LGBT News LGBT Parenting a death sentence with Salvation Army

Just..... wow

 

Is this real?

I mean, I already refused to give Salvation Army donations in the past...

 

On the bright side at least the comments weren't that bad. BTW this kind of hatred is typical of religion

 

fundementalist christian roots.

not the same thing, since christ really isnt given any presedence in fundie circles because he was an anti-war, peace loving, soicalist-communist hippie.

 

I haven't given money to the SA in ages.

Todd

 

In before "well, the Salvation Army in my area is real nice and doesn't believe that stuff, so don't give 'em a hard time. We shouldn't hurt everybody else who benefits from their work just because we disagree with them on such a small point as this."

 

That is sickening and ridiculous. Meanwhile those two women in that photo with the sign saying 'No gays allowed' probably went and did each other after that photo was taken.

 

This is horrible! If anyone needs me, I'll be on the Moon...maybe Mars.

 

Salvation Army is a religious organization, so this isn't surprising. Religion is probably the single biggest source of homophobic hatred worldwide.

 

Like I always tell people...I love God but I HATE organised religion!

 

I always wonder if religion is the source of sexual prejudices or it's used as an excuse by people who are too cowardly to admit that they hate gays/bisexuals/etc (or things they generally don't understand). Maybe it's both...

 

Yay, so when someone asks "Why won't you give money to the Salvation Army" my response will be "Because I'm not going to be giving money to an organization that is advocating my death; It's like committing suicide, but indirectly"

How nice...

 

This bothers me. Since it`s the only charity organization in Norway that isn`t corrupt, and I like to give to charity, I`ve been giving these people money for years! Not because I`m religious, but because the money actually is spent on a lot of good projects, feeding children, etc. Now, that won`t be an option anymore, and I am extremely disappointed in them. One thing is opposing, another thing is actually stating something this horrible! If they were against my sexuality, but fed starving children, I would still give them money. But is just too awful. There went my charity work

I can`t express how disappointed I am at their entire organization right now.

 

The Salvation Army is also just about as awful in New Zealand - or at least they used to be. I believe they've 'officially' apologised for how they acted in the '80s, but I still wouldn't trust them.

 

I will say that while I have listened to the broadcast (I do not think it directly referred to gay parents?) and I did not have such a strong reaction to it. I'm possibly hugely biased though: https://soundcloud.com/johnmbecker/salvation-army-major-lgbt

He seems to make it clear his position is in regards to membership to the Salvation Army, which I have no problem with. People have a choice to be a member or not, and in the beginning he was very clear that he was referring to people who want to be full members of the Salvation Army. As far as I'm aware he was attempting to convey that full membership would require a lot of discussion regarding the issue and was finding it very difficult as he was being very honest; it is part of Christianity, it's in the Bible, it forms part of the scripture that forms part of their belief.

Ha. Well, I guess I'm that person.

The Salvationists in the UK have always explained it to me that they're referring to a spiritual death and that when taken in context the passage refers to everything they view as a sin. As they believe human beings are ultimately responsible for how they behave they feel orientation should not contradict the way in which they believe God has called those who believe in Him to act.

It's a huge time of transition for the Salvation Army, and again as far as I am aware they are expected to not refuse to help people due to their sexual orientation and it is only something they should judge if someone wishes to become a Salvationist and then that is in line with their teachings; that if you are homosexual and wish to become a Salvationist you must read the manual and understand that they believe to act on your homosexuality would be committing spiritual death. They are a religious organisation, they have very strong beliefs and views but there is also a belief that there is no scriptural basis for active discrimination that impairs life. They do, naturally, have a strong stance when it comes to gay marriage as they follow the typical Christian view that marriage, as opposed to civil partnership, is defined through the New Testament. As far as I am aware they (at least the UK Salvationists I've met) are all for civil partnerships being equal to marriage, but are still of the position that marriage should be as it is defined through the Bible.

There has been a great blurring of sin and social issues when it comes to any religious organisation, and that includes the Salvation Army. What they, like many, have far too frequently done is take their position of homosexuality as a sin (which I have no issue with) and then forcing the sin stance onto social issues which should have nothing to do with that, especially within the Salvation Army where the core objective is to help those others will not. However the muddied waters between sin and social issues are starting to be questioned to; what a lot of the younger generation are questioning is whether it should be classed as a sin at all. The handbook is a product of its time, of teachings, and actually I'd hesitate to have it reworded as I think it's important to remember how things once were, if only to mark the progress between then and now.

What we're seeing now is a greater wave of young people within the Salvation Army who have started making connections between previous positions on being left-handed and homosexuality; you cannot help either, being left-handed or homosexual does not make you a bad person, and once the doors are opened to see people as having natural variations rather than seeing that variation as willful sin you open your door to good people excluded for little more than what may all have been a misunderstanding of terminology, meaning and context. What many are starting to point out is that they are focusing on the wrong thing, that the focus should not be on preventing gay marriage but acknowledging natural variations in human sexuality and understanding the difference between what would be viewed as willful sin and simply being who God intended you to be.

I think the fact that I have seen the transition first hand, and I have seen the careful consideration of why we concentrate on a few select verses when there are many hundreds condemning many more things that no Christians seem to be making much of a fuss about. There is a greater shift towards taking the verses traditionally used to condemn homosexuality in their full context, seeking to understand them without the prejudice of before and with an understanding of the world as it was then. As with any transitional phase it's not going to change in a year, maybe even 10 years, in fact it may take a very long time to phase out the old views and for those who believe that there should be a serious reconsideration of how Salvationists have approached (and continue to approach) LGBTQ issues.

Do I think the entire Salvation Army is "real nice"? No. I do not. Do I think you should donate just because they help a few people? Not at all. I think it's important to consider whether or not you can justify donating to them and express that free will appropriately. I donate my time and money to the local group because I know where the money goes and see the good it does, and after listening to the broadcast in full I am not dissuaded from continuing that. Each to their own decision.