Boycott seems fair

The Salvation Army has made headlines over its comments that homosexuality is an “unacceptable urge” and that it should be “restrained” with will power. Predictably this has raised the ire of gay advocates with some calling for a boycott of all Salvos fundraising. Calls for a boycott might seem extreme but I believe they are totally understandable. Obviously people are free to support whichever charity they choose and if you are either gay or a supporter of gay rights, why would you now give your hard-earned to the Salvos?

This comes at a time where there a multitude of charities screaming to be heard above the increasing number of worthy causes. Gone are the days when Red Nose Day seemed to be the only awareness day on the calendar. It seems there is at least one awareness day per week now, whether it be Jeans for Genes Day, the Australia’s Biggest Morning Tea or Loud Shirt Day. As I said, they’re all worthy causes but there is a serious risk of society contracting passion fatigue.

Considering this environment, I guess it’s admirable that The Salvation Army is standing by its opinion. It responded by saying that its organisation was “one of the most compassionate and non-discriminatory in the way it works with people who are marginalised in our community”. This is confusing reading. By officially damning the natural urges of homosexual people, it is further marginalising them. Yet it says it is “compassionate and non-discriminatory” in the way it deals with “marginalised” people in the community.

I understand that the Salvation Army does a lot of good for our community but this could seriously affect its fundraising efforts in the future.

Do you agree with Ged? Will you continue to support The Salvation Army? Or is this all just an over-reaction?