Bloomdido Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Do you think it is acceptable for the Salvation Army to be responsible for activities for children and young people aged six to eighteen when they have a policy that prohibits people joining them unless they 'renounce' their homosexuality (like in the army)? I think the whole thing is creepy. I am also concerned that Big Lottery funded programmes are promoting the Salvation Army activities when it is clear that the organisations discriminate against Gay people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 From your link. - For this reason, and in obedience to the example of Jesus whose compassionate love was all-embracing, Salvationists seek to understand and sensitively to accept and help those of a homosexual disposition and those who express that disposition in sexual acts. Salvationists are opposed to the victimisation of persons on the grounds of sexual orientation and recognise the social and emotional stress and the loneliness borne by many who are homosexual.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 They have the right to their views, the same as lets say, UK LGBT Youth Organisation, stonewall etc (these are just 2 picked at random from google) And as for the army, wow, a couple of mates of mine over in Afghanistan may not be happy if they saw this thread As for my point of view, I think its all down to personal choice, people have the right to join these organisations, or not, as they see fit. I was bought up in a childrens home, where being gay was unheard of, however, it didnt teach me to be "anti-gay", it taught me to accept people for who they are, not what they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karis Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 To be honest, really painfully, brutally honest, I don't care. I'm tired of seeing groups legislate the policy of private companies, or, in fact, anyone. A hotel doesn't want to let gays stay, that's fine; it's their choice. Same with the SA. Although, it's NOT their choice any more. Because the choice, and personal freedom, has been taken away from them with this outrageous finger pointing. The whole thing has been blown completely out of proportion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 They're a private organisation entitled to their view. As long as they're not teaching or encouraging people to be homophobic with anti-gay rhetoric, I don't see a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norbert Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Makes you wonder why they single out Homosexuality when they could equally be having a go at: Women who teach things to men. I Timothy 2:12 Wearing gold or Pearls. I Timothy 2:9 Eating Shellfish or Pork. Leviticus 11:7, 10 Charging interest on loans. Deuteronomy 23:19 Women wearing trousers. Deuteronomy 22:5 Shaving. Leviticus 19:27 Clothes made from mixed fabric. Leviticus 19:19 And so on… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Makes you wonder why they single out Homosexuality when they could equally be having a go at: It's religion, don't expect anything to make any sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 To be honest, really painfully, brutally honest, I don't care. I'm tired of seeing groups legislate the policy of private companies, or, in fact, anyone. A hotel doesn't want to let gays stay, that's fine; it's their choice. Same with the SA. Although, it's NOT their choice any more. Because the choice, and personal freedom, has been taken away from them with this outrageous finger pointing. The whole thing has been blown completely out of proportion. I'm tended to agree, but there is a big difference between a private club with members who choose to join voluntarily, and private businesses that serve the wider public. I think it's absolutely right that we have rules to prevent private companies from discriminating against people because of their colour, sex, disability or sexuality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odin's Wrath Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 The children shouldn't really be there in the first place. Children should not be exposed to religion until they are at least sixteen. Then they can make their own choices and not be brainwashed or conditioned into believing whatever their parents believe. There is no such thing as a "muslim child" "catholic child" "sikh child". Just a child whose had their parents beliefs forced on them and not being able to make their own decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 To be honest, really painfully, brutally honest, I don't care. Along the lines of this and this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.