Excellent point @Karen R.And it's not just World Vision whose
vision is narrow: they “lost at least 2,000 child sponsorships since
Tuesday” – presumably from nice religious folks-- who don't
hate gay people, I'm sure they'd tell you-- but just can't stand
the thought that gay people who are married might be treated like actual human
beings who are working toward the common good.No, instead
they’d rather pull donations that feed the needy children they used to
sponsor.What statement does that make?Some values.
So they're getting government funding, but they STILL want to be exempt
from the federal laws they don't like. Nice!Part of World
Vision's mission statement: "Motivated by our faith in Jesus Christ, we
serve alongside the poor and oppressed as a demonstration of God’s
unconditional love for all people." I think this news story
relates exactly the kind of demonstration of "love" that can be expected
from many religions. "We're all about inclusion and unconditional
love...as long as you see things our way."
@Brio;You're making a judgement you know nothing about. Your
"god's" word was written by men. Men intent upon deceit of their
followers.@bj-hp;All you have is the word of those
"called", that they were called. I wouldn't trust any of them.
Not the least bit.As for your "holy ghost", I think
you're mis-hearing what it's telling you.
Ranch: Christ doesn't hire anyone, he chooses his mouthpieces. Christ
never actually forgave the women found in adultery, he told those who brought
her before him that they had judged rightly and that she should be punished.
Then he said he who is without sin to cast the first stone. Everyone knew they
were sinners so no one through the stone but walked off. It was a means to
catch Jesus so as to criticize his teachings. It failed, he then asked the
woman where her condemners were. She said gone but didn't condemn her.
Instead he gave her leave but said, go and sin no more. Basically telling her
that her lifestyle was wrong and to get out of it. The choice was for her to
make. Everyone on this earth is a sinner but some sins are greater than others.
Notice that the worst sin is denying the Holy Ghost after receiving it for
which there is no forgiveness. The next one is murder or the killing of
innocent blood with that of sexual sin the next one like it. Therefore, though
I may disagree they are following closely.
@ Christopher Vogel:Propagation of religious dogma trumps
propagation of political dogma every time. And that seems to be what you are
offering with your liberal ideological based comment.And since
homosexual make up only 2% of the population, World Vision is undoubtedly
denying itself of only a relatively few potentially highly qualified employees
with their latest updated hiring policy.
Ranch,In answer to your question, there's a reasonable chance
Christ would be disinclined to hire people who refused to listen to God and
whose lifestyles were considered abominations before God. Please read Romans
1:24-27 and Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. Biblical scripture is very
clear on how God feels about homosexual conduct., regardless of what's
currently considered politically correct in the secular world.
So much for being Christlike.Who would Christ refuse to hire?
World Vision obtained most of its donations through television advertising,
concealing its evangelical roots. Evangelicals, for their part, are notoriously
stingy, largely confining their "charitable" contributions to their own
home congregations. Among other consequences is that, despite the US healthcare
system's heavy reliance for public care on hundreds of religious hospitals
(Lutheran, Methodist, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Mennonite, Quaker, Salvation
Army), there is not one single Evangelical hospital (unless you count one in
Pennsylvania that went civilian half a century ago). If World Vision has to
rely on those who bullied it into continuing to discriminate (and deprive itself
of many highly qualified employees), it will suffer financially. It will have
to continue to pretend that its activities are not largely focussed on
observance and propagation of religious dogma.
It's safe to assume these organizations are less interested in humanitarian
endeavors than promoting their brand of religion. Didn't Jesus reject rigid
dogma and practices in favor of serving his fellow man? Irony has never been
Americans strong suit.
I could give my every possession to a positive, supporting cause, and not only
would it be not enough to fully and forever solve the problem, it would be only
one of many such causes. It becomes important, therefore, to be able to trust
that a cause you choose supports what you do.I'm happy to hear
that "World Vision" realized the mistake and addressed it. I'll
take a look into them.
I used to think that it would be wrong to stop donating to World Vision. You
have changed my mind.