Started out as a response, but is really a post of its own. What we're talking about is this situation.
I completely agree with CC on this one. The issue is not the worthiness of the cause, it's that he didn't ask permission and get approval first. Radio hosts generally DON'T have signature authority. I don't know about the big names - maybe some of them have some sort of purchasing authority or show production slush fund. I do know that most hosts have to get approval for anything that costs the station money.
Clear Channel would have canned him just as quick, for exactly the same reason. Maybe their PR department would have done it in a more sensitive way, given how he's been able to spin this, but I don't see them keeping someone who goes and runs unauthorized events around. MAYBE if they were a Big Name host or something.
I really don't see the station owner's religion playing into this at all. This was a completely corporate, completely secular sort of decision. It even has that clumsy corporate feel to it.
What more deeply bothers me is the mindset that one should not be punished for breaking an unjust rule. I see this frequently - someone will argue that it's not fair that they're being punished for doing "the right thing". Nevermind that what they believe is "the right thing" is illegal or against a clearly stated policy.
It's Civil Disobedience Lite - all the self-righteous smugness, without any of those pesky consequences. And there seems to be a related idea that it's okay to violate the rights of others to do "the right thing", and that it's THEIR problem if they don't like you doing it.
Now, I am a 'tax, then spend' liberal - I support extensive social and infrastructure programs, along with sufficient taxation to fully cover the expenses of those programs. And I am fine with taking someone's money for those programs through taxation, because we have a political process that makes doing so a decision made by society in general. (While imperfect, it's reasonably close - unlike vigilante takings of any sort.)
What I am NOT okay with is the idea that one can, say, use their company's resources to run a charity event and then act like it's the company's fault for not being happy you did so.