There’s been a lot of talk this Advent on some blogs and in some Christian circles about the Target department store chain refusing to allow the Salvation Army to put its bellringers outside their stores. Much of the talk has portrayed Target’s decision as anti-Christian, but I think that’s a false conclusion based on this story from World magazine. According to the article, Target has been making an exception to its general rule disallowing solicitations on their property for the Salvation Army over the years, but now other groups are insisting that if an exception is made for the Salvation Army, it should be made for them. Can you imagine what it would be like having to run the gauntlet of hawkers and solicitors of all kinds as you try to get in an out of the store?
So Target did the only thing it could and began enforcing its rule. And you know what? The Salvation Army agrees and understands.
No hard feelings, says Dallas-area Salvation Army spokesman Pat Patey: “We understand there comes a time when you’ve heard enough of, ‘Well how can you let the Salvation Army be there and not let us there.’ We regret it, but it’s understandable.”
So if the Salvation Army understands, why is there such a clamor from everyone else over this?
There is a clamor because this fits into a meta-story about Christianity being marginalized from public life.
And if that were what this is about I’d agree, but people have made it into something it’s not.
The other groups should accept Salvation Army exceptionalism.
The Salvation Army should say without apologizing that they should be an exception to the no solicitation rule. They have earned it.
“So if the Salvation Army understands, why is there such a clamor from everyone else over this?”
They don’t know that the SA understands, and the fact that they do understand doesn’t get nearly as much attention (as in attention span) as as those who don’t know they understand.
Understand?
Target’s stores are private property. They can let on whomever they want, and if other groups feel excluded, that’s tough. Target definitely folded due to the overwhelmingly Christian image of the Salvation Army.
Your comment on arbortion is unfair. The army is pro-life, but tolarates abortion in life of the mother and rape/incest. Very GW Bush like. I disagree with the SA, but I would say this: I prefer their hard line on their positions than the truely pro-abort / pro-gay Catholics that we are so painfully aware of.
The SA’s positions overall embody what I think is a Christian world-view, backed up by good deeds. A real example to our Church. They also have the fortitude to discipline erring members, a major failing of our Church so well discussed at this site.
http://www.salvationarmyusa.org/usn/www_usn.nsf/vw-dynamic-arrays/85256DDC007274DF80256B7D004F2F81?openDocument
Target definitely folded due to the overwhelmingly Christian image of the Salvation Army.
Can you offer any evidence that Target kicked out the SA because of their Christian image because the SA itself certainly doesn’t act like that was the cause?
Oh, and they’re not my comments on abortion. I said that some people have pointed out their allowance for abortion in some cases. Is that true or not? So how can it be unfair to say it?
Dom,
There are bell ringers permitted at many other stores and these corporations have no problem with it. I have a hunch that Target caved into political pressures, but is, of course, making up an excuse that doesn’t hold water. My supermarket chain here in the Chicago area is part of the Safeway Corporation and they have SA bell ringers.
I think when we can get all of our bishops on board with a strong stance on prolife issues, and quit being mealy mouthed about their positions on homosexual marriages, zealous activism and priestly abuse, then we can throw stones at SA’s exceptions on abortion. We are just to plagued with problems at every level in the Church to take much issue with SA.
I have both written Target stating that I will not shop there and have increased my donations to SA.
I think when we can get all of our bishops on board with a strong stance on prolife issues, and quit being mealy mouthed about their positions on homosexual marriages, zealous activism and priestly abuse, then we can throw stones at SA_content>The SA where I live is expecting to lose quite a bit of money because of the new ban. What annoys me is the fact that Target *is* private and could perfectly well say that they allow the SA and no-one else. People are actually capable of understanding such things. Therefore what I, and I suspect others, think is that someone high up is now hostile to the SA. Fine. Say so. Take the consequences if there are any. This way I just think Target is becoming part of the confusion over what the government can and cannot do and whether anyone is allowed to be different.
Of course, others have pointed out that the Salvation Army is officially pro-abortion in certain circumstances, causing some re-thinking of support for the denomination—- who is tired and cranky as he writes this and knows he’s not supposed to write when he’s tired and cranky, thank you very much.
I would would say rude, not blunt. Nothing has been proved except that you’re a gossipmonger. And not a very nice one to throw stones at such a fine Christian organization as the Salvation Army.
Adios.
See, this is what I don’t get. You’d think people would believe it was important to know whether an otherwise nice Christian organization actually said it was okay with abortion in some instance. But I see that actually asking questions and trying to get at the truth is gossipmongering now. Talking about a religious denomination’s beliefs and tenets is gossipmongering now? Especially when what I was saying is apparently true?
Isn’t gossipmongering talking about someone else’s private dirty laundry in public? Is the creed of a Protestant denomination now private dirty laundry?
Again, who was throwing stones? Some people said the Salvation Army is okay with abortion in some circumstances. I repeated what other people said. Apparently it is true that they are okay with abortion in some circumstances. I didn’t say that they’re all going to Hell, that they’re not Christian, that we should shun them. I said it will cause some people to re-think whether to give money to them.
Sheesh, talk about thin-skinned people.