San Francisco, CA - Early last year, I wrote a Capital Ideas column sharply criticizing San Francisco Roman
Catholic Archbishop William Levada for capitulating to the city’s domestic partners law which requires employers
to give spousal benefits to unmarried heterosexual live-in partners. The archbishop accepted a shocking
“compromise” that allowed employees of Catholic Charities (a recipient of city funding) to designate any household member, including heterosexual and homosexual live-in partners, as being eligible for spousal benefits.

Yet, just when it seems like the whole world has gone to hell in a handbasket, along comes a brave soul willing to stand up for principle. Recently, the Salvation Army, the Christian charitable organization, declared that it would reject city funding rather than comply with the domestic partners law. City contracts account for $3.5 million out of the Salvation Army’s $18 million San Francisco service budget (mostly for programs for the homeless and senior citizens).

“Hizzoner” Willie Brown, “Da’ Mayor” of San Francisco, seemed surprised and annoyed by the Salvation Army’s
decision. Kandace Bender, Da’ Mayor’s spokeswoman, argued, “A number of agencies have thought they couldn’t comply with the ordinance, but found they could, including Catholic Charities.” Of course, it’s easy to
comply with evil laws when you sell out principle. The Salvation Army would have none of that. Robert Watson,
national commander of the Salvation Army, stated firmly: “Our policy is that we serve all people without
discrimination. But with regard to our personnel practices, we see this as a Salvation Army matter… We
don’t acknowledge homosexual conduct as part of the traditional family and marriage vows. We have a position
that we don’t recognize that as part of a normal relationship.”

A couple of observations. First, San Francisco’s domestic partners law is just another example of the extent to
which liberal governments are willing to go to force their brand of (im)morality down the throats of private
citizens and organizations. Although the Left loves to demonize the Right as the home of religious intolerance,
the truth is that most conservative religious people just want to be left alone. The Salvation Army didn’t want to
turn San Francisco municipal government into a theocracy. Willie Brown and his cohorts, however, did want to force the Salvation Army, through the power of the government purse, to give up one of its most basic principles.

Second, given the bullying tactics of liberal governments, it is instructive to compare the responses of the San Francisco Roman Catholic archdiocese and the Salvation Army. In order to maintain its steady stream of
government funding, the archdiocese was willing to accept a “compromise” that the San Francisco Chronicle rightly described as a “distinction without a difference.” The Salvation Army, however, decided to put the word of God above the word of Willie Brown. In St. Luke’s Gospel, Christ said it was impossible to serve two masters
because, “Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” In this era of mindless pragmatism, it is refreshing that the Salvation Army has chosen to forego the latter in order to remain faithful to the former.

-- Lance Izumi