What to do about JP Morgan’s funding of the Southern Poverty Law Center?

The broader Christian community continues to struggle with how to engage the culture in the ongoing sexual revolution–how do we hate the sin and love the sinner?  There seems to be a consensus that what was done in the past was at a minimum strategically ineffective, and that a new path forward must be forged.  But what that specifically looks like is difficult to identify at the social level. Yes, as individuals we are more likely to be able to enter into dialogue with those of opposite views, but our public activities generate the very animosity that precludes individual discussion–hence the dilemma.  Yet the sexual revolution and pressure from the secular progressive left only grows stronger, seemingly strengthened by the lack of moral opposition.  Our inability to “figure it out” has created a moral vacuum that the progressive left is only too willing to fill.

One manifestation of this is JP Morgan’s decision to continue funding “anti-hate” groups in response to the Charlottesville incident, which announced Monday that they were going to fund “anti-hate” groups:

“The events in Charlottesville have increased the urgency to confront hate, intolerance and discrimination wherever it exists,” Peter Scher, head of corporate responsibility at J.P. Morgan, wrote in a memo to employees, according to CNN Money.  The U.S.’s biggest bank said that the donation will be split equally between the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and is part of efforts to address “deep divisions” in the nation. In addition, the bank will contribute up to $1 million more by matching employee donations, according to Reuters.

Yet it is likely that this donation will only increase the divisions in our country–certainly divisions between conservative Christians and the secular progressive left.  The Southern Poverty Law Center has long since ceased being an advocate for justice, and has simply become a shill moral veneer for the secular progressive left.  Their primary output is the Hate Group map; a cursory view of their map shows any number of racist groups and then, the Christians.  Yes, if you believe in orthodox Christian teaching on sexuality, and what has been accepted by all cultures for millennia as the cultural norm, you are a “hater.”  This map has consequences, as the Family Research Council had a gunman open fire in their DC headquarters based on a leftist finding them on SPLC’s list.  Fortunately the gunman was not able to kill anyone.

So what should we do?  JP Morgan and others that fund these groups are responding to the political pressures and incentives they face. Perhaps they need to face consequences from conservatives? If I had a bank account at JP Morgan, I’d consider closing it with a letter explaining why.  Probably ineffective, but it is certain that silence will only beget more of the same.  What do you think we should do?

82 thoughts on “What to do about JP Morgan’s funding of the Southern Poverty Law Center?”

  1. Not sure there is anything one who has an account with JP Morgan can do other than what you mentioned at the end, that if one has an account with them, close it.

  2. Agree with your statements and if I had anything with JPMorgan I would with draw it from them. Apple as well. Once I get my iPhone paid off will go to android. These companies supporting this organization is as much “causing hatred” as all the radical groups that are tearing down our nation.

    1. Aren’t androids a product of Google?
      The same Google that is shutting conservative voices through YouTube, changing search algorithms to fit their ideology, and recently fired one of their employees for being right of far-left?

  3. Along with your suggestion of closing ties with JP Morgan and institutions that have made similar decisions, I believe the most important thing that we as individuals can do is to address the issue of how to treat homosexuality in our corner of influence. That stereotype of those who ascribe to orthodox teaching on sexuality being “haters” is definitely related to the current cultural worship of “tolerance”, but it wasn’t helped by those professing Christians who treat homosexuals in a non-biblical manner.

  4. “That stereotype of those who ascribe to orthodox teaching on sexuality being “haters” is definitely related to the current cultural worship of “tolerance”, but it wasn’t helped by those professing Christians who treat homosexuals in a non-biblical manner.”

    The way to treat homosexuals according to the Bible is to kill them. Leviticus 20:13.

    Do you agree with the Bible on this or not?

    It is a yes or no answer.

    1. There you go again… cherry picking something out of the civil code of ancient Israel and phrasing it to manufacture a false dilemma that will allow you to either accuse the answerer of “wanting to kill homosexuals” or “not agreeing with the Bible”, the former allowing you to then level charges of “bigotry and hate”, the latter permitting you to sling all sorts of terms like “hypocrite” or “moral relativist” around.

      As usual you ignore a number of very important mitigating factors that inform the church and Christians how they are to treat others, including LGBT persons, not least being the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. While the OT is valuable in determining what God views as sinful, it is not incumbent on the church in any manner whatsoever to advocate for the usage of ancient Israel’s civil code’s prescribed penalties for sin.

    2. Mr. Adams–
      The biblical approach to homosexuality is never and was never to go find homosexuals and kill them. Nor many other kinds of sins. When some particular sins were found within God’s chosen people, the punishment was death, in order to preserve the holiness of God’s people. And of course God is justified if he demands the death of every one of us in our rebellion against him. However God also has mercy, and made a way for our rebellious sins to be atoned for, through the blood of Jesus Christ. Yet God does not “wink” at sin now, as he did not in Leviticus, and his standard for holiness within his church is the same. Should a practicing, unrepentant homosexual be found within the church (note that this is not those that may struggle with homosexual attractions), they are to be disciplined, and if necessary, excommunicated–the earthly picture of the death that awaits eschatologically if they do not repent. Of course most churches are unwilling to practice church discipline against many sins, including homosexuality. But that is the Biblical standard, applied against the continuing principle of holiness of God’s people.

  5. Your simplistic “analysis” of the issue aside, SPLC
    does consider Charles Murray, who spoke at Cedarville a few years ago, an extremist.

    Murray has said that blacks are inferior in intelligence to whites and to Asians, and that this genetic difference helps explain the persistence of poverty among certain ethnic groups. In addition, Murray and his co-author assume that race is a valid biological concept, which it is not.

    Do you agree that Murray is an extremist, or are you going to show your true colors as a supporter of racism and say, no, I do not agree that Murray is an extremist?

    A clear answer, please. Extremist or not?

    1. Mr. Adams–
      I highly doubt Mr. Murray ever said that “blacks are inferior” in any dimension, including intelligence. I challenge you to show the citation–page # and edition of where he used the word inferior. Otherwise you should repent of bearing false witness.
      Now of course there is truth in this issue–painful truth–that everyone acknowledges (I suspect even you) that there are differences in measured intelligence between racial groups and these differences are inversely correlated with negative social outcomes–that was the heart of Mr. Murray’s analysis. You are right that Mr. Murray has suggested that this could be in part genetic, not simply environmental. It is a highly controversial conclusion, and you are free to come to a different conclusion, and you may be more right that Mr. Murray, but then again, you may not. No, I don’t consider someone that has done the careful scholarship of Mr. Murray, on a controversial issue, as an extremist.*

      And of course its highly disappointing, and as equally predictable, that you would call me a racist for not branding Mr. Murray an extremist. Views like yours are precisely why we have much of the animosity we do over racial issues. If someone doesn’t agree with your perspective, secular progressives lob the racist, sexist, homophobic epithet at them–your only weapon of choice, you go straight for the thermonuclear bomb. How can you think this is helpful? It may make you feel good, but its not particularly civil, and it is of course untrue.

      A few weeks back you wondered why I accused you of having an agenda, when you steered the conversation towards racism. Isn’t it patently obvious? On a topic about the SPLC targeting Christian groups as “hate groups,” with JP Morgan funding them, and what we should do about it, you use the posting time to accuse me of being a racist. That’s sad…just really sad.

      *For those readers not familiar with Mr. Murray (and Mr. Adam’s critique), you can get a start on understanding (and you really should have some insight into this issue–because it is near and dear to be hated and despised by the far left) by hearing from Mr. Murray himself,
      http://www.aei.org/publication/bell-curve-20-years-later-qa-charles-murray/

    2. “In addition, Murray and his co-author assume that race is a valid biological concept, which it is not.”
      I am in complete agreement with you here, even though Mr. Murray thinks the genome project is proving him right. We are all of one blood.

  6. This is the first time I am hearing about the Southern Poverty Law Center and I am appalled! I understand that they are ‘trying’ to stop the hate but sometimes bringing to much awareness to a situation can have counter effects. I do in fact think that as Christians we need to make clear the issue of homosexuality and I feel that we definitely need to learn how to love the people and hate the sin which can be difficult for some. However, I feel that this is so new to Christians that they are in a sense trying to get over the shock of homosexuality that they waver back and forth between how to treat homosexuality and that is where Christians need to be firm in their answers.

  7. I think that for sure JP Morgan has for sure dug themselves in a deep hole that is going to be difficult to get out of. I don’t think that there is much we can do as Christians without coming on too strong and hurting our witness. If anyone is in business with JP Morgan though, I guess that canceling the account and sending them a letter explaining why would get the point across without being too aggressive. This is a rough situation and Christians need to make sure they handle it the best way that they can.

  8. From where I sit, singling out groups like the SPLC as monolithic bogeymen is apiece with the very cultural warrioring that helped mortgage evangelicals’ public credibility to begin with. But I am grateful for the honest assessment of the conundrum (conservative) Christians find ourselves in. A centuries-old bully pulpit has crumbled, and we’re left with the task of convincing an increasingly diverse public square that we’re not as hateful as much of our history suggests.

    Adopting the persepctive of most any American minority group, how can we expect even our best language around hate and cultural inclusion to sound like anything more than an anemic “No really, you can trust us now, I promise.”? Actually earning a reputation as anti-hate would require a lot more very public examination of questions like: “How welcome have the groups SPLC defends felt in (white, conservative) churches over the last century?” And then, taking some specific action to embrace marginalized folks (of every kind) in ways that risk/cost something comparable to what LGBT folks still face in darkening the doors of most any evangelical church.

    I’m hopeful to see inklings (at this very late date) of such a white Christian response on questions of race, but even that seems met with considerable backlash. And however convenient the example, the white Christian (esp. evangelical) vote and persistent apology for Trump is a daily reminder of who/what many religious folks are willing to sacrifice on the altar of their politics and tribalism. So while I get that LGBT inclusion is a peculiarly challenging issue for contemporary religious conservatives, I can’t help but see the wounds as mostly self-inflicted. That is to say, if conservative Christians’ sexual ethic was (and had been) woven into the fabric of a broader gospel that majored on good news for the poor, scattering the proud, and freeing the oppressed, these questions of public perception would look radically different.

    As a fellow Christian who’s co-traveled through the ideological spectrum on this issue, here’s what I’d love for conservative Christians to do. Stop using folks’ most intimate sexual/gender expression as a proxy for waging (or even narrating) culture war. Adopt a simple but rigorous Christ-ethic as the context for your conversation about gender and sexuality. Be fiercely equal-opportunity in applying your understanding of what sex/gender have to do with loving another as yourself. Remain mindful about what percentage of the ways to live like Christ have anything to do with sexual relationships. Redirect the energy you spend on handwringing over anti-hate groups you distrust to *being* an anti-hate group that’s actually trustworthy.

    1. Ben–
      I’m not sure I understand everything you’ve said here (written pretty abstractly), but I do appreciate your thoughtful response. One question for you. Who do you think is the primary driver (or has been) in the “culture wars”, the left or the right? I see the left as waging the culture war with the right as resisting. Or who’s always playing offense and who’s always playing defense?

      1. Thanks, Jeff. Been thinking on this a lot in light of the Nashville Statement, et. al., and back to try a little more. :) Essentially, I think white American Christianity makes a really poor victim. Our identity, institutions, and theology all bear the stain of long-term investments in violent colonization, slavery/segregation, and hateful treatment toward minority groups of every kind. Where we’ve made moves forward from these failures, they’ve typically been reactive, begrudging, and devoid of serious inquiry about root causes and lingering effects. The NT church ran afoul of religious and civil authorities for being too radical in their inclusion; we find ourselves pining for a golden age Christianity that let us feel supremely comfortable in the social exclusions of a mid-century, white middle-class America.

        Bottom line? (Conservative) Christians playing the aggrieved party on issues of LGBT inclusion and religious liberty while carrying this unchecked baggage strains all credulity. It’s a pretty classic speck in their eye/plank in our eye situation. To tie it back again to JP Morgan/SPLC: I find JP Morgan’s support of the SPLC to be more of a symptom. With the *problem* being a version of faith that’s more concerned with the goodwill of a global financial firm than it is with fostering radically welcoming communities in the model of Jesus.

        I feel similarly about your culture war question. In a basic analysis, I get that conservatism’s posture on culture change is more “defense” than “offense.” But I think the idea of “defense” as the morally superior posture is quite dangerous. Because debating “who shot first” seems one convenient way to ignore the toxic effects of culture war (even for the imagined “victors”); and because it discourages honest analysis of what’s being defended. As best as I can tell, the American evangelicalism that took up arms in the culture war was already too diseased by its cultural cooptation to know any better. It doesn’t need better weapons or a more just war; it needs a proper diagnosis and few rounds of chemo.

    2. Whether you agree with the Christian conservative viewpoint or not, the SPLC has been for some time now just what Jeff Haymond said it is. You need only go to their site and you will see that they include in their list of “hate groups” pretty much any organization that isn’t on the political Left. This is akin to including all conservatives under the label, “alt-Right” or “white supremacists.” It is a despicable and disingenuous practice and this organization deserves to be publicly criticized and exposed.

  9. Mr. Haymond,
    How often should Christians stand for their beliefs by withholding their money?
    J.P. Morgan’s decision could certainly have a harmful effect on Christians and the way they are portrayed, so I support Christians who would respectfully close their bank account with an explanation. However, we live in a secular culture that has values that are not in line with Scripture. Christians vowed to boycott the new Beauty and the Beast because of its “exclusively gay moment” and spoke out against the Starbuck’s Christmas cups. We live in a fallen, and only supporting companies that fall in line with our values will be very difficult.
    Could continually threatening to withhold money give Christians a bad reputation?
    When should it be encouraged?

    1. “Could continually threatening to withhold money give Christians a bad reputation?”
      I think so. But what about the other direction? Does our continuing to give money to groups that are hostile to Christianity constitute our endorsing them? It is a dilemma.

  10. To say that we should stop backing companies like JP Morgan or apple is a hard choice because when it comes down too it there is a huge number of companies who cheat, steal, and lie to get to where they are now and should we stop supporting these companies because they have sined and are full of sinners?

    1. I agree the dilemma is a real one. However, one could also make an argument that unless someone starts making market choices according to their beliefs we will see no change. I personally own an iPhone and still drink Starbucks coffee occasionally. I view it as a sad part of reality that I will inevitably buy products from businesses that openly support a lifestyle the Bible clearly condemns. However, just because that is currently the case does not mean it must remain so. While Christians obviously don’t account for a majority of any given corporation’s business, they undoubtedly comprise a potent percentage that, if united, could cause profit loss and corporate policy change.

      1. In a free market, you can do business with almost any company you chose. So if there are two companies that offer the same type and quality of goods/services, but you disagree with one of the companies ethical policies, you can decide to ethically consume from the other company.

    2. It is a very difficult decision, and if you truly want boycott these “sinful” companies you would have to do a significant amount of research to determine which companies support what.

  11. Never heard of the SPLC.
    Don’t really have any good answer for the PR problem between sinners, of the Homosexual stripe, and Christians who recognize the problem these people are proud of.
    SPLC, as the article paints it, sounds like another Soros problem.

    On a related note, I don’t like the word “Homophobia” (Not mentioned in this article) because I have a problem with the Greek, and the implication.
    Given that phobias are commonly understood as irrational fear, and that homophobes are not to gays as arachophobes are to spiders/acrophobes to heights/claustrophobes to tight spaces,
    I would posit the debate that it would be more accurate to label Christians as homosexists, under the understanding that sexism is prejudice against sexes. (Although this typically doesn’t cover orientation, so For Lack of a Better Word).

  12. I think that one of the most civil ways to show opposition and get a point across to JP Morgan’s decisions would be to withdraw from them and write a letter of explanation. However, there are tons of companies that run on beliefs that are different from my own and even some that probably do things dishonestly, but because of my ignorance I am unaware and continue to be a customer. Perhaps boycotting the companies that I know share different beliefs is an answer, but I’m not sure that it is something that I would be fully committed to doing. Differing opinions and beliefs is a part of the fallen world and something that we have to learn to deal with. I think that it’s important to stand by the people that believe differently and, by God’s strength, be a light to them through that difference. Personally interacting with employees at companies that have different views is a mission field that I believe we are called to embrace. Yes boycotting is an answer, but I would rather use the relationships that have been built by being a customer to reach employees within the company.

  13. I think this also brings up the question of what is the proper response from the standpoint of someone who might have more authority, beyond the individual response of just shutting the account and sending a letter. That’s a start and it’s something practical that an individual can do, but what if a Christian had the ability to influence them on a greater level? For example, if a Christian had a high-level position at JP Morgan when they made this decision, what should he or she do?

  14. I agree that explaining why ending business with JP Morgan would probably be ineffective. I would not personally drop my business with apple or any other business that funds “anti-hate” groups because I see that as also being ineffective. They are not claiming to be followers of Christ so why should we expect them to act accordingly? This instance reminds me of the time Chick-Fil-A made it public that they do not agree with gay marriage and in return, some people who support gay marriage boycotted the fast-food chain. Did Chick-Fil-A suffer? Maybe, but not dramatically. Ending business with people against Christianity only closes the door for us to show the light of Christ. Christ commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves in Mark 12:31. I would understand why some would choose to take their business elsewhere but I do not personally think that would solve the issue present.

  15. This aspect of the issue has been extremely interesting. The insight you provided was quite thought provoking and made me personally think about my views and worldview towards the “sex identity” issues and also “hate groups”. I agree with your ideas of possibly closing JP accounts to represent and stand for the believer, but is it possible we represent Christ from the inside? Can we be associated with the ones who disagree with us and show them Christ’s love? Maybe we can’t be part of the “other team” and show them Christ’s message, but I believe it is quite possible that we can through patience, love, and care for all people regardless of their opinion.

    1. I agree with Bobby. We should show leftists the love of Christ through our actions. That doesn’t mean that we have to agree with them on every issue and take their side to defend them. But we can be gracious with our actions and potentially be the only Christ that they are exposed to.

  16. From J.P. Morgan’s perspective, I feel like it is their right to express and support their own opinions and beliefs. If I were to disagree with their opinions, and the actions that they take to support them, then I would separate myself from their company. Perhaps me separating from them based on beliefs would encourage others to do the same.

  17. It is crazy to think how much our society needs prayer, along with praying for ourselves as Christians to act the ways that are most glorifying to God. I believe that we should make decisions as to where we take our business based on how that companies ideals line up with ours. Sadly there are certain business that don’t have morals aligning with ours, that provide needed products unparalleled by their competitors. However, when we have options, I believe we should consider those options based off of what scripture has to say about the issue. Now, you will be hard pressed to find the part in the Bible where it says, “close your account at J.P. Morgan”, but we can still look back and see what the Bible implicitly says and apply that to our situation. Personally, I would do some shopping around to other banks and see what I can find that would help me support the companies that share similar values, and see what they have to offer, then from that information decide if I want to close my account with J.P. Morgan

  18. This situation with JP Morgan and the SPLC brings to mind a quote, from Voltaire I believe, that the marketplace was the one part of society where practitioners of all religions got along amicably. In his age, with religious conflict serving as the main avenue of civil, social, and political tension, this was a powerful statement in favor of capitalism’s ability to foster peace through self-interest. Is this still fundamentally the case in our time, as mission-oriented businesses multiply, and established corporations see politically advantageous causes as possible marketing opportunities?

    If capitalism has fundamentally changed, then intentionally out-competing the progressive causes and their business sponsors is one option. For instance, Christians could begin starting businesses and financial institutions devoted to reducing world poverty or increasing educational opportunities around the world. Even in a culture of political correctness, some such causes could thrive, drawing the cause-motivated business from JP Morgan and others, altering their incentives, and thereby changing their behavior.

    If capitalism hasn’t changed, then living out the ethical teachings of Christ as a witness in the marketplace should be the focus. The question of “What to do?” almost appears in this context as a choice between the exhortation to shrewdness and the companion innocence. Is strategy or humility more appropriate? I suppose an attempt at both might not hurt.

  19. It is unfortunate that the world we live in seemingly fully supports these so called “anti hate” groups. As a Christian, it is becoming increasingly difficult to be completely free of companies such as J.P. Morgan and Apple who outwardly support these left wing groups. I agree with your thoughts about closing accounts with J.P. Morgan. I feel that if I were doing business with the company I would cease all interactions with them. Although change may not come out of a letter sent to J.P. Morgan, I feel that there is a possibility that the company would at least reconsider their recent actions.

  20. If you don’t like what JP Morgan is doing, try to start a massive boycott against them. Causing them to lose a lot of money may force them rethink their position in the matter.

  21. It is extremely unfortunate that we live in a world where our differences create such a large chasm between people. A world where our differences decide who we associate ourselves with, and how we define ourselves. JP Morgan’s decision to support these “anti hate” groups is one that, as a Christian, we need not associate ourselves with. In this world, we need to be extremely careful with who we are supporting. Closing down accounts based on the company’s decision to back these groups is right in my mind. However, are we also able to witness to the supporters of this decision? Is it possible to continue association with JP Morgan as well as let our stance be known to the company? We are not called to agree with everyone, however we are called to love everyone. This may be the way that God is calling us to love these people. In this way, we are able to stand out amongst the rest and let our light shine through the darkness.

  22. I think most corporations tend to the preferences of the popular opinion. In today’s culture, it seems that there are more who support leftist views than that of Christian’s, so I don’t think closing down accounts and writing a letter will do much. The only way to get rid of the narrative that Christians are terrible, hate-filled people is to love the sinner and admit that we still sin as much as everyone else, in my opinion. It’s a slow change, but just those on CU’s campus can filter into their own groups outside of the “bubble” and start a slow yet effective change.

  23. Looking back at history, it seems as though the conservative or even Christian response to issues such as sexuality has been to hold the position without pushing back or saying anything against the changes. Unfortunately, since conservatives say nothing and liberals are more than willing to say something, when people finally push back against these changes, it appears disgruntled and harsh. However, as much as it may be uncomfortable to push back against these agendas, something must be done or else the society, in general, will continue to slide into anti-biblical viewpoints. Whether it is not patronizing companies that overtly support anti-biblical views, or engaging in meaningful discussions with our friends and neighbors, we as conservatives must start speaking out, lest our voice be silenced any more.

  24. Dropping your account with JP Morgan is a personal choice of showing your beliefs, as it won’t really affect the company. It is up to each person what they choose to be affiliated with and what they are supporting when they are contributing to a business. Many businesses support things that as a Christian I don’t agree with, however I haven’t stopped using their services. I don’t boycott the business, but make sure that I know what I believe in and let the way that I live speak for me. This could even lead to a ministry opportunity at some point in the future.

  25. It is unfortunate that JP Morgan is funding a group that supports leftist views. However, the group does do some good. As Christians, we should love everyone, so it is important to remember that some people are being helped as well.

  26. While I disagree with JP Morgan’s decisions, I do not think that I would personally close my account with them in an effort to make my beliefs known. As several people have mentioned, maintaining that relationship does provide an opportunity for ministry and to share Christian beliefs without making the more dramatic decision to cut ties with the company. Jesus did not refuse to associate with those that others labelled “unrighteous”. In order to reach the lost, it is necessary to maintain some kind of contact with them. That being said, I do think that it would be a good idea to send a letter to the company expressing your disapproval of its actions and stances. I think that this would be the most effective way that individuals can have an influence without tainting the reputation of Christians in the public view.

  27. This article was interesting to me because of the questions posed at the end of the article. I have no problem with what JP Morgan is doing. They are their own business and are completely entitled to give money to whatever organization they choose. I like that they are opening up and being generous in this way and at the same time trying to score some easy points with the general population. We are the minorities in this country, big businesses all across the board make similar donations to show how they truly “care” about the community. If I were their position, I may do something similar except to give money to slightly different groups. Christians pulling out of JP Morgan will really do nothing else, but give us personal satisfaction.

  28. I think the most important action that Christians can take is to voice their opinions, but without sounding malicious or as if you are disrespecting one’s dignity or personhood. I believe that Christians are often misconstrued stereotypically in society and perceived to be fearful homophobic hypocrites that would love nothing better than to watch any and all opposition burn in the fires of Hell. For those who are aware of the Bible’s teachings, the gospel falls on the opposite side of the aisle. To better clarify the Church’s stance, Christians ought to publicly support those movements that stand for racial equality, while also making a clear distinction that sexual orientation is a ground on which Christians firmly stand opposed. This distinction will allow others to see past the ignorance and lies pervading Christianity and give credit to the Church’s genuine love for others, even those who disagree with evangelical Christian theology. Christians are not vehemently opposed to the Anti-Hate movement, only that facet that funds the advancement of LGBTQ awareness. For JP Morgan holders, I would not pull out suddenly and without explanation. As one reader previously noted, it would be wise to pen a latter to the JP Morgan administration stressing one’s unease with the decision and one’s reasons why.

  29. JP Morgan is a massive company and would not be affected if i were to pull my account with them. I think where Christians are more effective in evangelizing and standing up for their faith is doing so locally within their sphere of influence. For example if a gay couple was getting married that I was friends with and I was invited to the wedding I would explain that I still love them and want to continue being friends but I don’t support them living in that sin and would not attend the wedding. If I had a multi million dollar business that used JP Morgan, my sphere of influence would include JP Morgan. If I pulled that company to another bank and told JP the reason was because they supported those groups, that would have much bigger ripple affects on JP than if i had a single account with $100 in it.

  30. Christian’s views are becoming less and less popular as time moves on and this needs to be taken into account when dealing with these companies that are trying to satisfy the popular opinion. While cancelling an account with JP Morgan may give the Christian a personal victory, it really isn’t going to solve the problem. I think that the problem needs to be addressed at a more deeper level. Christians are needed in the business world now more then ever before. It may take some time, but having a Christians worldview at the executive levels of JP Morgan, or any company, will have a far greater impact on the decision making than sending a letter that no one will read.

  31. There has always been something about people with pessimistic outlooks that annoys me greatly.
    However, reading this I can’t help but feel a little pessimistic myself. From every angle I look at this issue, it feels like trying to run through a brick wall. To support these groups who in a roundabout way persecute Christians makes little sense. Yet, to simply do nothing and not engage with this reality doesn’t exactly look great. It’s a conundrum. My gut feel is that this situation will never be resolved (there’s the pessimism). Looking around the world today it seems apparent that things are increasingly tense and divisions among people are only growing. The JP Morgan case discussed in this post only another instance of this. For me all this brings to mind the birth pains addressed in Matthew 24:8 which are indications of end times and Christ’s return. But don’t get me wrong, while the situation seems hopeless I am in no way suggesting Christians simply twiddle their thumbs waiting. Personally, I think the most important thing we as believers and God loving people can do, is to love those around us. Everyone has a sphere of influence, and big or small, we have a responsibility to love on those people, whilst remaining grounded in Biblical truth and teaching.

  32. Personally, if I had an account with JP Morgan and knew that they were funding an organization that released a list of “hate groups” which included Christians, my natural reaction would be to close my account with a letter of explanation. Even further, I would attempt to write to the organization to have my voice heard in frustration the list they are creating and advertising of “hate groups” is indeed causing more hate. Yet on the opposing side of the spectrum, we cannot just simply turn away from all organizations that have differing views than we as Christians do, but instead we’re called to interact with all with the love and mercy that Christ as shown us. So while I would still close the account so I would not be financially supporting a company that helps incite hate, I would still do my best to interact with my former bank with the love that Christ has shown me.

  33. If an individual feels the strong need to close an account with JP Morgan, then I see no issue with that. However, personally, I would not close my account because there are so many companies and organizations that support certain groups, and it would be hard to only be a customer to places that I 100% support the held belief system. Each person feels strongly about different things, and if someone chooses to close their JP Morgan account, then that is fine, but one person or a small handful of people closing their accounts may not be a big enough action that JP Morgan would feel the consequences.

  34. It’s crazy that in this modern day of age that Christian’s, and their views, get hated on. This situation with J. P. Morgan amongst others truly show the decline in Christ-like worldviews in the world today. I think that, in this case with J. P. Morgan, that as Christians we should discontinue any accounts with this bank. It wouldn’t be right to show support for something that goes against what we believe.

  35. Do you fully believe that funding such group actually furthers such division? I want to know your support for it or reasoning. I am actually inclined to agree, however. We often see that groups created to do nothing but further a political/moral cause rarely have a positive calming effect on the given situation. But is there proof? would we say this if the funded group were a pro-traditional marriage group?

    1. Andrew–
      Well, the security guard at FRC that was almost killed because the guy saw FRC on the hate list would suggest that SPLC’s actions create more division. As far as “proof” who knows what will happen in the future, but the past track record suggests more conflict.

  36. It is very hard to stop associating yourself with companies like these. If you take a look at any big company, they are not always following what the Bible is saying. Although this is true, we as Christians can’t sit back and keep our mouths shut. Maybe something as simple as a letter to the company explaining why we aren’t associating ourselves with them. Now this may not do anything to make the company change, but it does inform them that customers will be leaving for them taking the stance that they took. if enough people disagreed with them and let them know that they disagree, they may reconsider what they are doing and think about what they are supporting.

  37. “What do we do?”
    We cannot stop expressing our beliefs to others. Ultimately, it’s their choice to agree or disagree with God’ s word. As Christians, we can be the light in the darkness of the world and share the gospel with others. Also, we cannot react too aggressively because what would that say about us as followers of Christ?

  38. Personally, I do not think that withdrawing money from JP Morgan will do any good. The money has already been donated and the loss of one small account, or even a thousand small accounts will not greatly influence a bank with a quarterly revenue of over 25 billion dollars. If a person would like to let the bank know they are displeased, simply sending a letter would let the bank know the feelings of the individual without creating the headache of switching banks.

  39. I really enjoyed what you had to say. I think the funding of these so-called “anti-hate” groups is definitely making the division in this nation that much bigger. The more the secular “left” pushes their views, the more the christian community disagrees with the modern society. I think any funding, from businesses like JP Morgan, to these groups should be stopped, and society should begin seeking other means to bring this country together. As christians, we should continually pray and love those around us doing anything and everything we can to lessen the divide between us and the secular world, while remaining true to our beliefs.

  40. JP Morgan is using their large platform to make a strong statement about what they stand for and what they believe is right. Christian also then must not only speak their opposition, but show it through peaceful actions and prayer. No longer supporting JP Morgan, by withdrawing money, is the most respectful yet prevalent way to do so. As Christians we must not have contradicting beliefs, arguments, and actions. I personally believe it is worth the time to do research on the companies you are supporting by buying their services and products to make sure they are not for anything you are against.

  41. Generally speaking, would you reccomend boycotting a company for their moral stances? If so, how do you separate the moral stances of the higher ups at a company from the moral stances of a company itself? Can a company truly have moral stances at all, or would those stances just be a conglomeration of the highest members of the company?

  42. This is the first time I’ve heard about the Southern Poverty Law Center. I’m sure the map that they have is legal, but that just doesn’t sound right. A map detailing every “hate” group, where to find them? I always think it’s ironic when something from an “anti-hate” group leads to more hate. It brings to mind the question of “What are you trying to do with that?” along with the comment of “It doesn’t look like it’s working.”

  43. This brought to mind MLK’s words “hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that”. We have here a group that wants to eradicate hate, but their plan to go about doing that is to expose, and essentially call out, every one they deem a hate group, and how to find them? I may be wrong, but it seems to me that this is almost a passive-aggressive way of declaring war on anyone deemed as part of a hate group. The whole concept is extremely ironic.

  44. I don’t believe pulling my account from JP Morgan would have much of an effect at all. I by no means agree with the things they are supporting, but I think there are more effective ways of going about things. We live in a fallen world and standing up for what the Bible truly says tends to receive a lot of hate. We still are called to preach truth to others and tell them what they need to hear, which in many cases is not what they want to hear.

  45. Choosing to close a bank account at JP Morgan, to me, seems to be a matter of keeping one’s personal conscience clear and, as was said, probably ineffective. Regarding what we can do to try to clear the animosity associated with the broader Christian community beyond individual dialogue, I believe that Christians in business should make intentional efforts to exhibit Christian values through the various services they carry out, such as helping the poor, starting community service projects, providing educational resources, etc. I believe that this would help shine a more positive light, even if it only starts in one corner. It is hard to erase negative views that have been formed, but this does not mean that nothing should be done to try to fix this.

  46. To a large degree, companies such as JP Morgan have their hands tied in regards to issues like this, as the Wall Street Journal pointed out. Do they truly believe in these causes? It’s possible, but unlikely that they would really subscribe to the far-left politics of groups like SPLC. The larger issue is that of reputation. John Lott, a fellow economist, has waxed eloquent on the power of reputation in the marketplace, and he’s quite on point. Regardless of how excellent the company is, a poor reputation among their customers will sink or severely hamper the company. For someone like JPMorgan, it’s far more cost-effective to shuffle a little money towards SPLC and so avoid the headache of combatting a PR problem. The conservatives will never get the same air time on major networks that SJWs do, and it’s wholly in JPMorgan’s self-interest to fund SPLC and take the wrath of a quiet majority that won’t do anything (which isn’t much wrath anyway). In that light, perhaps closing up shop with them isn’t the worst idea after all. We obviously don’t have their attention anyway…

  47. JP Morgan is private (non government) company and is perfectly within their rights to set up policies regarding how it will enforce discrimination laws within the company (ignoring Biblical morality for the sake of the argument). People may not like its decision but so long as the policy doesn’t violate any laws, there is nothing that can be done. If people are really that upset at JP Morgan’s business and policy decisions, they can take their business elsewhere. That is the beauty of the free market.

  48. It is definitely an awkward situation for us Christians. On one hand if we do decide to pull out of these types of businesses we may inadvertently strike up even more hate for us and our beliefs , and may paint ourselves as even stronger “haters” in the eyes of others. On the other hand if we continue to support said companies we probably won’t see a change for the better either, as it won’t just come on it’s own as we remain quiet.

    If it was me in this situation, I would deeply consider taking my business elsewhere.

  49. Sadly most of our society views Christians as people who hate on those who do not share the same beliefs as us. It is true that people living in sin need to hear that what they are doing is wrong. However we must as Christians share Christ’s love with them as well as speak truth to them. Just branding them as sinners and doing nothing else about it is why our society states that we are “haters.”
    As far as the JP Morgan topic I don’t believe that taking my business away from them is going to make much of a statement. I do believe that we as Christians should pray for the unbelievers of this world and pray Christians show Christ’s love to those who are fallen.

  50. I had no clue J.P. Morgan was doing this. I agree with you on the pulling out of a bank account if I had one. I personally think a larger corporation such as them should stay out of social issues. They have an unfair advantage to sway the social unrest in any directions. All Social “justice” should be done by individuals not corporations.

Comments are closed.