Here we go again. No doubt about it, one of the key stories of the day offers a fiery mix of politics, money, sexuality, social justice and, yes, religion.

I’m talking about this NBCNews.com headline: “Pete Buttigieg criticized for volunteering with Salvation Army.”

Stay tuned for upcoming debates featuring Democrats seeking the White House. Will this issue have legs in the news? Maybe. Maybe not. I think it depends on whether candidates on the woke side of the party decide that it is good or bad for their prospects for an openly gay candidate to even hint at a willingness for dialogue and tolerance on religious-liberty issues.

Meanwhile, there is this journalism question: Does anyone at NBC News realize that the Salvation Army is a CHURCH as well as a major provider of help to the poor? Hold that thought. First, here is the overture:

Pete Buttigieg is drawing criticism after pictures of him volunteering for the Salvation Army, which has historically opposed gay rights, recently resurfaced on social media.

In the photos, Buttigieg is seen standing outside Peggs restaurant in South Bend, Indiana, where he is the mayor, for the Red Kettle Ring Off, an annual charity initiative during which public officials compete to raise money for the Salvation Army. While the photos were from 2017, Buttigieg, who has surged to the top of many polls of Democratic presidential candidates in Iowa, has been participating in the event since at least 2015, according to local news reports. He also held an event at the Salvation Army in South Bend last year. 

“I know the photos are two years old, but still, I can't help but wonder if Mayor Pete just looks at what LGBTQ activists have been working on for years and then chooses to spite it,” tweeted Zach Ford, press secretary of the Alliance for Justice, a progressive judicial advocacy organization.

When it comes to questions about religion and coverage of religion news, the crucial parts of the NBC News story start right here:

The Salvation Army, which was founded in England in 1852 with the stated mission “to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination,” has a documented history of discrimination against LGBTQ people. This troubled history includes refusing to comply with legislation and ordinances requiring the extension of benefits to same-sex spouses of employees and offering links to gay conversion therapy organizations on their website.

I would argue that NBC News editors — if the goal was to help readers understand this conflict (and maybe even show fairness to both sides) — could have tweaked that statement to say: “The Salvation Army is an evangelical church, founded in England in 1852, with the stated mission “to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination. …”

Yes, the Salvation Army is also a nonprofit that receives government aid for some of its programs (as do many secular and religious nonprofits). The Army does not take government aid for its rehabilitation programs, which include evangelistic content. That has been tricky church-state territory for many groups in recent decades.

The Salvation Army, backed by the U.S. Supreme Court, also hires ministers and employees who affirm (or do not attack) its core doctrines on a host of subjects, including marriage and sex. That’s essential First Amendment territory, but still controversial for many (not all) people on the doctrinal and political left. It’s a crucial issue for Buttigieg, as a candidate in a party with many, many, African-American and Latino voters who are part of traditional churches (see recent Bobby Ross post here at GetReligion).

Moving on. The news team at NBC pounces in this passage:

In 2012, a Salvation Army spokesperson implied that gay people should be put to death and several homeless trans women from across the country have reported discriminatory treatment from the charity, saying the organization denied them shelter. In 2017, the New York City Commission on Human Rights filed complaints against the organization for allegedly refusing transgender clients at a New York substance abuse center.

NBC does add, with the usual material from online sources instead of actual people who support the Salvation Army’s work:

The charity has attempted to leave its controversial past behind in recent years. On its U.K. website, it states that the Salvation Army “stands against homophobia, which victimises people and can reinforce feelings of alienation, loneliness and despair.” The website adds that though individual members of the organization may hold different views about LGBTQ people, the organization as a whole condemns discrimination on the basis of sexual and gender identity. The U.S. page of the Salvation Army’s website includes anecdotes from LGBTQ people that have been helped by the charity.

Now, it would have helped — a lot — if NBC had noted that the “Salvation Army spokesperson” who made those remarks was a relatively minor figure in Australia and that top church leaders immediately shot down that statement as, well, heresy.

The Huffington Post reported:

Salvation Army spokesman Major Bruce Harmer quickly released a statement distancing the organization from [Major Andrew] Craibe’s “extremely regrettable” remarks, noting that members do “not believe, and would never endorse, a view that homosexual activity should result in any form of physical punishment.”

Harmer goes on to note: “The Salvation Army believes in the sanctity of all human life and believes it would be inconsistent with Christian teaching to call for anyone to be put to death. We consider every person to be of infinite value, and each life a gift from God to be cherished, nurtured and preserved.”

The issue with complaints by trans women, concerning shelter in Salvation Army facilities, was a familiar conflict between the views of trans activists and homeless women — often women who have experienced sexual trauma and abuse. These homeless women, and their legal advocates, would argue that it is a violation of their dignity and privacy (some would say safety) to force them to share living quarters, bathrooms and showers with people who, in terms of DNA, are biological males.

That’s an issue that is a bit more complicated than the one reported by NBC News professionals. Was the goal here to accurately represent the views of people on both sides of that debate?

I would also add, that in political terms, if would have been good to have noted that not all LGBTQ leaders take the same stance, in terms of figures such as Mayor Pete showing a willingness to cooperate — on issues of common concern — with traditional religious believers.

That’s a crucial part of this story, if the goal is accurate coverage a range of views found among LGBTQ people, especially some religious believers. For example: