Question — Would the Children’s Home Society fund a Whites-Only Pool Night? A Christians-Only Pool Night? Where is the ACLU?
Answer — No. Of course they wouldn’t; that would be discriminatory. As far as “where is the ACLU” — they don’t defend Christian rights.
But would they fund a Muslims only pool night? You betcha.
…yet another step on the road to Dhimmitude
***
h/t: Michelle Malkin
IF it were Sheik Oilbucks funding the swim night, would that make a difference? Is the outrage about Muslims daring to be Muslims, or is it about what may or may not be an accounting problem with a private organization?
It’s the later. I don’t care who privately funds or rents what or where. I do care about publicly funded orgs using public funds for this kind of activity. Mainly because it would never, ever, be allowed for, say, a white’s only swim party.
Where would we be without blogs and cable television? I’d never learn this kind of stuff..lol Hey Robbie, since you’re in the minority now in Texas, I think you should apply for a tax-payer funded grant or two for something..surely you must be the victim of something now that you’re a minority!
[...] So, it’s Ok for a public swimming pool to rent out their pool for a Muslims-only Pool Party (paid for by a publicly-funded, non-profit organization no-less) — but it’s not OK for a city to rent a public building to the KKK? [...]
Got something you want to say?
Notes:
You have 10 minutes after you submit your comment to edit it. Simply click the E(dit) link above the countdown-counter at the bottom of your comment. You can only edit a comment from the same IP address from where the original comment was submitted.
If your comment does not appear immediately, it has been sent to the moderation queue for approval.
Your comment either contained more than 2 hyperlinks, or it used a word(s) that are on my Spam blacklist. Comments awaiting moderation will usually be approved within a day.
And, being that it's my blog and all...I reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.
Posting tweet...
Copyright (c) 2004-2008 UrbanGrounds. All rights reserved.
Entries (RSS) and Comments
(RSS).
I don’t get the outrage about the event itself. If the Boy Scouts want to rent the pool (that would be boys only) or if the Episcopalians want to rent it for their confirmands (by definition, that would be Christians only), what would be wrong with that? A private party renting the pool ought to be able to control both admission and behavior of the guests.
If Muslims want to rent the pool to accommodate their own religious practices, during a period that I couldn’t swim in it anyway, how does that harm me?
Well, you say, the taxpayers support the organization paying the bill. Well, yes and no. The Children’s Home Society appears to be a private organization that is part privately funded, and part publicly funded. Children’s homes all over the country have similar arrangements. The government funding is normally earmarked to support specified services to children and families, often down to a by-name accounting for foster or residential care for specific children. The government benefits because private services obviate the need for public orphanages.
It MAY be that this Children’s Home has muddled accounting practices and commingles public and private funds, but I’ve not seen evidence of that.
It MAY be that some contributors don’t want their gifts used to support a Muslim swim night, but that’s an issue between contributors and the members of the board of directors. Who am I to tell a private organization how to run its business. If I don’t like how they spend their money, I don’t have to contribute.
IF it were Sheik Oilbucks funding the swim night, would that make a difference? Is the outrage about Muslims daring to be Muslims, or is it about what may or may not be an accounting problem with a private organization?
Left by Mile Wise on August 15th, 2005 at 9:03 pm