It is certainly no secret that evangelical Christians harbour a certain antipathy towards homosexuality and by extension, it could be argued, towards gay men, lesbians, bisexuals and trans folk. In fact, most religious groups, be they Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox Christian, orthodox Jew, or Muslim, have issues with what they see as the sin of same-sex behaviour and relationships. This comes as no surprise to anyone.
At the same time, however, many such groups are involved in worthwhile charitable endeavors. The very belief system they adhere to which moves them to speak out against homosexuality also moves them to reach out to the less fortunate of the world in charity. Christians believe Christ has called them to love their neighbour and do good works. Jews see such work as a mitzvah, a religious duty, or tzedakah, an act of fairness and justice. Muslims are called by The Prophet to zakat, to assist widows and orphans and others in need and give comfort to the oppressed.
Certainly in the democracies of the West, it has been largely Christian groups who engage in charitable works, continuing the work started by the monks and nuns of medieval Europe by operating hospitals, food distribution, health care in Third World countries, sanitation, work programs, and a myriad of other projects designed to improve the quality of life in regions that do not enjoy the benefits we in the West take so much for granted.
Crossroads Christian Communications Inc. is one such group.
Since 1982, CCCI, an evangelical Christian television and media company founded by David Mainse, and which is probably best known for its television program, 100 Huntley Street, has been involved in charitable work in Third World countries through its Emergency Response & Development Fund. This fund supplies clean water and sanitation, food, shelter, and education/skills training and is involved in health and HIV/AIDS work.
Mainse has come under fire, as has 100 Huntley Street, for anti-gay views and opinions. He was heavily involved in the anti-equal marriage campaign and has frequently spoken out about the "dangers of the homosexual lifestyle."
However, the ERDF is the charitable arm of Crossroads and, I assume, operates at arm’s length from the parent organization. This is not unusual. Even our national GLBTQ rights organization, Egale Canada, has a charitable branch; the Egale Canada Human Rights Trust.
As charitable organizations, these branch groups cannot engage in lobbying or other political activities. To do so would contravene their charitable status.
Crossroads’ charitable arm does get federal tax dollars for the work it does in foreign aid, just as any other charitable organization does. Donations to the ERDF are tax-deductible, just as any other donation to a charitable foundation would be.
NDP leader Thomas Mulcair recently criticized the use of taxpayer money to fund what he described as an ‘anti-gay group’, stating CCCI’s views on homosexuality and same-sex marriage "...[Go] against Canadian values...against Canadian law," and should therefore not benefit from federal money.
Certainly a viable point can be made against using taxpayer money to fund groups that do not conform to the laws of Canada. Our tax dollars absolutely should not ever be used to fund Hezbollah, for instance, or any group in Canada that supports terrorism and/or extreme religious views of whatever stripe; nor should they fund groups lobbying the federal government of Canada on whichever issue you might care to name. However, given the work the ERDF is doing which is, in fact, "charitable" according to the criteria set out by Revenue Canada, and given that no evidence has surfaced those funds are being transferred into the political/advocacy work in which CCCI is involved, or being used to fund groups that harm the GLBTQ community like Exodus International or other "change ministries", I don’t see a problem.
If one does not agree with CCCI, which I don’t, then don’t donate to them or the ERDF. If one does not agree with Egale Canada’s work, then don’t donate to the Egale Canada Human Rights Trust. But if the federal government is in the business of financially supporting charitable organizations, then it must support any charitable organization that meets the criteria of being a charitable organization. Period. Full stop.
It has also been pointed out that Mulcair’s own church, the Roman Catholic Church, holds similar views to the ones expressed by CCCI and other evangelical and conservative Protestant churches.
The former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, also known as Pope Benedict XVI and now, after his abdication, as Pope Emeritus, likewise issued a document in his capacity then as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in which he described homosexuality as "intrinsically disordered", amongst other things. He was roundly criticized for it, too. The catechism of the Roman Catholic Church states that homosexuality is not only "intrinsically disordered", which in the view of queer activists is bad enough, it also calls homosexual acts "acts of grave depravity."
Where this gets a bit curious...or, as Alice said in Wonderland, curiouser and curiouser...is that while Mulcair denounced funding Crossroads/ERDF he called for more funding for a group called Development and Peace. Who are they, you may well ask. Development and Peace is the official aid organization of the - wait for it - Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops!
So on the one hand, we have a Member of Parliament denouncing a group which does charitable work in Africa, supplying clean water and helping to improve living conditions there because the main branch of that group, and key people involved in it, condemn homosexuality as a sin. Then on the other hand, he calls for additional funding of a group that does charitable work in the Third World despite the main branch of that group, and key people involved in it, condemning homosexuality as a sin and an act of "grave depravity". I’m confused...
Surely what is good for the Catholic goose is good for the evangelical gander. If a secular federal government is going to be involved in funding charities that meet the criteria set out by its own department responsible for charitable status, then it can’t have a representative who sits in its Parliament condemn one and not the other. Whether or not government should even be involved in funding religious charities is a whole other issue.
Religion and secularism are polar opposites. We adhere in liberal democracies to the separation of Church and State for a reason. We don’t want religion controlling government and I don’t think we should have government controlling religious belief either. Threatening to withhold funding because a member of Parliament doesn’t agree with the stated views of a religious organization is an inappropriate form of control over belief.
The ERDF does good and important work and, on that level alone I think they should receive their due. As for the views expressed by Crossroads and by Mainse regarding homosexuality being a sin, I obviously disagree but, really, is anyone surprised an evangelical Christian organization believes that? One really does not have anything to do with the other. So long as they don’t influence policy around our hard-won rights or attempt to influence foreign governments’ social policy in the area of human rights, they are free to believe whatever they want and not have the threat of withholding funding held over them.