Salvation Army Anti Gay = Common Knowledge?

[RecoveringKinkoid]

I've know for years the Salvation Army was against equal rights for gay people. Long story short, it came up in conversation and the husband was stunned to learn this fact. And I was stunned that he was stunned. I thought it was pretty much common knowledge. Evidently it's not as common as I thought.

The question for this thread is without you finding it out here, and hopefully looking it up for yourselves, did you already know this? Is this something that people know or is it some obscure fact?

[the_std]

I found this out when I was twelve, my mom and I were sorting through some old crap to donate, and I asked if we were going to take it to the Salvation Army. She made a face and said no, we'd be taking it to Value Village instead. She went on to explain why, and ever since that day, the Salvation Army, their retail stores and their bell ringers will not get a cent of my money.

[Rageaholic]

Damn, I didn't know that.

I heard from a professor that they were scandle free which enticed me to donate a dollar more often, but I guess scandles don't include their views.

I don't know if this will stop me from donating though. Depends on how much influence they have against this issue.

[smileyeagle1021]

The STD, when people ask me why I don't donate to the Salvation Army, I always explain that if it weren't bad enough that they were anti-gay, they aren't very efficient. There are many smaller local charities that do the exact same thing as the Salvation Army with much less overhead.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Yeah, I'm right there with you. We don't have anything to do with them. However, my avoiding having anything to do with them is active. In my husband's case, it was passive. He didn't give to them, but not because of that.

Well, now that he knows, it's no longer passive. Seriously, he was outraged.

We have friends who do the bell thing and they are people I figured knew, and chose to do it anyway thinking the SA does more good than harm or whatever. That's their business if that's the case, but the husband is now convinced there is no way some of these folks participating in this would be doing it if they knew.

That's why I didn't bring it up to them, really. I figured they knew. I guess next year, I'll bring it up in case they don't. But I honestly figured it was no secret at this point. It's been going on a while.

[blas87]

Found out a couple of years ago.

Their bell ringers and stores do not get a single penny or item of clothing from me.

And unfortunately, when I tell others of it, they say I'm drinking Koolaid and believing everything I hear.

[jackfaire]

I heard that once. The problem is people think of them with warm and fuzzies. so things that slip their mind.

[Greenday]

I had no idea until I saw this thread. This is definitely news to me, though it's not as if I would have any reason to know. I don't know of any Salvation Army's in my area.

[AdminAssistant]

I knew. I only donated my bed to them because they were the only local group that would take it. Everything else goes to Goodwill, and I do my thrift shopping at Goodwill, too. (It's much cleaner, has a better selection, and no god awful contemporary Christian music gets forced in my ears.)

I've also heard of Salvation Army workers throwing away un-Christianly donations, like Harry Potter toys. :wtf:

[Hyena Dandy]

Yeah, I knew. I figure, if they're the only option, I'll donate to them, but I'd rather send my money somewhere else. There usually is a better option, if you live in a city or a suburb. If you live in a smaller town, not as much.

[Andara Bledin]

The STD, when people ask me why I don't donate to the Salvation Army, I always explain that if it weren't bad enough that they were anti-gay, they aren't very efficient.
According to the American Institute of Philanthropy (http://www.charitywatch.org/articles/salvarmy.html), they actually rate high on the financial front.

That said, I prefer to give to local, more focused charities, anyway.

^-.-^

[fireheart17]

The STD, when people ask me why I don't donate to the Salvation Army, I always explain that if it weren't bad enough that they were anti-gay, they aren't very efficient. There are many smaller local charities that do the exact same thing as the Salvation Army with much less overhead.

Or slightly larger charities who don't have people ransacking through their bins every night :D

My family have NEVER donated to Salvos, but not for that reason. I found out about them being anti-gay through a former work colleague who has family in the Salvos and was struggling with coming out as bisexual (it was a guy from interstate, who didn't have much support in my state).

We tend to donate to Savers instead for a few reasons:

1) they support Diabetes SA/Diabetes Victoria and SIDS n Kids in Victoria (the latter is more famous for holding Red Nose Day :D).

2) They will drop off bags every once in a while for us to drop our stuff in and they collect it at a certain date themselves. (this is a community thing mind you)

3) They provide VERY VERY good customer service. When they forgot to pick up our donation bags, I drove over there myself as it wasn't that far to go. The gentleman out back saw me with the three bags I had, came over and carried them over to the drop off point himself. (I'd parked across the street) I explained what had happened and he apologised for what had happened. They haven't forgotten a bag since, and in the event they do, I know that I will get help.

4) They do not have drop-off bins out the front of the store, so after hours, cheap-ass shits can't rummage through them for free stuff. (they have one smaller drop-off bin in the front of the store, but it is in view of the checkouts) They also have a drop-off point out the back for the larger goods as well.

5) Their range is SO much better than the Salvos. I have been able to find a pair of pants for job interviews with no problems. Only thing I can't seem to find is a shirt :\.

And of course, over the PA system, they will ask their customers not to set their trolleys on fire :lol: (trolley=shopping cart)

[HYHYBT]

As I understand it, the Salvation Army is what you might call passively anti-gay. It's a church, of a sort, of the kind that believes homosexuality is wrong, and it probably isn't such a great place to work if you're gay, but they don't push politically or deny services.

I could, of course, be misinformed on that. We don't have one here anyway.

[Boozy]

I've know for years the Salvation Army was against equal rights for gay people. Long story short, it came up in conversation and the husband was stunned to learn this fact. And I was stunned that he was stunned.

Freaky. I had the exact same conversation with my husband about a week before Christmas.

We had just finished groceries and were leaving the store when my husband slows down by the Salvation Army bell ringer, wishes her a merry Christmas, and puts a twenty into the pot.

I say nothing until we get out to the car. I immediately complain to him that that we have a short list of charities we support, we had already made our end of year donations, and he should have asked me first. He was baffled, thinking it was about the twenty bucks, which would have made no sense since we've never consulted each other on such small disbursements.

Meanwhile, I was also baffled at his behaviour, because I couldn't figure out how a man so supportive of gay rights could have given to the Salvation Army in any amount.

It eventually occured to me that he didn't know about their track record. Turns out he had no idea.

[Cazzi]

I must admit, that was news to me too, but I already didn't support the Salvation Army for another reason.

An old boss of mine was brought up in children's homes believing he was an orphan. He turned to the SA for help knowing that they had a good record of tracking people down after he found out that his mother was probably still alive.

They refused to help him.... their reason? His mother wasn't married when she had him!
Like that was his fault how?

I used to frequent their local charity shop before then.. I haven't been in since.

[bainsidhe]

I only heard about it 2 months ago, when I read an article, otherwise I had no idea. And I thought it was kinda passive too, though that doesn't make it right. I thought for sure the article would have a big impact on donations this Christmas (again, since this was the first I heard of it), but then I heard they beat their goal. *shrugs*

I usually donate clothing & whatnot to Goodwill, but only because they're convenient. Otherwise I donate to a church's yearly rummage sale. I don't care much for Goodwill, they've become so commercialized it's crazy. Plus local Goodwills have been known to trash leftover clothes that aren't sold. Perfectly good clothes that other agencies could use, thank you. :(

[Mishi]

I knew about it because of Dan Savage, and then looked it up for myself. We don't donate to them because they called me, triple-checked that I am *my name*, and then said: "Hi Mishi, we have a list here for your street and the surrounding streets, we need you to collect donations for us. I will send out the items you need, the date for collections is X and you WILL collect donations between Y-Z, okay?" The lady was surprised when I said that no, it was not okay, I had never volunteered for them and never would. She was a little bit offended, so I hung up.

[Kheldarson]

I actually didn't know until this thread.

But I'll probably still drop the few cents I rarely have anyway at Christmas each year. It barely adds up to a dollar and makes the bellringers happy, so what the hey.

[the_std]

so what the hey.

I'm not the type of person to generally get involved in what other people do with their money in terms of charitable donations, but you put this out there, so...

What the hey is that you could be giving those pennies to a organization that helps support people without spreading a message of intolerance. Convenience is a terrible excuse to give money to an organization that displays this message of intolerance, however passive it may be. By giving them money, you support their entire organization, not just the bits you agree with. You are supporting the anti-gay agenda and that is a sad, sad fact.

[Hyena Dandy]

And as I said, I would rather give money to them than no-one. Fortunately, there are a lot of options in my area, so I don't have to. But if it was a Hobson's Choice, I'd choose them.

[the_std]

Okay, I know I'm using the dreaded "A" word here, but I'm not scared of assuming that Kheldarson is in a situation where there are other options. They might just not be convenient options, and like I said, convenience is a really lousy reason to contribute to someone like the Salvation Army.

[SkullKing]

Okay, I know I'm using the dreaded "A" word here, but I'm not scared of assuming that Kheldarson is in a situation where there are other options. They might just not be convenient options, and like I said, convenience is a really lousy reason to contribute to someone like the Salvation Army.

I agree. You can often just by a little extra with you change and give it to someone else on the way home. I sometimes do that when I go to the bakery for instance.

[AdminAssistant]

This time of year, the local grocery stores always have those coupons out that you can scan to give 50 cents or a dollar to a local food bank....another way of small giving.

[telecom_goddess]

I knew about the Salvation Army having that attitude, but only recently. I'm never giving them anything and didn't really to begin with.

[smileyeagle1021]

According to the American Institute of Philanthropy (http://www.charitywatch.org/articles/salvarmy.html), they actually rate high on the financial front.

That said, I prefer to give to local, more focused charities, anyway.

^-.-^

of course, there are still a lot of places that do better...

[Peppergirl]

I had no idea until just now. I dropped alot of change in those buckets this year. :(

I'll no longer be doing that. Very disappointing!

[Iseeyouthere]

I recently learnt about this as well. I'm glad that I didn't get work with them.

[Kheldarson]

I'm not the type of person to generally get involved in what other people do with their money in terms of charitable donations, but you put this out there, so...

What the hey is that you could be giving those pennies to a organization that helps support people without spreading a message of intolerance. Convenience is a terrible excuse to give money to an organization that displays this message of intolerance, however passive it may be. By giving them money, you support their entire organization, not just the bits you agree with. You are supporting the anti-gay agenda and that is a sad, sad fact.

So...my giving maybe, at most, a dollar, over the course of a Christmas season, over maybe 6 buckets, for the express purpose of giving holiday cheer to the guy or gal, or kids in one case, who's sitting there in the cold collecting money is a bad thing simply because the group they're with happens to, among other things, support anti-gay legislation. Sounds like beautiful reasoning to me.

[KabeRinnaul]

Okay, I know I'm using the dreaded "A" word here, but I'm not scared of assuming that Kheldarson is in a situation where there are other options. They might just not be convenient options, and like I said, convenience is a really lousy reason to contribute to someone like the Salvation Army.

Not a good assumption. We're in West Virginia. There's SA, this one Goodwill somewhere out on the other end of the valley, and... the Lions Club if you have some glasses to donate. And then... the Scouts? Do they do donations? But they're notoriously Anti-Gay, too, so I don't think you'd be happy with that, either. Or local churches. But considering the area is pretty heavily Baptist, I don't know how well that would work.

[Boozy]

Not a good assumption. We're in West Virginia.

And you only have three or four charities in West Virginia?

Three seconds on Google says otherwise. (http://www.charity-charities.org/charities/WV.html)

[the_std]

So...my giving maybe, at most, a dollar, over the course of a Christmas season, over maybe 6 buckets, for the express purpose of giving holiday cheer to the guy or gal, or kids in one case, who's sitting there in the cold collecting money is a bad thing simply because the group they're with happens to, among other things, support anti-gay legislation. Sounds like beautiful reasoning to me.

Uhm... Yes? It is a bad thing because it SUPPORTS ANTI-GAY LEGISLATION. Is "Christmas cheer" more important than the rights of gay people?

[Kheldarson]

Hm...the smile I get as I do something nice or the meh I get thinking about legislation that the federal government shouldn't be involved with in the first place? I think I'll go with the former thanks.

I'd rather do something rather inconsequentially nice for the people in front of me than be a stick in the mud for the sake of people who I don't even know.

And for someone who said he didn't like making assumptions, you're making a pretty big one about my politics and ethics. Just sayin'.

[the_std]

Hm...the smile I get as I do something nice or the meh I get thinking about legislation that the federal government shouldn't be involved with in the first place? I think I'll go with the former thanks.

So instant gratification over supporting an organization that doesn't hide the fact that they're discriminatory?

I'd rather do something rather inconsequentially nice for the people in front of me than be a stick in the mud for the sake of people who I don't even know.

But this is what I'm trying to point out - it's NOT inconsequential! You are giving money to people who use that money to only support people who aren't gay, and this being a charity organization, I don't believe that people who are in need of such support should be discriminated against simply because they're attracted to people of the same sex as them.

And for someone who said he didn't like making assumptions, you're making a pretty big one about my politics and ethics. Just sayin'.

I didn't assume anything. You'll notice it was a question. You prefer giving Christmas cheer over supporting gay rights?

(Side note, I am also a woman, not a he.)

[AdminAssistant]

Edited: STD summed it up better than I did.

As far as locations go, if you have a working internet connection, that's no excuse. Gather up loose change, deposit it in the bank, and make a donation in that amount to an organization that actually helps people, as opposed to organizations that support hateful legislation or that spend money evangelizing as opposed to doing good.

[Kheldarson]

So instant gratification over supporting an organization that doesn't hide the fact that they're discriminatory?

I think I just said that. I'd rather give to the person in front of me or my church. Or the Scouts. These are the things I support.

But this is what I'm trying to point out - it's NOT inconsequential! You are giving money to people who use that money to only support people who aren't gay, and this being a charity organization, I don't believe that people who are in need of such support should be discriminated against simply because they're attracted to people of the same sex as them.

And private groups don't have a right to refuse service? I may think that's a shitty reason, but that's still their right.



I didn't assume anything. You'll notice it was a question. You prefer giving Christmas cheer over supporting gay rights?

Yes. At the tune of a dollar, yes.

[Andara Bledin]

Apparently, the Salvation Army's official position is that it does not discriminate about who it gives charity to based on sexual orientation. It seems that when it happens, it's done as a decision at a local level and is not supported higher up.

However, they do actively campaign to not be required to provide benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of their employees and to not be required to hire sexually active gay ministers. The latter should absolutely be their right - the former, not so much.

It's interesting to note that their stance isn't that being gay is bad, but being sexually active in a non-heterosexual manner is.

The drive to boycott has been going on for over a decade, now, but it doesn't appear to be getting much traction.

^-.-^

[the_std]

Well then, Kheldarson, I will say that I heavily, heavily disagree with your actions, as there are a lot of people like you out there who will just drop change in the buckets, and that change adds up quickly. I do not support this because it ends up being a lot more than a drop in the bucket - it is a large source of funding for an organization that I think goes against the very premise of charity. But if you are okay with that, then I guess there isn't much more for us to talk about here.

[Jetfire]

The boycott drive may not be gaining traction; but modern purchasing certainly has been. In recent years I've been hearing more and more how the bucket drives aren't pulling in the money they used to, because people aren't paying with cash any more. The Salvation Army has been researching and trying to figure out other methods to encourage donations (cell phone donations for example) but nothing's really offset the dropping in of a few dollars that they used to have.

Personally, I hadn't heard of their stance, but now that I have, I'll be even less inclined to support them. (being a strong debit card user to begin with; I've almost never tossed any money in their buckets anyways; and my used item donations go to Value Village now, and have been for awhile; mainly because they're more well known).

[AdminAssistant]

Or the Scouts

The Boy Scouts is another horrifically anti-gay rights organization, that will kick out children who identify as homosexual, trans, or even as atheists.

Unless you're referring to the Girl Scouts, which is completely separate and has no such track record of discrimination.

[Kheldarson]

Actually both. I'm both a Boy Scout and a Girl Scout and proud of both, although the Boy Scouts are far more effective in terms of teaching things with their merit badges compared to the Girl Scouts.

[Andara Bledin]

The boycott drive may not be gaining traction; but modern purchasing certainly has been.
Well, the physical kettle drives may be having trouble, but their collection broke records for the 6th straight year as of last year, so they're not really being affected. They have "virtual kettles" where people making purchases online can donate.

Considering that the Salvation Army is structured like a military group, and that the official policy is that they do not discriminate in their philanthropic endeavors based on sexual orientation, I would suggest to any that are victims of such discrimination to kick complaints up the chain of command, just as you would do with someone in any other armed service who is not acting according to protocol.

Because, honestly, there aren't enough people in the world who care enough about the boycott for it to have any tangible effect. Hell, it's been going on for over a decade and most people have never even heard of it.

^-.-^

[Bardmaiden]

I didn't know the Salvation Army was anti gay.

Thing is I kinda like them, not in church going way but because they were the only church to accept my aunt. You see my grandmother had three children one adopted, one my grandfather looked after even though it wasn't his child and born out of wedlock (this was the 1940's not so accepted then) then my mother. At the age of two my aunt caught menigitis and it affected her very badly she became mentally the age of two year old for the rest of her life. Her mother wished for her to be baptised and the Sally Army were the only ones that would perform the service as the rest of the churches said she wouldn't understand the importance of it so they wouldn't do it...hang on a minute I was baptised when I was about a year old I didn't know about churches then.

So TL;DR version I like them for family reasons but not their anti gay stuff.

[Andara Bledin]

A Minor Correction: The Salvation Army is not specifically anti-gay. They are anti-sexually-active-gay. Their stance is that if you are not heterosexual, then you should practice celibacy.

It's not much better, really, but there is a difference.

^-.-^

[HYHYBT]

What they use the donations for matters as well. If they indeed do not discriminate in how they hand out what they collect, then to me how they choose to structure themselves, and even who they hire (they are, after all, a church) is, to me, their business. I'm pretty sure they stay out of politics except to insist that they continue being allowed to do as they wish, unlike many other churches who are far more anti-gay to begin with.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Apparently, the Salvation Army's official position is that it does not discriminate about who it gives charity to based on sexual orientation.

^-.-^

I'm not saying this is a true statement, because I don't know. But I've read a few claims that they do. I have no way of knowing if it's true or something someone make up to further demonize the SA. People indeed do that. But there ya go, it is what it is.

[blas87]

If giving a few bucks a year to SA just cuz it's "nice" to do, is the same as me signing up to donate to the United Way, because it'd be "nice" to do. That's another organization that's full of crap and not a good charity.

[Andara Bledin]

I'm not saying this is a true statement, because I don't know. But I've read a few claims that they do.
From their own position page (http://www.salvationarmyusa.org/usn/www_usn_2.nsf/0/B6F3F4DF3150F5B585257434004C177D?Opendocument) at SalvationArmy.org:
Homosexuality

The Salvation Army holds a positive view of human sexuality. Where a man and a woman love each other, sexual intimacy is understood as a gift of God to be enjoyed within the context of heterosexual marriage. However, in the Christian view, sexual intimacy is not essential to a healthy, full, and rich life. Apart from marriage, the scriptural standard is celibacy.

Sexual attraction to the same sex is a matter of profound complexity. Whatever the causes may be, attempts to deny its reality or to marginalize those of a same-sex orientation have not been helpful. The Salvation Army does not consider same-sex orientation blameworthy in itself. Homosexual conduct, like heterosexual conduct, requires individual responsibility and must be guided by the light of scriptural teaching.

Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex. The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life. There is no scriptural support for same-sex unions as equal to, or as an alternative to, heterosexual marriage.

Likewise, there is no scriptural support for demeaning or mistreating anyone for reason of his or her sexual orientation. The Salvation Army opposes any such abuse.

In keeping with these convictions, the services of The Salvation Army are available to all who qualify, without regard to sexual orientation. The fellowship of Salvation Army worship is open to all sincere seekers of faith in Christ, and membership in The Salvation Army church body is open to all who confess Christ as Savior and who accept and abide by The Salvation Army's doctrine and discipline.

Scriptures: Genesis 2:23-24; Leviticus 18:22; Mark 2:16-17; Romans 1:26-27; Romans 5:8; I Corinthians 6:9-11; I Corinthians 13; Galatians 6:1-2; I Thessalonians 4:1-8; I Thessalonians 5:14-15; I Timothy 1:15-16; Jude 7

Recommended for approval by the Commissioners' Conference
Approved for use within the USA by International Headquarters

I'm taking it straight from the horse's mouth.

From an article last month (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/24/us/beliefs-salvation-army-hears-dissent-over-gay-views.html) in The New York Times:
In a statement sent by e-mail later, Mr. Hood, a Salvation Army spokesman, adds that “gay couples are to be treated in the same way we treat heterosexual couples.”

“Whether they are provided overnight lodging,” he says, “is determined solely on capacity and availability of beds.” Most beds in Salvation Army shelters are for men, but the Salvation Army has “been going through a transition of facilities over the past several years to expand bed space for women and also to isolate some private rooms for couples, whether they be homosexual or heterosexual.”

I don't actually have a horse in this fight as I am straight and don't know even a friend of a friend who has been denied charity by them, nor do I give them any money. I'm just interested in making sure that if people are going to "do the right thing," they don't do it based on lies, outdated information (the Times article is over an event that took place 20 years ago), or the false actions of those at the bottom acting without sanction or blessing from their superiors.

^-.-^

[Peppergirl]

Ok, so to throw a further monkey wrench into it:

What about Target and their anti-gay donation debacle from a couple years ago?

http://news.change.org/stories/targets-150000-donation-to-fund-anti-gay-politics


Did most of us stop shopping there? I bet not. I know I'm guilty of still going there.

[Andara Bledin]

An update from a month later at MPR News (http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/08/05/target-apology-donation/)

An excerpt:
In a letter to Target employees, CEO Gregg Steinhafel wrote that the purpose of the $150,000 donation to MN Forward was to support economic growth and job creation, but he wrote that the contribution affected many employees in ways he did not anticipate and quote "for that I am deeply sorry."

Target spokeswoman Lena Michaud said the company will also do a strategic review of political donations and plans to lead a discussion on improving gay rights in the workplace.

"Our commitment right now is in letting people know that we've heard their feedback and we're really sorry that we've let them down," Michaud said. "We want to continue doing the many things that Target has done as a company to foster our inclusive corporate culture and then look at ways of doing things better in the future."

I have yet to run into a story about Target where they didn't act quickly and pro-actively to assure the public and their own employees that whatever bad thing was done was not on purpose and that they will move forward by no longer doing that thing and by reviewing the process that led to them doing that thing in the first place.

Either that or the story in question is a blown up load of rubbish. I have yet to find a compelling reason to not shop there, despite how often "boycott Target" campaigns roll around.

Also worth noting is that Minnesota Forward specifically supports politicians that are committed to supporting the business community, without consideration for their stances on other issues. They couldn't care less that Emmer and probably the other two Republicans they supported were anti-gay, and they also don't care that the three Democrats to whom they gave funds are probably pro-gay - It's not part of their agenda, and if one is going to raise a stink, it would be in their best interests to disclose that fact.

^-.-^

[blas87]

I only shopped at Target a year or two ago, because I was given a gift card for there from my employer. I should have thrown it away, I know, as earlier I was on my soapbox, but at least it was quite a while ago, and I don't even think about Target when I'm planning my shopping.

[Andara Bledin]

Honestly, compared to most of their contemporaries, Target is arguably the least evil among them. I can't see what they've done that would really cause anyone to soapbox against them. Unlike, say, the six other corporations who specifically jumped on board with Minnesota Forward after the whole "they give money to politicians who also happen to be anti-gay" thing.

^-.-^

[Peppergirl]

Thanks for the update, Andara. I clearly never kept up with Targets responses to the issue.

[smileyeagle1021]

So...my giving maybe, at most, a dollar, over the course of a Christmas season, over maybe 6 buckets, for the express purpose of giving holiday cheer to the guy or gal, or kids in one case, who's sitting there in the cold collecting money is a bad thing simply because the group they're with happens to, among other things, support anti-gay legislation. Sounds like beautiful reasoning to me.

When there is so many other charities to give to... yes.
A polite I've already donated does nothing against the people in the cold... in fact normally saying that makes their day when someone says it honestly (of course, there is the rub, you really should have made a donation to somewhere if you are going to say that).



I'd rather do something rather inconsequentially nice for the people in front of me than be a stick in the mud for the sake of people who I don't even know.


you don't know any gay people? You don't know a single gay person?
To be blunt, are you ignorant or living under a rock? Over 99% of counties in the United States (and I'd assume similar levels exist in other countries) have out gays or lesbians living there. So I find it hard to believe that anti-gay policies aren't going to affect anyone you know. On that same standard, if you don't care about people you know, why are you donating to a charity that could for all you know be sending money to help people in a different country, surely you don't know all the people in need of charitable help from organizations such as the Salvation Army.

Actually both. I'm both a Boy Scout and a Girl Scout and proud of both, although the Boy Scouts are far more effective in terms of teaching things with their merit badges compared to the Girl Scouts.

As an Eagle Scout, I have a hard time disagreeing with you, but as someone who has seen the organization from both inside and out, I can safely say, that there is nothing that amazing about BSA, the good that comes from it can easily come from other places, namely the child's parents. Involved parents were a much bigger influence in me getting my Eagle than the program itself, and that was consistent with everyone I met in the program was the same, those with involved parents excelled, those without didn't.
Are they a good program? Absolutely. But as a donor you have to decide whether the good they do outweighs the bad and if you want to send your money somewhere else, something I'd advise doing when there are other organizations that do just as well, if not better, that don't push a bigoted agenda (both religious intolerance and homophobia).

Ok, so to throw a further monkey wrench into it:

What about Target and their anti-gay donation debacle from a couple years ago?

http://news.change.org/stories/targets-150000-donation-to-fund-anti-gay-politics


Did most of us stop shopping there? I bet not. I know I'm guilty of still going there.

I stopped spending there because of it, but I'm not surprised that not many people changed their buying habits because of it.
Gays and Lesbians make up, under even optimistic assumptions less than 10% of the population, with realistic estimates at 5%, and as Kheldarson demonstrates, you don't have to be homophobic or bigoted to turn a blind eye because you don't think it affects anyone you know. You can even be an otherwise good person and just not know what the affects of your actions are.

[Kheldarson]

you don't know any gay people? You don't know a single gay person?
To be blunt, are you ignorant or living under a rock? Over 99% of counties in the United States (and I'd assume similar levels exist in other countries) have out gays or lesbians living there. So I find it hard to believe that anti-gay policies aren't going to affect anyone you know.




I actually have a gay friend that we discussed this thread with. And Kyle doesn't see the big deal with donating to them. So...yeah. Nobody I know is affected by this seemingly big deal of making a donation to a church group.

As to the rest, I'll just go ahead and put this out here. I am morally against extramarital relationships. This means any sexual union (gay or hetero) done outside a church marriage. That's a church matter that doesn't apply to everyone though and has no standing in the courts and cannot be affected by the courts. However, politically, I support civil unions for anybody. That's a tax issue and should be handled by law.

So, I'll support a church group that stands against extramarital relationships and will push to make sure lawmakers keep their laws away from the church. I also support groups that push for political civil unions who will ensure that all have equal rights.

[HYHYBT]

I only shopped at Target a year or two ago, because I was given a gift card for there from my employer. I should have thrown it away, Why? A gift card means they owe you something. Throwing it away means they get to keep the money free, instead of providing goods for it.

As for not shopping at Target... it was one donation, in a case where they had conflicting interests and reasonably might not have known about one of them. Meanwhile, other than that, they've been pretty consistently friendly for ages, unlike (from what I've heard) their blue competitor. Punishing the good for not being perfect is a great way to wind up with only bad choices... and we all have to shop somewhere.

[blas87]

I still prefer Wal-Mart, because you never need coupons to shop there. Of course, the ones I do find (manufacturer's coupons) I can still use there.

Or I could just clip and print coupons for grocery stores and ShitKo and Target and drive all over town to save a few bucks.

[Andara Bledin]

I still prefer Wal-Mart, because you never need coupons to shop there.
So, you'd boycott Target for a one-off donation to a business-friendly politician that also happened to be anti-gay, but you have no problems shopping at Walmart, who supports specifically Catholic charities which are known to actively discriminate against the GLBT community, and whose CEO signed a petition to ban adoption for same-sex couples?

Article at Rainbow Sash Movement (http://rainbowsashmovement.wordpress.com/2011/11/17/does-walmart-like-catholic-charities-promote-anti-gay-family-values/)
Article at Know They Neighbor (http://knowthyneighbor.blogs.com/home/2009/04/ceo-of-walmart-found-on-arkansas-antigay-petition.html)

Unlike Target, I have heard dozens of very good reasons to not shop at Walmart, all of which are supported by multiple news reports and legal documents.

^-.-^

[blas87]

That I can claim ignorance on.

I was fully aware of everyone's normal anti Wal-Mart propoganda and usual "Don't shop there! They don't pay their workers enough!" or "They don't provide good benefits!" or "They are screwing over small businesses!11!"

But I was not aware of that.

Damn. Almost out of options am I then.

[AdminAssistant]

While I try to avoid Wal-Mart, I don't judge people who shop there...particularly from my home state where there's a Supercenter in damn near every town. Often the prices are far, far cheaper than at the grocery stores, and not many SuperTargets have broken into the market yet.

[HYHYBT]

For food, I have these choices: 1) Walmart Supercenter.

2) Either of two regular grocery stores in town, both of which charge what seems like half again what WM does and one of which is owned by a very "conservative" Christian.

3) Convenience stores: cost more than the grocery stores, virtually no "real" food, and who knows what their corporate policies are.

4) Travel to a city for groceries, wasting gallons of gasoline per trip.

I usually go to Walmart. If there were an otherwise-comparable choice in town, I'd take it for WM's horrible restroom sinks alone, much less their policies.

[Andara Bledin]

I have nothing against people who shop at Walmart.

I just find it senseless for someone to not shop at Target for things that Target doesn't actually do but that Walmart does.

^-.-^