The Organizations Cathy Supports

[Marc_Anthony]

Has anybody actually looked at the organizations that Cathy supports?

-The Family Foundation. Seems fairly benign. familyfoundation.org/initiatives/marriage/

-Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Also seems fine. I see no “hatred” in either group yet. fca.org/

-Exodus International. This one has a bad rap. It USED to promote “conversion therapy” for gays. However, it DOES NOT any longer. People will think of it as a hate group because it offers counseling to people struggling with same-sex attraction. That’s not hatred, that’s expected from an organization that believes same-sex attraction is a bad thing; this organization is more radical than some others, but not as bad as its reputation…except for one thing.

In 2009 Exodus International attended a conference in Uganda that was set up to pass a law that included “draconian measures against gay and lesbian people such as forced ex-gay therapy, life imprisonment for people convicted of homosexuality and the formation of an organization designed to “wipe out” gay practices in Uganda. The conference also featured Scott Lively, a holocaust revisionist who at the event also blamed the 1994 Rwandan genocide on gay people.” Less than a year later they backtracked, but I wouldn’t support them.

exodusinternational.org/

-Family Research Council. This is another controversial one. OFFICIALLY, they seem legitimate. They speak out harshly against homosexual marriage, acceptance of same-sex attraction as “normal” in society, and against gay rights. BUT a board member, Peter Spriggs, suggest that homosexual actions should be outlawed; I do not agree with that. People can DO what they want on their own time, but I’ll tell them it’s sinful. He believes that getting rid of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would lead to gay men molesting other men, which frankly sounds ridiculous. He says that “If you look at the American College of Pediatricians, they say the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a danger to children.” The American College of Pediatricians claims he is misinterpreting them.

This organization seems to have a radical board member, at least, but their official position doesn’t shout “HATRED!” to me. I wouldn’t donate to them, though. christianpost.com/news/exodus-leaders-issue-statement-against-uganda-s-anti-gay-bill-44477/

-New Mexico Christian Foundation. Perfectly benign.

-Georgia Family Council. Run of the mill anti same-sex marriage organization. No more radical than that.

RESULTS: The vast majority of the organizations Chick-Fil-A donates money to do not condone hatred unless you consider opposing same-sex marriage the equivalent of condoning hatred. I don’t think that follows myself.

Now the two controversial organizations. Let’s start with Exodus International. They used to be more radical but they appear to have mellowed out a bit nowadays. The big thing that gives me pause if their presence at the Uganda conference. Their “anti-gay bill” was a horrific abuse against human rights. They did backtrack, but they were also present at the conference. I would not support them. However, I doubt Cathy realizes this about the group; if you go on the website it certainly says nothing there about promoting “hatred” against gays. And, they DID backtrack. So while I dislike that he donates to this organization I don’t think it’s as bad as it could be, and I’m not too hung up about it ultimately.

The Family Research Council, officially, does not support any radical positions unless you consider being against same-sex relationships radical, which I don’t. BUT Spriggs, a man on the board of directors to this day, has very radical views, outlined above. I would not support the group. However, their official position seems legitimate, and so I don’t think the organization can necessarily be said to be a “hate group”.

NOTES: There were some lists floating around designating certain groups as “hate groups”. I ignored them because of the obvious bias that if you believe same-sex attraction isn’t wrong then you’ll inclined to think that a prominent group focusing on that as an issue is a “hate group”. So I looked at the organizations myself.

MY CONCLUSION: I support the majority of the charities Cathy donates to, and the ones I don’t support aren’t radical enough for me to believe that they are true “Hate groups”; if Exodus International did not backtrack on the anti-gay bill and “mellow” a bit, I would believe they are a hate group, but they did backtrack and they did mellow, so I don’t have an issue with him supporting them.

In summary: Stop saying he supports hate groups, and stop poisoning the well by calling them “anti-gay groups”, which implies that they believe gays are lesser people rather than equal people with an unfortunate disorder. He supports groups opposed to same-sex marriage and to acceptance of same-sex sexual relationships. Those two things are not equivalent.

REFERENCES (Sorry, you’ll have to wade through them, all the info is there but I didn’t bother organizing it. I tried to use articles and videos from people who support Cathy and people who don’t):

nonplussedbyreligion.tumblr.com/post/28149182868/who-are-the-so-called-hate-groups-that-dan-cathy

christianpost.com/news/exodus-leaders-issue-statement-against-uganda-s-anti-gay-bill-44477/

exgaywatch.com/wp/2009/03/open-letter-to-the-exodus-international-board-of-directors/

exodusinternational.org/

frc.org/human-sexuality#homosexuality

religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/03/chick-fil-a-controversy-shines-light-on-companys-charitable-giving/

citypages.com/2010-05-26/news/university-of-minnesota-professor-s-research-hijacked/

splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/10-myths#

tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/family-research-council-labeled-hate-group-by-splc-over-anti-gay-rhetoric.php?ref=tn

youtube.com/watch?v=9xEJPvQr9Bc *

frc.org/get.cfm?i=by03f03

www.christianpost.com/news/exodus-leaders-issue-statement-against-uganda-s-anti-gay-bill-44477/

georgiafamily.org/press/column/redefining-marriage

newmexico.nationalchristian.com/ministries*

 

[april32010]

thank you marc,this represents a lot time and effort on your part.i’m sure lots of folks are going to appreciate it :clapping: :tiphat:

 

[bouncebanana]

thank you marc,this represents a lot time and effort on your part.i’m sure lots of folks are going to appreciate it :clapping: :tiphat:

I appreciate it. Bookmarking this thread.

 

[utah_rose]

Thank you, but I do disagree with your view of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” . This is already causing problems in the military, as chaplains are being forced to perform gay marriages. I don’t have any problems with a person being gay, but my son-in-law was a Naval officer, and many of the military dislike this reversal for various reasons.

An example of this is the recent Gay Pride parade in San Diego where openly gay military men and women, in uniform marched.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Thank you, but I do disagree with your view of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” . This is already causing problems in the military, as chaplains are being forced to perform gay marriages. I don’t have any problems with a person being gay, but my son-in-law was a Naval officer, and many of the military dislike this reversal for various reasons.

An example of this is the recent Gay Pride parade in San Diego where openly gay military men and women, in uniform marched.

Thanks for responding (thanks to everybody here, actually ).

1. I never said revoking “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was a good idea; I said it’s a pretty huge and in my view ridiculous leap to say that it will lead to gay men molesting other men.
2. What’s the problem with openly gay people in uniform marching?

 

[Marc_Anthony]

NOTE: This was meant to counter some claims of my friend (somebody who is interestingly against gay marriage), who claimed that The Family Research Council, the Family Foundation, and Exodus International were the equivalent of the homosexual KKK.

A gross exaggeration at best in the first example and blatantly false in the second example.

As for EI, he specifically claimed that their “missionary work” “helped lead to” Uganda’s infamous “Kill the Gays” law. Another gross exaggeration at best and falsehood at worst. In actuality they sent representatives to a council about the passing of the bill there almost a year before the bill was passed, and before the year was up they came out publicly against the bill.

He also said that they specialize in “re-orienting” homosexuals, which he meant as trying to help them become straight. In actuality they have moved away from that position and instead focus on helping homosexuals who wish to be celibate on overcoming their temptations.

It’s debatable if any of these are even hate groups (I would say no, definitely not, although I suppose you could make a case for a couple, if a sketchy one at best). It’s flat-out ludicrous and mildly offensive to call any of these groups the equivalent of the “homosexual KKK”.

 

[St_Francis]

Thanks for responding (thanks to everybody here, actually ).

1. I never said revoking “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was a good idea; I said it’s a pretty huge and in my view ridiculous leap to say that it will lead to gay men molesting other men.
2. What’s the problem with openly gay people in uniform marching?

First, let me say I join April in thanking for sharing the results of your research!

The problem with military personnel marching in uniform marching like that is that it has always been *forbidden. *The military are a branch of the government which represents and uses force to achieve its goals; it is totally inappropriate for people to appear in uniform on one side or another of a public political actvitiy *because *there is the implication not only of government support for one side of the issue (which is wrong) but the underlying implication of force.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

First, let me say I join April in thanking for sharing the results of your research!

Thank you!

The problem with military personnel marching in uniform marching like that is that it has always been *forbidden. *The military are a branch of the government which represents and uses force to achieve its goals; it is totally inappropriate for people to appear in uniform on one side or another of a public political actvitiy *because *there is the implication not only of government support for one side of the issue (which is wrong) but the underlying implication of force.

Ahhh, okay, thanks. Makes sense now.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

People can DO what they want on their own time, but I’ll tell them it’s sinful.

I read this over again and this quote sounds rather ridiculous. I’ll revise it:

“People can DO what they want on their own time, but that won’t stop the behavior from being sinful.”