ICYMI, in this week’s edition of Evangelicals Sure Are Funny, And Not In A Good Way, we were treated to, in the span of less than 48 hours, a large Christian charity announcing it would open employment to workers in legal, same-sex marriages, followed by a massive conservative evangelical freakout, followed by a quick reversal of the same-sex-hiring decision by the charity, World Vision.
World Vision is an organization that supports needy children in third-world countries. A central feature of this support involves the financial sponsorship by individuals and families, where the funds are directed to specific children overseas.
However, after Christianity Today—The NYT of the evangelical world—reported on World Vision’s decision to employ persons in legal same-sex marriages, some of these fine, upstanding, Bible-believing evangelical Christians who previously were providing a monthly sponsorhip to a needy child(ren), dropped their sponsorships, pledging not to pledge any more. Some even “bragged” about dropping their sponsorships on social media.
In some cases, these no-longer-sponsors were egged on by such illuminaries as the leaders of the Assemblies of God, the nation’s largest Pentecostal denomination (former AG John Ashcroft in a member), Franklin Graham and other reactionary dingbats.
After “many thousands” of such dropped sponsorships, World Vision caved, or relented, if you prefer, and abruptly rescinded its same sex marriage employment decision. This undecision was bad enough, but the leader of World Vision went on to pen a sickeningly syncophantic letter to sponsors and former sponsors admitting it violated the creed of theological correctness, begging for forgiveness.
With World Vision having sucked up to the Southern Baptist Convention and other wingnut advocates of dark ages religiousity, some former “sponsors” have decided to feed hungry children again, as long as there money doesn’t have to pass through teh gay hands:
Since the reversal, he said, “We’ve had some people call back to say, ‘Can I have my child back?’ ” But, he added, “Not everybody.”
“Can I have my child back”, these evangelical ingrates now ask? How about, um, “No. You don’t get to use our children as pawns, to be discarded and picked up on a whim depending on whether you’re happy or not with one of our employment or other policy decisions. We’ll find better sponsors. Please go away now.”
What’s really shocking is that someone, anyone, would drop a sponsored child in the span of 48 hours or less. They couldn’t wait a month? A week, even, to give it some more thought? Apparently not.