Is the Salvation Army Bigoted?

It used to be more clear.  I remember reading the Salvation Army did not hire gay citizens, period.  Now, they are not quite so clear.

A Salvation Army spokesperson said recently, they hire “The best person for the job.”  That could mean a gay person would never be hired, or, a gay person who was the best applicant would be hired.  Which is it?

While the Salvation Army has the right to practice legal discrimination, it does have a moral obligation to state publicly its policies toward minorities.  Along with its annual pleas for money, it should state whether it does, or does not, hire gay people.

Some would say we should not be critical of the Salvation Army because it does so many good works.  The Muslim Brotherhood does good works.  The Communist Party made sure the poor had enough to eat.  Many organizations do good works.  The question is, do they  discrimination?

What if, for example, the Salvation Army said, “We hire only white people.  We do not discriminate, however, because we house and feed the needy of all races.  The only reason we do not hire other races is because of our religious belief God selected to be his only companions in heaven and would be displeased if we hired others.”

I would call such a policy bigoted and would donate to other equal opportunity organizations. That a bigoted organization does good works does not make it worthy of our support.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/salvation-army-responds-to-lgbt-activists-amid-call-for-red-kettle-protest-85769/

Join our discussion on FaceBook, Red River Freethinkers.  Thank you.

 

Avatar of Jon Lindgren

About Jon Lindgren

I am a former President of the Red River Freethinkers in Fargo, ND, a retired NDSU economics professor and was Mayor of Fargo for 16 years. There is more about me at Wikipedia.com.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

44 Responses to Is the Salvation Army Bigoted?

  1. Henry says:

    Jon: “The Communist Party made sure the poor had enough to eat.”

    Jon, you are on a roll tonight and quite humorous. Alexander Isayevich Solzhenitsyn would disagree with you.

    • Stanta says:

      just read a nice article on the million who starved to death from 1958-1962 in China. Written by a Chinese communist.

      • Erik says:

        Don’t forgot the millions of Ukrainians starved to death by Stalin in 1932/33.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          Erik 4:29 Thanks for the first time comment. Your are correct about the Ukrainins and Stalin. And, there were other bad examples. There were some cases where the Communist idea worked for some lower income people for a while–that’s what I was referring to. The early days of Cuba’s Castro were better for poor people than the previous government.

          • Henry says:

            Is that why many are still driving 57 chevies (drivers, not restored) down in Cuber? The good economic conditions?

          • Henry says:

            Every citizen has a rice cooker given to them by the government. Electricity on the other hand? Yeah right.

      • entech says:

        Those evil communists, next they will be burning people at the stake.

      • entech says:

        Dustin your 4:20 am. It is something I have noticed from one or two, you say something, almost anything, that they don’t agree with and they will desperately try to find someone or some group that is guilty of something worse. It is as if this spreading the load, so to speak, somehow exonerates them or cancels whatever it is. Of course, someone will now accuse me of the same.

        Reminds me of a couple of quotes, as they are popular just now:
        “None so blind as those that will not see”, probably by the well known and frequently referenced – Anon.

        It isn’t that they can’t see the solution. It is that they can’t see the problem.
        Gilbert Keith Chesterton.

        I think both could apply to those that are virulent in their objections to what you say. They didn’t seem so bad when there were just a couple of us struggling through, in my case on 50 year old memories, But now that someone who actually knows the subject better than they, we get shock and horror and squealing. I think Chesterton is most appropriate – both epitomise the bias and bigotry of.

        I have a little bet with myself.

        • entech says:

          Oops, that should have been a new thread.

        • Stanta says:

          We didn’t bring up the kindly communists Entech. they were championed by Jon. We just thought we would point out how progressive and liberal they were.

          • entech says:

            You get me wrong, again. I am seriously saying how badly they failed, and how awful things can get when the wrong people take over a movement.
            Stalin and Torquemada are similar, both took a movement that was supposed to be for the benefit of “the people” and turned it into a reign of terror (or was that Robespierre).
            The main point is that you cannot divert attention from the horrors of the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution and how badly they went wrong by pointing out the horrors of early Christianity with the inquisitions and so on. Neither can you use the horrors of Secular totalitarian states, rotten Communists, to coverup (popular term at the moment) the horrors imposed by religious Totalitarian states, whether it be Christianity then or Islam now.

            Everyone must carry their own burden I think one of your NT types said, but also, (Ezekiel 18:20) – “The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.”

        • Stanta says:

          Jeremiah 5:21 Hear this, you foolish and senseless people, who have eyes but do not see, who have ears but do not hear.

          A possible source for your Anon.

    • Avatar of Dustin White Dustin White says:

      I think it may be more important to take the entire message that Jon is conveying here and work with that instead of taking a short snippet and acting as if that really makes a difference.

      Jon makes a good point. Whether or not part of his material is flawed (and I don’t that it is) should not completely detract from the entire message.

      • Henry says:

        Dusty: “take the entire message that Jon is conveying here and work with that instead of taking a short snippet”

        The general theme as indicated in the title was addressed along with glaringly wrong snippets. You will have to look a little closer.

      • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

        Stan 11:39 “Jon should find better examples.”

        You and Henry have enjoyed posting information about the bad things done by groups I compared to the Salvation Army. In a way, you make my point. Groups often present a good side, but have a dark side. As to Castro and other communist groups, they started out as idealists hoping for redistribution of income. In their early days they did just that. Over the course of their histories, their dark sides outweighed their good.

        I’m saying the Salvation Army has a dark side. People might consider that and look for an agency which helps the destitute but has no dark side.

        • Henry says:

          Jon: “I’m saying the Salvation Army has a dark side.”

          The Salvation Army needs to stop being harassed. Let them do their work. They don’t bother you when you are sorting the expired cans.

  2. Henry says:

    Jon: “Along with its annual pleas for money, it should state whether it does, or does not, hire gay people.”

    It has. “Homosexual practice would render any person ineligible for full membership (soldiership) in the Army.”

  3. Henry says:

    Jon: “Is the Salvation Army Bigoted?”

    No. However, there are bigots recently mistreating the Salvation Army.

  4. Michael Ross says:

    “The question is, do they discrimination?”

    If they feed the hungry, cloth the naked, and house the homeless is of no consequence to you as long as don’t support your precious perverted agenda. I dare say they don’t ask a needy person’s sexual orientation.

  5. Avatar of Dustin White Dustin White says:

    Excellent article Jon. This is actually why I do not support, nor donate to the Salvation Army. They may do some good work; however, their policies are intolerant and hateful. I would rather send my money elsewhere.

  6. buzz marick says:

    ya,that’s the ticket.sue the bastards

  7. Michael Ross says:

    “We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end.”
    ~ Gilbert K. Chesterton

  8. Michael Ross says:

    Humanist Curriculum, quotes about Sexuality:
    It’s OK to lie. It’s OK to steal. It’s OK to have premarital sex. It’s OK to cheat or to kill if these things are part of your value system, and you clarified these values for yourself. The important thing is not what values you choose, but that you have chosen them for yourself and without coercion of parents, spouse, priest, friends, ministers or social pressure of any kind.
    http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quotes_by/humanist+curriculum

    • Avatar of Dustin White Dustin White says:

      I love the logic here. Point to others who supposedly cause evil and that some how makes up for some other evil. It pretty much comes down to the idea that its okay to be a bigot, as long as my neighbor is a bigger one.

      • Michael Ross says:

        The point is we are all “bigoted”. We are all prejudiced and biased. The question is: Is your bias the correct one? I believe the Bible and the founders and framers of America were biased. They had the correct bias. They believed in a fixed standard. You choose your own standard or it is chosen for you by the whims of cultural change. Political correctness, trends, fads and fashions are your guideposts. Anyone who holds to fixed, absolute standards you label a “bigot”.

        • Avatar of Dustin White Dustin White says:

          What bias are you referring to that the founding fathers had? Many were desist. Some rejected large portions of the Bible. Some engaged in slavery and had lowly opinions of women. Many of them disagreed with each other. And all were a product of their times.

          Now, don’t get me wrong. The founding fathers did some great things for the country. But many of their biases were intolerable.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          Michael 4:47 “We are all prejudiced and biased. The question is: Is your bias the correct one?”

          Michael, you are a delight to have on this forum. You express yourself clearly without playing games like some others.

          The bias I have is an effort to treat every law abiding citizen equally. I think this is what our founding fathers intended, except for the salvery/black issue. Conversely, I think the Bible’s rules of picking out groups who are obeying laws and trying to help make the world a better and demonizing them are wrong.

          • Michael Ross says:

            Much appreciate the compliment Jon. Although I and some others sharply disagree with you, the give and take remains mostly friendly and cordial. You set the tone for that. You are a good witness for your atheist beliefs. More so than some Christians are for theirs, Im’ afraid. I look forward to your post everyday. It challenges my beliefs and makes me think. I’m sure Henry, Stanta, WBS and others feel the same.

  9. buzz marick says:

    let your concience be your guide and hope you are given correct guidance from whatever Force you live by. My Force I chose to call GOD.

  10. Itg is discouraging to read an attack on the Salvation Army for the reason that they do not have homosexual staff in their Christian endeavors…because they ARE Christian and believe what the Bible says about homosexuality.
    Why are atheists so miserable in their “beliefs” that they have to constantly rain down attacks on those who do not march to their drumbeat? Would an atheist be tolerant of serial attacks on their major principles, if that is what they are?
    I am quite sure the answer would be NO because atheists are the least tolerant people I know of…you are like a famous person who believes that it is
    MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY……that would be a good, brand- new atheist “tenet”.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      buffalogal 8:57 “Would an atheist be tolerant of serial attacks on their major principles…?”

      Least we forget Pres. George H. W. Bush when asked if atheists are worthy citizens, “No. This is a Christian nation….”

      • entech says:

        It is obligatory to attack atheism Jon, it is is the book, love thy neighbor, pray for your enemy, but hate fags and atheists with all your might.

  11. That was a serious attack on atheism?
    It used to be primarily a Christian nation and anyone who disputes that is not playing with a full deck. But not so anymore.
    Christians are the ones under attack…not other faiths.
    And I wonder why…is it because the name of Jesus Christ has an electric effect on non- believers who usually are willing to talk about “God” but bring up Jesus Christ and it is like slapping someone in the face with a most heinous thing (like a cold wet fish) I have observed it so many times I cannot even guess at the number of times.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      buffalogal 1:24 “Christians are the ones under attack…not other faiths.”

      When a President of the United States says your group, atheists, should not be considered citizens, we don’t take that as a compliment. We’re an overly sensitive bunch I guess.

      • Stanta says:

        Interesting, which president was that? Never heard of it.

        • entech says:

          Least we forget Pres. George H. W. Bush when asked if atheists are worthy citizens, “No. This is a Christian nation….”
          Even a foreigner knows that.
          “No, I don’t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God.” is a remark attributed to Bush senior in 1987, never confirmed or denied.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>