out an organization that refused to be "inclusive" to him and all other gays?

    So, I guess we ARE being "inclusive" when we support organizations that AREN'T. Got it. Man, this conservative logic makes my head spin!

    I guess the greater question is: Would Jesus have have really turned Bil and his boyfriend away that night to sleep on the street? I don't think so... Why does this not make Christians angry, no matter what you feel about the moral questions surrounding gay issues?

    Tony

    ReplyDelete
  5. A few years ago gay activists attemted to stop the Salavation Army Fundraising during the Christmas Season /Liberal anti Christian groups dropped letters in their donation buckets protesting their beneifit package to employees that did not pay medial benefits for their unmarried partners or homosexual un married partners . The biggoed attempt to stop a religious organization from helping others was stopped when the light of day came under what they were doing .
    But it goes on .
    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-rights-activist-calls-for-boycott-of-salvation-army-christmas-fundraise/


    The best argument against homosexual marriage is what happens to the culture and the growing intolerance that always comes with it .

    People in the Salvation Army help people . The feed the homelsee , they clother them , they try to shelter them when no one else does . they help the mentally ill homeless, th osuugest because they have Bibical Standards " gosh darn those Christians helping the poor" that teach that homosexual sex is sin full , that living together is sinfull , is really none of the homsexual activist or anyone's business. If you don't like the Salvation Army helping others , why don't they get their biggoted butts out there and helping those who can get help elsewhere themselves . Help the homeless yourself . And yes they hel-p those homosexual , those who are drug addicted , those who are alcoholics , the least of these they help . But they will not promote the sin . Thats your problem Tony . Not the problem of the Salvation Army

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-rights-activist-calls-for-boycott-of-salvation-army-christmas-fundraise/

    ReplyDelete
  6. A few years ago gay activists attemted to stop the Salavation Army Fundraising during the Christmas Season /Liberal anti Christian groups dropped letters in their donation buckets protesting their beneifit package to employees that did not pay medial benefits for their unmarried partners or homosexual un married partners . The biggoed attempt to stop a religious organization from helping others was stopped when the light of day came under what they were doing .
    But it goes on .


    The best argument against homosexual marriage is what happens to the culture and the growing intolerance that always comes with it .

    People in the Salvation Army help people . The feed the homelsee , they clother them , they try to shelter them when no one else does . they help the mentally ill homeless, th osuugest because they have Bibical Standards " gosh darn those Christians helping the poor" that teach that homosexual sex is sin full , that living together is sinfull , is really none of the homsexual activist or anyone's business. If you don't like the Salvation Army helping others , why don't they get their biggoted butts out there and helping those who can get help elsewhere themselves . Help the homeless yourself . And yes they hel-p those homosexual , those who are drug addicted , those who are alcoholics , the least of these they help . But they will not promote the sin . Thats your problem Tony . Not the problem of the Salvation Army

    ReplyDelete
  7. Faith and Freedom Staff9:16 PM, December 02, 2011

    Note: We cannot publish your comment if you include links.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @9:15 ... Giving someone a warm bed or a bowl of soup does not mean you approve of that person's moral character. That's the SA's problem -- the pass judgment on gays only and then refuse their assistance. I wonder what the response would be if the SA refused shelter to a Mormon. Or a divorcee. It would never happen.

    No one has still answered my question: would Jesus have turned the gay couple away to sleep on the street that night?

    Tony

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The gay couple were not turned away. They were asked to sleep separately along with any other unmarried couple, gay or not. The couple chose to sleep outside together rather than being inside and separated.

      To answer your question, no, Jesus would not have turned them away.

      Please get your facts straight.

      Delete
  9. "Since 1986 the Salvation Army has engaged in five major assaults on the LGBT community's civil rights and attempted to carve out exemptions that would allow them to deny gays and lesbians needed services as well as employment.

    When New Zealand considered passage of the Homosexual Law Reform Act in 1986, the Salvation Army collected signatures in an attempt to get the legislation killed. The act decriminalized consensual sex between gay men. The measure passed over the charity's objections.

    In the United Kingdom, the Salvation Army actively pushed passage of an amendment to the Local Government Act. The amendment stated that local authorities "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship." The law has since been repealed, but it led many schools and colleges to close LGBT student organizations out of fear they'd lose their government funding.

    In 2001, the organization tried to extract a resolution from the White House that they could ignore local non-discrimination laws that protected LGBT people. While the commitment would have applied to all employees, the group claimed that it needed the resolution so it "did not have to ordain sexually active gay ministers and did not have to provide medical benefits to the same-sex partners of employees." After lawmakers and civil rights activists revealed the Salvation Army's active resistance to non-discrimination laws, the White House admitted the charity was seeking the exemptions.

    Also in 2001, the evangelical charity actively lobbied to change how the Bush administration would distribute over $24 billion in grants and tax deductions by urging the White House deny funding to any cities or states that included LGBT non-discrimination laws. Ari Fleischer, White House press secretary, issued a statement saying the administration was denying a "regulation sought by the church to protect the right of taxpayer-funded religious organizations to discriminate against homosexuals."

    In 2004, the Salvation Army threatened to close all their soup kitchens in New York City to protest the city's decision to require all vendors and charities doing business with the city to adhere to all civil rights laws. The organization balked at having to treat gay employees equal to straight employees."

    THOSE are the reasons why Browning is recommending that LGBT Americans and their allies direct their holiday giving elsewhere. I find it very revealing of Randall's dishonesty that he blatantly misrepresents Browning's reasons, while refusing to link the piece. My guess is the note from FFN Staff about not publishing links is because folks are trying to correct this breach of standard net etiquette. The Salvation Army may or may not discriminate in providing services (Browning's experience conflicts with the SA flak's claims), but it is undeniable that the group has sought to lobby governments against the decriminalization of homosexuality, and to get the special right to discriminate in hiring using taxpayer dollars.

    Given that Christianist groups that Randall has supported in the past, are currently compiling and disseminating black lists of companies, who do not use their preferred verbiage in holiday advertising, I'd say that Randall's labeling of Borwning "naughty" is a classic example of the pot calling the kettle black.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The Salvation Army does not refuse to feed or help gays. They refused Browning and his boyfriend the liberty to eat and sleep together as a married couple, which they were not. This case is well known.

    ReplyDelete
  11. My respect for the Salvation Army just jumped several points up. I will give even more. Nice work SA.

    Homosexuality is NOT a civil right issue. It is an insult to other truly civil right cases to claim that it is. It IS a choice to participate in aberrant behavior. There used to be laws against it because people used to be students of history and are fully aware of what happens to a society when it allows and slips further into despicable and ungodly behavior.

    Besides that fact that it doesn't make sense. Ya right, men do what with men!?!?!?! And women do what with women??!!! You have to be kidding. That isn't natural and it certainly is not the way men and women we made, huh?

    You know full well that Jesus was VERY blunt when it came to people 'testing' Him. In Bil's circumstances it is most likely that He would have turned them away with their demands and attitudes. Jesus spoke with and received the 'woman at the well' (for example) because she was teachable. There were plenty who faced Him and He said "you will die in your sins". Jesus tells the truth because He knew what was in men's hearts. We can't know but it does not take a rocket scientist to guess that Bil's attitude left much to be desired.

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.