Other Letters from PFLAG members and friends Regarding the Salvation Army Reminder Bill Project

Salvation Army Administration:
Thank you for your invitation to "help bring peace and goodwill to men,
women and families who are suffering this holiday season".  Enclosed you
will find a copy of my $50.00 donation to Urban Peak, a shelter for homeless
youth in Denver.  This is one of approximately 20 charities our family
supports through financial contributions and volunteer efforts.  Until the
Salvation Army's discriminatory practices against it's gay, lesbian,
bisexual and transgender (GLBT) employees are changed, we will no longer be
supportive of the Salvation Army in any way.
For several years my son and I volunteered to "person the Salvation Army
kettles" in our local community.  This was one way I had hoped to teach him
to give back to his community and help those in need.  Recently, our teenage
son has come to realize he is gay.  He is still the same wonderful,
intelligent, and caring individual he has always been, as are all of your
GLBT employees. 
In the future, our time and talents will only be shared with
non-discriminatory organizations.  Please remove my name from your direct
advertising mailing list until you come to understand the worth and value of
all human beings as Jesus Christ did.

Most sincerely,
Raeanne C. Frazer, Evergreen, CO

from Linda Campbell, Treasurer of PFLAG-Genesee County November 15, 2001
I have several issues with the editorial claiming that the Salvation Army merits support in light of the organizations discriminatory policy against gay and lesbian employees (Our Views, Salvation Army Merits Support More Than Protest, Fri 11-9-01, p. A8). First, this is an issue of a very large national organization, not just a local agency. Second the Salvation Army receives millions of dollars from the federal government, even though it is a church. I don’t approve of tax dollars supporting organizations that discriminate against gays and lesbians. Third, if the Journal argues that the more important issue is that the organization doesn’t turn away gays and lesbians seeking assistance, is it really understandable that they discriminate against gay and lesbian employees? How is that discrimination different? How can one focus of the discrimination be understandable and the other of no concern? The Triangle Foundation (a Michigan civil rights, advocacy, and anti-violence organization for gays and lesbians) has had reports, in Michigan, that the Salvation Army has discriminated against gays and lesbians seeking assistance. Given these points, and the fact that one of PFLAG’s missions is as an advocacy group working for gay and lesbian civil rights, protesting donations to a national organization that discriminates against gays and lesbians is more than appropriate. And lastly, the call to protest Salvation Army kettles this year is absolutely legitimate. Support other local charities instead.
Linda Campbell

Letter to the editor from Linda Campbell, Treasurer of PFLAG-Genesee County, November 27, 2001
According to the Journal article (“Kettles’ Fake Fives Attract Real Cash” 11-27-01, A3, p.1) the American Family Association (AFA) plans to support the Salvation Army (SA) after a recent bitter falling out. I find the union of these two groups a curious one. Three weeks ago, AFA president Don Wildmon accused the SA of "surrendering to a foe…They have sold their soul for a mess of pottage. …turned their back on their fellow evangelical Christians. And did it for money.” (AFA Action Alert "An Old Friend has Betrayed Us", 11-12-01). The "betrayal" according to the AFA was the SA Western Region's decision to offer domestic partner benefits to employees. AFA President Wildmon, at that time, accused the SA of surrendering their souls for "thirty pieces of silver" (AFA Action Alert 11-12-01). He strongly encouraged AFA members nationwide to withhold financial support because of AFA’s disapproval with SA policy. AFA’s recent condemnation of PFLAG’s campaign to draw attention to SA’s action, is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Now that SA’s national leadership has rescinded the domestic partner policy the AFA and the SA are back in bed together, so to speak. Local AFA rep Gary Glenn is now offering the SA up to $1000, depending on how many PFLAG reminder bills are dropped into SA kettles, to make up the revenue lost by the PFLAG protest. There are two things at issue here: 1. In the recent past, AFA has done what it is now condemning PFLAG for and, 2. The SA's calculated decision to deny equal civil rights to gays and lesbians (many of whom are also Christian) was a discriminatory decision that cannot be denied.
Linda Campbell

 from Linda Campbell, Treasurer of PFLAG-Genesee County
I have learned that the American Family Federation plans to support the Salvation Army after a recent bitter falling out. I find the union of the American Family Association (AFA) and the Salvation Army (SA) a curious one.  Three weeks ago, The AFA accused the SA of "surrendering to a foe…They have sold their soul for a mess of pottage.  …turned their back on their fellow evangelical Christians.  And did it for money…"  according to AFA President Don Wildmon (AFA Action Alert titled "An Old Friend has Betrayed Us", 11-12-01).  The "betrayal" according to the AFA was the SA Western Region's decision to offer domestic partner  (DP) benefits to employees. Part of the logic the SA Western Region used to make their original decision was based on "the dramatic changes in family structure in recent years.  …reflecting a trend that has grown in recent years among Fortune 500 companies, academic institutions, and non-profit organizations" (SA spokesman Col. Philip Needham) -- in other words, reality.  Although the regional decision was published as a difficult and reasoned one, sources external to the SA, like the AFA threatened withdrawal of support (including financial) if the policy stood. AFA President Wildmon, in response to the SA's regional decision to offer DP benefits, accused the SA of surrendering their souls for "thirty pieces of silver" (AFA Action Alert 11-12-01). The external threat combined with internal threats of resignations and loss of congregates applied sufficient pressure for the SA national headquarters to rescind and overrule the policy approved by the Western Region.  The criticism heaped on the SA by the AFA and other extremist groups was scathing, contemptuous and derisive. 
It is interesting that since the SA has made a policy change against providing DP benefits in the Western Region the AFA is back in bed with them, so to speak.  Local AFA rep Gary Glenn is now offering the SA up to $1000, depending on how many PFLAG reminder bills are dropped into SA kettles, to make up the revenue lost by the PFLAG protest.  
 There are two things at issue here..1. how could the AFA treat the SA, another Christian agency, so hatefully over a policy disagreement and,  2. the SA's calculated decision to deny equal civil rights to gays and lesbians (many of whom are also Christian) was a discriminatory decision that can not be denied.

Linda Campbell

from Brenda Wagner, friend of PFLAG
Recent letters to the editor regarding the Salvation Army are extremely disturbing to me.  As I read my eight requests from worthy charitable organizations yesterday (we receive on an average of 6 requests a day), I know how important it is that each of us contribute to the organizations that work to offer better lives to those who are less fortunate for whatever reason. 
I had already decided to stop giving to the Salvation Army before I read of PFLAG's stand.  I strongly believe in the separation of church and state and was appalled to read that the Salvation Army was willing to spend over $100,000 per month (where does that money come from?) to help get through Bush's faith based initiative.  This would have been done in return for protection from local laws that prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation. I wonder why this would happen with our charitable dollars if the organization does not discriminate in employment.  They already have protection when hiring their ministers. 
I continue to read the sad commentary from Salvation Army supporters who "claim" they know the "truth." Their continued efforts to shoot the messenger and question the motives of those who find the Salvation Army's actions no longer worthy of support make me wonder about their "agenda." 
I wonder if the letter writers would indeed not give money to the Salvation Army if they found out that the organization does discriminate.  Concerned Christians will need to give lots of money this year to make up for people like me who will pass the kettles without even dropping a penny. 
Brenda Wagner
Letter to the editor, November 22, 2001, Flint Journal from Ron Riley
In regards to "Army, parents group still disagree" page A3, 11-21-2001 I question rather or not Major Ralph Bukiewicz was correctly quoted when he characterized the claims about discrimination as "slanderous", when in fact he likely meant that the situation is really "scandalous". Three years ago, the Salvation Army publication "The War Cry" attacked church-state separation, stating that the United States was meant to be an officially "Christian nation." In 1987, Pascagoula, Miss., resident Jamie Kellam Dodge was fired from her job as a victims' assistance coordinator at a domestic violence center. The New York Times Magazine reported earlier this year that The Salvation Army reached a settlement with Dodge, saying that although the court record is sealed, Dodge received $1.25 million as compensation for wrongful termination as a result of her religious beliefs. In July, The Washington Post reported that Army officials had been working behind the scenes with top advisors to the Bush administration to ensure that the Army would have the right to discriminate under the faith-based initiative while receiving the government faith-based subsidy. In return, Army officials agreed to give the proposal a high-profile endorsement. An internal Salvation Army document obtained by The Washington Post mentioned a "firm commitment" the Salvation Army had received from the Bush administration to make certain that the organization would not be subjected to state and local laws banning discrimination against gays and lesbians. The document mentioned that the Salvation Army planned to spend in excess of one million dollars on lobbyists to promote the Bush faith-based initiative. It is well documented and leaves no doubt that the Salvation Army has discriminated in the past, and that they are working hard to facilitate such discrimination in the future. More information about this is available at: http://www.au.org/cs01.htm The salvation army HAD been one of our family's favorite charities. But no more. Even more important in my view than discrimination against gays and lesbians is the fact that the Salvation Army has misused over a million of our hard earned donation dollars to try and short circuit separation of church and state. For this sin our family will never support the Salvation Army again. After all, there are far more deserving causes than we have dollars for, so we will have little difficulty finding a deserving home for the money which we had given to the Salvation Army in the past.
Ronald J. Riley 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

PLEASE: Notify Us Of Any Errors Of FACT: ErrorOfFact@PFLAGGC.org
Contact Us - Site Index -