response 120 of 174:

Nov 15 00:07 UTC 2000

When I was in an Ann Arbor elementary school (admittedly a while ago), I 
don't remember ever getting any BSA membership material, either from the 
schools, or from others.  I don't think I had any friends that were boy 
scouts.

response 122 of 174:

Nov 15 05:45 UTC 2000

When I was in school, which was not too long ago, the PTO was generally
presented as the forum for parents to go to discuss and influence local school
policies.  Claiming that something is sponsored by the PTO, rather than the
school, and should thus not be subject to any of the anti-discrimination
restrictions put on school sponsored activities, seems to me to be a very hard
sell.

Societal opinions on morality can and do change.  People do reexamine their
beliefs, and do sometimes decide that they were wrong, especially when society
around them is also changing and doing so is a matter of going with the flow.
As such, I think albaugh's statement in #106 that "you aren't going to get
the BSA to change its view on what is moral or not," as well as his statements
in #113 that society will not discriminate against the Boy Scounts, are at
best short sighted.  It may not happen right away, but if societal attitudes
continue to move in the direction they're moving in now, and the Boy Scounts
don't budge, I think the Boy Scouts will go the way of the all white country
club, perhaps still in existence, but not acceptable in mainstream society.

There was a time when it was considered immoral to allow black people and
white people to associate with eachother.  It took much longer to knock down
the legal barriers set up to prevent that association in schools than it did
in other parts of society, suggesting that people were especially scared of
having black and white kids interacting with eachother.  I'm certainly not
going to argue that there is true racial equality in the US today, or that
there are no longer parents who send their kids to all white schools due to
racism.  However, 50 years ago such segregation was legally mandated in many
parts of the US, and people continued to fight for that segregation long after
it was outlawed by the Supreme Court in 1954.  Yet today, if anybody were to
protest the hiring of a black teacher for their kids, or to object to a black
parent leading an after school activity, on the basis of race, most people
in the US would be outraged.  I seriously doubt we would be having an argument
here over whether an organization that didn't allow black leaders should get
United Way funding, because we would all agree that it shouldn't.

response 124 of 174:

Nov 15 07:09 UTC 2000

I'm perfectly willing to believe that the Cub Scout pack is sponsored by the
PTO, not the school.  What you're having a harder time convincing me of is
that the PTO is not sponsored by the school.

response 126 of 174:

Nov 15 17:36 UTC 2000

Re: #118:  I *believe* it is a BSA policy, though it may only be our troop's
polciy (I doubt it), that scouts and parents *NEVER* sleep in the same tent.
Adults must sleep in adults-only tents.  Only scouts sleep in scout tents.
They usually buddy up, for the practical reason that one can help/alert the
other(s) in the event of an emergency (e.g. tent is on fire).

Ensuring that adults and scouts don't sleep in the same tent is to avoid even
the appearance of impropriety.  Further, adults other than the parent of a
scout are not allowed to transport a single scout (i.e. alone) who is not the
child of the parent - two or more scouts are required.

response 128 of 174:

Nov 15 20:45 UTC 2000

Yes, Cubs are different than the older Boy Scouts, so sometimes they're
treated as "little fellas".  Camping in *tents* for Cubs is not that common
of an experience, at least in my observation.

response 130 of 174:

Nov 19 06:49 UTC 2000

Jesus F*cking Christ.  When I was in Boy Scouts in the mid to late 1960s
our scoutmaster at the time was a Lt. later Captain in the USMC
'lurps'.  We learned how to infiltrate and kill commies and you guys are
worried about fags.  I dunno if it was appropriate or not, but I sure
learned a lot.  We also learned lots of other outdoor skills such as
'booby traps' and the proper method for conducting and responding to an
ambush given any particular terrain (hint: charge an ambush).  We had
various 'role models' - one of whom was a 'cracker' who didn't like
blacks - 'nigras'.  We put a c-rat can of peanut butter in his fire.  It
exploded as expected and burned the heck out of his tent although he
escaped with only a scalp wound (bled like the dickens) (I'm not sure we
actually ment to try to kill him...).  There was one 'patrol' of 'other
ranks' who had a 'bitch' that they used to torment.  My patrol -'rat
patrol' aka 'tunnel rats' (Influenced by TV of the time) - rescued him
and he was so grateful he offered a blowjob to all.  I told him to shut
the f*ck up and hit the hay and that I would personally beat anyone who
took him up on his offer.

This is what I recall as a boy scout (then there was the time where
later 'in country' the entire troop was disbanded on account the
scoutmaster son of the local council chief was arrested for drug dealing
and we were all assumed to be 'poisoned fruit' even though as far as I
knew he never sold drugs to his troop or even did drugs in his official
capacity, but thats another story altogether.) (I never got to be an
'eagle scout' even though I had fulfilled all the requirements dammit!) 

Bottom line, I suspect that in the BSA the folks that benefit from the
program - the 'kids' - are fully able to more or less deal with a lot of
stuff at that age and have no problem with 'fags' - by that age they are
more or less set in their own individual ways.  But, I do think that the
BSA has a responsibility to ensure that its 'leaders' provide at least a
semblance of a 'positive role model' or at least something approaching
that which the 'kids' can respect.  Generally in my experience it does
so and thus is a positive force in society and thus ought to be
encouraged.  I think rabid commies, democrats, and the french have no
place in scouting as do not many others and I do think that one should
not throw the baby out with the dirty bathwater...shit, at least they
teach helping little old ladies across the street...

response 132 of 174:

Nov 19 15:36 UTC 2000

        hahahhahaha!

response 134 of 174:

Nov 19 16:51 UTC 2000

I think he is saying his troop used to go to "Camp Amiga-mike".  Watch out
for th marines statioed around the Girl Scout camp.

response 136 of 174:

Nov 20 16:28 UTC 2000

        What mystifies me is the (unfounded) rationale that because someone
is gay, that therefore they would encourage or somehow statistically alter
the chance of any children they come in contact with, to also be gay.  It's
not communicable, last I checked, and the rumor about the toaster bonus for
signing up a straight person is still just a rumor.

response 138 of 174:

Nov 20 21:11 UTC 2000

bdh3 - your 60's experience with scouting sounds like some bad movie about
the red scare militia.  I'm happy to say that no paramilitary BS is tolerated
in the BSA I've been involved with.  YMMV.

response 140 of 174:

Nov 21 01:41 UTC 2000

Now I understand lmaster. He was exploring his *feminine* side. <cough>

response 142 of 174:

Nov 21 14:27 UTC 2000

Actually, that's not quite what they argued. They argued that forcing the
Boy Scouts to accept gay scoutmasters "would diminish the organization's
ability to effectively communicate its chosen message," which is that being
gay violates the boy scouts' oath to be "morally straight" and "clean." 
Their concern was not about being forced to accept straight members, but
was about being forced to accept members which might force it to change its
chosen message. They also expressed concern that, if the ruling were
upheld, organizations such as the Boy Scouts would have to "explicitly
emphasize their anti-gay message in order to preserve their right to select
their own leaders and define their own membership."

The organization, which I've never before heard of, is "Gays and Lesbians
for Individual Liberty."

"In short, GLIL believes that the participation of openly gay Americans in
all aspects of this nation's public and civic life is important because it
sends a positive message of tolerance and acceptance to society. 
Similarly, the service of openly gay individuals, like James Dale, as
Scoutmasters would signal to young Scouts that homosexuality at the very
least should be tolerated and that openly gay individuals can be good role
models. 

"Consistent with the First Amendment, however, this message must be sent
through private choice and must not be communicated due to government
coercion."