Have you ever asked a simple question only to find you’d
opened a can of worms? That’s exactly
what happened when looking for answers on why the Salvation Army had cratered
to a law suit filed against them in New
York in which they ‘voluntarily’ gave up $ 450,000 to
make their legal issues go away.
The Magna Charta was signed ‘voluntarily’ as well; one of
those words which apparently means different things depending on the urgency or
force used to obtain compliance; but I’m getting off track…
According to an A/P story
this past week:
“The settlement announced by the
New York Civil Liberties Union calls for the Salvation Army to notify all
current and future employees of its government-funded social service programs
that it doesn’t discriminate based on religious belief. The requirement applies
only to workers in New York.
The notification would also tell
employees they are expected to follow professional practices in their work
without regard to the organization’s religious practices.”
When most folks think of the Salvation Army they picture the
little red kettle in front of a department stores, an opportunity to drop spare
change to help some poor soul regain lost dignity; but there’s more to this
benevolent Christian society…a lot more.
Bill Federer’s American Minute records the formation of the Salvation Army and its spreading across the Atlantic:
“Originally named the Christian
Mission, the Salvation Army conducted meetings among the poor in London’s East End slums.
Adopting uniforms and a semi-military system of leadership, the Salvation Army ministered to the poor, drunk and outcast, while fighting sex-trafficking and teenage prostitution.”
Adopting uniforms and a semi-military system of leadership, the Salvation Army ministered to the poor, drunk and outcast, while fighting sex-trafficking and teenage prostitution.”
Somewhere along the way the organization grew to the point
where it became necessary to follow local, state and federal rules and laws
which govern tax free ventures such as churches and other benevolent
institutions.
While going through the many and varied accounts of how the
Salvation Army conducts business here in these United States of America a few
interesting statements seemed at odds.
For instance, the official webpage for the Lincoln, Nebraska branch of the Salvation Army states:
“All funds donated to The Salvation
Army in Lincoln
are used by The Salvation Army, or agencies of which it is a member. The
Salvation Army connects your donation directly to the point of most urgent
need. It is not funded with any federal, state or city tax dollars.”
Other pubic statements found on the internet indicate that “82
cents of every dollar spent” in donations handed over to the Salvation Army is
spent on those services for which they were intended while the remaining money is
for standard business expenses.
This tends to validate the Salvation Army as a truly
benevolent privately funded organization; that is until some other items of
interest are brought to light.
“Nongovernment donors — including
holiday shoppers stuffing bills into the kettles — provide the greatest share
of funds nationwide: $1.58 billion in 2009, out of total revenues of $2.86
billion.”
That’s $ 1.28 billion in taxpayer funded donations to the
Salvation Army, almost half of the Salvation Army’s income.
It matters not, at least to me, how much money the Salvation
Army takes in from private donations or how large their holdings come to,
spacious buildings to conduct business or residential housing for their senior
administrators; however, it matters considerably when public funds are used to
support even the most virtuous philanthropic undertaking.
In my youth I grew up watching tales of Davy Crockett, “King
of the wild frontier”, as the tune rolls in memory. Every kid wanted a genuine coon skin cap and
we’d wrestle one another to prove we were up to the challenge; but Crockett was
also known as a statesman, elected to represent the will of his
constituents.
The following is an excerpt from Davy Crockett’s thoughts
regarding the use of public money.
“I have as much respect for the
memory of the deceased and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living as
any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our
sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the
balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress
has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon
this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals to give away as much of
our own money as we please in charity, but as members of Congress we have no
right to so appropriate a dollar of the public money.”
My question to Congress, “Why is taxpayer money being spent
to support the Salvation Army or, for that matter, any welfare entitlement
programs”? Davy Crockett had it nailed;
Congress has no authority to spend taxpayer money on entitlements regardless of
their good intentions, such discretionary spending is for individuals and the
private sector.
I could also ask why millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars
was spent to help restore churches, temples and even Muslim mosques throughout the world. So much
for separation of church and state; or is that even part of the discussion when
throwing money down the toilet?
While attempting to mollify the public the U.S. State
Department in an official statement said that, “…the money given to the Cairo mosque was “part of”
a $770 million program to fix the city’s sewer system.” (You’re pulling my leg, they really said
that?)
So it’s okay to give $770 million U.S. taxpayer dollars to a
foreign country to fix their sewer system and provide a safer environment for
those wishing to follow Islam and their hatred of all Westerners and infidels;
but it’s not okay for a Christian organization to help the down trodden, the
wretches in our own culture, at least not with tax money that could be sent
over seas to help our enemies.…how silly of me to even bring up the
subject.
At one time there was a saying, “Charity begins at home”;
but apparently that doesn’t apply to Christian charities attempting to follow
the myriad of laws and restrictions placed on them by Congress in order to
placate the ACLU and Atheists among us.
I’ll bet the farm that had the name of the organization been
changed from the Salvation Army to Muslim Brotherhood Outreach then nothing,
and I mean nothing would have ever been said or done. Diversification and tolerance are only words to
be used in accomplishing the agenda of progressives, the godless intent on
destroying America
and our Christian culture.
This article has been cross posted to
The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The
Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.