Of course any article can be biased, but this one has cited sources, at least. It would take further digging to determine if those sources are credible.
In my opinion and based on my past reading on the subject, the simple fact that it’s a religious organization is enough to dissuade me from giving them anything. It is no small statistic that religious organizations are corrupt, hypocritical, expect obedience over tolerance, anti-union, anti-LGBTQ, ultra-conservative, and generally support the notion that people must be submissive to their authority.
I’ll continue to donate to secular organizations that do genuine good.
Off the top of my head, I can only think of primary sources. Would need to dive into some academic tools to find sufficient sources for Wikipedia’s requirements. I’ll make a note to do so, when I get the time to do so.
Can you back that up ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Salvation_Army#Biased_History
Not OP, but I found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Preacher_and_the_Slave
Ah that makes sense, they were competing for the same demographic for their recruitment efforts.
Of course any article can be biased, but this one has cited sources, at least. It would take further digging to determine if those sources are credible.
https://libcom.org/article/starvation-army-twelve-reasons-reject-salvation-army
In my opinion and based on my past reading on the subject, the simple fact that it’s a religious organization is enough to dissuade me from giving them anything. It is no small statistic that religious organizations are corrupt, hypocritical, expect obedience over tolerance, anti-union, anti-LGBTQ, ultra-conservative, and generally support the notion that people must be submissive to their authority.
I’ll continue to donate to secular organizations that do genuine good.
Off the top of my head, I can only think of primary sources. Would need to dive into some academic tools to find sufficient sources for Wikipedia’s requirements. I’ll make a note to do so, when I get the time to do so.