Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on September 06, 2017, 09:13:51 PM
-
It's not like the outrage wouldn't be expected, but geez... Apparently every charity Trump is donating his $1mil to is "racist", "homophobic" or otherwise unworthy.
Regardless of my feelings on the Red Cross, they are generally one of the first charities people give to, and even if I don't like them, I think they are anything but racist. And the Salvation Army? My God - I'm pretty sure my local branch gives ~80% of its resources to various not white people. At least if I go by the "Where your money is going" stuff they send me every month.
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/09/06/tough-crowd-trump-announces-charities-to-which-hell-donate-toward-harvey-relief/
-
I would be curious how much each of those complainers has donated.
And apparently the Red Cross is a religious organization. I didn't know that.
-
Maybe he should have given to the Clinton Foundation.
-
Maybe he should have given to the Clinton Foundation.
Even if it was just a dollar, he could have put that on the list. It would be a great misdirection play.
-
Even if it was just a dollar, he could have put that on the list. It would be a great misdirection play.
You're eeeevillll. Eeeeevilll, I say.
Good work. >:D
Terry
-
Wow, these people are hateful. (The "tolerant" ones):
Red Cross, Samaritan's Purse, & Salvation Army are a waste of a donation. Any religious group that discriminates in who they help is a no.
Most if not all are restrictive, religious, discrim orgs. Glad they're doing SOMETHING; but they turn minorities & LGBTQ AWAY in these times
... I really shouldn't be surprised, but these people have so much hate in their hearts that they really have no idea what their "enemies" do.
For example, Samaritan's Purse. CLEARLY anyone who chooses that name is all about making sure you only help people that are just like you, right?
-
I wasn't aware that ARC, Salvation Army, or Samaritan's Purse conducted a religious test prior to providing aid.
In fact, the name "Samaritan's Purse", should give a hint as to how they operate...But the Anti-Religious would not know that, as they don't know that parable...
-
The Red Cross is not a religious charity.
The other two are religious charities with very good ratings for effectiveness. The Salvation Army is actually a church. Samaritian's Purse is associated with Franklin Graham.
This is one of the most retarded things for leftist to complain about.
-
I wasn't aware that ARC, Salvation Army, or Samaritan's Purse conducted a religious test prior to providing aid.
In fact, the name "Samaritan's Purse", should give a hint as to how they operate...But the Anti-Religious would not know that, as they don't know that parable...
Salvation Army has been known to toss people for not attending their religious services and for being homosexual.
Samaritan's Purse also has made people sit through a church service before getting help.
Would you consider being required to go to, say, a mosque, or some Satanic mass, as a condition of receiving assistance, to be a religious test?
Plus, the Purse has had questions raised about how much it's CEO gets paid, while Red Cross has been known to have hundreds of millions of dollars disappear into thin air while claiming to have helped some people.
-
Salvation Army has been known to toss people for not attending their religious services and for being homosexual.
I've seen the Salvation Army in action during a disaster response. They required nothing of anyone. They were just there when needed. It's the whole reason I started giving to them. If Trump is giving to their Harvey relief fund, I expect nothing different from them.
Perhaps they make addicts attend services as part of their drug rehab programs, which are voluntary. I don't see anything wrong with that (I also don't know if they do). If the addicts don't like it, they can always go back to shooting up under a bridge somewhere, or seek out a non-religious organization to help them for free.
-
Would you consider being required to go to, say, a mosque, or some Satanic mass, as a condition of receiving assistance, to be a religious test?
They are not government programs.
-
Samaritan's Purse also has made people sit through a church service before getting help.
I'm sure that's really outrageous, somehow. We'll let you explain.
-
Trump is supposed to be a Christian. Why is it horrifying that he gives to Christian charities that are widely hailed as being efficient? The only one on the list I won't give to is the Red Cross, due to their scummy reputation.
-
I'm sure that's really outrageous, somehow. We'll let you explain.
I already did. Look a couple of posts up.
-
Salvation Army has been known to toss people for not attending their religious services and for being homosexual.
Samaritan's Purse also has made people sit through a church service before getting help.
Would you consider being required to go to, say, a mosque, or some Satanic mass, as a condition of receiving assistance, to be a religious test?
Plus, the Purse has had questions raised about how much it's CEO gets paid, while Red Cross has been known to have hundreds of millions of dollars disappear into thin air while claiming to have helped some people.
1. That's if you are there for addiction, homelessness (food and shelter for the night) etc. That's been their modus operandai for years. Part of their mission statement since their founding. If they can save your soul, it makes it easier to save you from your demons.
2. As Ben stated, when it comes to assistance in a disaster (Tornado, Flood, Hurricane, Earthquake, etc.) They provide food and shelter, to anyone and everyone.
3. They are private charities, no one is required to accept their help, if it would offend them to do so.
4. Donald and Melania Trump are making the donation from their own private money. Not from .gov money.
5. How much is Hillary* and other Policritters donating and to whom ??
*- is she donating to her own foundation again ?? Will the money "donated" be "spent" the way it was in Haiti.
-
I already did.
Are you proposing that people have some kind of right to immediate, right-this-second charitable aid from a private group that's kind enough to help strangers? They can't endure an hour of singing and preachifying, first? I mean, are you saying they made them sit through a church service before they clamped off their arterial bleeding? Did these people crawl in from the desert, and moan through their parched lips, until the church service was over, and they let them have a bottle of water? I mean, really, explain what is so insufferable about attending a church service.
-
I already did. Look a couple of posts up.
Um... no you didn't.
-
Are you proposing that people have some kind of right to immediate, right-this-second charitable aid from a private group that's kind enough to help strangers? They can't endure an hour of singing and preachifying, first? I mean, are you saying they made them sit through a church service before they clamped off their arterial bleeding? Did these people crawl in from the desert, and moan through their parched lips, until the church service was over, and they let them have a bottle of water? I mean, really, explain what is so insufferable about attending a church service.
I have done multi-agency disaster relief alongside The Salvation Army a couple of times. There was no preaching and no tambourines, they mostly did stuff like deliver sack lunches and bottles of water to victims and to other volunteers, and manned distribution centers.
-
I have done multi-agency disaster relief alongside The Salvation Army a couple of times. There was no preaching and no tambourines, they mostly did stuff like deliver sack lunches and bottles of water to victims and to other volunteers, and manned distribution centers.
Those monsters.
-
I have done multi-agency disaster relief alongside The Salvation Army a couple of times. There was no preaching and no tambourines, they mostly did stuff like deliver sack lunches and bottles of water to victims and to other volunteers, and manned distribution centers.
That's exactly what I saw, as well as things like taking out the trash from ops centers and other "mundane" stuff that would be beneath the Red Cross.
-
I need to get my DR credentials renewed and get involved again...
-
This is what Congress should be packaging in with Harvey/Irma aid.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/20839/never-let-crisis-go-waste-after-hurricanes-repeal-michael-j-knowles
The Federal Emergency Management Agency currently bans granting funds to churches and other religious organization on the basis that such grants would violate the First Amendment prohibition against “establishment of religion.” In fact, the opposite is true, and the current policy of offering emergency relief funds to merely those civic organizations that toe the secular religious line constitute precisely the discrimination FEMA ostensibly seeks to avoid.
Absolutely. The government should treat religious and non-religious groups equally. If the .gov is going to fund non-religious aid groups, it should fund the religious ones in exactly the same way. That's not establishing religion; that's just equal treatment.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/10/christians-provide-more-aid-to-hurricane-victims-than-fema/?utm_source=site-share
Curse all those bigoted Christian charities!!!1!!1!1
-
I bet the Christians made sure the aid only went to white Trump-voters that had memorized anti-LGBTQUWALLAWALLABINGBANG verses from the original King James Bible.