'Us' working in accordance with like-minded people who happen to be churchgoers.
Neither one of us seems to have statistics ready, but I'm willing to bet that far, far more religious people think homosexuals should be serviced than those who think otherwise. And I have a really hard time believing that the Salvation Army has, all things considered, been a historically bad or malevolent organization. Although certainly there can be room for improvement in their operations (assuming what you've said is correct).
Why does any attack on those treatments need to come from aggregated atheists? In the end it makes the problem more religious than it has to be. Better efforts would go toward attacking the practice of service denial without bringing theistic connotations up any more than they need to be. And there is no reason that these efforts need to be taken on just by atheists; theists, as well, I'm sure will largely agree in attacking the practice.
Because I see too many believers staying quiet about it rather than speaking up against their fundamentalist counterparts. I don't see a lot of moderate or liberal Christians telling their conservative brothers to sit down and shut up, especially not the way the conservatives are scolding the moderates and liberals.
This doesn't mean that I'm not willing to make common cause with the moderates and liberals. It means I'm willing to do it without them.
I don't attack religious beliefs because I hate the religious. I don't challenge religious claims out of malice or revenge. I call attention to their bad behavior because they're being bad and we need as many people stepping forward to challenge them as possible. I see more atheists willing to stand up than I do believers. I will keep doing it until my participation is no longer necessary.
I'm glad you're having a better experience, but I don't think it's safe to say that your experience is representative.
'If not us, then who?'
'Us' working in accordance with like-minded people who happen to be churchgoers.
Neither one of us seems to have statistics ready, but I'm willing to bet that far, far more religious people think homosexuals should be serviced than those who think otherwise. And I have a really hard time believing that the Salvation Army has, all things considered, been a historically bad or malevolent organization. Although certainly there can be room for improvement in their operations (assuming what you've said is correct).
Why does any attack on those treatments need to come from aggregated atheists? In the end it makes the problem more religious than it has to be. Better efforts would go toward attacking the practice of service denial without bringing theistic connotations up any more than they need to be. And there is no reason that these efforts need to be taken on just by atheists; theists, as well, I'm sure will largely agree in attacking the practice.
Because I see too many believers staying quiet about it rather than speaking up against their fundamentalist counterparts. I don't see a lot of moderate or liberal Christians telling their conservative brothers to sit down and shut up, especially not the way the conservatives are scolding the moderates and liberals.
This doesn't mean that I'm not willing to make common cause with the moderates and liberals. It means I'm willing to do it without them.
I don't attack religious beliefs because I hate the religious. I don't challenge religious claims out of malice or revenge. I call attention to their bad behavior because they're being bad and we need as many people stepping forward to challenge them as possible. I see more atheists willing to stand up than I do believers. I will keep doing it until my participation is no longer necessary.
I'm glad you're having a better experience, but I don't think it's safe to say that your experience is representative.