Skip to comments.
[Catholic League Cancels Boycott] AMERICAN RED CROSS APOLOGIZES FOR CENSORING RELIGIOUS SPEECH
www.CatholicLeague.org ^
| 3-12-2002
| William Donohue
Posted on 03/12/2002 8:55:35 AM PST by Notwithstanding
March 12, 2002
AMERICAN RED CROSS APOLOGIZES FOR CENSORING RELIGIOUS SPEECH
In a news release March 11, the Catholic League pledged to contact the leaders of over 100 organizations asking them to join us in dropping all support for the American Red Cross. We did just thatwe faxed all of the organizations on our list. And also we contacted the Red Cross.
Our complaint centered on the decision of the headquarters of the American Red Cross to defend its Orange County (CA) chapter in prohibiting students from Orange County High School of the Arts from singing God Bless America and America the Beautiful at a Red Cross luncheon this past Sunday. The Red Cross opposed the songs citing its sensitivity to religious diversity and its preference for a music program that would be inclusive and not offend different populations participating in this particular event.
Yesterday evening, the American Red Cross issued a statement saying the judgements we made in this case in applying our principles clearly offended some in our community. It mentioned that it is important to use reasonable judgement in applying principles to the everyday circumstances we confront. The news release continued saying the judgement we made to exclude certain songs from the Sunday program was a mistake. It then apologized for its decision.
Catholic League president William Donohue remarked as follows:
We are delighted that reasonableness prevailed at the American Red Cross and we have no interest in continuing our campaign to discredit the organization. While we accept the apology we do not buy the line that this was a mistake. No, it was a calculated decision designed to punish religious speech. The statement, therefore, is intellectually dishonest. But the bottom line is they got the message. One more point. We expect the organization will soon change its name: any group that has Cross in its name is clearly being insensitive to religious diversity.
TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Breaking News; Culture/Society; Extended News; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bloodhounds; christianpersecutio; redcross; sasu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-99 next last
To: Notwithstanding
Can't we keep up the boycott anyway? ;-)
2
posted on
03/12/2002 8:57:08 AM PST
by
patent
To: patent
Can't we keep up the boycott anyway? ;-) And we would want to do that because......???
3
posted on
03/12/2002 9:02:32 AM PST
by
evad
To: Notwithstanding
Rumor is that the Red Cross will be merging with Rainbow Push. The new name is the Red Pushy Rainbow.
To: Notwithstanding
saying the judgements we made in this case in applying our principles clearly offended some in our community. It mentioned that it is important to use reasonable judgement in applying principles to the everyday circumstances we confront. Problem is, you see, that the same morons keep making the same mistake over and over and over and over...
Haven't you heard?
IDIOTS!!
Doing something in order to avoid "offending" a handful, and offending millions in the process... is stupid.
Any third grader can tell you that!
To: evad
because they promote socialism.
6
posted on
03/12/2002 9:04:46 AM PST
by
TLBSHOW
To: Notwithstanding
Donahue nails it. The only "mistake" by the American Red Cross was in underestimating the outrage their political correctness would encounter. And he's right, the "cross" in their name must be deeply offensive to all tolerant free-thinkers. Likewise, the "American" part of their name will strike the pc sort as jingoistic and exclusivist. Hmmm, how much of their name does that leave us with?
Comment #8 Removed by Moderator
Comment #9 Removed by Moderator
To: Notwithstanding
I will NEVER give a dime to the Red Cross again. I am a firm believer in donating to local community concerns that a person can monitor or even gain hands on involvement in.
If a national disaster occurs, donating to local church charities is a lot better than donating to the Red Cross.
To: evad
My "we" sees no reason to support an organization that consistently acts like the Red Cross does. Its apology here sounds as genunine as yet another Ted Turner apology for yet another anti-Christian comment. Perhaps they apologize for it, but why support an organization that prefers to silence you and your values, except when it hurts their donations? Perhaps your "we" has a masochistic streak, and likes giving money to people who would rather gag you. My "we" notes there are multitudes of organizations out there that will take my money and still respect me in the morning. I prefer to donate my all to finite funds to them.
patent
11
posted on
03/12/2002 9:08:24 AM PST
by
patent
To: Notwithstanding
We expect the organization will soon change its name: any group that has Cross in its name is clearly being insensitive to religious diversity. /sarcasm off
Fool me once, shame on you--
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Third time's a fool?
To: Notwithstanding
For those of you who want to protest the Red Cross's actions click
here.
Freeper jrewingjr came up with this great idea. Ping all your friends and chapter members.
To: Notwithstanding
Did anyone watch the piece "60 Minutes" did on the Red Cross Sunday night. It appears that the Red Double Cross has been stiffing people for years...you may want to continue your boycott.
14
posted on
03/12/2002 9:09:55 AM PST
by
kellynla
To: Notwithstanding
Since military flying days, I have dispised the Red Cross for their condescending attitude toward all military personnel.
I am delighted with this turn of events.
Please have a very nice day.
15
posted on
03/12/2002 9:09:58 AM PST
by
rmvh
To: Notwithstanding
We expect the organization will soon change its name: any group that has Cross in its name is clearly being insensitive to religious diversityGood one!
16
posted on
03/12/2002 9:10:22 AM PST
by
Cleburne
To: Publius6961
Doing something in order to avoid "offending" a handful, and offending millions in the process... is stupid. Any third grader can tell you that! Indeed, AND those few that they want to avoid "offending" in most likelyhood would not be "offended" in the first place but by doing this they assured themselves of offending millions. Stupid indeed.
17
posted on
03/12/2002 9:10:26 AM PST
by
mc5cents
To: patent
See post 13.
To: Notwithstanding
The Red Cross opposed the songs citing its sensitivity to religious diversity and its preference for a music program that would be inclusive and not offend different populations participating in this particular event. In attempt to avoid offending non-Christians and people who are not U.S. citizens, the American Red Cross decided that from now on it would simply be known as the Red.
/sarcasm off/
To: patent
My father in law told me how he was not given food and drink during WW2, by the red cross. Said they had been relieved from the front lines by other units and had taken rear postions and had come into contact with red cross unit, that had food and other items. They were not given anything because they had no money on them. He did say the officers ate free though.
Seems they have not changed their ways. So as far as I'm concerned you my continue the boycott!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-99 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson