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.

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?