| General Board Of Church And Society |
Article Index for General |
Shopping Morals |
Website Links For Methodist |
Information AboutGeneral Board Of Church And Society |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT METHODIST BOARD OF TEMPERANCE, PROHIBITION, AND PUBLIC MORALS | |
| methodism | |
| alcohol law | |
| history of methodism in the united states | |
| temperance | |
|
The Board constructed the Methodist Building on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC in 1925 in order to further increase its influence and Lobby ing power in public policy matters regarding Alcoholic Beverages . After Ratification of the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution established Prohibition , the Methodist Board promoted its aggressive enforcement. It also attempted to eliminate any criticism or opposition to what many called the Noble Experiment. In 1925, it charged that Vaudeville acts and Comic Strips were being used to dispense wet (anti-prohibition) Propaganda in New York City, which it called “a foreign city, run by foreigners for foreigners according to foreign ideas.” The Methodist Board was dissolved after a merger of Methodist denominations in the 1960s and the united church created the General Board of Church and Society (GBCS). The 1965 Trust Contract requires all principal and income from the trust’s assets to be used exclusively for “work in the areas of temperance and alcohol problems.” Some temperance activists are currently attempting to have the trust’s assets of over $20 million transferred from the GBCS to a new corporation dedicated exclusively to fighting the consumption of alcohol. They allege that the GBCS corporation is funding programs on antiwar, environmental, technological, and dozens of other activities unrelated to reducing the consumption of alcohol. GBCS officials respond that they interpret the trust’s language to include to include a variety of social causes. In a separate legal action, Judge Ron Enns of Texas is Petition ing not to have the assets transferred to another corporate entity but to enforce the language in the existing trust contract. It appears that the issues will be settled in court. SEE ALSO
SOURCES
|
|
|