Ah, so it's the size. I was inferring from your previous posts your problem had to do with no 'value added' or 'mixing functionality' or something. But now it's size.
No, it's not the size, it's the role.
So you're saying "big business" is a role that must be seperated from religious organizations.
I know of an apartment complex owned by an inter-denominational ministry in Houston. I wonder if that constitutes "big business" and should be banned? And I know of an old age home run by a Jewish religious organization. Is a retirement home "big business" and not a role a religious organization ought to be in? Come to think of it, there's also a Jewish health club nearby ... more role mixing. Tsk tsk. How schizophrenic. How do they manage those conflicts of interest?
Industry and Mother Theresa are inherently different in terms of role in society. Those concepts/values/temperaments/approaches/practices/functions/processes/missions/etc. cannot merge or mingle in a single entity without compromising something, creating conflicts of interest, schizophrenia.
"So do other agencies (like public health clinics). I don't have a problem if it's related to their mission."
Related to their mission and an inherent part of their mission are very different. Running city hospitals is not an inherent part of the mission of religious institutions. Sure, it's somewhat related. So is the manufacture of pews, but churches don't appropriately get into that business.
If it's owned by a religious organization, how is it a "city hospital"? Because it's inside a city's limits?
I don't see why a religious organization shouldn't be free to engage in anything whether it's making pews, running a hospital, apartment complex, heck, anything. |
