4 ms·

To clarify the last sentence: the article says: > Kars4Kids primarily funds a New Jersey-based Jewish organization, Oorah, which provides programs, including a

by fn-mote 5mo ago

To clarify the last sentence: the article says: > Kars4Kids primarily funds a New Jersey-based Jewish organization, Oorah, which provides programs, including an adult matchmaking service, trips to Israel for teens and summer camps in New York, the judge wrote. The only program in California that Kars4Kids sponsored was a promotional giveaway of Kars4Kids-branded backpacks, she found.

MBCook 5mo ago
It’s still not relevant. The charity is giving almost no money to kids. Thats the relevant part. Doesn’t matter if it Catholic, Jewish, Scientologist, or Zoroastrian. The law wasn’t faith based. The decision wasn’t faith based. So why does the faith matter?
- deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
- Ukv 5mo ago
  Both "giving almost no money to kids" and that the recipients (mostly adults) it did benefit were "based on religious affiliation" seem fairly surprising to me. If I donated a car, I would feel mislead by both.
  - bombcar 5mo ago
    Normally if you're donating to something like Catholic Charities, you kind of have a bit of a hint what they do (though AFAIK they don't specifically target only Catholics) https://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/ways-to-give/donate-a-vehicle/ https://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/ways-to-give/donate-a-v...
- Brian_K_White 5mo ago
  The identity and entity matters. It's not a random group who did a random thing for a random reason, it's a specific group who did a thing for a specific reason. No one else made them behave in the way that got them called out. There is no religious persecution going on here. It's not a case of "But why does it matter he's black?". The act was specifically performd by a religious group, specifically for the benefit of that religious group only, under false pretenses of being neutral. The people you are implying are being prejudged, are in fact the ones who commited the prejudice and discrimination.
- kylehotchkiss 5mo ago
  ... 1-800-kars-for-scientologist-kids, donate your kar today ... I mean if they promise to write your car was worth 50% more than KBB, maybe???
- nubg 5mo ago
  Look up "Epstein".

by fn-mote 5mo ago

MBCook 5mo ago

It’s still not relevant. The charity is giving almost no money to kids. Thats the relevant part. Doesn’t matter if it Catholic, Jewish, Scientologist, or Zoroastrian. The law wasn’t faith based. The decision wasn’t faith based. So why does the faith matter?

deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
Ukv 5mo ago
Both "giving almost no money to kids" and that the recipients (mostly adults) it did benefit were "based on religious affiliation" seem fairly surprising to me. If I donated a car, I would feel mislead by both.
- bombcar 5mo ago
  Normally if you're donating to something like Catholic Charities, you kind of have a bit of a hint what they do (though AFAIK they don't specifically target only Catholics) https://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/ways-to-give/donate-a-vehicle/ https://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/ways-to-give/donate-a-v...
Brian_K_White 5mo ago
The identity and entity matters. It's not a random group who did a random thing for a random reason, it's a specific group who did a thing for a specific reason. No one else made them behave in the way that got them called out. There is no religious persecution going on here. It's not a case of "But why does it matter he's black?". The act was specifically performd by a religious group, specifically for the benefit of that religious group only, under false pretenses of being neutral. The people you are implying are being prejudged, are in fact the ones who commited the prejudice and discrimination.
kylehotchkiss 5mo ago
... 1-800-kars-for-scientologist-kids, donate your kar today ... I mean if they promise to write your car was worth 50% more than KBB, maybe???
nubg 5mo ago
Look up "Epstein".