This is the concluding post of the PBH series Choose Another Charity, comprised of 3 articles on the Salvation Army<\/a>, MADD<\/a>, and ChildFund<\/a>.<\/p>\n
Salvation Army<\/strong> [Editor’s note: For a vigorous debate on the Salvation Army, see the comment section of the original article<\/a><\/em>]<\/p>\n
In fact, the Salvation Army goes so far as to say gay people shouldn\u2019t be having sex. You can find this nugget on their website<\/a>: \u201cChristians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life.\u201d<\/p>\n
Starting at the beginning of George W. Bush’s presidency in 2001, the Salvation Army began lobbying for an exemption to equal labor practices for government-funded faith-based organizations. Why? Because the Salvation Army wanted to continue to discriminate against gays and prevent them from being hired<\/a>.<\/p>\n
There\u2019s still more, too. The Salvation Army has repeatedly rallied against anti-discrimination laws involving hiring of homosexual employees. They\u2019ve even tried to block a repeal of sodomy laws in New Zealand<\/a>. And in Canada a few days ago, the Salvation Army turned down donations of Harry Potter and Twilight toys<\/a>. The occult connotations of these toys, supposedly, is out of line with their Christian teachings. Harry Potter is Satanic? That’s a rather old-hat Evangelical argument, isn’t it?<\/p>\n
The Salvation Army\u2019s tremendous size and omnipresence may provide the illusion of moral rectitude. Sadly, that just isn\u2019t the case. There are plenty of wonderful charities out there without hidden political agendas worth donating to instead of the Salvation Army. Check out websites such as Charity Navigator<\/a> to look for charitable organizations that will spend your money on the causes they support, not political muckery.<\/p>\n
Mothers Against Drunk Driving<\/strong><\/p>\n
It seems almost blasphemous to say there\u2019s anything wrong with Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD<\/a>). Drunk driving is totally irresponsible and has caused many deaths and disfiguring injuries. At the same time, it\u2019s hard to think of MADD and not imagine your own mother telling you to find a designated driver or take a taxi if you get too sauced. How could anyone fault MADD if its objectives are situated within a universal motherly concern?<\/p>\n
This past November, MADD\u2019s National President and Official Spokesperson, Laura Dean-Mooney, proposed that all new cars be fitted with IIDs<\/a>. When you think about it, this is an absurd intrusion into the everyday liberties of American citizens.<\/p>\n
Why would MADD partner with liquor companies when their other policies seem rather neo-prohibitionist? Because MADD is more interested in self-perpetuation than it is in serving its cause. For instance, take a look at MADD\u2019s 990 Tax Form for 2008.<\/a> MADD spends half its revenue on salaries. For a nonprofit, this is unacceptable. It\u2019s even more egregious in light of MADD\u2019s current 3.5 million dollar deficit.<\/a><\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Once you consider other expenses such as MADD\u2019s preposterous new line of non-alcoholic beverages<\/a>, the likelihood of any donations actually preventing drunk driving is actually quite slim.<\/p>\n
Most nonprofits who claim not to be interested in spreading \u201creligious messages\u201d would have gladly taken this money. However, ChildFund did not. According to Gen Con officials<\/a>, the charity didn\u2019t feel comfortable with the donation because of Gen Con\u2019s relationship with the popular pen-and-paper game, Dungeons & Dragons. Dungeons & Dragons is a popular target of fundamentalist Christians because of all the Satanic elements the game endorses\u2026 such as pretending to be a dwarf, rolling dice, and listening to a lot of bad progressive rock.<\/p>\n
The multiple name changes, religious flip-flopping and hefty fees depict ChildFund as a confused, mismanaged organization. This is corroborated by its financial information. As its excess income has increased decently for the last several years, its actual capacity has been decreasing<\/a>. What is anyone supposed to make of that?<\/p>\n