I usually try to keep religion out of my posts on dyingread.

This isn’t because I’m ashamed of my religion or don’t think religion is relevant or important, but I know that religion can be a volatile topic for people—and when I say things like “Christian” or “Jesus”, that means different things to different people.

But, this is something I can’t not talk about. I need to write something because I have never seen the religious/homosexuality conflict reach this level of absurdity: that we would use the lives of young children as bargaining chips in our rhetoric-filled political skirmishes so we can feel like we’re more right than other people.

In case you have no clue what I’m talking about, two days ago, World Vision, a Christian aid organization, changed its hiring policy to include employees in a legal same-sex marriage.

Today, facing enormous protest and backlash—especially in the way of donors ceasing their funding—they reversed that decision.

Let’s skip a lot of the obvious—there are Christians who are against homosexuality, it’s a contentious issue, the Bible says this about gay people, it doesn’t say this about gay people, etc. etc. etc.

People believe things, others believe other things. That will not change any time soon.

The root of the World Vision controversy is this:

THESE PROTESTING DONORS CARE MORE ABOUT BEING RIGHT AND MAKING A STATEMENT THAN TAKING CARE OF POOR CHILDREN.

that is not ok.

Do donors have the right to allocate their money wherever they choose? Yes.

Should donors be discerning with how their money is used? Yes.

But let’s not lie to ourselves—the core issue here is not about allocation of funds, and not giving to something you don’t believe in—

THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT DONORS KNOW THEY CAN MAKE A STATEMENT WITH THEIR MONEY, AND THEY HAVE CHOSEN MAKING A STATEMENT OVER SAVING LIVES.

If we opened up the bank accounts of every single person who threatened or proceeded to pull their donations from World Vision, is it possible that we would find a purchase from a company or organization with at least one gay employee?

You’re right, that’s a stupid question. That’s what we in the biz call a rhetorical question. Get used to it—there’s plenty of rhetoric to go around these days.

If a person was really so against homosexuality that they could not, in good conscience, allocate a penny towards any organization or company with gay employees… they wouldn’t be able to spend money at all.

Good luck going to a grocery store, or Starbucks, McDonald’s, or Walmart.

Paying taxes would immediately become an issue as well.

So clearly, that’s not what’s going on here. The truth has to be something different. These donors must have pulled their funds for a different reason: they must believe that doing so can influence World Vision’s decision making.

Sadly, they’re right. And today, World Vision did the right thing by reversing their statement. It was the right thing to do because they knew if they didn’t, thousands, possibly millions of children would go uncared for, as donors against their hiring policy would stop giving to those in need.

World Vision’s reversal was embarrassing, humiliating, and hurtful for everyone involved.

We can call them spineless for backing away from what seemed like a stance of inclusivity.

We can call them sell-outs for being controlled by money and finances.

We can call them backstabbers and betrayers for opening the door for the LGBTQ community, and slamming it right back in their face.

But they had to do it because the lives of children mean more to them than being right, or politically correct, or being criticized, or being judged by people, or having the right doctrine and theology.

And it is with a truly heavy heart I recognize that not everyone can say that.

May God have mercy on us all.

image from World Vision