Jewish, Catholic, Protestant and nonreligious are suing the Salvation Army, alleging that it imposed a "religious veil over secular, publicly financed activities like caring for foster children and counseling young people with AIDS." Jewsweek explains:
"I was harassed to the point where eventually I resigned," says Margaret Geissman, a former human resources manager who told the Times that her superior asked for the religions and sexual orientation of her staff. "As a Christian, I deeply resent the use of discriminatory employment practices in the name of Christianity."
According to the New York Times, the plaintiffs are charging the Salvation Army's New York division of coercing them into "sign[ing] forms revealing the churches they had attended over the past 10 years, name their ministers and agree to the Army's mission 'to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ.'" Some litigants claimed they were let go "after years of working in secular jobs when they objected to signing the forms. "Others," the Times reported "said the new religious focus violated the social workers' ethics code and could have chilling effect on their work -- for example, preventing them from giving condoms to people infected with H.I.V. or forbidding abortion counseling."
The money received from the government is significant - according to Reuters, the Salvation Army Greater New York Division alone receives $89 million a year from the state, New York City, and Nassau and Suffolk county governments. There has also been collusion between the Bush administration and the Salvation Army on this issue:
Six months after its unveiling [Bush's faith-based initiative] late January 2001, it was revealed that top-level administration officials had been conducting secret meetings with the Salvation Army to enlist its political and financial support for the then-flagging project. According to the Washington Post's Dana Milbank, the meetings, which included Karl Rove, the president's chief political strategist, and Don Eberly, the then Deputy Director of the newly opened White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, had been going on for several months.
An internal Salvation Army document indicated that in exchange for its support -- which included plans for an Army-sponsored $100,000 public relations campaign -- the charity would receive assurances that any bill passed by Congress would contain a provision allowing religious charities to sidestep state and local anti-discrimination measures barring discriminatory hiring practices on the basis of sexual orientation.
So, the Bush administration was going to let the Salvation Army use tens of millions of dollars in government money to discriminate against anyone they wanted for any reason they wanted in exchange for them using some of that money to publicly support and promote Bush's faith-based initiative. Just how different is that from bribery?
A very good reason for the government not to fund religion is that such funding can corrupt religious groups in exactly this manner: in exchange for more and more money, the religious groups will support particular political parties who are then labeled as "religiously correct" - adherents are informed that the "truly faithful" will support one party rather than the other. Because God says so? No, because Mammon says so.
Read More: