Quantcast

Is Wounded Warrior Project Anti-Christian?

Cal 2013/02/02 12:33:23
You!
Add Photos & Videos


So for those who don't know the back story I'll catch you up. The Liberty Baptist Church and Academy (in Fort Pierce, FL) recently decided that it would hold a donation drive within it's parish and school system. They wanted to support wounded veterans out of a sense of responsibility, out of charity, and to set a good example of patriotism. They we're coldly denied by Wounded Warriors Project in a single defeating letter. The pastor, Wallace Cooley, obviously thinking that their restriction was an error followed up…and low and behold found it to be true. Wounded Warrior Project will not accept donations that are religious or coming from a religious source; the exact quote from the letter being "We must decline the opportunity to be the beneficiary of your event due to our fundraising event criteria, which does’t allow community events to be religious in nature,”. The letter in image form can be found here.

Of course the entire community is now upset, and wondering why. Why can they not donate to wounded veterans who have fought for our right and liberties. Why does being Christian in this nation make you a second class citizen? That's a much larger issue I'm going to address this week because in all reality the land that was once the home of religious freedom is now locked tight. Religious freedom is only acceptable to those who are not of the faith now and Christianity from this nation is scrubbed from our culture with little to no resistance

Read More: http://patrioticvoices.com/2013/wounded-warrior-pr...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Kaleokualoha 2013/02/02 19:47:06 (edited)
    No it is not
    Kaleokualoha
    +22
    Instead of being "anti-Christian," the WWP is apparently against religious fundraising. Their letter indicates that the WWP rejects community events that are RELIGIOUS in nature, not just Christian. To conclude that their rejection is "anti-Christian" would be a fallacious "hasty generalization":

    "Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence— essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables. In statistics, it may involve basing broad conclusions regarding the statistics of a survey from a small sample group that fails to sufficiently represent an entire population.[1] Its opposite fallacy is called slothful induction, or denying a reasonable conclusion of an inductive argument (e.g. "it was just a coincidence")." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    I have no doubt that Christians, like everyone else, are welcome to directly donate to the WWP. The problem occurs when WWP fundraising EVENTS are religious in nature.

    To misrepresent WWP rejection of religious fundraising events, as a rejection of Christians per se, is to play an "identify card," much like playing a race card. In these cases rejection of a specific case is dishonestly claimed to be rejection o...

    Instead of being "anti-Christian," the WWP is apparently against religious fundraising. Their letter indicates that the WWP rejects community events that are RELIGIOUS in nature, not just Christian. To conclude that their rejection is "anti-Christian" would be a fallacious "hasty generalization":

    "Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence— essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables. In statistics, it may involve basing broad conclusions regarding the statistics of a survey from a small sample group that fails to sufficiently represent an entire population.[1] Its opposite fallacy is called slothful induction, or denying a reasonable conclusion of an inductive argument (e.g. "it was just a coincidence")." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    I have no doubt that Christians, like everyone else, are welcome to directly donate to the WWP. The problem occurs when WWP fundraising EVENTS are religious in nature.

    To misrepresent WWP rejection of religious fundraising events, as a rejection of Christians per se, is to play an "identify card," much like playing a race card. In these cases rejection of a specific case is dishonestly claimed to be rejection of an entire group. Using such identity cards reflects a lack of integrity.

    "If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters." - Alan Simpson
    (more)

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Baduyo 2013/08/17 16:14:30
    No it is not
    Baduyo
    wounded warriors; religion; they are all forms; christian; anti christian; etc; what does it matter; they fight and die for this country; Where were you when we needed you
  • Magik 2013/04/04 14:42:15
    No it is not
    Magik
    To say they are anti - Christian is to take what they have said and overlay it with your interpretation . It sounds like they want to remain free of any particular religious connection because of questions like you are asking .
  • Aingean 2013/03/09 23:18:39 (edited)
    No it is not
    Aingean
    +1
    Wounded Warriors website also states they wont take anything religiously afflicted, that means all religions not just Christianity. They are trying to avoid offending someone that is not of that religion, it is stupid but it isn't anti-Christian.
  • Mj PINKYFINGERDOWN 2013/02/20 22:44:22
  • MikeWon 2013/02/20 15:06:02
  • Samantha Green 2013/02/10 17:26:50
    No it is not
    Samantha Green
  • Scrappyang 2013/02/09 15:25:55
    No it is not
    Scrappyang
    +1
    They are a PRIVATE charity, not involved with the government. If you feel others can decide who and what/who to serve/deny, then those rules must apply to all private entities, not just those you agre with. If you think they are anti-Christian, then put your money else where.
  • gracious43 2013/02/07 21:25:15
    No it is not
    gracious43
    If they open the door for taking money from a Christian donation, then they must take it from a satanic donation, or a new-age group. By stating no religious money at all, they close the door to anything that members might find objectionable.

    My brother was a member of a charity which refused to take money from a brewery. I don't blame them. I don't blame churches that refuse to take money from gambling winnings. No charity should be forced to take money from an activity they find morally offensive.
  • elijahin24 2013/02/07 18:05:46
    No it is not
    elijahin24
    And to suggest that being Christian in this nation, relegates one to 2nd class citizenship, would be laughable if it weren't so enraging. WWP has a clear point here: In order to serve ALL soldiers, they must not be directly affiliated with any group united by political affiliation or religion. If this pastor said he wanted to hold a fund-raiser in his COMMUNITY, based on a shared love of our returning veterans, and NOT based upon religion, I'm sure WWP would have been happy to oblige. His congregants could have attended.
    Look at it a different way: if a Mosque had offered this same idea, and they had accepted, is it not likely (if not inevitable) that some in this country would accuse them of supporting the radical policies of SOME Muslims; even if this particular Mosque was anything BUT radical? And if they turned down a request from one religious organization, but accepted that of another, would they not be viewed as bigoted against the one they turned down?
    To have a blanket policy prohibiting ANY religion-based fundraising, they allow themselves to avoid that scrutiny from ANY REASONABLE person. Clearly there are at least 16 UNreasonable people (so far) who are not disuaded from such scrutiny.
  • ✞Knight of Honor 2013/02/07 00:06:44
    Yes it is
    ✞Knight of Honor
    Blatantly so.
  • No it is not
    ⚥Κόζμω Græme اليا Mongrain
    RED HERRING
  • D S 2013/02/06 02:46:32
    No it is not
    D S
    "Wounded Warrior Project will not accept donations that are religious or coming from a religious source;"
    Says nothing about "Christian".
    Sounds like you're trying stir up something that isn't there.
  • MapoTofu 2013/02/05 21:39:10
    Undecided
    MapoTofu
    It seems to me the only group not acting in a Christian manner is our very own government. Why isn't there a provision to help all Veterans when they return from wars that protect our fat asses from the enemy?
    And while I agree semantically and logically with the Top Opinion, it also seems the only losers here are once again the Veterans, because the WWP is denying those funds.
  • elijahin24 MapoTofu 2013/02/07 18:07:07
    elijahin24
    WWP is not a part of the government. It's a private organization.
  • MapoTofu elijahin24 2013/02/07 23:32:20
    MapoTofu
    I am aware of that. Not questioning their RIGHT to refuse, just their reason. At stake are the Veteran and the funds they need. Accept the money, help the Vet and leave the superfluous ideology out of it. People complicate too many things unnecessarily.
  • elijahin24 MapoTofu 2013/02/09 02:09:17
    elijahin24
    Usually, involving religious groups, is a good way TOO complicate things.
  • John 2013/02/05 17:51:17
  • xcheshirecat 2013/02/05 07:46:55
    No it is not
    xcheshirecat
    Don't you know the difference between a person and an organization?
  • ttfndude 2013/02/05 04:24:03
    No it is not
    ttfndude
    but that doesn't take away the fact that all federal government intities have become anti-christian......
  • John ttfndude 2013/02/05 18:08:27
  • ttfndude John 2013/02/06 03:36:04
    ttfndude
    make me.....because I know what I am capable of do you?
  • P. Sturm 2013/02/05 02:16:36
    No it is not
    P. Sturm
    They refuse funding from all religions equally.
  • Shifting Piece 2013/02/04 23:48:30
    No it is not
    Shifting Piece
    +1
    No. I don't believe so.
  • hawk Semper Fi 2013/02/04 23:20:02
    No it is not
    hawk Semper Fi
    +1
    They are not simple as that if you care to read the repay and understand it It states that they do not allow any community evens to be religious in nature.
    Keys words here are do not allow any that covers all religions not just Christianity.

    People need to grow up and stop being so PC.

    Semper Fi
  • MONGOOSE 2013/02/04 23:17:06
    No it is not
    MONGOOSE
    +1
    No way.........When someone signs up to go into the military you are the property of the United States on all what you believe in goes right out the door. So if you were a Christian going in it doesn't have anything to do with what you believe in before, if you were just a person walking down the street at the same and you both sign into the military that's it.
    Shot or not does not make you nothing but a wounded trooper.
    Look it up if you even have the military course book.
    I like how you talk about stuff.
    "THE MONGOOSE"
    troops hand book
  • Zippcodey 2013/02/04 23:06:49
    Undecided
    Zippcodey
    Let the government take care of them then, if they don't want any money coming from religious organizations. If this government can't take care of wounded soldiers they better get out of the war business.
  • MONGOOSE Zippcodey 2013/02/04 23:49:20
    MONGOOSE
    OH the military and are government will take those that signed up to be in to whatever branch they did.......There all the same, when they think in what they believe in is going to get them out of any type of trouble, when they signed up now they are the property of the United States and they could faced with a dishonest able-discharge.
    I know a few that were stupid enough to do so.....They went to the Military Attornery that was a big mistake which they both found out a bit to late and faced with a dishonest able-discharge from the Marines they only had 8 months into them anyway, didn't even het into combat.
    "THE MONGOOSE" what do you beieve
  • Tennessee3501 2013/02/04 22:48:31
    No it is not
    Tennessee3501
    The constitutional lawyers should look very carefully at this! As Hamlet said: "Something is rotten in the State of Denmark."
  • charles nelson 2013/02/04 22:43:31
    Undecided
    charles nelson
    Just tryin to keep things simple ..
  • Ashley 2013/02/04 21:13:06
    Undecided
    Ashley
    I have no idea.
  • leslie 2013/02/04 20:47:23
    No it is not
    leslie
    +3
    No it is not Anti-Christian.
    They are a Secular organization that is doing good for all Returning Vets who may be in need. They are Anti RELIGION PERIOD be it Christian/Jewish/Muslim. Those who are coming back in need do not need a religious organization They need real and valid help and that is what WWP is doing. THEY Exist for one reason. Helping Returning Veterans in need. It is typical of a Right Wing Conservative Christian Nut Job Paranoid Conspiracy Theorists to accuse caring NON RELIGIOUS individuals of being Anti-Christian.
  • wow-really 2013/02/04 20:31:45
    No it is not
    wow-really
    +1
    If a muslim/islamic temple were to do the same, I have no doubt people would question their sincerity and motive for doing so. Unfortunately we live in a time where religious faith, regardless of what kind, is a dirty word. No body wants to be associated with it one way or another, as it has become politically incorrect. Just look at our own president. Depending in which state or crowd he is in, depends on what faith he chooses to tout.
    As we all know, when people start deciding what is and what's not P/C, people will get their feelings hurt, one way or another.
    Too bad, because the only people we hurt by being P/C, is ourselves in the long run. And I'm sure those poor wounded soldiers wouldn't cared where those donations came from ... What they care most about is that someone cares about them to donate in the first place. PERIOD!
  • teachaman~PWCM~JLA 2013/02/04 19:56:42
    No it is not
    teachaman~PWCM~JLA
    +3
    it's a tax-code thing ... Liberty Baptist should instruct its parishoners to donate personally, and not en mass ...
  • robert.goldsmith.14 2013/02/04 18:16:54
  • Walter Harris 2013/02/04 17:24:14
    Undecided
    Walter Harris
    i can't tell yeh or neh but i can say that it keeps them more secretive so they can deny some warriors to keep from paying money that they would ordinarily have for themselves. put in lamens terms. they are probably pocketing some of the money
  • Linnster Walter ... 2013/02/05 01:53:51
    Linnster
    Look them up on charitynavigator.com and you can see exactly where the money goes.
  • john brenni 2013/02/04 16:59:27
  • Bastion 2013/02/04 16:48:51
    No it is not
    Bastion
    +2
    It's pro-secular . . . which is GREAT.

    It's a very good idea for an organization like the Wounded Warrior Project to keep separate from fundamentalist religious groups . . . it would tangle up their mission with too much nonsense.

    Quote from the Liberty Baptist website: "teaching of the theory of evolution attempts to destroy the foundation of our faith" - Wounded Warriors does NOT need to get mixed up with this kind of ignorance.
  • Sweet-N-Sour 2013/02/04 16:15:52
    Undecided
    Sweet-N-Sour
    Interestingly, they have also rejected advertising exposure on Gun Talk Radio because they did not want to be associated with guns and Second Amendment issues. (Something that American veterans fight for, ironically) They also claim that is their policy. They did not seem to have any problem taking money from a Playboy sponsored fundraiser though. They have every right to accept donations from whom they wish but it seems hypocritical to support vets and reject many of the very groups that stand behind these veterans wholeheartedly. That's fine though, from what I understand, they give 17% or less to veteran causes after advertising and administrative salaries. There are better charities out there that give more help to our vets. WWP has become a bloated, self important caricature of itself. See the Gary Sinise Foundation for better ones.
  • CocaColaCandy 2013/02/04 15:12:28 (edited)
    No it is not
    CocaColaCandy
    +1
    First, the article refers to the event being religious in nature, not the organization. What exactly about the proposed event made it a religious event according to their policy is unclear, there are no details. Second, it refers to religion in general. It is a public organization which cannot sponsor religious events of any kind and does not single out Christianity. So the answer has to be NO.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/20 22:15:32

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals