Harsh Treatment: Salvation Army To Fire Officer For Marrying Outside of Church

0_61_120508_harshCapt. Johnny Harsh of Oshkosh, Wisconsin thought that the Lord had provided his answer to the loneliness and grief that followed the loss of his wife, Capt. Yalanda Harsh, to a heart attack. It was Cia, 56, a nurse, that he met on a Christian online dating Web site. The Salvation Army, however, then told him that he was suspended and would be thrown out entirely if he dared to find love outside of the church.

Salvation Army Advisory Board member Helen Lord Burr insists that rules are rules and officers are expected to find love within their ranks.red_kettle.

The Church remains an evangelical organization, a point often missed in this famous charitable work. It was only a few years ago that it was sued by Patti Davis — Ron Reagan’s daughter — for pulling out of a speaking engagement due to her support of stem cell research.

For the full story, click here and here.

23 thoughts on “Harsh Treatment: Salvation Army To Fire Officer For Marrying Outside of Church”

  1. Typical salvation army hypocrisy. Two examples I know of personally:

    1. A elderly friend and neighbour of mine gave the SA a large block of seaside land as a camping ground for young people. They have since sold that land, pocketed the millions and allowed disgusting great apartments on what was once a beautiful natural site. My friend would turn in his grave.

    2. My builder was the local Salvation Army Band euphonium player. He did frequent trips overseas – until he was arrested in Peru smuggling drugs.

    By their fruits…….

  2. FFLeo:

    Our poster, mark, reminds me of the Roman saying: Nil homine terra pejus ingrato creat.(Earth produces nothing worse than an ungrateful man.)

  3. Senator Gyges

    I throw myself at your mercy. Pleading density to charges of obstructing others comments.

    Senator your tangent has pinpoint accuracy. I too am a fan of the Marxist ideas on club membership, “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them… well, I have others.” Quoting Groucho, who was a master of the first amendment, and made it on J. Edgar Hoover’s shit list year in and year out.


    All I can say is WOW, A+ first class citizenry! And fine a response.

  4. Buddha,
    Good job dealing with the lates onslaught of trolls. Jill, I agree that most religions control sex in order to gain control of our minds. How else would we believe some of this stuff? Waynbro, Stepford Wives does come to mind, but I think Jill’s Kool-Aid would help when watching that movie again.

  5. WHOAAAA! Did you see how much weight Turley has put on lately! I saw him on the Maddow show and he needs to knock off pounding down the candy bars!

  6. Waynebro,

    Would you like some cool-aid to drink while you watch the movie? It’s really good stuff. Helps you see god.

  7. Why do I have the sudden urge to go out and rent a copy of The Stepford Wive’s”?

  8. Harsh is not being throwned out of The Salvation Army completely. He is not allowed to be an officer. I left the role of officer to marry and I have not been disappointed at all. I knew that when made the commitment to serve God through the avenue of the Army. Captain Harsh knew the same thing. The Armys guidelines for this is reasonable. A Salvation Army officer position is 24 hour. Just as any pastor, pastors their congregation. An officer also has many other roles as administrator, counselor, public relations, fund raising, and even janitor at times. I think it is so wrong what he is doing and he is not telling the whole story.

  9. Gee, Wendy. At least he BOUGHT it. Unlike your boy Bush who STOLE it and then got lucky enough to run against the only person on the planet who couldn’t beat that incompetent shit-kicker. Get your facts straight, troll. George Bush’s last name should be Exxon if you want to play the finance game. And if you don’t think Cheney STILL works for Halliburton, you’re not paying attention. You come in here, off topic, and you sound like just another bitter loser. Get over it and get over yourself. Once the judiciary is restored, some if not most of YOUR boys are GOING TO PRISON. Some of them for treason.

    How’s it feel to back traitors? People who sent other mother’s children off to die so they could personally make money? People who fabricated evidence? People who commit torture? People who violate the Constitution? And you want to play with campaign finances . . . you really don’t get that these issues aren’t going away, do you?


    Got that?

    You should know opportunistic bastards because that is the very definition of Neocon Republicans. YOUR boys. YOUR bosses. The fascist war criminals. Murder Inc. Obama is a politician which by definition makes him unsavory. Your boys are CRIMINALS though. Big difference. Have a nice evening, but sell your crap elsewhere, Neocon troll. You’ll win no converts here. You’ll likely get verbally beaten about the head and shoulders, but no converts.

    More on point, the SA did WHAT in the name of Jesus? Boy . . . is He going to be pissed. Either God is Love or He isn’t. Pick a side.

  10. Cook,

    You’re right. That doesn’t mean that non-members don’t have a right to comment about the club’s practices.

    Tangentially, I’m a fan the Grouchy Marx theory of club membership.

  11. I think the Obama love fest just came to a screaching halt in America.

    You can buy a lot of things in America for $750,000,000. Even apparently the US Presidency.

    Obama has already lost his Presidency legacy because forever he will be known as the guy who said he would take public financing then changed his mind when he realized he could BUY the election.

    In other words he is just another two bit opportunistic bastard.

  12. Parallel lives of the Democrats and Republicans

    December 8, 2008 Posted by Scott at 4:53 AM
    We noted Victor Davis Hanson’s superb column on the parallel lives of the Democrats and Republicans.

    After comparing Richard Fuld with Robert Rubin, Ted Stevens with Charles Rangel, Alberto Gonzales with Eric Holder, and Christopher Dodd with Trent Lott, Professor Hanson framed the question “why we continuously consider liberal transgressions as misdemeanors and their conservative counterparts as felonies.” I thought that Professor Hanson’s device of “parallel lives” could serve as everyday inspiration for many chapters yet to be written.

    In his weekly Washington Times column, Andrew Breitbart adapts Professor Hanson’s Plutarchean method to a similar end. Breitbart considers the photo featuring President-elect Obama’s chief speechwriter Jon Favreau and his colleague that turned up in the media and on the Internet last week. The photo depicted Favreau groping the breast of a cardboard cutout of Hillary Clinton while Favreau’s unidentified colleague shared his beer with her.

    Breitbart observes that “[t]he aggressive iconography of two young drunk men taking advantage of a life-size cutout of a woman – especially a powerful one – would bring an elite college campus to a standstill, force a housecleaning of a Fortune 500 company, ground the Air Force Academy and would, in most cases, ruin the career of a Republican staffer or elected official.” He juxtaposes the jocular reaction to Favreau’s photograph with that of any comparable Republican:

    If, for instance, President Bush’s former speechwriter Michael Gerson had been caught in flagrante cartone, he would have stepped down before the president could fire him. If not, the media, the feminist establishment and the Democratic Party leadership would have destroyed Mr. Gerson and Mr. Bush and crafted a “culture of harassment” umbrella descriptor to hang around the administration’s neck in perpetuity.

    In GOP land, apologies and resignations are never enough….

    In the case of Favreau, however, “the Democratic double standard on political correctness kicked in immediately as the feminist establishment, the media and even Mrs. Clinton herself came forth to save the fast-rising Obama wordsmith.” Whatever moral one draws from this particular episode, it is a striking illustration of the phenomenon that was the subject of Professor Hanson’s column.

  13. Their club, their rules.
    Sometimes the tribe asks for more from an individual than they can give.

  14. It boggles my mind why any believer would willingly submit to legalism in the first place?

    It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery. (Galatians 5:1)

  15. This reminds me of JP II clutching his chest in horror when a nun spoke up to him saying women should be priests. I thought he was a gonner for sure! Religious organizations often make irrational demands of their followers. It is a good thing when the members challenge the validity of these demands. If the church doesn’t want to consider whether certain things make sense and their rules interfere with a member’s conscience I’d saying leaving is the right way to go.

    It is striking to me how many religions take such great pains to control the sexuality of their members. I wonder if this is because our sexuality is one very important key to who we are, so controlling that leads right into controlling us at our core.

  16. It’s beyond Harsh.

    It’s unChristian-like.

    The fact most beliefs do not excommunicate their membership for marrying outside of their church. Neither Catholics, Jews, Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Calvinists, Baptists, (yes, even Baptists) Quakers, Mormons, and even Jehovah’s Witnesses will cut off a member for marrying outside of their faith.

    Faith’s that do require such unreasonable and illogical restrictions on marriage, such as the Amish, are plagued with the curse of inbreeding, as opportunities for suitable mates reduces with each passing generation.

    It’s a ridiculous requirement and no doubt news of this sort of bigotry will unfortunately dampen the coffers of the bell ringers this Christmas season.

    On a side note, I wasn’t even aware the Salvation Army was a Church. I thought they were merely a Christian charitable organization. Learn something new every day.

  17. Do you think it is actually “harsh” for a voluntary religious association to tell those who purport to be members of that organization that, if they don’t follow the teachings and rules of that organization, they are no longer members of that organization? Or, are you just having fun with the Captain’s name? I’m curious.

Comments are closed.