SCREW the Salvation Army. I'm so sick of this hateful

[cboy4]

"charity."

We all know that they loathe honest and decent gay people and want nothing to do with them.

But now there's this little gem, which I know not everybody has heard about:

<...The Salvation Army, which has an English-only policy, had given the women, and all employees, a year to learn English. The two, whose job was to sort clothes, refused. They were fired...>

Big effing deal. They work (or shall I say, worked) for the Salvation Army sorting clothes. They were not goddam Air Traffic Controllers.

This is one of the most un-Christian charities in America.

And I'd rather throw my spare change down a storm drain, than hand it over to one of those bell ringers (people I hold no animosity toward, BTW).

I understand the SA helps the poor, but I'm sorry. Their policies are cruel and despicable.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119621139528705983.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

English-Only Showdown
By JOHN FUND
November 28, 2007; Page A23

Should the Salvation Army be able to require its employees to speak English? You wouldn't think that's controversial. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is holding up a $53 billion appropriations bill funding the FBI, NASA and Justice Department solely to block an attached amendment, passed by both the Senate and House, that protects the charity and other employers from federal lawsuits over their English-only policies.

<snip>

But hardball politics practiced by ethnic grievance lobbies is driving assimilation into the dustbin of history. The House Hispanic Caucus withheld its votes from a key bill granting relief on the Alternative Minimum Tax until Ms. Pelosi promised to kill the Salvation Army relief amendment.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. They want everyone to speak english.

Just like Jesus.

[Clark2008]

3. Actually, I'm finding it hard to hate them.

They gave them a year to learn and, to be quite honest, it's better for immigrants to learn English because it makes them more marketable as job applicants (in other words, they won't have to sort clothes forever).

Both my ex and my current husband are immigrants. Granted, current hubby was born to American parents and never had to worry about learning English, ex-hubby learned it well before even coming here and thinks everyone else should, too.

:shrug:

But the Jesus thing was funny. :)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. We all know how important it is to speak english when sorting clothes.

Salvation Army wasted all that time with that years long Clothes Sorting Training Program.

:eyes:

[madeline_con]

261. Yeah, you might slip and say "pantalones"!

:eyes:

[BushOut06]

8. It's a racist policy at worst, misguided at best

Their position doesn't require them to interact with the public. Why should they, or anyone else, be forced to learn English?

People need to accept that this is a multicultural society.

[Bobbieo]

12. I think it is to the immigant's advantage to learn English for his/herown

safety and welfare. I speak Spanish and French but not everyone is as liberal as you and I, Bushout.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

13. I think it's to your advantage to go and learn Chinese.

Why don't you go do that? I'll give you a year.

[Bobbieo]

16. That might not be a bad idea seeing the way Bush has the world in such a mess.

[Bobbieo]

20. Bornagain - Don;'t think that is a bad idea seeing the way Bush is running the world.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. Then by all means, go for it.

Learn Chinese in a year, or voluntarily quit your job.

[Bobbieo]

29. Born again - Grow up ,man and get a life!!! I've been retired for 20 years

now and just may take up Chinese as a new hobby.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

33. Oh, what, dish it out and can't take it?

:nopity:

[BestCenter]

173. Oh noes!

I already know Mandarin! Whatever shall I do?

[me b zola]

182. Learn Cantonese

:D

[BestCenter]

188. Nah, it's okay.

I'd rather learn Hindi or possibly Punjabi.

[Henryman]

59. Bornaginhooligan, you made me laugh in my cube! n/t

[leftynyc]

203. Don't you think that if you lived in China

it would be a good idea to learn the language? Honestly, I don't understand this issue at all. All four of my grandparents came over from Russia and the first thing they did was to get a job, go to school and learn English. Why is it so fucking hard to understand that their lives will be better for it? What if there is an emergency and instructions are being given? Should we just expect all emergency personnel to be multi-lingual?

[cboy4]

21. They sort clothes for a charity!!

I'm very certain they speak enough English to get by.

The Salvation Army would rather just be difficult and intolerant.

[havocmom]

239. OT, but anybody know if the clothes were made in the US ?

:evilgrin:

Salvation Army will take clothes from anywhere, but evidently, have problems with people from other places. You're right, they are just being difficult and intolerant.

[BushOut06]

24. I have no problem encouraging people to learn English

But when you go and make it a requirement, that's where I have a problem with it. Especially if their job doesn't require them to interact with the public!

[Bobbieo]

34. I'm not trying to make it a requirement. It just might save a person;s life

to be able to speak English. Hispanics are not the only imiigrants here.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. Huh? Save a life?

What're they going to do? Direct an emergency tracheotomy over the phone?

[proud2BlibKansan]

65. While sorting clothes!

:rofl:

[Javaman]

244. While sorting clothes...

Maria, ever vigilant for the threat of an emergency, noticed her life long friend, Rosa, choking after inhaling some dryer lint!

Maria burst into action. Shouting orders and directions to all her co workers who were standing around the quickly blue-ing Rosa, but alas,because of Maria's inability to learn English, her alerts fell upon deaf ears.

Rosa, cradled in Maria's arms, her hands around her throat, giving the international signal for choking which was totally ignored by her english speaking fellow employees, died quietly in Maria's arms.

Maria, distraught, screams with anguish at the sky in Spanish, "why!!!!".

The english speaking employees look around confused, shrug their shoulders and go back to sorting the laundry, leaving Maria, asking the immortal question of herself, "why didn't I learn English!!!!".

ergo: why didn't the america employees learn spanish? ;)

[BushOut06]

40. The OP is about making it a requirement

n/t

[michreject]

44. They interact with their supervisor

Somebody has to give them assignments.

[BushOut06]

48. In that case, maybe we should just require EVERYONE to learn English

Do you realize just how many people would lose their jobs if every business owner required their employees to learn English? That would be real nice, wouldn't it? :sarcasm:

[michreject]

50. I agree 100%

In that case, maybe we should just require EVERYONE to learn English

Especially if you live and work here.

[BushOut06]

55. I was being sarcastic

So, what should be the penalty if you don't speak English?

Should you lose your right to have a job? Should you be denied assistance? Should hospitals be allowed to refuse treatment if you can't communicate with them?

Should the government have the right to deport you for not learning English in a given time period?

[michreject]

62. What does all of this have to do

with an employer requiring their employee's to speak english?

Answer, nothing.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

56. Kwey wichkewan!

Mino kijigan ogojik.

[Mr_Monday]

22. It's not racist, just discriminatory on the basis of language.

People don't want to live in a multilingual society.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. You think they'd do this to a European immigrant?

I doubt it.

[Thothmes]

198. Its only racist if they did not require Polish immigrants to learn English

[DangerDave921]

200. Not racist at all

You use the term "racist" far too loosely. The SA is not discriminating on the basis of race. It is discriminating on the basis of language skills. That, by definition, is not racism. Did you read anywhere that SA is firing people based on their race? Of course not.

As a private business owner, one is well within his or her rights to specify that an employee must be able to speak English. It is so basic that I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with that. I own a small business myself. And you're telling me I can't require that my employees speak English as a condition of employment?

[cboy4]

11. Do you like the part about how they refuse to hire

gay people as well?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. maybe he thinks it's to people's advantage to be straight.

[cboy4]

23. Exactly. For their "safety and welfare."

:eyes:

[BushOut06]

42. In a right-wing Christian's view, that would be correct

They would want gay people to become straight for their own safety. To protect themselves from bigoted assholes, as well as the fiery pits of hell. :sarcasm:

[cboy4]

46. lol. That's koo-koo enough to be true.

:crazy:

[FreeState]

70. Gay people cant fold clothes - didn't you know? n/t :)

[cboy4]

139. I know ha? :) Why there's hardly any gay people at

all in retail. lol

[Chulanowa]

68. Maybe they like sorting clothes.

Thing is, we don't often appreciate how difficult it can be to learn English. Our language is a mongrel of the Romantic and Germanic language families. English has no rhythm, it has thirty different words for any conceivable concept, context radically alters the meaning of many of them... Honestly all English lacks to become the most fucked-up language ever are tonal inflections and tongue clicks.

A year, huh, to learn one of the world's most complex languages, while no doubt keeping these people on long hours, while odds are htey have kids at home and possibly a second job.

It must just be damn difficult finding any bilingual people at all to hire for a personnel go-between, huh?

[Maine-ah]

209. I think most high schools in the US require a student to take

a certain amount of years of a foreign language. I learned quite a bit of french in one school year. I don't understand why people coming to live in the US shouldn't be required to learn english. Personally, I'd find it very difficult to try to instruct someone who only spoke their own language, on how to do their job, or any other matters pertaining to their employment.

[noamnety]

72. you are very generous in ascribing motives to them.

I, on the other hand, am finding it hard to believe they fired the employees to ensure they had the best possible job opportunities.

[Bjorn Against]

76. Have you ever tried learning a new language in one year?

It is much easier said than done. Sure they might be better off if they did learn English, but what resources is the Salvation Army providing them to learn the language? Do they get free access to ESL classes? Do they get assistance at all? Or are they just on their own? The right-wing loves to demand everyone learn English instantly upon arrival in this country, but they are totally opposed to giving them any sort of resources to do so.

[LittleClarkie]

189. Hrr?

Wouldn't that be Aramaic?

[dbackjon]

2. Salvation Army is a misnomer

Because the policies of it are straight from hell.

Fuck them, and their bigotted policies.

[JitterbugPerfume]

4. I tell them WHY

I don't give them money.

[ThomCat]

10. Me too. But I doubt the people in their main office

hear or care.

[JitterbugPerfume]

18. I know

but at least the bell ringer might be enlightened

[Richard Steele]

5. Recommended. There's a lot to dislike about the Salvation Army.

And a lot of better places to send charitable donations.

[hfojvt]

107. name some

and one of them had better not be 2nd harvest.

[Richard Steele]

172. Something you want to say? Please, by all means, just say it. nm

[hfojvt]

190. alright, I will say it

Because Truman didn't have the guts to let McArthur go in there and blow the sh*t out of them.

But I am paraphrasing "Back to School".

I might say a couple of things. I have volunteered something like 100 hours with the Salvation Army. So I hate to think I have wasted my time. Many people put money in the kettle and claim that the Salvation Army has helped them in the past. I went to Osawatomie a couple of times after their floods this summer and the SA was helping there.

Personally I have not been impressed with 2nd Harvest. I gave them $15 last year as part of DU's Christmas fund drive. Since then I have gotten a letter a month asking for more donation. It feels like they took at least half of the $15 I gave them and used it to but envelopes, letters, and stamps to mail back to me asking for more money. Sure, if I gave more, that percentage would go down. But at $11,000 a year, I am not totally made of money, and seeing how the first $15 was spent does not inspire me to give more. Plus, I read that their CEO makes beacoup bucks.

Mainly though, I thought perhaps you could back up your assertion with some examples.

[Richard Steele]

191. So, basically, you are saying that you are a CONSERVATIVE who is annoyed by real DEM charities.

That sound you hear is ten thousand DUers nodding in unison.

[hfojvt]

223. you are not making sense

Nobody who knows me here will deny that I have annoyingly conservative opinions, but to volunteer for an organisation that helps the poor and needy and to volunteer to assist flood victims does not seem like a sign of conservatism. The communist Howard Fast had nothing but praise for the Salvation Army in his autobiography "Being Red".

And being annoyed at an organisation that seems to spend my donation on postage instead of feeding the hungry and on a huge CEO salary does not seem like evidence of conservatism either. Unless "Salvation Army bad, Second Harvest good" has become some sort of progressive dogma that is not supposed to be challenged by facts. If so, I need to get these memos. Especially since I am communications chair for the local Democratic party at least until I resign in March after Hillary wraps up the nomination.

Finally, my opening line was a humorous intro, not a sirius statement. You said "then say it" so I responded first with Rodney Dangerfield's response when Sam Kineson was screaming at him "say it, say it, say it!" in the movie "Back to School". So I am not sure what you are doing unless your purpose is to bait a real DUer and to keep a Salvation Army bashing thread kicked.

[LostinVA]

231. 10,001

[Richard Steele]

195. So you wish we had NUKED Korea in 1952, do ya? Tell us REAL DUers again: why are you here?

[mitchtv]

7. Not one red cent

they just built a big ugly church across the street from me. I planted swveral big trees to protect our line of vision. They bring to mind an old saying: "Beware of false prophets"

[cboy4]

14. You planted several big trees to protect your line of

vision.

hahaha That's great.

I should start wearing those orange foam things in my ears when I walk out of stores to protect my sense of hearing from those bell ringers. lol

[ChairmanAgnostic]

9. slight change in order

they are one of the most uncharitable CHRISTIAN charities in America

[Mr_Monday]

31. Wow, you seem really intolerant.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

47. look at it from the perspective of the needy.

first, they are forced to follow arbitrary rules
then, they are forced to pray to a god chosen by some humans based on a badly translated collection of works that were rewritten on several occasions to reflect the political necessities of their times (Nicea, Trent, and several smaller events)
third, they must praise that god and agree that it is all powerful

and only THEN do they get to eat, sleep, receive clothing.

I'd say that was less than charitable. More like a religious based bribe. with pain, suffering, hunger and extreme cold as the other choice.

and now on top of that, you must learn a language that a small percentage of the earth speaks fluently, even in the States. that is charity?

and you dare call me intolerant?

[Mr_Monday]

51. Yes, I do dare. nt

[ChairmanAgnostic]

53. thanks. I needed comic relief.

lawdy lawdy, lawdy.

any mere bag of mostly water, DNA and Stem cells who thinks that they are so important that their imaginary friend in the sky knows everything, yet still demands from that particular bag of mostly water, DNA and stem cells, prayer and tithing to selected, self-promoted humans, AND requires them to speak in certain tongues - I guess that is what faith is all about. Glad I don't have that taint.

What a strange world in which we live. Science is bad. Faith must replace it. English must be spoken before "charity" or work is available. that is so

-american-christian-

when you think about it.

[RebelSansCause]

176. yay for the FSM

:hi:

[cboy4]

57. That's interesting. You accusing someone of pointing

intolerance and being intolerant.

Hooooo-K

[Mr_Monday]

58. Thus the problem with tolerance (in this context) nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. It's the one thing Jesus hated most.

:spray:

[mitchtv]

164. In defense of anti faschits

WE don't tolerate bigotry around here. If you last in DU you will find out

[porphyrian]

17. Give to Goodwill instead. They're much better, and not a religious recruiting front. -n/t

[pegleg]

19. The good they do far outweighs any negatives.

I know many people who would be much worse off without them. I agree with their policies. I was let go from a human service job because I wasn't bilingual.

[cboy4]

26. Wow, you seem very intolerant.

I'm sure Joe Biden would be very disappointed to hear you're supporting him.

[pegleg]

32. I am very intolerant when it comes at the price of American jobs

besides I don't think Joe would take the chance of badmouthing the Salvation Army.

[cboy4]

36. Yea, because these two women making minimum

wage at the Salvation Army are responsible crushing the hopes of other Americans who want to sort clothes at a fricken charity.

But at least you admit you're intolerant.

Would you admit you're a bigot as well?

[cboy4]

61. *********CRICKETS*********

LOL

[Mr_Monday]

64. Yes everyone who disagrees with you is a racist and bigot.

Now, can we actually have some discussion?

[cboy4]

147. I never called anyone a racist. I used the word "bigot."

And yes, people who embrace discrimination based on sexual orientation and national origin are bigots.

Anything else?

[Mr_Monday]

179. I just was making an observation on you rhetoric..

I just thought you seemed a bit overly aggressive, constantly throwing those words out at your those who disagree with you in order to shut them down rather than discuss with them.

[cboy4]

183. How do I have the power to shut anyone down? People

are free to say anything they want to me.

But don't put words in my mouth, alright?

That's a serious charge implying that I've accused people of being racist.

I have not.

I've told some people they are bigots or intolerant for supporting the Salvation Army's bigoted policies.

That may sound aggressive to you, but sometimes the truth hurts.

[Mr_Monday]

187. Whoops, forgot to apologize for my mistake.

Charging you with throwing "racist" around carelessly, and by carelessly, I mean not at all. My bad!

[blogslut]

30. Sorry you were let go

However, I see no wrong in requiring a human services employee to be bilingual.

[treestar]

37. How many truly bilingual people are going to line up for that job?

They can do better if they are bilingual - they would not be sorting clothes for the Salvation Army.

[blogslut]

45. I was talking about the human services job

However, sorting clothes is good, honest work and I hope you aren't condemning people who do menial tasks for a living.

My questions to you are, at the salary these workers get paid by the Salvation Army, do you think they can afford English lessons? Do you think the Salvation Army intends to pay for English lessons? Don't you think that working with English speaking people is an effective way to learn English?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

39. Are you sure that was the reason?

Because I can think of other reasons.

[blondeatlast]

87. Human services? I'd say they were right to let you go.

In my city, bilingual (at least) is a basic requirement for public contact positions--and rightly so.

Poor you. :nopity:

[knitter4democracy]

28. I knew a gal at college who grew up in that church.

First of all, it is a church. All that stuff they do is part of the church and used to evangelize. Her dad was pretty high up, but when he started questioning some things, they were all kicked out of the church. Just like that. She was more than a little bitter about it and said not to trust them and how they spend the money.

So, I don't give them a whole lot. I give to other groups.

[IndianaJones]

38. repent brother cboy. nt

[cboy4]

43. I'll repent as a dump all of my change down the storm

drain.

[IndianaJones]

49. dude...you know you don't carry cash....you're all about the card. nt.

[cboy4]

54. Damn you! nt.

[Warpy]

41. I'll continue to give to Aunt Sally's

Yes, they're religious and prigs and all the worst of it. However, my dad said they were the best thing that happened to him in a military hospital in WWII and I know one family personally that were pulled out of a migrant camp and put onto their feet by that organization, and they're certainly not the only family.

No, I don't like what they preach and I don't like a lot of their restrictions. However, the good they do outweighs the bad. Requiring their Spanish speaking workers to attend English classes in the US is a good thing, really. Even if they're linguistic blockheads like so many of us are, it will increase their ability to understand English even if they can't speak it and that will be of great value to them in coping with a majority English speaking country.

It would be instructive to know why the two workers refused the classes.

In any case, they're not the only charity I contribute to. I do contribute to them because I know what they've done for me and mine and want them to continue to do good works for the people they approve of. My other charities take care of the people they don't approve of.

[laylah]

52. However,

they will harbor and move around, KNOWN child molesters. What is up with THAT?

http://www.poynter.org/article_feedback/article_feedback_list.asp?id=37646
http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/089/RipOff0089639.htm

And other suspected/known organizations
http://www.kosnoff.com/CM/Custom/TOCPracticeAreaDescriptions.asp

[Chovexani]

63. Whatta bunch of pendejos. (n/t)

[PeaceNikki]

66. I know someone who was homeless and taken in by them when he had nowhere to go.

Drug addicted and on the streets without a pot to piss in. They offered him shelter, food and education with no expectations. None. He didn't have to praise Jesus or recruit or anything of the sort.

Now, I completely understand taking issue with their policies and I do as well. I agree, on paper they suck in that regard. However, I have not heard any real-life anecdotal evidence of them turning someone in need away ever because of their religious affiliation, sexual preference or any other reason at all. In addition, of the "major" charities, I don't think they have execs making "United Way" kind of salaries. Their annual report states that 83 percent of donations goes directly to services, not expenses. That's a pretty respectable number.

Are they perfect? Hell no. Do a lot of their policies suck? Hell yes. Do they help people? Yes, yes they do. No, that doesn't give them a "pass" and yes, we should pressure them to change that... but at the same time they do help people. A lot of people and I can't and won't throw my change down a storm drain as you suggested if the choice is between that and helping people in need. Ever.

[cboy4]

78. I hear what you were saying. They so help people in need

(just don't tell them your gay).

And keep in mind, I was being slightly dramatic when I said I'd throw my change down the drain.

I wouldn't really. I'd put it in my pocket, and give it to one of the local food banks, or a different charity that chooses not to discriminate.

[PeaceNikki]

101. I have never heard of them turning anyone in need away due to sexual preference.

Ever.

Salvation Army services are available to all people regardless of their sexual orientation.

In addition, I think the blame on the anti-gay hiring policies lies more on our current administration's "faith-based" initiatives than with the organization.

http://www.gayglobe.us/salvationarmy-gays-canada.html

While the Salvation Army and other religious groups try to avoid gay rights laws in the United States, many of the same organizations, including the Salvation Army, work within Canada's extensive human rights codes.

In Toronto, the Salvation Army operates two hospitals, Scarborough Grace, a general care center, and Toronto Grace, a geriatric center. Both receive government funding and neither has asked for exemptions from Ontario's Human Rights Code, which protects gays and lesbians in the workplace.

The hospitals, and others like them across Canada, are also bound by same-sex partnership laws regarding pensions and other benefits laws enacted by state and national levels of government.

[Habibi]

160. Yes.

You're right on. SA was pretty much the only game in town in the first weeks after Katrina, from what I've heard. They get their asses out there and spoon up soup and tend to the sick and take in the homeless. I don't like some of their policies. My best friend works for them and she doesn't like some of their policies, either. But they do the right thing a lot of the time.

(And they are extremely good to her as an employee.)

[nadine_mn]

67. Its hard for me to see this in black and white

The policy pisses me off...

But when I worked with victims of domestic violence the Salvation Army was the only place that helped with rent, clothing and furniture (no questions asked) they have helped so many women and children move on with their lives - violence-free.

They also have helped pay utility bills for low-income people at risk for having them shut-off and provide much needed help.

So they have done bad and they have done good - I don't think the good absolves them from this crap, but because of the good they have done (and there is no other charity that has stepped up to the plate in these areas) I will still donate and bring cocoa to the bell ringers

[PeaceNikki]

69. I agree. See my post above.

I've also help serve meals at our local chapter. I've seen the vets and the abused women and children that benefit from the good that they do.

It makes it really hard for me to thumb my nose in defiance at them for their policies with which I don't agree. I agree that there are a lot of times when nobody else steps up to the plate to help these folks. And, for that, I will still support them.

I will still help them when and where I can. I can't shun an organization when I have touched and tasted some of the amazing work that they do.

[eagler]

71. For all the good I've seen them do I can forgive any shortcomings.

The SA has been a life saver for untold millions.

[cboy4]

93. Oh I see, as long as they help people, sky's the limit

on discrimination.

You're obviously not a minority.

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cboy4]

201. Well if you are indeed a minority, you're not very

bright.

[eagler]

220. So now you're saying minorities are not very bright?

[cboy4]

221. Why would I say minorities are not very bright, considering

I'm a minority?

I was referring to you. And you alone in this instance.

[eagler]

222. Well then forgodsakes make yourself clear.

You insinuated that because I'm a minority, I'm not very bright. And yes I do sympathize with you although not with your summation of the Salvation Army.

[LostinVA]

236. That is not what he said at all -- good grief

[eagler]

241. Relax. I'm playing around.

[LostinVA]

235. Oh brother

[AngryOldDem]

232. Then donate your time and money to someplace else.

We get it. We do. You don't like SA. Duly noted.

I work at another charitable organzation and I know for a fact that many of our clients have been helped enormously by SA, especially its Booth House, which is a transitional housing program for homeless men. A lot of these men are now productive, hard-working, good citizens; many (including the men themselves) would have written them off years ago as lost causes had it not been for the SA. We work in partnership with the SA, and I guess am just one more hate-filled stooge who appreciates the work they do for the needy and homeless in my city. (This is especially true now more than ever, since the number of needy/homeless has literally skyrocketed over the past year.)

There is hardly anything or anybody whose opinions/policies/etc. I agree with 100% of the time, and that includes the organization I work for. That's just the way it is. But to make blanket statements about an organization, as well as judgments of the people who support it despite our difficulties with some of its policies, is just nonproductive and inflammatory, and ultimately, unnecessary.

Go spend your money elsewhere, please. If it will make you feel better, go up to a bell-ringer and let loose on him or her. Whatever.

[Spirit of 34]

73. One of the earliest activities of the SA in this country was union-busting

They would send their bands to drown out union speeches, soapboxing, and picket line chants/songs.

[Flabbergasted]

74. I am eternally grateful to the Salvation Army for letting me and my wife get a shower free of charge

for about 8 months, 3 times a week.


No ones perfect.

[JVS]

75. If you don't like their policies, start your own charity.

[Bjorn Against]

80. Or don't give them money and speak out against their discriminatory policies

There are many other good charities out there, I used to give the bellringers my spare change but until they stop their homophobia and xenophobia they don't get another cent from me. The Salvation Army is not the only charity there is, not everyone needs to start their own charity when there are plenty of good ones that don't discriminate.

[cboy4]

83. I'd rather dump money down a storm drain next to their

little red kettle, than start my own charity.

I'm too busy working to protect the civil liberties of minorities.

[MUSTANG_2004]

77. I think they're a good charity

I will continue to support them, even if I don't agree with the completely (I'm not a Christian, so not agreeing with them is a given).

On this particular situation, I don't see that its a terrible thing to require employees to learn English and giving them a year to do so certainly seems more than fair.

[cboy4]

79. If you consider a charity that discriminates for

more than just language requirements "good," that's certainly up to you.

However, I think there are plenty of other local charitable organizations that are better choices.

[MUSTANG_2004]

105. No charity is perfect

If I have to agree with an organization completely, I wouldn't give money to any of them.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

121. Plenty of charities aren't hate groups.

Bigotry is not a minor mistake.

[MUSTANG_2004]

124. Sheesh. They're not a hate group. /nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

127. They hate homosexuals.

And now, apparently, non-english speakers.

[MUSTANG_2004]

157. They don't want to hire homosexuals

because they think homosexuality is wrong and against the religion they practice. They don't discriminate at all when providing assistance to people.

Not the same thing as hatred.

[bullwinkle428]

162. So that's not hate? Good luck with that!

:eyes:

[MUSTANG_2004]

206. You're watering real hatred down.

And diminishing what hatred is.

Look, as an employer who has a gay male working for me, I can say that I think the SA policy is misguided and wrong. Their religious beliefs are that homosexuality is wrong, and they apparently refuse to hire anyone who actively practices it. Now, refusing to hire someone for such a reason could be classified as intolerant, but the word "hate" is far stronger and, IMO, not merited here.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

167. So would it be cool for them to not hire african americans?

You know, if they said it was against their religion?

[MUSTANG_2004]

207. No. /nt

[LostinVA]

225. What's the difference?

[MUSTANG_2004]

229. Not sure what you mean

I don't think it is right to fire someone for being gay, and I'm not sure why you think I do.

[LostinVA]

224. I've been FIRED for being gay and you're telling me it's okay for companies to do that?

I think you took a right turn somewhere.

[MUSTANG_2004]

228. I never said it was ok. /nt

[cboy4]

156. No, but I think the Salvation Army is one of the more

egregious organizations with their discrimination policies.

[Mr_Monday]

181. I think you are placing to much store in politics and not enough in Charity.

Yes its discriminatory, but they do help people. They are not an evil organization hell bent on the destruction of society as we know, but some "nice" people who have weird (crazy fundie) beliefs.

[BushOut06]

197. There are plenty of charities that don't discriminate!

What's so hard to understand about that? And even if Salvation Army was the ONLY private charity in existence, I still wouldn't give them a single penny.

[Bjorn Against]

82. Have you ever tried learning a new language in a year?

If you did you might find it is not as easy as you might like to believe. Especially when you don't have any resources to help you. The right-wing is more than willing to demand everyone learns English, but they are not so willing to provide free access to classes that would allow people to learn English. People don't just learn a language in one year, especially when they don't have educational resources.

[cboy4]

86. Not only a new language in a year, but English . .

one of the toughest languages.

I'd love to see someone from the Salvation Army try to learn a complex language in a year, while holding down a job and taking care of things at home.

That I would love to see.

[MUSTANG_2004]

102. They didn't have to learn it in a year

According to the SA, they weren't forcing them to learn fluent English in a year. Instead, they had to make a "good-faith effort to acquire a better working knowledge of English."

http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=6537171

[Bjorn Against]

113. And what is a good faith effort, and how are they expected to acheive it?

Are they going to be offering classes? The article you linked to suggests that the Salvation Army's definition of a good faith effort is getting them to a point where they don't need to speak Spanish in the workplace anymore. They aren't suggesting they only have to learn a few key phrases, they are expecting them to be able to communicate in a brand new language.

[MUSTANG_2004]

122. Ask them, not me.

The SA said:
"employees who could not communicate in English were told that they needed to learn English in order to obtain at least a working knowledge of spoken English, and that all employees were given more than a year to demonstrate progress in learning English"

As far as what that means, I don't know. If you believe the SA at all, it doesn't sound like they were requiring fluency in just a year.

[Bjorn Against]

137. Well why are you saying their policy is reasonable if you don't even know their policy?

They aren't giving any reasons why the employees are capable of doing their jobs now but they wouldn't be capable one year from now if they did not learn a new language. They are just threatening to fire any employee that can't meet expectations which they will not even define. The management decides whether or not a good faith effort was made unilaterally, if they were to put into writing specific phrases they expected the employee to learn I may not have a problem with it but I am not about to excuse them because their lawyer uses some extremely vague language to try to shut up the critics.

[MUSTANG_2004]

158. Um, you were asking details

I said the policy, as stated, sounds reasonable. I don't have the details of what it entails any more than you do, so I'm not about to start a detailed analysis of what they are requiring. I mainly wanted to note that they say that they were not requiring learning fluent English in one year, which is what some posters implied.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

84. They don't sound very good to me.

Or very charitable.

"I don't see that its a terrible thing to require employees to learn English and giving them a year to do so certainly seems more than fair."

Riiight. Firing somebody just before X-mas, for not speaking English with a job that doesn't require English.

Nothing terrible about that.

:eyes:

[ileus]

81. A common language keeps America united.

There's nothing wrong with learning english is there?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

85. One language. One Religion. One race.

Uber alles.

[cboy4]

89. A common language keeps America united?

:puke:

Is that what they say in Switzerland where there are almost a half dozen official languages?

[blondeatlast]

92. No, but apparently in Bland, VA they do (I kid not--Bland) nt

[Romulox]

95. They also say Belgium is on the verge of break up along language lines...nt

[blondeatlast]

98. India has 42 languages--they're doomed.

Not.

[Romulox]

104. LOL. Pakistan was partitioned from India to form a separate Islamic state!

Oh, and if you recall Pakistan and its parent, India, were nearly in a nuclear war a few years back...

You might pick a better example! :)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

106. Canada.

:shrug:

[blondeatlast]

111. ...

:thumbsup:

[Romulox]

131. Canada has a pretty vigorous francophone separatist movement...nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

135. Oh my goodness!

Fire all the spanish speaking clothes folders! Or else California and New Mexico are going to secede just like the great Quebec Wars!

:rofl:

[Romulox]

140. You are wildly misrepresenting everything I post. I think you are interested in ARGUMENT not debate

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Romulox]

126. It is not a good example of a state in which it is unthinkable that partition could take place

Seeing as, in fact, a partition has indeed taken place in recent memory... :think:

[Romulox]

128. WTF are you calling me a racist for mentioning that Pakistan broke away from India?

:wtf:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

132. I think it's got more to do with your "english only" stance.

Why you think the partitioning of India and Pakistan has to do with all the other languages spoken in India is beyond me.

[Romulox]

138. What "English only" stance? I never mentioned "English only" or advocated such a stance

And the partitioning of India simply demonstrates that India is not a good example of a country in which it is unthinkable that such a partition could take place. I think that should be clear by now.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

141. You showed up to support the rights of bigots to be bigots.

Like I always say, if you don't like people calling you names, stop giving them good reason.

[Romulox]

143. LOL. Celebrate your ignorance if you will. I stated (quite succinctly) the LAW on the matter

[LanternWaste]

227. The separation wasn't due to languages

The separation wasn't due to languages. The cold war between the two are not related to language. I'm afraid I don't understand what the point is your making... :shrug:

[Romulox]

252. Language is only one aspect of culture; Religion is another.

The only real point being, India is simply not a suitable example of a country for which a partition to form a homeland for an ethnic/cultural minority is unthinkable! :think:

[Mr_Monday]

185. Actually,

I heard they use English (in some parts at least) as a sort of common language when broadcasting on television (news) in India. So yeah, a common language is important.

[blondeatlast]

90. Language is the only thing that tears us apart!

Sexism, racism, homophobia, class distinctions, sports team preferences vanish if we all can say "Put the size 6s over there" in Esperanto...

[Mr_Monday]

186. Over simplified response.

I'm sure ethnic slurs would emerge from Esperanto if it were adopted. It is not the language that is hateful but the people who use the language that are hateful.

[blondeatlast]

96. No, and I suggest you try it sometime.

"There's nothing wrong with learning English, is there?"

I taught it for years--it would be nice if native speakers would try it... :eyes:

[Mr_Monday]

184. Agreed.

Having a common language gives all Americans an even footing when it comes to communication. Although I'm not against bilingualism being taught, I don't like the idea of having a multi-lingual state.

[LanternWaste]

226. Then I'm assuming that we need to modify many, many place names

Then I'm assuming that we need to modify many, many place names such as San Antonio, Milwaukee, Baton Rouge, etc? You know, to keep us united?

[SharkSquid]

88. They run misdemeanor probation here in FL

And they repeatedly fuck my wifes clients out of decent rehab and the indigent REALLY get screwed.

[Raine]

91. "sorting clothes"?!?

:wtf: why should you need english for that (!) not to mention they probably pay them sweat shop wages for it. :mad:

[tammywammy]

94. do you have a link with the whole story?

All I can get is the first two paragraphs and I'd like to read it all before commenting.

[cboy4]

100. Sure............Here's one

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iuCyvt9_27D_uJUNbU9M7oedAvcgD8SUCTSO0

[tammywammy]

118. Thanks

Okay, this is what I think:

I think it's good for the Salvation Army or any other employer to help employees who's native language isn't English, learn it. I mean by giving money assistant/or having ESL classes, etc.

I don't agree with what Salvation Army did here. These two women worked there for over 5 years with no problem, and there's no safety hazard in folding clothes that would necessitate forced learning of English.

I think over the years the Salvation Army has helped a lot of people, but their discrimination against non-English speaking employees and against GLBT people is horrible. So I'm of two sides on this, I usually give maybe $10/max to the Salvation Army during the holiday season, because mostly it's convenient.

I don't think I'll be dropping off my change with them anymore in the future. I usually donate all my clothing, linens, etc to the local homeless shelter or women's shelter.

[kansasblue]

97. 'And I'd rather throw my spare change down a storm drain,'

That made me laugh. Thanks for the article. I haven't been to them in years after I was informed by a friend. Lot's of other good choices.

[Romulox]

99. I, for one, fully support an employer's right to require English proficiency.

This is basic common sense.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

103. Why would it be required for folding clothes?

And if it's so important, why not have the requirement before hiring?

[Romulox]

109. It's important to communicate with supervisors and co-workers.

I think virtually everyone acknowledges that arguing an employer may not require an employee to be fluent in the language in which it conducts its business is a dead end.

As to why not require it before employment, I'll simply say that you must not be familiar with the Employment at Will doctrine. They simply don't need a reason to terminate or to change the terms of employment.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

112. It hasn't been a problem in the last six years these women have been folding clothes.

Isn't that what they call a "red herring?"

[blondeatlast]

119. No, a legitimate concern. Can't run the risk of getting the size 10s confused with the 12s, yanno.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

120. They have crazy number systems in mexico, I hears.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

133. You don't have to preach to this choir.

[Romulox]

216. I would be EMBARASSED to be the kind of COWARD that calls a person a racist w/o reason

When they lose an argument. What a disgusting person throws around such a hateful charge w/o any factual backing?

Set to the side the fact that my understanding of the matter is grounded in Federal Employment law, and yours appears to grounded in ...Rum... :eyes:

[mitchtv]

166. your post said to me one thing

They need a union

[Bluebear]

178. You said it. nt

[blondeatlast]

108. Muy bien. I support an employer's requirement for a second language proficiancy.

!Bueno para mi!

[Romulox]

114. Me too. The tricky thing here is that you need to demonstrate a legitimate business purpose

for these sorts of requirements, lest you make yourself vulnerable to charges of racism or national origin discrimination. A translator, for instance, has a legitimate need to be able to speak two languages. Similarly, it seems fairly self-evident that an employee who works under English speaking management needs to understand their direction.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

115. LOL

:rofl:

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Romulox]

130. You called me a racist upthread for mentioning Pakistan broke away from India

That is ridiculous and completely out of line. I didn't insult India.

You really owe me an apology.

edit: And yes, since there is no official language in the US, a Spanish-speaking workplace could legitimately require Spanish proficiency as a condition of employment.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

136. Actually, he/she said you're not a racist.

I'm not sure how persuasive that is though.

[Romulox]

142. Add sarcasm to the list of things that are too subtle for you to understand!

:silly:

[Romulox]

213. Self-delete--replied to wrong message. nt

[Romulox]

214. I see you have no integrity whatsoever--another hit and run artist.

Lame. :eyes:

[blondeatlast]

215. !Usted es chistoso y mono!

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Romulox]

217. I've decided to report EVERY ONE of your COWARDLY attacks

You decided to attack me for no reason. You're acting like a bully and a troll.

I have no idea what your problem is, but your behavior is really reprehensible. :eyes:

[blondeatlast]

237. Oh, dear. I'm doomed. I called you cute and funny. Mods: Here's a helpful link:

http://www.freetranslation.com/

[Romulox]

243. Umm, you also called me a RACIST 3 or 4 times, with absolutely no provocation

Like I said, I have no idea what makes you behave the way you do, but I am done playing your games.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

245. Isn't it cowardly to be afraid of other people speaking different languages?

And then running for help when you lose an argument?

[blondeatlast]

246. You called me a drunk. I don't drink, but I'll leave it there for all of DU to see.

'Cause I'm such a coward and all.

[blondeatlast]

247. You called me a drunk. I don't drink, but I'll leave it there for all of DU to see.

'Cause I'm such a coward and all.

[blondeatlast]

248. I have past posts of yours to refer to. You called me a drunk.

I don't drink, but I'll leave it there for all of DU to see.

'Cause I'm such a coward and all.

[Romulox]

249. LOL. No one is doing a better job of making you look the fool than yourself.

You seem to be having some difficulty working the internets. :rofl:

[Romulox]

250. I defy you to post whatever post of mine you deem racist. Nobody will be surprised when you can't.

:popcorn:

[blondeatlast]

125. Like--the employer requires it? I'd like to see that lawsuit...

Come to think of it, with this SCOTUS, they'd buy that sad argument.

[spoony]

117. You know it's almost Christmas when the SA hate starts on DU...

You and that guy in the lounge who wants to murder bell-ringers with an M-16 should get together and draw up a strategy on how to bring those evil charitable motherfuckers to the ground.

[Bjorn Against]

123. The Salvation Army hate goes year round, but it is not DU that hates...

The hate comes from an organization that views gays as second class citizens and thinks folding clothes requires a person to speak English fluently.

[cboy4]

134. Why would you link my concerns about discrimination

with someone who, according to you, wants to murder bell-ringers.

I don't hate them at all.

I just find the Salvation Army's bigotry despicable.

Yours also.

[spoony]

145. Throw your idiotic labels at someone who still takes you seriously.

The SA and its volunteers have helped people from all walks of life. They aren't the hateful creatures you are portraying them as, and to my knowledge have never turned someone in need away for being gay or a minority.

The only thing "despicable" here is if you actually succeed in getting people to not donate money that could help the needy.

[cboy4]

146. Well, I'll be more than happy to help to encourage

people to give to the Salvation Army once it decides to abandon it's un-Christian, bigoted policies and views.

Until then, I have no choice but to use my influence to persuade folks to donate to charities who care for people from all walks of life.

It's the same the reason Target refuses to allow the SA on the properties of any of its one thousand, three hundred stores.

Ouch.

[PeaceNikki]

148. Target's decision was not based on any of SA's actions or policies.

In fact, they still do a lot of fundraising for them. They even parter with the Salvation Army.

See: https://sites.target.com/site/en/corporate/page.jsp?contentId=PRD03-002480

[cboy4]

152. Yea, you're right. Target didn't come right out and say

they were keeping SA bell ringers away because of its homophobia.

The official line was it was simply enforcing existing rules against solicitation.

However, not everyone believes that was the sole reason.

[PeaceNikki]

154. If that were the case, they would not be the major supporter of SA that they are.

And they are a major supporter. Still.

Again... see?
http://sites.target.com/site/en/corporate/page.jsp?contentId=PRD03-001336#salvation

And again, they do NOT turn away the needy due to sexual orientation. The issue was regarding employment and it was only an issue in the god-fearin' US of A thanks to federal "faith-based" bullshit.

[cboy4]

155. Alright, well my issue is not with Target because I'm

satisfied that its no solicitation policy keeps the bell ringers away.

And yes, I agree with your comment about the "faith-based" bullshit.

[AngryOldDem]

233. LOL.

Yep -- I just e-mailed someone a link to this thread and I said essentially the same thing.

Pretty simple -- it's your money; you can throw it in the kettle or throw it down the drain. Seems to me a pretty straightforward choice.

[SyntaxError]

144. Curious about something...

were they willing to pay for classes or lessons? Could it be done on company time?

[DS1]

150. I just want to 'off' the goddamn bell ringers

but the anti-gay attitude does make things easier

[liberalhistorian]

151. Excuse me, but if they're working and living in this country,

then they need to speak English, it's just that simple. If they don't want to speak English or even make the effort to learn, then why come to a country where it's the official language? Either they want to become Americans or they don't. I can't count the number of times I've encountered employees who not only cannot speak English, but are downright rude about it. Helloooo---you're working in the US! If you don't want to speak or learn English, then don't come here.

And the SA has done a LOT of good for desperate, needy, homeless, etc., people, a LOT. Here in Rapid City, they run homeless shelters where they also provide self-sufficiency assistance, and not just a handout for a day, soup and food kitchens, a thrift store where the homeless and down-and-out are often employed, etc., etc.

[Smarmie Doofus]

153. Yer a bit simplistic, if you ask me. Especially....

>>>If you don't want to speak or learn English, then don't come here. >>>>


... for a historian. Did Columbus learn the Taino language before setting foot on Hispaniola?

Did the Pilgrims learn the language of the inhabitants of 1620 Massachusetts?

For that matter... did *any* Europeans EVER bother to learn the languages of the indigenous peoples in the "New World" to which they immigrated?

[tyedyeto]

159. When did English become the 'official' language of the US of A?

If it did... then why is everything I receive that pertains to voting materials in 3 or more languages? If it is 'official', as you claim it is, English only would be the only language on written correspondence every government (federal, state and local) sends out. But it isn't. Why not? Since you have claimed that English is the 'official' language in the US of A.


Edit because I hit the post button without spell checking.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

168. And they are willing to throw all the good they do away rather than give benefits to same sex

partners.

Fantastic.

http://lifesite.net/ldn/2004/may/04052707.html

http://www.chicagopride.com/news/article.cfm/ArticleID/1824489

[cboy4]

170. Oh boy.

[Bluebear]

180. ...

:spray:

For best unanticipated smiley.

[Richard Steele]

171. "LiberalHistorian: two, two, TWO misnomers in one!" nm

[in_cog_ni_to]

161. Don't forget....They also REFUSE to hire GAY PEOPLE because it's against their religion.

:grr: I finished giving to them years ago when they pulled that shit! Now they've turned xenophobic too? What a lovely Christian organization.:eyes: Happy Holidays, my ass.

We need salvation from this greedy army
Posted September 22nd, 2007 at 9:45 am


The Salvation Army is perhaps the most overrated organization in America. Everyone gets a warm fuzzy seeing their bell ringers outside the Wal-Mart at Christmastime. Woe to anyone who dares to point out that this band of right-wingers in uniforms are just homophobic religious fundamentalist adept at tapping the public purse.

Everyone knows the Salvation Army provides a lot of social services — often with our tax dollars. So the Army operates as a government contractor and thus must meet certain laws and regulations, right? Not quite. Even as its leaders continue to seek taxpayer handouts, the Army demands the right to be free from oversight and regulations that apply to any other social-service agency. It New York City, Army officials demanded and won the right to fire gay people and suspected gay people, even though those folks were working in jobs that were not religious in nature.

Now the Army is at it again. It owns an apartment building in New York City that has for years provided affordable housing for single women. The building is located in a tony Manhattan neighborhood, and someone got the bright idea that the building could be sold and turned into luxury condos, netting the Army a ton of money. All the Salvation Army had to do was evict all of those women.

But wait a minute. New York has strict laws dealing with tenant rights. You can’t just throw people out on the street. So what did the Salvation Army do? It argued in court that, since it is a religious organization, it can do whatever it wants.<snip>

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/12964.html

[TCJ70]

265. Do you know of anyone...

who was denied employment in a non-pastorate position because of their race or sexual orientation?

[hyphenate]

163. Perhaps something has changed

through the years. I was born over 51 years ago in a Salvation Army hospital to an unwed mother--and I wasn't the only child born under such circumstances then or ever.

[TCJ70]

258. The story isn't about services...

It's about changes in the terms of employment.

[IndianaJones]

165. I collect for the Salvation Army. Thanks a lot man. nt.

[cboy4]

169. I've alerted. nt.

[BestCenter]

174. Where does it say they're discriminating based on race or ethnicity?

Language transcends such distinctions.

[cboy4]

175. They discriminate based on sexual orientation and

national origin.

http://www.salvarmycareers.org/jobboard/SalvationArmyCareers/without_fl/legal.htm

A National Statement by the Salvation Army Regarding Equal Employment Opportunity

It is the policy of The Salvation Army to provide equal opportunity for employment on the basis enumerated in all applicable federal, state and local laws, except where a prohibition on discrimination is inconsistent with the religious principles of The Salvation Army.


See, they can essentially do what they want per their un-Christian disclaimer.

Hope that helps.

[NMMNG]

177. Quién fuego de Jesús?

:shrug:

[frogmarch]

192. This has got to be the most asinine thread

I've ever read on DU. Geez, people - those of you who are dissing the SA - so the SA isn't perfect! Big deal! It does a lot of good for a lot of people. I know, because I'm a SA soup kitchen volunteer, and I also volunteer my time and vehicle and gasoline to collect donated clothing, food, and other donated items for the SA. I'm also an atheist, and you know what? I don't care about SA's religious policies, or any of that other stuff. What I care about is trying to help the organization help desperate people in need. Why don't you get off your high horses and go do something worthwhile yourselves?

Edited to clean up my language.

[CRF450]

193. Agreed

While moving into my first house, I sent alot of my clothes and a few playstation games that I didn't want anymore to the SA

Besides, communication is one of the most important things to have on the job. I wouldn't hire anyone that cant speak my language either.

[cboy4]

202. Yea, when it comes to sorting clothing at the Salvation

Army, communication is critical.

That's why you need a masters in language arts, ha? :eyes:

[CRF450]

240. Perhaps the boss would want them to do something else on the job...

where communication is needed? HA!

The employees involved here agreed at time of hire, to abide w/the requirement of the employer. They had a year to Learn english, they refused to do so, that breaks the contract they were hired under, so thats their fault, not the SA!

[cboy4]

242. How generous of the SA to give them a whole year

to learn a complex language like English.

Why they should be up for a Nobel Peace Prize!

Intolerant religious people. Sounds like an oxymoron to me.

But the SA can do what it wishes.

However, so will I...and that's encouraging as many people as possible not to donate money to such a shamefully intolerant charity.

Fair enough CRF450?

[Bluebear]

194. High horse indeed. The poster can NOT work for SA BECAUSE HE IS GAY.

And that's alright by you? ("I don't care about SA's religious policies, or any of that other stuff.")

====

There’s the time, for example, when the Salvation Army leaders met behind closed doors with the Bush White House to come up with a strategy for passing a law that would allow government-funded groups to fire people for refusing to join the religions of their bosses. Convert and praise Jesus or lose your job, the Salvation Army law said. That was a practice that the Salvation Army was already engaging in, giving religious tests to employees and telling them to take a hike if the responses were not theologically correct, taking government money all the while. The Salvation Army spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of red kettle money on that political project alone.


What else does your red kettle donation pay for? Political organizing against same-sex marriage, for one thing. The Salvation Army uses its organization to promote opposition to equal marriage rights for same sex-sex couples. The web site of the Salvation Army states, “The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life. There is no scriptural support for same-sex unions as equal to, or as an alternative to, heterosexual marriage.” Catch that other part too - the only good homosexual is a homosexual who decides not to have sex for the rest of his or her life.

There’s also the Salvation Army’s history of rescinding benefits to same-sex domestic partners. Said the Human Rights Campaign, “We’re talking about health care, about providing health benefits, and what the Salvation Army has decided to do is prevent certain families from getting health care, and that’s just mean.” Salvation Army supporters responded to Portland’s request that it adhere to the city’s ordinance requiring organizations receiving money from the city government to provide benefits to same-sex domestic partners by sending hate mail with messages such as “You are a sick person who doesn’t deserve to be mayor.” Compassion?

http://community.livejournal.com/alternatives_av/35512.html

[cboy4]

199. Edited to clean up your language? That should be the

least of your concern, considering your post is packed with insensitive comments.

You may not care about SA's "religious (discriminatory) policies," but others do.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

219. If Pat Robertson's group started doing good works and helping people, would you volunteer?

The Salvation Army uses and abuses its church status to bypass discrimination laws. Not only that, they would rather give up contracts then comply with anti-discrimination laws. So in the SA's mind, the right to discriminate against gays trumps the joys of doing good.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_2002_Jan_22/ai_81790787


And the thing is, since they do operate in Canada within the anti-discrimination laws, it is possible for them to operate within the U.S. anti-discriminatory laws. They just don't want to.

http://www.gayglobe.us/salvationarmy-gays-canada.html

[REP]

196. They're anti-abortion, so they no longer get my money

"Blood and Fire" is a terrific motto, and they do o some real good, but I can no longer support them.

[Le Taz Hot]

204. For all of you who are arguing that this is racist,

there are several employers here who won't hire you unless you speak fluent Spanish and English. Is that racist? I await your answer.

[cboy4]

205. I've read your post four times and I'm not sure I

understand what you're getting at.

Can you clarify?

[Le Taz Hot]

208. The Salvation Army requires

their employees to speak English -- even giving them time to to learn to do so. If they do not do so within the alloted amount of time, they can no longer work there, meaning they are out of a job. There are DUers on this thread who claim that an employer requiring employees to speak English is racist. My question is, is it racist for employers in my area to require that a person speak fluent Spanish and English in order to be employed?

[cboy4]

210. It's not "racist" for employers in your area to require

a person to be bilingual, depending on the job.

That's the key.

These Salvation Army workers were responsible for sorting clothes -- a menial job a trained monkey could do. (No offense to people who sort clothes, but I'm making a point.)

And the point is these Salvation Army workers could sort clothing and get by on the basic English I'm certain they know. They weren't air traffic controllers.

You'd think a heavily Christian employer would be more understanding and lenient.

[Le Taz Hot]

211. First you say it is not

racist for employers to require a person to be bilingual, depending on the job. But it IS racist for an employer to require employees to speak English (along with their native language -- remember, no one is saying "you can't speak your native language in the workplace"). I'm sorry, I'm not seeing a difference here.

You said "depending on the job." OK, one of the jobs I'm thinking of is sorting produce (specifically, raisins). Now, that is a "menial" (your word, certainly not mine) job. You stand on your feet, 8 hours a day, and pick extraneous material (stems, nests, you-don't-even-want-to-know) from the raisins before they go into the hopper to be cleaned. This is a job that currently requires one to be fluent in Spanish and English. I don't understand why, if the SA's requirement that his employees be bilingual is racist but my example the employer, according to you, is not racist.

[cboy4]

212. Le Taz, I'm still not really sure where you're going with

this.

Let's just say if all things were equal, and it was not wrong/bigoted/racist (whatever) to require a national to learn/speak English for the job...it seems to me that if there were any employer to make an exception, it would be a church organization.

Compassion, yah know?

And don't you think it's just a tad bit ironic that the Salvation Army, a charity that's renown for helping people off of the streets ended up throwing its own employees out on to the streets!!? :crazy:

If the SA is going to insist that its employees speak English to sort clothes (because we all know how important speaking English is to do that), then the SA should not hire non-English-speaking people from the get go.

[Romulox]

218. It is obvious not racist to require Spanish at an employer that has a legitimate reason for it

The people who are screaming "racist" upthread seem to be those with the least knowledge on the matter...

[Pithlet]

230. Ugh. I stopped donating to them when I learned they discriminated against gay people.

I was hoping they'd come around someday, after the bad publicity they received, but it doesn't look like that's likely.

[rasputin1952]

234. Looking at this, I have to say that the employees involved

in this situation agreed at time of hire, to abide w/the requirement of the employer. They had a year to at least gain a rudimentary knowledge of English, they refused to do so, thereby breaking the contract they were hired under.

Since they refused to abide with the clause that required them to learn English, they are at fault. If the SA had denied them the opportunity to learn the language, then the SA would be at fault, but that is not the case, in fact, the SA appears to have made attempts to smooth the way

How this OP came around to being racist, anti/pro gay, pro-choice/anti-choice and a whole slew of other things is beyond me. Point is, the employees refused to comply with the contract they were hired under, this is grounds for termination in virtually every organization.

As for the Salvation Army, in my personal assessment of the organization; I may not agree with all of their views on social issues, but it is an organization that has helped untold hundreds of thousands of people, regardless of color, creed, gender, sexual orientation, age or anything else. When disaster has struck, the SA, the Red Cross and other organizations have always shown up to aid and comfort the victims. I have never once heard of them asking about religion, gender, sexual orientation, or anything else of that sort when they have shown up to help people.

Anyone can call them on their social issue stances, but one thing is for sure, you'll be glad to have them around when disaster strikes, and they will not deny you aid and comfort.

[TCJ70]

257. The problem with the time of hire is that it was 5 years ago

However, employers can change job descriptions whenever they want as long as the employees are notified. If the stipulation of learning english (in whatever represents a "show of effort") was included in a new job description for these two women, and they signed it, but didn't follow through, then yeah they messed that one up.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

238. Can't wait for scientist to create an translator microbes like Farscape

In the fictional Farscape universe, translator microbes allow alien races to understand each other's speech. According to the script, they "colonize at the base of the brain" and allow one to understand alien speech.

Most science fiction movies and television shows require an explanation as to why all of the characters speak a common language (usually English), and the Farscape series explains this with translator microbes. Not much information is available about them, but every time they are needed in the Farscape series, they are injected by Moya's DRDs in the foot of the person who needs to understand alien languages. This happened to John Crichton in the premiere episode. Translator microbes seem only to be required by the individual who needs to understand alien languages, not the speaker. In other words, only the hearer needs to carry the microbes in order to understand alien speech, but for two-way communication to occur, both parties need the microbes. In the Farscape series, almost everyone has these microbes, enabling two-way communication with most species.

:more below
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translator_microbes






I can still dream, right?

[ChiciB1]

251. Well You May Have Good Points... But GOODWILL Is Worse!

Actually, I've decided that the local consignment shops are my choice! Goodwill's prices have gotten so high these days that I thought I was in a Department Store the last time I went to one!

I had a yard sale recently and was going to donate to Salvation, but called a local place instead!

[Quixote1818]

253. I feel the same way. nt

[TCJ70]

254. Regarding The Salvation Army and Homosexuality

I've been reading this website for a long time, but have never felt the need to post until this thread came along.

I guess you could call me a Salvation Army insider, I've gone to the church my entire life (in several different places around the midwest), and see a few accusations in this thread that don't quite match what my observations have been.

1. Will people with certain sexual preferences be turned away from services?

--Absolutely not. It's not even a question. If you need help, you get it. From The Salvation Army's international website:

"Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination."

No one is turned down from a service based on race/religious/sexual orientation/insert whatever other attribute you want here. The only exception is lack of funding for the services wanted (which I have seen happen).

2. Can homosexuals work for The Salvation Army?

--Yes, if the position is not part of the pastorate. I've not heard of anyone being turned down for a job based on sexual preference. I'm not even sure how this could be proven unless only one person applied for the job, happened to be a homosexual and was turned down. If you have proof of this happening, I'd be happy to see it.

Flame on?

[libnnc]

255. I don't have a "sexual preference".

I have a sexual orientation.

You think I "prefer" to be ostracized by society?

[TCJ70]

256. I wasn't talking about society.

I was talking about The Salvation Army. I guess I got nervous with my first post. I'm sorry for offending you.

[Bluebear]

259. "Certain sexual preferences" !?!?!?!!??!

What "preferences" would those be? Certainly you don't mean orientation?

[TCJ70]

263. I already apologized for that mistake...

But I don't have a problem doing it again. I'm sorry I offended you.

[Bluebear]

266. I hadn't seen it.

No worries, we get antsy with the "preference" thing :)

[cboy4]

262. Here's some reading information for you:

http://www.americablog.com/2004/11/details-of-salvation-armys-rabidly.html

[TCJ70]

264. Do we get it right all the time?

No. I have my own misgivings about what happened to the ladies in this story (not enough facts in the article).

When it comes to the benefits things, the website you site isn't quite accurate. Any employee with The Salvation Army can purchase benefits for themselves and their family (wife, husband, children, and I think extending to brothers and sisters...maybe). The question was "since homosexual couples aren't legally defined as a marriage in all states, do we allow those couples to purchase coverage for each other?"

The US Western part of TSA acted without anyone knowing, causing a knee-jerk reaction from the rest of the countries leadership (that's how I understand it anyway). Unfortunately, I think we came down on the wrong side of this issue at the end of the day.

Do you know of anyone who was fired or not employed as a result of being homosexual?

[IndianaJones]

260. dude...how do your threads get so big? nt.