Wounded Warriors reject donations from Religious Group
 

So basically, if you are church then you are not good enough to accept donations from.....

Wow... [foxnews.com]

Uhmmmmmmmm, maybe someone should remind them what the Corp's motto is.

Hint - Latin for always faithful. Faithful to God, Country, Family and the Corps.

I say fine with the decision (if it's what they want to do it's their right but I do think it's stupid) but what shocks me is that you have to pay a $100 registration fee to raise money for them. I'll remember both the next time they call. Actually they just called me this week so it'll probably be about 2 more weeks until they call back!

Play that victim card!

Ironically this same guy would be raising hell if a muslim organization wanted to do the same thing.

More likely to be raising hell about our government giving weapons to a muslim nation.

??

Not sure what you mean, im saying if a mosque wanted to do a fund raising event for wounded warriors he would criticize them for associating with a "terorrist" religion.

I was referring to the Egypt thread.

I don't know that the OP would object to anyone donating to Wounded Warriors.

I see no reason to make that connection. My pastor certainly wouldn't have a problem if a Mosque wanted to raise money for Wounded Warriors...

Im not talking about the OP im talking about the blogger for fox news

The little girl was holding a puppy too.

The no-religious-organization rule is obviously a longstanding policy from an organization that does A LOT of good. So now FoxNews has decided to drive a Jesus wedge between a group that helps wounded soldiers and potential donors. Questions: who wins and who loses here? Can't these kind-hearted churchgoes make a donation without doing so through their church and without going to the media? Should donors to the Wounded Warriors and other worthy causes now expect something in return, ideologically at least?

There is absolutely absurd behavior by the church and FoxNews. Another good reason to bring back the draft and let these war hawks stare death and injury in the face.

What about if the church in question was Unification church or church of David Koresh? Or should charities be forced to accept all gifts?

similarly westboro baptist church

If Wounded Warriors doesn't want their money, I am sure there are plenty of other groups who would gratefully accept it. I think their policy is stupid, but I support their right to do stupid things.

What has church done to deserve such treatment?

I mean the last time I checked the Church wasn't asking to be able to dictate how the funds are used or asking for any changes to WW's operations and policy. I fail to see how accepting money with no strings attached would have any negative impact...

Perhaps churches should rethink about how they treat others as second class citizens.

Maybe it was this church? http://slickdeals.net/f/5833900-A...t-auto-tip

Is it telling a religious organization would make a big stink about this?

Not everyone who serves in the Marines is faithful to "God". Some are faithful to multiple Gods and some find faithfulness to family, country and the Corps is enough without involving an invisible sky friend.

Soooooooooooooooo F'ing what? Does that same Marine not use money because it says "In God We Trust" on it? What about Wounded Warriors? They have no problem spending money with 'In God We Trust" on it but draw the line at accepting money from a religious organization? If this particular church is one that is basically a hate mongering church I can totally see it but it's their poicy in general to not accept $ from religious organizations? If you have a point in regards to my post I am not seeing it. As a charity who is trying to help others I'd be happy to get funds from most places. I'd draw the line at things like hate mongering organizations, the mob, etc. but good old fashioned good people who believe there is some invisible guy in the sky I'd be willing to accept. Especially when those I am helping fought for God, Country, Family and Corp.

I didn't come up with the Marine Corp motto, they did. My point is simply that every friggin Marine knows what Semper Fi is yet this agency, who supposedly wants to help wounded warriors, turned down funds. If they want to fine, after all I would think it's their right. Maybe you should contact the Marine Corp to see if they'll get rid of their motto. Hell, I'm sure there are people in there that don't even believe in the Corp... Maybe their motto should be something "we just like to blow shit up and get buzz cuts"??? :D

I'd draw the line at not accepting donations from churches that eagerly seek to damage the reputation of a charity they claim to support, in order to advance their political goals.

"Ohhh! Look at us! We're poor, poor discriminated white Christian people! Pity us! Look how badly Obama's treating us! It's a Culture War!"

Were the donations denied after they "sought to damage the reputation"? No, they were denied before. It sounds like they weren't told "no" and then they called up every news agency out there either. They're giving a statement, not burning crosses in Wounded Warriors front yard. What has Obama got to do with anything in this case?

Really man, you are being a bit loony... O_o

One has to question a group that turns down funds raised for its purposes. If I took a bag of groceries to the local food bank and they said "thanks but no thanks. We don't take donations from men." I would question how serious they are about helping those they claim to help. And I would probably find another avenue for my donations.

Dude, I was using sar-casm! Look into it. Lighten up.

The group decided they wanted no religious affiliations; it's just that simple. It's not that the church wanted to donate money; they wanted to organize fund-raising events on behalf of the charity. And so this would publicize the charity and the church together, which the charitable group wants to avoid.

Seems to me like WW has a very clear and established policy about not taking donations from religious organizations... I don't see this as a big deal.
If the people who raised the money are sincere about donating to this particular charity they can do it as individuals. The money will be put to good use regardless of if it came from the Church or individual donors.

I fail to see how taking one check from 50 members of a religion or 50 checks makes any difference. Do they check the religions of individual donors?

It just makes me think many of their executives drawing six figure salaries [wikipedia.org] may be a little too comfortable. And spending 45 cents of each donated dollar on administration [charitynavigator.org] may be a little steep.

I'm just asking :D

Don't want any more misunderstandings going on in this thread then there already are :hug:

ummm, the "jesus wedge" was driven into place by WW not anyone else. you seem to be railing against dissemination of this information. If WW has nothing to hide, why all the complaining?

but cant that argument be made both ways? people generally dont like to be treated the way WW treated this group. please note, they have a right to do what they did but they also have to live with the consequences.

Overall, this is a huge mistake. Many of the nations religious are the same people that love the military.... my guess is they just alienated thier biggest supporters. not a good plan.

It is the church that is complaining and it is Fox News that wrote the hatchet job.

A gift or donation is something that is given without expecting anything return. You don't ask a charity to change its rules for you and then start a public smear campaign against them if they don't agree.

Again, I bet none of these "decent" churchgoing folk have given half of what one of these injured veterans have sacrificed. These people are not Christians at all.

WWP just made a big mistake.

They wont be getting anymore donations from me. Ill be contacting USAA as well, because they have a WWP credit card going. Hopefully my voice along with millions others will get USAA to disassociate themselves with Anti-Gun Anti-Christian bigots.

Terrible behavior. It's not like the church lost anything. The charity refunded their registration fee, and explained nicely why they couldn't accept their money. The church can just do something else with that money. It's very poor behavior on their part to then go crying to the media about it.

The church has every right to speak out if they believe they were treated unfairly. And the news media has every right to run with the story. That pesky first amendment thing...

Maybe the attention will embarrass WWP into changing its stupid policy. And maybe it will invite some much needed scrutiny of all those six figure executive salaries at WWP.

"Treated unfairly..."
"Stupid policy..."

Ok.. how was the church "treated unfairly"???
WWP has a policy that they enforce equally anytime a donation comes from a religious organization.
I don't see how that is treating anybody unfairly.

A charity CHOOSES to remove themselves from drama by not accepting donations from ANY orgainzation within specific parameters... how is this "stupid"?
They do not accept donations from ANY religious organization. This significantly reduces any chance of being drawn into drama by whack jobs who say "zOMG!! they're taking donations from Muslims!".
Just say NO to them all, problem solved.


The MEMBERS of that church are more than welcome to forward their individual donations to WWP if they so choose. This is not a "Stupid policy" ..

so? they complained about a policy big deal. ironically, they complained a WW and now you started your own mini-smear campaign against "decent" churhgoing folk. lol the irony.

umm. first amendment. so why not?

talk about a wild unsubstantiated ignorant claim. first off, they were attempting to raise money for WW.... and were shut down. so your anger is that they should just STFU and let the athiests of the world shut them out of charity? nah, being christian has nothing to do with taking it up the ass from athiests.

So, you believe this church and this news outlet should not be allowed to exercise their rights under the first amendment?

Money raised by a religious organization is as green as money from anywhere else. If this charity really cared about helping wounded vets, they would take that money and use it.

Again, kudos to this church for publicly shaming WWP for its stupid policy.

There is no government action involved here and thus no First Amendment issue. Additionally, the First Amendment is concerned with what you can say and not with what you should say. There's a difference.

This charity has a registration fee. Do you *honestly* think, when you submit the request, that it doesn't mention anything about who they accept money from? Yes, the charity is to blame for accepting the registration in the first place but the church is also to blame for either thinking the rules don't apply to them or for not reading what they were signing up to in the first place.

Sounds like you are the one is getting all offended at one word (supposedly) and then lashing out at people.

A bar in my town has an unwritten anti-gay policy. Many gay people have complained. I don't see the big deal though. It's not like the gay community has lost anything. Gay people can just do something else with the money the planned on spending in the bar. It's very poor behavior on their part to then go crying to the media about it.

all these people have a right to say what they want, incuding you. why you crying like a baby about it? i get it, you don't like what they are saying. boo hoo.

i have no idea.

i have never heard of a charity not accepting money from a religious group before. i have personally worked with mulitple charities (non faith based) and was honestly surprised to hear this. Are you aware of this policy at other charities?

In 2011 they took in 70 million. lets see what that is after people learn of this policy. I will add (again) that shunning gun loving christians will cut into donations by 50% i bet. its a bad policy born of political extremism (IMHO).

after about 10 minutes on the WWP website i was unable to find this policy, even in the faq section. but its possible i missed it.

edit: i did look at the registration page and donation page as well.

I looked over their website pretty thoroughly last night and also found zero mention of any such policies.

Edit: I found some references with google's help

Host an Event [woundedwarriorproject.org]

WWP does not co-brand, create cause marketing campaigns or receive a percentage or a portion of proceeds from companies in which the product or message is sexual, political or religious in nature, or from alcohol or weapon companies [wwphighcap.org]


Interestingly, the policy quoted in the email from WWP to the church is slightly different from the policy on their website.

To me this reads like a misunderstanding. Like someone at WWP thought the church wanted to host a WWP co-branded fundraiser. The article reads like the church just wanted to give them a check from money they had collected.

Presumably the church could take an offering generically for wounded veterans w/o any WWP branding and send it to WWP and they would cash the check. They just won't co-brand certain events. That would make more sense.

good find.

Lol. No one is questioning their right to say what they want. People are questioning the church's grandstanding when it's done to the detriment of people who have lost limbs serving their country in combat.

lol, that was the choice WWP made not the church. you have it backwards. if this policy didnot exist, the church would have made a donation. your interpretation of the course of events are comical.

Denying someone service out of bigotry is different from refusing a donation out of a desire to avoid drama. Your example is flawed.

The patrons are donating to the owner's retirement and his children's college fund.

Let's suppose that some gay rights organization wanted to fundraise for WWP and got shot down. Don't you think MSNBC would be all over this and a lot of people would be on the other side of the issue?

there is about a snowball chance in hell that MSNBC, CNN, Obama, etc. etc. would not be railing against WWP. And all the faux outrage against the church wouls be outrage against the WWP. :vomit:

There's been a truckload of posts removed from this thread. If yours was one of them, consider your tone and try not to repeat it.

church money = money from donations
wounded warriors = charitable foundation

why not just skip the middle-man (the church) and have people donate directly to wounded warriors as opposed to the church? the religious leaders can all encourage their devotees to donate to other causes, as opposed to making that choice for them

because many of these organizations (not just churches) host a fund raiser... monte carlo, octoberfest, silent auction etc. etc. never been to one eh? :lol:

Equally puzzling, a search in google news reveals a lot of churches raising funds for WWP. I'm guessing they didn't bother to ask permission and just held a bake sale or similar for WWP.

Will WWP be sending all of those checks back? Going after those churches for "co-branding" without their permission?

christians should NEVER EVER express disapooointment with any person or organization EVER as this would be a direct violation of "turn the other cheek" policy. We should also to take this opportunity to empty out the prisons for any criminal act against any christian ever since it would be anti-christian to imprison them. we should also "mark" all christians with a red cross on thier arms to that any non-christian is immediately aware that the individual has no legal or moral recourse for any actions taken against the christian, as again this would be a violation of said policy. any christians refusing to be branded and/or those taking any action not in accordance with "turn the other cheek" policy show be thrown in prison and a special prosecutor assigned his or her case as appointed by the Joint American Commision Kreating an Athiest Supreme Society (also known as JACKASS).

I'm outraged.

Really.

you should be, this is a serious issue. we must silence these hypocriitical Christians!

The same reason that other organizations make group donations.

As long as the funds are not islamic, which are equally meant for terrorists and warriors, makes no sense rejecting them. Having said that, dare not point a finger on our warriors.

you lead the charge...

Huh?.

How may I please you?

it should be clear to everyone except thos wako Christian hypocrites that these "donations" were just a way to lay the ground owrk for a future smear campaign, duh. let me guess, you think that these people wanted to actually HELP wounded vets???? yeah right, I can see right through the bullshit christian lies!!!

we must all unite behind JACKASS!!!!

Makes little sense rejecting donations from Church. Donations are sacred as long as they are not from Mosques.

no, actually stress free, thanks for asking!

i just think that it may be a little easier dealing with the extremists around here using sarcasm rather than logic.

As others have alluded to I think the title is kinda misleading. Here is the frist prpahragh from the article:

A Christian church and school in Florida are devastated after they said Wounded Warrior Project refused to accept their fund raising effort because it was “religious in nature.”

fund-raising efforts =/= donations

Why the spin?

I always find that a bit of humor works well with Elmer.

;)

Crybaby to the mods to get my post deleted but not yours eh? Classy.

The church could have expressed their disappointment to the group and moved on. Instead they went the utterly classless route by raising a stink with the news media. Again, free speech is one thing, but don't pretend your organization's shit don't stink and you are better than everyone else when you do crap like this. Mark Twain said it best, no way in hell Jesus would be a Christian these days.

you kidding right? you think I mod alerted them? unbelievable.

let me see if I got your opinion correct. all Christians are useless sacks of skin because one church made comments like these:

"We are second-class citizens now because we are people of faith.”

“We appreciate the freedoms we enjoy in this country and the fact that our soldiers have fought for freedom of religion,” he said. “We teach patriotism in our school.”

“We are not a wealthy congregation,” he said. “But they are generous. We could tell as we began to talk to our people that it stirred their hearts.”

“Our school is all about patriotism,” she told Fox News. “We teach that our country was founded for religious freedom – and then to find out that we couldn’t even support the Wounded Warriors because we are Christians – it was hard to explain it to them.”

“They were very sad,” Albritton wrote. “One little girl wanted to know, ‘Why can’t we share with the soldiers?’”

“I was at a loss as to what I should tell her because I don’t understand it myself,” she wrote. “Well, WWP, why can’t we share with the soldiers?”

“one of the saddest letters I have ever had to write.”

“We are very disappointed that we, as a religious organization, are being discriminated against,” he wrote to parents. “But they are a private organization and have and should have the freedom to make their own rules.”

“we also have the right to make our choice as to where our support goes.”

“I am deeply disappointed that an organization such as yours would reject money from American citizens who want to thank their soldiers for what they have done,”

“I can’t say that I’ve found a good way to explain it to my children yet,”

I mean WOW, these are some soulless evil people in that congregation. I bet they bite the heads of chickens too while looking for ways to subvert donations to the poor and needy. with evil like this in America why waste our time looking for terrorists in other countries???

they had already collected some money:

it does not make sense to me. It seems their policy is to avoid co-branding. Why would they care if the pastor of a church writes a check to them.

its a good question. honestly, I get the not wanting co-branding to avoid problems with potential donors but the policy they have is kinda strange to me. Like I said above, my guess is you have some ranking members with an extreme anti-religion view.

The email sent from WWP to the church says that WWP will not accept the proceeds of fundraising from a religious organization. The policy on WWP's website does NOT say that. My guess is that WWP employs one or more people who don't understand their policies. It seems like one or more parties may be confusing fundraising with hosting a WWP co-branded fundraiser.

I think it's pretty funny you seem to think that society somehow revolves around a game of atheists vs. Christians. Frankly, atheists aren't the only group that are sick of Christian arrogance, self privilege/importance and laughable persecution complex.

excellent straw man. really, you should be proud. if there was a logical fallacy olympic event, you would be a contender.

as I am enlightened I will turn the other cheek. Here is my house and my car, you car kill my family and have everything.... I will ALWAYS turn the other cheek.... after all it is more important to me that non-Christians see me as "true to my religion" than for me to care for my life/family/possessions.

You're not doing much to disprove the persecution complex bit

wasn't trying too to be honest. making fun of the poster that called out this church for not turning the other cheek.

If the WWP had turned down the NAACP instead of a Christian church, every single one of the haters in this thread talking about persecution complexes would be on the other side calling WWP a bunch of racists and worse. :rofl2:

Link please.

No doubt.....

Do you need to make up BS and then rage against it? or is that just a hobby?

Wounded Warrior Project Apologizes for Rejecting Church Donation
 

“The truth is – it was a mistake from a junior staff member,” the spokesperson said. “We register religious events on a regular basis and always have.” [foxnews.com]

details details details.:

It's clear that the pastor really cares about WWP, especially since he went back to Fox News with a follow up scoop.

If for no other reason, and this is the one that matters, some wounded veteran will now get the assistance they need. I'm guessing that redass's mind is blown by this turn of events. I mean, how in the world could they ever accept donations from a religious organization when there are umpteen reasons not to! :wave:

Seriously though, I wouldn't have a problem with them accepting $ from an alcohol or tobacco company either. I mean it'd be one thing to have a co-branded commercial, but accepting a blank check with no requirements to do anything whatsoever seems like an ok thing.

I agree - the more $ to wounded vets the better. I have a feeling that their co-branding policy is to avoid something like a bunny ranch in Nevada hosting a fund raiser that might reflect negatively on WWP. But, to be honest, I wouldn't have an issue with that.