***Update***: The Salvation Army in Canada has put out a statement saying that what occurred in the Calgary branch is not in line with national policy:
The Salvation Army has no policy against distributing Harry Potter or similar toys and, in fact, these types of toys are donated and distributed in some areas. Decisions about what to distribute are made at the local level, often in consultation with parents of recipients and based on years of feedback. The Salvation Army is sensitive to what parents feel is appropriate for their children and choices sometimes have to be made. In cases where donations are not usable by The Salvation Army, these toys are generally given to other organizations for their use.
…
Let’s say you want to donate some gifts to needy children this Christmas. You go to the store, buy some Harry Potter and Twilight toys, and toss them in a local Salvation Army dropbox.
Turns out your gifts won’t be getting to any children. The Salvation Army is just throwing them away:
The Salvation Army says it refuses to distribute Harry Potter and Twilight toys collected for needy children because they’re incompatible with the charity’s Christian beliefs.
…
“I asked if these toys went to another charitable organizations but was told no, that by passing these toys on to another agency for distribution would be supporting these toys,” said the man, who wouldn’t give his name due to his occupation.
If there’s one thing needy children want, it’s protection from fictional witches and vampires courtesy of Jesus’ followers. I’m sure they’ll be thrilled with the news.
But it’s ok, because the Salvation Army (known as “Sally Ann” in Canada) is approving a few other toys instead:
“I was told to withhold a six-inch Harry Potter figure, but when I picked up a plastic M-16, I was told, ‘That’s for the 10-year-olds,'” he said.
“I was shocked…war-themed toys and toys from TV shows and movies with far more violence than Harry Potter and these were considered appropriate toys?”
Always nice to see Christian values in action…
(via Skeptic Money)