response 93 of 174:

Nov 13 00:32 UTC 2000

Here is a position document from:

  http://www.scouting.org/excomm/positions/unitedway.html

For the web-challenged, it says:

  ---

As a founding agency of the United Way, the Boy Scouts of America 
greatly appreciates the support that has been extended to Boy Scout
councils across the country. For many decades, United Way funding has 
helped the BSA bring the Scouting programs to underprivileged youth, 
introduce new programs, and broaden the existing program.

In our pluralistic society, the strength of local United Ways has been 
their ability to bring together and support a mosaic of community needs. 
These needs are best met through a comprehensive mix of agencies, many 
of which serve exclusive constituencies. 

The United Way does not implement a specific policy of nondiscrimination 
for individual charities so as to avoid conflict with charities that
serve only specific segments of the population, including all-women's 
shelters, programs for persons of a certain age group, or programs for
persons of specific cultural communities.

In its more than 90 year history, the Boy Scouts of America has served 
more than 100 million members and their families as a consistent
platform for the values upon which America was built. We remain 
committed to providing these values to future generations.

A core value of the BSA is respect. Scouting respects those with ideas 
and customs that are different from our own and expects the same
respect from those who may disagree with Scouting's position. Tolerance 
for a diversity of values and ideals does not require abdication of
one's own values. 

As a values-based educational movement, the Boy Scouts of America asks 
its members to subscribe to the tenets of the Scout Oath and Scout Law. 
Inculcating moral and religious values in young people benefits all of 
society. 

Scouts are at work in our communities everyday - collecting food, 
recycling, visiting nursing homes and hospitals, and in thousands of 
other ways living out the Scout Oath and Law.

The BSA aims for the United Way to realize Scouting's value to the 
potential, dignity, and worth of all people, regardless of their 
background.

  ---

The BSA's position on gay people in positions of leadership appears to 
be:

  ---

We believe an avowed homosexual is not a role model for the values 
espoused in the Scout Oath and Law. 

Boy Scouting makes no effort to discover the sexual orientation of any 
person. Scouting's message is compromised when prospective leaders 
present themselves as role models inconsistent with Boy Scouting's 
understanding of the Scout Oath and Law. 

Scouting's record of inclusion is impressive by any standard. However, 
we do ask all of our members to do their best to live the Scout Oath
and Law. Today, boys from every ethnic, religious, and economic 
background in suburbs, farms, and cities know and respect each other as
they participate in our program.

  [ . . . ]

In a support brief filed by three of Scouting's largest chartered 
organizations, they addressed why Scouting has been so effective for 90
years: "Scouting's program for character development is effective 
precisely because it teaches through both precept and concrete examples 
of its adult leaders ... Scoutmasters exist not only to espouse the 
ideals of Scouting, but more importantly to live and embody them; they
are the role models of the Scouting movement."

  --- 

I got this exerpt from

  http://www.scouting.org/press/000628/index.html

Here are a couple of exerpts from email messages I sent to a way right 
wing Christian when he sent me a message about the fallout from this 
matter:

  ---

I feel grateful for the many years that I spent as a boyscout, and while 
I may think the BSA has a misguided policy towards gays, I don't want to 
see any kids denied the scouting experience -- especially in times like 
these where parents are too busy chasing after the Almighty Dollar to
take responsibility for raising their own kids.

  [ . . . ]

At any rate, the presedential debates got me thinking about the BSA
again.  Somehow the topic made its way to leadership, and I thought
of the ways in which our country trains children to be leaders.  The
BSA is the only organization I know of that teaches leadership to
children.  The schools certainly don't, nor do the churches.  None
of my other extracurricular activities provided any real training at
all for being a leader, all the way through high school.  I shudder
at the thought of having a country full of zombie followers, and it
scares me to think that the BSA might ever go away or become less
influential in our society.

It was in the Boy Scouts that I gained an appreciation and love for
nature.  I also learned about cooperation, teamwork, and respect as
a Boy Scout, among myriad other things.

  [ . . . ]

I wish I knew what was the right answer here.  I wish the BSA
would not have such a misguided policy.  I wish the gay groups
would not have considered the BSA their enemies.  I wish that
organizations and companies wouldn't have made the decision to
stop donating to the BSA.  I wish that people wouldn't threaten
to withdraw their support of those organizations and companies.

Instead, I wish that the BSA would have known that men who like
men aren't a threat to the boys in their organization.  I wish
that those gay groups would have worked in good faith to spread
understanding and good-will within the BSA, such that they would
have more enlightened policies.  I wish that people who like the
BSA would enlighten companies like RR Donnelley about all the
good the BSA has done and continues to do, such that they would
increase their support for the BSA.

I see our great country becoming like Israel and Bosnia, and I
feel powerless to stop it.

  ---

I really am troubled by all the divisiveness I see around me these 
days, or what some call the "Balkanization" of the U.S.  Why can't we 
work towards productive dialogue rather threats and retaliation?  Other 
scouting organizations around the world don't have the same restrictions 
regarding homosexual leadership that are found in the BSA, and its only 
a matter of time before the BSA see's the light.  In the mean-time, 
should they be attacked and forced to retrench in defense of a policy 
that they might be inclined to change with some persuasive arguments and 
gentle prodding?  Should the BSA be forced out of business because they 
are not yet perfect and are stubbornly refusing to see things our way?
Should we really work to bring harm to those with whom we disagree?  

And what should we do about the myriad other organizations that don't 
include everyone?  Should we bar support of battered women's shelters 
because they don't cater to men as well?  Should we bar support of 
football teams that don't allow non-athletes play?  

Sorry about the very long response . . . 

response 95 of 174:

Nov 13 02:17 UTC 2000

Let any organization sets its own standards for participation, but
don't allow public support for those that discriminate (given a national
definition of what constitutes discrimination). Anti-discrimination has
been an evolutionary process. Inevitably some people and organizations
will get left behind because they cannot or will not evolve. But new
people and organizations arise all the time, and will accomodate to
the advance of antidiscrimination. The girl scouts don't discriminate
on the basis of sexual orientation - perhaps they should start a male
counterpart?

response 97 of 174:

Nov 13 04:23 UTC 2000

The only sort of support that the government has any say about is government
support. that's usually what's meant by "public support," and I assume that's
what Rane meant, too.

response 99 of 174:

Nov 13 06:31 UTC 2000

Public support comes from governments, whose resources come from the public
via taxation. Boy Scouts (and Red Cross) are private organizations, which
have gotten a lot of public support in the past because they serve public
purposes without violating laws. The Boy Scouts have a religious element,
but have not applied it to their public services, as far as I know (they
accept employees and children of any religion, race,..etc..but now only
up to some sexual persuasions. The Red Cross has no limits on any non-criminal
beliefs and orientations (even though their symbol derived from a religion).
They may be changing that, by the way, because the cross carries a false
message when they work with, say, Muslim countries, where their counterpart
is the Red Crescent. Globalism is coming to the Red ???????. 

response 101 of 174:

Nov 14 00:20 UTC 2000

They should no longer be allowed to meet in any public school
building or circulate membership information on school
grounds.  Not unless the same space could also be rented
to other organizations with agendas which discriminate, 
like the KKK.

I wonder if United Way has lost any general donations because
one of the recipients of their funding is BSA.  I hope so.

Would the adopted children of two gay parents still be welcome
in the BSA?

response 103 of 174:

Nov 14 04:15 UTC 2000

Bullshit, Mary.  All groups that do not conduct illegal activity are 
eligible to hold meetings on school premises, which are public 
buildings.  That includes church groups, some of which may hold views 
you don't happen to agree with, which you may - gasp - consider 
discrimintory.  The Boy Scouts do not tell you what to think, and you 
have no right to tell the BSA what to think.  Next, I suppose, you'll 
want to ban Catholic groups from using school buildings, because 
Catholics do not consider women proper persons to be priests, therefore 
they're discriminatory.

response 105 of 174:

Nov 14 05:10 UTC 2000

Don't kid yourself; the BSA leadership _understands_ your point of view,
they just don't *agree* with it.  More understanding isn't going to help.

But yes, you are more likely to win them over with sweet persuasion than
with opposition.  But who can stomach the compromise necessary to convince?

response 107 of 174:

Nov 14 06:21 UTC 2000

I think in the past, many people have extended resources to the BSA in
the belief that they were a public institution open to all.  The BSA has
made it quite clear that they are *not* a public institution.  That's
fine, but there are consequences, and one of those consequences is that
those resources *should* no longer be available to the BSA (indeed, they
never should have been in the 1st place).  Just what those resources are
is going to be an interesting question for society to resolve, but just
as it's ok for the BSA to discriminate against people, it is and should
be perfectly possible for people to discriminate against the BSA.  This
is certainly going to change things, and an interesting question is
whether, in the end, whether BSA will be left as part of mainstream
america, or gets left behind along with shoe-shine boys and door-to-door
salesmen.

response 109 of 174:

Nov 14 12:22 UTC 2000

boy scouts.  heh, that shit's fer urban folks ennyhoo.

response 111 of 174:

Nov 14 14:27 UTC 2000

re 99:  The International REd Cros ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to recognize the 
counterpart organization in Israel (Magen David Adom)!!!

response 113 of 174:

Nov 14 17:33 UTC 2000

You liberal PC damaged Ann Arborites ought to get a clue:  Society is *not*
going to "discriminate against" or shun the Boy Scouts.  That includes
teachers, regardless of the witless dogma their various EA union leadership
concocts.  Only about 9 of some 1400 United Way "chapters" nation wide
determined that they would not partner with BSA for one reason or another.
That's not a mandate.  The overwhelming number of parents do not give a hoot
that homosexuals are not supported as scout leaders, and in fact, they're
darned glad they're not.  So you grex types go right ahead believing all this
"we shall overcome" propaganda you congratulate each other with, while
"outside" it's a much different picture.

response 115 of 174:

Nov 14 19:29 UTC 2000

I believe that what seems to pass for discrimination in the dogma
espoused in today's culture is nothing more than a call for attention
and legitimization.  To be called a bigot in this world just seems
to mean your honest disagreement has absolutely no validity and that
the opinions have no basis except hate.

I've heard some pretty hateful things from those seeking political
protection from situations that are perfectly valid judgements on
all fronts, except for their personal perspective.