ZOT!
Posted on 12/14/2009 12:45:15 PM PST by SmithL
The halls aren't the only thing getting decked this holiday season.
The Salvation Army, the country's biggest charity, is taking it full on the chin from a social media network mobilized against the organization's position on homosexuality and other social sins. Twitter, Facebook and gay Web sites are lit up with protest and calls for donor boycotts.
The Army's official same-sex statement suggests it's unlikely those cheery volunteers ringing bells over red kettles will be donning gay apparel anytime soon.
While homosexuals are not "blameworthy," ... "Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex." The Army is an unabashedly evangelical, religious entity, after all, and has also resisted domestic partner benefits for its employees.
Last month, there was another stink about the Army's Houston division demanding to see Social Security cards of needy parents before providing toys for their kids. Angry protesters claimed this was discrimination against cardless illegal immigrants.
Before we take the predictable San Francisco, to-the-barricades view on all this, let's consider the Catholic concept of "proportionalism." This means (roughly, my interpretation) that bad conduct can be acceptable if a much greater good is being accomplished.
The Salvation Army served 33 million people in the United States last year. It raises about $2 billion a year and spends an impressive 89 percent of that on services - food, shelter, foster care and HIV programs.
It is a consistent and reliable disaster relief group.
"The first hand that reaches to pull you from the rubble of our next earthquake," Shea O'Neill wrote on the SFAppeal Web site last week, "will be the anti-gay hand of the Salvation Army."
There's no whitewashing their beliefs, if you oppose them, though the Army mission also is clear that its relief services are available to anyone "without regard to sexual orientation."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Sure they do good things. It doesn’t change the fact that they are a homophobic organization.Comments?
TheSuaveOne wrote:
“Sure they do good things. It doesn’t change the fact that they are a homophobic organization.”
Comments?
“This account has been banned or suspended.”
Gotta plug here for the Knights of Columbus too.
Well that says it all. Thanks!
Yes we are, BUT we don’t go into churches or go to church functions, demanding they accept our sin, tell us it is perfectly ok to continue sinning, now do we. We hear sermons on occasion, each and every one of us, about sin and to stop that particular sin, or warning us against it. Homosexuals do not want that sermon directed at them. They do not want to confess to the Lord, their sin, and ask forgivness, they want to continue with the churches blessing. And that is not going to happen.
Of course they do. And they love the sinner, which is why they do those things, as well as helping those afflicted with AIDS, but they are not going to accept any sin, regardless of the sin. It is called spreading the word.
People are called to love sinners, NOT accept their behavior unconditionally. Part of love is telling the truth.
See the difference? I offer a suggestion of how you "could" do what you want. You "demand" that others do what you want. Very simply put: you want power to take liberty away from those you don't agree with. Capitalists/Conservatives really believe in letting others live freely, as long as others don't force their beliefs and behaviours on us. pretty simple.
TheSuaveOne:
“This account has been banned or suspended.”
TheSuaveOne:
“This account has been banned or suspended.”
Many sins are desirable to the flesh.
Learned behavior, born with it, whatever. All men (and women) are born into sin. The homosexual used to understand that they were sinful, thus the “closet” thing.
These days however, sin is in.
Still, we are called to recognize and overcome sin - not give in to it. There is an easy road and a hard road. Could be homosexuality, could be promiscuity in general, covetousness..any of a number of sins.
If the homosexual chooses to live in his or her sin, it is none of my business, and it is none of THEIR business what I believe either.
The Salvation Army helps all regardless of sin, they need not accept the sin to help the sinner. But the sinners these days seem to think the SA must have a mind meld with them or their works are for naught.
I feel sorry for them.
This sounds like the insurance company was using a legal dodge to keep from paying. You said, "semantics"...the words of the contract?
It sounds like the insurance company SHOULD have paid.
It sounds like the Salvation Army lawyer knew that.
It sounds like the Salvation Army lawyer got the insurance company to pay, the thing you've agreed that the insurance company was supposed to do in the first place.
The SA attorney was a shark. I will never give them any money
Do you still pay the insurance company?
Homophobic? Are you saying they are afraid of homosexuals when the article says that they do great work on "food, shelter, foster care and HIV programs."
So, they spend big on HIV programs, but they are "homophobic"????
I'd say that this is not likely to be fear. It is most likely to be grace working through love. Those who love an alcoholic tell him to quit....that it's killing them. Those who hate him encourage him to keep drinking.
Those who love the homosexual tell them to quit...that it's killing them. Those who hate him tell him to keep up his homosexual lifestyle.
And those who really love him will spend their resources fighting the diseases that kill the person, and who nonetheless blast them with words intended to hurt them - like "homophobe."
It is the only charity my family would ever donate to. As far as homsexuality, they’re right.
I had insurance which in the end paid the bill, but only after the State Ins Commissioner got involved. The lawyer was not after the Inc Co., she was after us and many of the threats she made were illegal and proven to be so.
Do I still have that Ins Co? No way!
As for the SA we did not want charity in the sense of a freebie, but we did need charity in the sense of kindness and grace, neither of which we received from the supposed charitable institution.
Homophobic is an invented term that has no meaning.
It is also nonsensical.
Homo is a prefix normally attached to another stem that means "the same" (in Greek)
phobic is a suffix, from the Greek, phobos, meaning a morbid fear.
So in other words, homophobia actually means a morbid, irrational fear of sameness. Or, in fact, one could say that it is one who fears monotony.
A more accurate word would be homosexualmisia ... or if you want to go more classical, you could try misomalakos.
But I think that making an unwarranted attack on those who fear monotony using that word is uncalled for.
It was priceless to see the expressions on the freaks' faces when the Salvation Army captain gave his speech and then the Mayor and council "took a collection" throughout the chamber with any container they could find. The perversionphiles sat stone-faced and didn't open their wallets. It showed them to be the true haters that they are.
So, by that thinking, are you a pedophile-phobe, an incestuphobe, a polyphobe, a necrophilephobe? Or do these have any meaning?
You have been duped into the inane thought pattern of the left. Go see an exorcist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.