Why you shouldn't give to the Salvation Army

[JayQueer]

I didn't bring up republicans in this thread. You were responding to someone else. Sorry if I continued with the discussion though.

Goodwill doesn't have a fantastic record either. Have you tried Out of the Closet? I believe you said you live in LA but not sure.

Sorry, it was JohaninSC who brought up "Republicans" earlier, not you. I stand corrected.

Yes, "Out of the Closet" is probably the best -- but they only have locations in certain parts of L.A., like West Hollywood & Venice Beach.

"Out of the Closet" doesn't really have any suburban locations in Orange County that I know of.

 

[Críostóir]

Unfortunately, I don't think his comments can really get him in hot water, as this is a HT thread with no "On Topic" designation. Threadjacking is legal here. :c

Hmm, unfortunately you can't have both Attention and On Topic. I waffled between them before choosing the former, which was clearly a mistake, with the trollage about.

Could everyone else please stop quoting him? I have him on Ignore so I won't see his posts, and your quoting him kinda spoils that.

 

[JayQueer]

They have several locations downtown, San Fernando Valley, and Pasadena. They've expanded in recent times.

http://www.outofthecloset.org/locations.html

They have a location in Long Beach which may be closer to you.

Ooo.......thanks Giancarlo!

I'll have to check it out!

 

[Sam Blum]

Maybe it's an American experience that the Salvo's aren't being even handed, but in my limited experience, it isn't the case in Australia. Here they don't seem to have a problem helping out any particular group.

As far as employment goes, I'll find out tomorrow. It may well be like any religious organisation, in that they are allowed to discriminate on grounds that any employee agrees to sign on and submit tho their ethos. About ten years ago, the Principal of a really cool Catholic (I know - this doesn't sound like me, does it?!) college asked me to take a position within her school. She is a really amazing educator (in general) with an incredible success rate, and politically savvy to boot. When I pointed out the obvious dilemma I would have, she simply said, "Oh for goodness sake - just lie!"

I wouldn't lie for a job that I don't really need and certainly not where the message to kids is to lie about who you are, and also there is an over-generalisation around the world when it comes to gay men working in Catholic organisations that one steers well clear of. That said, I would seriously talk with my boyfriend if I had one, and we were living homeless and with barely enough food or clothing, shelter et cetera about lying to get us whatever we needed. I would make it up to him every moment we spent together (the denial), but I would do whatever needed to be done to put food in his mouth and keep him warm and safe. I would turn to Prince Machiavelli for guidance.

In many places there are seemingly better alternatives to the Salvation Army, but in many places there is no alternative.

 

[Sam Blum]

Oh Giancarlo... so self-righteous, so indignant, and as usual over things that haven't even been addressed to you directly. Perhaps a little prayer will take that away. I'll pray for you now. Big hugs

 

[MoufOfKhaos]

^How... quaint. *ahem*

Tellingly, many who oppose the Salvation Army in this thread would do so, if for no other reason, than it represents an active branch of Christianity. To be sure, the element of religion is as offensive to them as the anti-gay dogma.

For that to be true, I'd have to boycott just about every homeless shelter i've ever laid eyes upon. Your theory, besides not being true, is a sham; a puppet point.

As for snubbing or sneering, a chief tenet of the faithful is to practice forgiveness. Our litmus test is too racheted up so as to be along gay politics only, and we too easily forget that we fail in areas other than sexual liberation politics, and stand in need of acceptance by our fellow citizens just as much as our Salvation Army neighbors.

This is not about sex, it's about their mission statement - to help the less fortunate - being tainted by the fact that they openly shun those that they don't agree with. Which, as most dogma does, gets in the way of their message entirely. Sorry, but them not agreeing with gay marriage is one thing. Them turning away homeless people that happen to be gay when their very mission is to help the homeless is quite another.

We should be careful about setting ourselves up as judge, jury, and executioner on societal matters. Even if we were paragons, it rightfully comes across just as haughty as any imagined religious fascism.

We're not the ones playing "god" here, so the garnish in your words is just as useless as actual garnish. Window dressing when I want the meat.

One form of hatred is no more attractive than the next. We are correct to work for acceptance. That doesn't mean we have to become holier-than-thou's ourselves.

This is not hate, at least from where I sit. If I choose to donate to a cause like that, you better believe I intend to donate to an organization that's all-inclusive. I'm no holy man, far from it(and thank hell for that!) - but I refuse to be damned by other "god" fearing folks.

 

[star-warrior]

After mum died, we donated a bunch of stuff to the British Heart Foundation and Help the Aged. Non-religious charities that helps the community, especially the old and vulnerable those that are funding research into diseases is much better IMO than to dogma insisting religious charities. That said, there are many religious charities who do good work in non-discrimatory ways.

 

[teadrinker]

Well, the Sallies certainly have many faults. However, when my father, in the last few years of his life (we had been estranged for some time) was just a drunken wreck of a man, the Sallies took him in, fed him, clothed him, and attempted to give his last days a shred of dignity. I can't find it in my heart to be completely dismissive of them.

-T.

 

[refujiunderground]

well, thanks for giving me a reason to justify not giving the salvation army shit. i already ignore them whenever i see them because i really don't feel like giving them shit anyway. so yeah, now i know i'll never give them anything.

 

[gaypornjunkie]

Two wrings a right does not make. The salvation army helps tens of millions of people.

 

[Críostóir]

Well, the Sallies certainly have many faults. However, when my father, in the last few years of his life (we had been estranged for some time) was just a drunken wreck of a man, the Sallies took him in, fed him, clothed him, and attempted to give his last days a shred of dignity. I can't find it in my heart to be completely dismissive of them.

-T.

No one's asking you to be completely dismissive of them. We're asking you not to give them your money. They'll take in a "drunken wreck of a man," but not a gay couple? Are those the people you want to give your money to? I say not only no but HELL no.

Two wrings a right does not make. The salvation army helps tens of millions of people.

What the hell are you talking about? Much as I'd like to wring some SA necks, I think you must have meant "wrongs" - but no one is doing wrong by not giving money to the SA. If charitable giving is diverted from them, it will go elsewhere.

And also you can reduce outright waste by not donating to them in kind: did you see the link above about how they throw away Harry Potter toys? They don't resell them or give them to some other charity; they discard them in the trash. So the money people spent buying those toys for poor children is utterly wasted.

The Salvation Army is a reprehensible organization. They may help tens of millions of people, but the cost (in discrimination and evangelical craziness) is too high.

 

[wundersteve]

I like to spread the donations around to as many organizations as possible, religious and secular, both the local and international charities, rather than give my annual donations to only one or two organizations.

My hope is that this helps cover different services, regions and people needing help, so no one falls through the cracks, ideally.

 

[gaypornjunkie]

No one's asking you to be completely dismissive of them. We're asking you not to give them your money. They'll take in a "drunken wreck of a man," but not a gay couple? Are those the people you want to give your money to? I say not only no but HELL no.



What the hell are you talking about? Much as I'd like to wring some SA necks, I think you must have meant "wrongs" - but no one is doing wrong by not giving money to the SA. If charitable giving is diverted from them, it will go elsewhere.

And also you can reduce outright waste by not donating to them in kind: did you see the link above about how they throw away Harry Potter toys? They don't resell them or give them to some other charity; they discard them in the trash. So the money people spent buying those toys for poor children is utterly wasted.

The Salvation Army is a reprehensible organization. They may help tens of millions of people, but the cost (in discrimination and evangelical craziness) is too high.

I did not claim they were saint, but overall their good deeds outweigh their bad ones.

 

[MadisonAubie]

That's not fair. The Republican Party as a whole is not friendly to gays, but there are some gays who are politically conservative & economically conservative, and find that they believe in what the Republican Party stands for, with the exception of the anti-gay sentiment.

If you are economically conservative & very big on 2nd amendment rights, and pro-life.............I don't see how you could vote for the Democratic Party, even if you were gay.

Jay, as for economic conservatism, going back to the Reagan years, the national debt has grown much more during Republican administrations than Democratic ones.

The Democratic party also believes in the 2nd amendment, but realize there needs to be limitations on gun control. Who wants criminals to have access to fully automatic weapons or rocket launchers? If the GOP had their way, nothing would be illegal.

As for pro-life, it makes a good campaign platform, but bad policy for re-election hopes. If they pass a ban on abortion, they get rid of the best campaign tool they have with evangelicals. The GOP had complete control over the government for the first six years of the W. Bush administration. How many laws did they pass to ban abortion? They've loaded the court with conservative justices and STILL haven't overturned Roe v Wade, and it's unlikely they ever will. They need that campaign issue.

 

[Asenath]

I don't have any patience for conservatives who proclaim to be "pro-life." Seriously - wanting to cut programs that help children & families is "pro-life"? Wanting to pass laws that make life saving operations for women illegal is "pro-life"? Wanting to investigate miscarriages and stop stem-cell research on conditions that affect real, living people. . .I can't with that shit.

Or, like the great George Carlin said: "If you're pre-born, you're fine. If you're pre-school, you're fucked."

 

[Críostóir]

I did not claim they were saint, but overall their good deeds outweigh their bad ones.

I disagree. As someone said recently in another context, "John Wilkes Booth was a pretty good actor. Let's not let all the good things he did be overshadowed by that one time he shot Abraham Lincoln."

Any organization that only helps people based on race/religion/sexual orientation or anything else doesn't deserve any support. Clearly if you're picking and choosing to help people based on certain qualities, then you aren't really in it for helping people at all.

Right on, as we said in my misspent youth.

 

[pat grimshaw]

Críostóir, you astonish me with your audacity!

I assume you are an Irish 'bearer for Christ' but you’re certainly a teapot calling a kettle black. You're bothering to heap scorn here upon a smallish Protestant organisation while glossing over the greater malevolence of the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

Those protestants have been operated for a mere 150 years while the ‘Holy Romans' have been tainting and infantilising for two millenia!

~
And as for Mr Browning and all you other whiners— you’re not complaining about a taxpayer-funded organisation which exists solely to serve your needs. They are a group of people, many of them are volunteers and most of them are lowly paid who do their best to help those in need. If you don’t like the ways they do things, ignore them or do better!

 

[Críostóir]

Críostóir, you astonish me with your audacity!

I assume you are an Irish 'bearer for Christ' but you’re certainly a teapot calling a kettle black. You're bothering to heap scorn here upon a smallish Protestant organisation while glossing over the greater malevolence of the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

1. I am Irish-American, German-American, and Bohemian (Czech)-American. Críostóir is not my real name. It is Irish for Christopher, which is English for Χριστόφορος, which means "bearer of the Anointed One." (Christos (Χριστός) means "the Anointed One" in Greek, as Moshiach (Messiah) does in Hebrew.)

2. I'm not a teapot calling a kettle black. I am not an evangelical organization.

3. I'm a little startled that you assume I'm Roman Catholic, or that I support the Roman Catholic Church. In point of fact I am neo-Pagan and detest the RCC and its loathsome pope.

4. The RCC has a greater share of overall evil than the SA, to be sure. But Catholic Charities etc. do not discriminate in service delivery. They will feed anyone without asking their sexual orientation. This is because the people who run the charities are serving Christ as they understand him, not Pope Rat (the stupid motherfucker in a stupid fucking hat).

And as for Mr Browning and all you other whiners— you’re not complaining about a taxpayer-funded organisation which exists solely to serve your needs. They are a group of people, many of them are volunteers and most of them are lowly paid who do their best to help those in need. If you don’t like the ways they do things, ignore them or do better!

All I'm trying to get people to do is ignore them...instead of giving them money.

 

[pat grimshaw]

^
You sound and read like a Lapsed Catholic, to be sure.

 

[Críostóir]

^
You sound and read like a Lapsed Catholic, to be sure.

Odd, because I'm not. I was raised in an agnostic-tending-atheist household, where all forms of spirituality were ridiculed. My adolescent rebellion involved dabbling in Christianity (Missouri Synod Lutherans, gods help me), but when I became a man, I put aside childish things.

I'm fairly knowledgeable about the Church, but from outside, not inside.

That said, there are worse things than being a Lapsed Catholic! Though actually you should realize that the politically correct term is 'Recovering Catholic'. I think they even have a 12-step program for people who just can't stop going to Mass.