How many blankets do you need to hand out to the homeless to make up for the gay teenage boy who kills himself because of such social attitudes? ~ the little lioness

How many blankets do you need to hand out to the homeless to make up for the gay teenage boy who kills himself because of such social attitudes?

Awoke to the news that the Salvation Army were copping it in the media for reinforcing its stance that homosexuality is an unnatural urge that needs to be suppressed.

Anna Brown, convener of the Victorian Gay & Lesbian Rights Lobby, said the charity had also opposed gay marriage at a House of Representatives inquiry.

“Actively campaigning against marriage equality is counter to the principles of compassion and humanity, and these are the very values that motivate most Australians to donate to the Salvation Army,” she said.

“It’s difficult to reconcile how an organisation seeking to alleviate social disadvantage can play a role in perpetuating views … founded in prejudice (that) cause significant harm to the health and wellbeing of gay, lesbian and transgender Australians and their families.”

My immediate thoughts? Aside from this is why churches shouldn’t be responsible for welfare, and it should be government/secular, I was also reminded that one of the current Nuffnang charity ads is selling mobile phone covers for the Salvos, in order to help fund youth services.

I of course, went straight to the social media to have a few words on it.

But two of my friends, Kel and Jen, put it well

From Kel:

Really sad. I wanted to believe they were a charity I could get on board with, but how many blankets do you need to hand out to the homeless to make up for the gay teenage boy who kills himself because of such social attitudes?

And Jen:

A family friend of ours used to manage ‘this way up’, the salvos furniture place that employs disadvantaged people. He had to leave a few years ago because after a change in the salvos leadership it all became less about really helping people in a practical way and more about ‘saving their souls’.

So, to the Nuffnangers out there, I call on you to disable charity ads while they are still running Salvation Army, or similar charities who are so conflicted over what their REAL mission is. And let the Salvos know where you stand.

Happy Monday.



Powered by Facebook Comments

14 comments for “How many blankets do you need to hand out to the homeless to make up for the gay teenage boy who kills himself because of such social attitudes?

  1. June 18, 2012 at 11:23 am

    Interesting that you would consider not supporting the Salvation Army simply because of their belief system. If you needed a blanket they would not care about your sexual preferences. If you needed a meal, counseling, food etc … they would not with hold it if you told them you were homosexual. So while they would still support you, regardless of your belief that there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality, you would not support them in all the wonderful work they do simply because thy believe the bible?

    As to your comment that “churches shouldn’t be responsible for welfare” – I say good luck finding enough charitable-minded secular oganisations that would take up the slack if religious institutes were banned from doing it.

    • June 18, 2012 at 11:28 am

      When they are speaking out and reinforcing the stigma that exists for being gay etc in our community, lobbying to not accept same sex couples as just as worthy people has heterosexual couples, then they are doing harm in society and should not be recieving tax breaks from the government and donations form people who feel that they are doing harm to the mental health and wellbeing of the youth they are supposedly helping.

      Sure, they would give me a blanket, but the background message that actually, I’m a broken human being that shouldn’t have the same rights at others? agrh.

    • June 18, 2012 at 11:34 am

      And team FSM is the second biggest Religious lender on Kiva ;)

    • Kelkel
      June 20, 2012 at 6:58 am

      That’s silly reasoning. Fiona isn’t denying a blanket for a homeless person because they happen to be christian, she’s not supporting an organisation because, while they do some very good things in the community they also actively hurt members at the very same time. If the RSPCA found homes for 9 dogs and kicked every 10th one, I dare say they would lose support from a lot of people, because while those 9 dogs need homes, having that 10th dog kicked doesn’t sit well in our conscience.

      The Salvation Army do some incredible, selfless work. However, many of us have decided that we cannot support a charity on a “net good” – basis, if that can even be argued.

      • June 20, 2012 at 1:28 pm

        Interesting, again, that you would seek to deny the 9 dogs a happy home (to continue your example) because one was kicked. However, that example falls terribly short. TSA aren’t ‘kicking’ homosexuals through their position on homosexuality any more than they are ‘kicking’ women who choose to terminate their pregnancy despite the TSA’s opposition to abortion. They help every person who needs help, regardless of age, race or sexual orientation. What they ARE doing is standing up for what they believe in, in the same way that Gay supporters are standing up for their beliefs.

        Gay supporters who urge others to boycott TSA, simply because they believe what the bible says, are basically saying “It’s okay for us to have our beliefs and ideas but no one can disagree with us because we’re right and they’re wrong.” Talk about intolerance.

        • Kelkel
          June 20, 2012 at 3:13 pm

          You’re failing to distinguish that none of us are saying “no donations to charities”, but rather chosing not to donate to charities who we find morally ambiguous, instead diverting our donations to charities who don’t hurt other people. Homeless people still deserve blankets, and dogs don’t deserve to be kicked.
          I find it interesting that you think it’s fine to kick a dog, so long as you find a home for the other nine. Personally I cannot see a situation where it is ever acceptable to kick a dog, perhaps there is a passage in the bible I have missed that says otherwise.

          You’re right. “Kicking” is a poor term to describe the hurt you directly cause homosexuals through telling them that it is a sin to love who they love, and by denying them the chance to have their relationships recognised as real and equal. “Kicking” is a poor term to describe the toll that it takes on their emotions, their self esteem, and their mental health. Physical scars are more easily healed.

          Prejudice such as this should not be tollerated, so call it intolerance if you like, but you would see the exact same reaction from me if you told me that say, black people weren’t allowed to marry because their love is not valid according to your religion.

          Do you believe fish are better for some reason? No? Then I’m pretty sure the general public understand the spirit of my statement. :) Besides which, I’m sure anyone reading would be hard pressed to feel insulted by my comparisson next to ignorance such as your comments regarding homosexuals being “confused”, and a “product of their upbringing”. But by all means, knitpick if it eases your conscience. :)

          • June 20, 2012 at 3:54 pm

            “I find it interesting that you think it’s fine to kick a dog…..”

            I did not say that, nor said I think it.

            I did not put words in your mouth or thoughts in your head, yet you feel you have the right to do both to me?

            I also never stated that I regarded “…homosexuals [as] being “confused”, and a “product of their upbringing”.” I simply said that is how a member of TSA might view them. I also did not state that I had a religion. I have no need to “…ease my conscience” as it is quite clear. There’s nothing wrong with trying to see both sides of an issue. At least not until now, apparently.

            As usual, there’s no reasoning with people like you who have a “you’re wrong, I’m right” mentality. At least I can see both sides and can accept arguments for both sides. My neighbours are homosexual and they are some of the nicest people I know – just as nice as my friends’ workmate who is a member of TSA – and they seem to have a better understanding of tolerance that you do.

            • June 20, 2012 at 4:02 pm

              Wouldn’t you rather that there be a charity where 10/10 dogs were giveen homes and none were.kicked or they were being kicked by society?

            • June 20, 2012 at 4:03 pm

              And I had assumed you were religious because gout have bible verses in your sidebar. Forgive me if that’s too presumptuous.

  2. June 18, 2012 at 11:50 am

    No, not broken. Or at least not any more broken than anyone else. According to the bible, all are sinners. God doesn’t distinguish between sins – one is no “better” or “worse” than another. The worst the Salvation Army would consider a homosexual person is ‘misguided’ ….. just as you yourself consider them ‘misguided’ for their views.

    • June 18, 2012 at 11:54 am

      I also feel that they are “misguided” for pushing politically for one section of the community to continued to be discriminated against. Which is what they are doing. It’s not that they’re just going about their business, giving out blankets, and counselling. No, they’re out there telling 10% of the population that they are ‘sinners’ for loving who they love. Which I think does more harm than good.

    • Kelkel
      June 20, 2012 at 7:13 am

      Misguided? It’s not like they’ve seen an episode of Today Tonight and formed their sexual preferences thusly. Sexuality is a hardwiring of the brain, not a choice, not an opinion. Gay people haven’t received misinformation or poor guidance. You can’t guide a bird to be a fish.

      • June 20, 2012 at 1:16 pm

        Homosexual people may well be ‘hard-wired’ but it has yet to proven that there is a ‘gay’ gene. So as far as The Salvation Army are concerned, homosexual people are misguided, a product of their upbringing, confused ….. (btw, I am not a member of TSA, nor am I homosexual, but I am able to be tolerant and see both sides of the question.)

        “Gay people haven’t received misinformation or poor guidance.” A rather sweeping and generalized statement, wouldn’t you agree? That would be like saying “Salvation Army members have received misinformation and poor guidance.” Either statement could well be quite true, or untrue, of both groups of people.

        And by saying the difference between hetro- and homo-sexuals is a huge as the difference between a bird and a fish, you yourself are marginalizing and compartmentalizing them. Wouldn’t a better comparison be to say “You can’t guide a goose to be a duck.”?

What do you think?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: