Boy Scouts could end ban on Gay Members & Leaders

[rockgremlin]

I do however, support every organization, business and individual to be able to have their opinions and / or policies.

The problem here is that their opinions and policies support outright discrimination. The same mindset was rampant during the 50's and 60's - only instead of sexual identity, the bigotry was aimed at racial identity.

[Deathcricket]

Sorry guys, the person with the longest post and most words, wins.

Grats hank!

[2065toyota]

The problem here is that their opinions and policies support outright discrimination. The same mindset was rampant during the 50's and 60's - only instead of sexual identity, the bigotry was aimed at racial identity.

Just for consistency, have you also filed a complaint with "united negro college fund". Or 'cheetahs' in Vegas for having no male dancers? What about Costco for not letting me in without my card. There are many types of discrimination, and all can be reasonably justified. How about we also show the tolerance that you ask for to allow an organization to do as it wishes.

Again, I am only arguing for equal tolerance, not arguing that they made a right or wrong decision

[rockgremlin]

Just for consistency, have you also filed a complaint with "united negro college fund". Or 'cheetahs' in Vegas for having no male dancers? What about Costco for not letting me in without my card. There are many types of discrimination, and all can be reasonably justified. How about we also show the tolerance that you ask for to allow an organization to do as it wishes.

Again, I am only arguing for equal tolerance, not arguing that they made a right or wrong decision

I can see your point, and I agree with you that not an injustices of the world can be rectified. Especially that Costco one - I hate that!

However, I think that the issue of equal rights for homosexuals carries a little more weight than whether or not Cheetahs doesn't allow male dancers, etc. What I'm arguing for is an issue of basic human rights. In America we claim to be lovers of tolerance and diversity. ("....with liberty & justice for all'). But if you read the fine print there are a very large number of individuals who aren't included.

I'll tackle that issue with Costco another day, but for now let's focus on issues that are more pressing.

[hank moon]

The gist of the prizewinning post is that the BSA is (indirectly) supported by federal tax dollars in many ways, some pretty subtle. There's also the no-so-subtle matter of the legal monopoly on "scouting" organizations. The BSA has from the start blurred the line between public and private. Something to consider when comparing them to other orgs who have "opinions and / or policies" but federal no tax dollar support and legal monopoly.

[Sandstone Addiction]

The problem here is that their opinions and policies support outright discrimination.

The same policies "support outright discrimination" against the vast majority of the population.

Most girls are not allowed, anyone over 18 is not allowed, little kids too--that's a lot of people and a lot of discrimination.

Obviously the BSA hates nearly everyone! [sarcasm]

[RedSpecialized]

I can see your point, and I agree with you that not an injustices of the world can be rectified. Especially that Costco one - I hate that! ..........In America we claim to be lovers of tolerance and diversity. ("....with liberty & justice for all'). But if you read the fine print there are a very large number of individuals who aren't included.

All this time I thought the fine print said " IN GOD WE TRUST"......?

[James_B_Wads2000]

And God hates fags! Point winner!



James

[Iceaxe]

What does the BSA care if someone in the scouting program is gay? How would they even know?

It's easy to tell if someone is gay.... because they look like you.

Hahaha...



Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[rockgremlin]

The same policies "support outright discrimination" against the vast majority of the population.

Most girls are not allowed, anyone over 18 is not allowed, little kids too--that's a lot of people and a lot of discrimination.

Obviously the BSA hates nearly everyone! [sarcasm]

Dude.....what would you know? You're addicted to sandstone!

[rockgremlin]

It's easy to tell if someone is gay.... because they look like you.

Hahaha...



Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

This from a dude that likes to go "camping" with unfamiliar men he meets online...

[Sombeech]

Discrimination is terrible and it's ugly. I do not see any reason why homosexuals would not make great scout leaders, and whatever else the policy is including.

But once and for all, can we quit DIRECTLY linking homosexual discrimination to racism against African Americans? It's not even close to what the Blacks went through.

• Public lynching
• Burning Crosses in the front yard
• Separate seating in the theaters
• Not allowed in many of the same buildings
• Separate facilities
• The right to vote
• SLAVERY
• Being used as currency
• Different schools
• Being denied schooling altogether
• limited job openings
• the right to own a home
• And much of the same racism that exists still today, which is nothing what it used to be, but is still far worse than how homosexuals are treated on average.

Do you know how pissed off the vast number of African Americans are when you try to relate what they and their ancestors went through, to how a very small limited number of institutions do not fully support the homosexual lifestyle?

It's like when somebody compares Bush or Obama to Hitler. It just holds zero validity and I have to discredit anybody who raises the comparison.

Now the BSA, if I understand correctly will still not allow openly homosexual scout leaders, will definitely get their fill of negative feedback and consequences. I do not fully understand their stance but I do support their freedom to make it, and I support everybody else's freedom to criticize the hell out of them for doing so. But for hell's sake it's getting ridiculous the way we compare the Black struggle with what homosexuals may not have available today. And the same people are bringing up racism 100% of the time anytime somebody doesn't like Gay Marriage. Discrimination sucks but the racism comparison does not help the argument one bit.

If you really want to help the homosexual struggle, focus on why they WOULD be actually capable of performing whatever detail they are being denied, and you'll have better success. Just leave the racism comparison out because it actually hurts the cause.

[DOSS]

But once and for all, can we quit DIRECTLY linking homosexual discrimination to racism against African Americans?

No.. because it is what is called an example. Not that it is exactly the same but it is something that people can use to relate and understand the same kind of actions being taken on other people... Is that really that hard to understand?

How does one explain to a bigot that they are a bigot when they truly believe that their actions are not bigoted?

[Sombeech]

No.. because it is what is called an example. Not that it is exactly the same but it is something that people can use to relate and understand the same kind of actions being taken on other people... Is that really that hard to understand?

How does one explain to a bigot that they are a bigot when they truly believe that their actions are not bigoted?

Again, same kind of actions? Which of what I listed above are the same kind of actions?

You would have a valid rebuttal if Jews and the Holocaust were thrown into the mix at least 50% of the time, or even the Egyptians against the Hebrews.

How about a rare occasional mention of the extermination order against the Mormons in the state of Missouri that was only lifted in the 1970's? Is that EVER used as an example?

Find me one thread where homosexual discrimination is discussed without mention of the civil rights or African American discrimination.

Just one.

Then I'll lay off.

EDIT:
And again, for those who read my points simply highlighting the vast differences between the two demographic bigotries, and think this means I'm anti gay, anti black, anti Mormon, anti Scout, or the anti Christ, I'm not. I'm "Anti Emotional Reaction".

And by the way I've recently become a scout leader with the 16-17 year old boys, and it makes absolutely zero difference if I was working with a homosexual scout leader. I would not care one bit. I do not defend the BSA's decision but I do defend their right to make it, and I do defend your right to give them one hell of a protest because it's obviously a big bold statement.

But just ask yourself, is it not true that there is the constant attempt to portray those who are not on the Gay Marriage cheerleader squad, the same type of racists as in the 60's?

[Brian in SLC]

Again, same kind of actions?

I don't have much of a dog in this hunt, but...

Defining a Hate Crime
A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias. For the purposes of collecting statistics, Congress has defined a hate crime as a "criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation." Hate itself is not a crime—and the FBI is mindful of protecting freedom of speech and other civil liberties.

Local news stations have been covering the heck out of this. Pretty interesting. We had a bit of a spirited, but friendly, discussion about it today post work. Was wondering what the politics behind this were, what the heck was driving the change. Corporate sponsers pulling out (no pun intended...ha ha)? Show me the money! Crazy stuff.

Have to say the local Utah spokesman doesn't come across as the poster child for inclusiveness...

[Brian in SLC]

Doesn't take much of a google search to find this interesting article...

Gay rights & civil rights

By ERIC DEGGANS
Published January 18, 2004

---

"If (the black man) demands the right to be hired, he has to recognize somebody else's right not to hire him." - U.S. Rep. Thomas Abernethy, D-Miss., in a 1964 speech against the Civil Rights Act.

"If I'm an apartment owner, I should have the right to rent to who I choose to. If I'm an apartment owner and it says in my thing that no dogs can live in my complex, I'm discriminating against the dogs, I guess, huh? But, in other words, I'm saying these are rules that one has set."
- Rev. Richard Bennett Jr., executive director of the Miami-area African American Council of Christian Clergy, explaining, in Miami's New Times in 2002, the group's resistance to recognizing gay rights.

Ask Nadine Smith whether the struggle for gay rights can be compared to black people's classic civil rights struggle, and she chuckles a little before responding.

As executive director of the Tampa-based advocacy group Equality Florida, she's at the center of the fight for gay marriage rights, gay adoption rights and more. And as a black lesbian, Smith admits she "sort of lives in the intersection" of all those questions.

Comparing the struggles to conquer homophobia, sexism and racism aren't academic exercises for her; it's the story of her life.
"Sometimes this question is phrased in a way that plays into the hands of bigots by asking people to rank oppression . . . asking people "Who has it worse?' " Smith said. "I've experienced racism, sexism and homophobia. And the worst one is whatever one you're dealing with right now."

The Rev. Walter Fauntroy offers a similarly pensive response to the same question.

Now age 70, Fauntroy was the Washington, D.C., coordinator for the historic March on Washington in 1963 that produced Martin Luther King's renowned "I Have a Dream" speech. As a former delegate for Washington in the U.S. House and former head of the Congressional Black Caucus, he spearheaded countless civil rights initiatives in the community and in the legislature.

But when a proposal surfaced to include a gay speaker on the 20th anniversary celebration of the March in 1983, Fauntroy chaired the group of organizers who turned it down (he said gay speakers have appeared at anniversary celebrations since 1993).
And though he believes black and gay people's struggle for rights are "exactly" the same when it comes to five key areas - access to income, education, health care, housing and criminal justice - he draws the line at the most visible issue now before the courts and community: gay marriage.

"My religious tradition says (homosexuality) is an abomination," said Fauntroy, who serves as pastor of the New Bethel Baptist Church in Washington and has publicly supported a constitutional amendment defining marriage as "the union of a man and a woman."

"Don't come to me asking society to attribute to a same-sex union the term "marriage.' It's a misnomer," the pastor added. "Have your same-sex union; have your contracts. But don't confuse my young people into thinking they don't need one another. Don't tell my young women they don't need a man."

As the country prepares to celebrate the birthday of one of the country's greatest civil rights leaders Monday, the question resurfaces: Is the fight to expand gay rights comparable to the civil rights struggle for black people that remains Martin Luther King's greatest legacy?

If so, will those opposing gay marriage laws, gay adoption rights and openly gay military service wind up on the same side of history as segregationists and alarmists who once opposed so-called "race-mixing"?

And if not, why not?

One component clouding the issue on all sides is emotion.

Black people, who may or may not agree with homosexuality itself, remain wary of associating other struggles with the effort to end America's centuries-long legacy of racism and segregation. Gay people suspect that much of the resistance to comparing the two struggles stems from homophobia.

"A lot of people have a visceral reaction to the thought of gay sex," said Matt Foreman of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in Washington. "It's been called in our movement, the "Ick Factor.' But if you have an opportunity to sit down and talk with someone about the issues, many times they come around."

Put the question to Henry Louis Gates Jr. - one of the country's leading scholars on race and civil rights as chair of African and African American Studies at Harvard University - and he reacts as if you've asked him whether rain is wet.

"The black community has traditionally been homophobic . . . (it's) deeply rooted in our culture, and I don't understand why," said Gates, now launching a PBS series and companion book on the current state of black America called America: Beyond the Color Line.

"I don't understand why the movement to legitimize gay marriage would bother people so much," added Gates, while noting that, outside issues of civil rights and social justice, black people often hold conservative political viewpoints. "We have to fight to educate people and transform that visceral response . . . (because) one of the strengths of the black civil rights movement is that it's served as a model for so many other movements. We who have suffered so much should also be the most compassionate."

And Gates isn't the only prominent black voice to take this point of view. Both black presidential candidates, Carol Moseley Braun, who dropped out Thursday, and Al Sharpton, have called the gay marriage fight a civil rights issue in the traditional sense - along with luminaries such as Julian Bond, Martin Luther King III and his mother, Coretta Scott King.

Staffers at the King Center in Atlanta declined to schedule an interview with Mrs. King, saying they preferred to focus on community service at the celebration of Dr. King's birthday. But she has spoken out on the subject in the past, equating homophobia to racism.

"I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice," Mrs. King said in 1998, according to Reuters news service."But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people."

Indeed, plans for a nationwide series of rallies during Valentine's Day week to protest a constitutional gay marriage ban - including a Feb. 14 rally at Lowry Park in Tampa - bear all the hallmarks of classic, grass-roots civil rights actions. The rallies are sponsored by Metropolitan Community Churches, the Equality Campaign and DontAmend.com.

But those who say homosexuality is immoral and unhealthy charge that gay activists are "hijacking" the nation's civil rights movement; using hard-fought gains for racial minorities and women to justify an orientation many find morally repugnant.

"Skin color or ethnicity involves no moral choices . . . but how you conduct yourself sexually does," said Robert Knight, a former Los Angeles Times staffer who now serves as director of the Culture & Family Institute, an affiliate of Concerned Women for America, which advocates the promotion of biblical values among citizens.

"They are trying to hijack the moral capital of the black civil rights movement and use it to force society to affirm their behavior, regardless of other people's moral beliefs about it," added Knight, who can quote medical studies and surveys that he says back his religion-based belief that homosexuality is a dysfunctional choice, not a born trait.

Fauntroy expressed fears that infighting among black people and gay people over such questions may distract progressive voters at a time when the focus should be elsewhere: namely, on breaking conservatives' hold on the White House and Congress during an important election year.

"Right wing racists . . . use these one-sided issues to divert attention from the fundamental issues of how you spread income around," he said. "I am still smarting from the use of prayer in the schools and abortion . . . to foster voting on sideshow issues. I resent having to spend my valuable time discussing another sideshow issue."

* * * "All the bayonets in the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes, our schools, our churches and our places of recreation."
- Then-presidential candidate Strom Thurmond in a 1948 speech.

"The whole thing bespeaks of something much deeper and more insidious than "We just want to get married.' (Homosexuals) want to change the entire social order."
- Mychal Massie, conservative columnist and member of Project 21, a Washington-based alliance of conservative black people, in a November Associated Press article.

When organizers of the 40th anniversary of the March on Washington officially invited gay and lesbian advocacy groups to help plan last year's celebration - a first in the history of the event - Matt Foreman joined in, helping draw an estimated 1,500 gay and lesbian supporters to the celebration.

And on some issues - the way religion is used to justify persecution, the way unpopular court cases are paving the way for mainstream acceptance - he sees the parallels between his struggle for civil rights and the struggle to eradicate racism.
But even Foreman thinks some gay rights advocates go too far.

"The problem is that . . . people in the gay and lesbian movement have frequently tried to cloak themselves in the civil rights movement for African Americans without recognizing the differences . . . and that has quite rightly been seen as offensive," said Foreman, who pointed out a recent press release from one advocacy group calling marriage bureaus "the new lunch counters" for gay people, evoking the sit-in protests at segregated restaurants in the '60s.

"We don't have separate restrooms, we are not being met by dogs and truncheons (and) that is a huge, profound difference," he added, noting that people of color may be even more offended in hearing such comparisons come from a group the media often portrays as affluent, male and white.

"Gay people have been persecuted throughout history, but there is nothing to compare to state-sanctioned centuries of oppression," Foreman said. "And many gay and lesbian people are able to or are forced to hide their orientation and avoid discrimination."

The key, for some, may lie in separating the history of each group's persecution from their struggles to overcome it.
Trying to draw similarities between racism and homophobia seems a losing proposition. But looking at the progress both groups have made in fighting to earn new rights may be instructive.

For example, when the Supreme Court struck down laws against interracial marriage in the 1968 Loving vs. Virginia case, a Gallup Poll showed 72 percent of respondents disapproved of such unions. It would take 23 years of regular surveys before the percentage of those approving interracial marriage would outnumber the percentage of those who disapproved.

The lesson: Polls showing widespread current opposition to gay marriage (at 60 percent among both white and black people, according to a November poll by the Pew Research Center), may change with time.

In his 1996 book One More River to Cross: Black and Gay in America, author Keith Boykin devoted an entire chapter to "The Common Language of Racism and Homophobia," noting that arguments once used to justify segregation and racial oppression now surface in antigay discussions.

Indeed, the position gay rights activists find themselves in now - victory in several key court decisions that has sparked a backlash in the mainstream; sympathetic media coverage that is changing some minds - could be comparable to the position black civil rights activists found themselves after the Loving case or the Brown vs. Board of Education decision striking down school segregation in 1954.

"It's amazing to me how we don't learn from our past experiences," said Boykin, a former writer for the Clearwater Times. "(Pulitzer Prize-winning historian) Barbara Tuchman once said every successful revolution eventually puts on the robes of its oppressor. I'm afraid in the case of black people, we've seen that happen again."

But for some who oppose homosexuality, no amount of historical comparison will change their minds.

"Just because I don't want a gay man to teach my son in school, that is not discrimination," said Rev. Richard Bennett Jr., whose African American Council of Christian Clergy in 2002 circulated fliers to Miami-area black churches saying Dr. King would be "outraged" at efforts to link gay rights advocacy with the black civil rights struggle.

"If my daughter plays with a little girl who says I have two mommies or two daddies, that's affecting my children," he added. "For them to compare the civil rights with gay rights - it should be offensive to every African-American in the whole United States."

[Iceaxe]

Sorry beech.... but I totally disagree with you.... discrimination is discrimination and its wrong. It doesn't matter if it's black or gay.... attempting to rank one form of discrimination over the other is silly.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[Sombeech]

Sorry beech.... but I totally disagree with you.... discrimination is discrimination and its wrong. It doesn't matter if it's black or gay.... attempting to rank one form of discrimination over the other is silly.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

Nope, I'm absolutely not favoring one group over the other. I'm not ranking, I'm not prioritizing, I'm not scoring. People are saying homosexuals are going through what Blacks did and I'm straight up calling bullshit and everybody knows it. And that is not an anti gay statement. Both Gays and Blacks are discriminated against, along with many other groups. That is terrible and everybody reading this agrees that it is terrible. But the main difference is you would never compare the oppression against Mormons in Missouri by extermination to homosexual discrimination today. Why is that? Why is it ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS compared to African American discrimination?

It's because you are suggesting that the two parties are going through the same things, and they absolutely are not. Why not compare homosexual discrimination to the Jews more often? Just curious, why is it always the blacks?



And another one with plenty of F bombs so here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHlowcuNHxo

[DOSS]

Again, same kind of actions? Which of what I listed above are the same kind of actions?

You would have a valid rebuttal if Jews and the Holocaust were thrown into the mix at least 50% of the time, or even the Egyptians against the Hebrews.

How about a rare occasional mention of the extermination order against the Mormons in the state of Missouri that was only lifted in the 1970's? Is that EVER used as an example?

Find me one thread where homosexual discrimination is discussed without mention of the civil rights or African American discrimination.

Just one.

Then I'll lay off.



But just ask yourself, is it not true that there is the constant attempt to portray those who are not on the Gay Marriage cheerleader squad, the same type of racists as in the 60's?

Just one example of a gay guy being killed becouse he was gay http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/ref...ard/index.html
can you say public lynching :) Now please STFU as you said you would

I think you missed that fact that a similarity and same are not the exact same thing. you may want to read up on the differences before you come back saying that "that is not the exact same thing".. you would be right, its a similarity IE it is what most closely resembles the thing being talked about but is not the thing.. sigh

Oh and the fact that only a small % of the population knows about the extermination order so it would not be a very good example to use to explain things to people who don't understand already that discrimination is occurring.Had you thought of that?

I don't have to find you any such discussion because it is probably brought up in all of them as it is the closest most accurate example of the discrimination they face. Please note again the use of the word "EXAMPLE" that does not indicate it is a perfect and exact replica of the discrimination but that it is close in similarity to it...

And finally I did ask myself.. and bigotry is bigotry we don't need to measure levels of bigotry :)

[Sombeech]

Find me one thread where homosexual discrimination is discussed without mention of the civil rights or African American discrimination.

Just one.

Then I'll lay off.

Just one example of a gay guy being killed becouse he was gay
can you say public lynching :) Now please STFU as you said you would

Oh come on now, my promise to you wasn't THAT hard to follow, was it?

I don't have to find you any such discussion because it is probably brought up in all of them

A hint, there probably, just maybe is a thread here where Black discrimination is not mentioned as an automatic comparison, I just want you to find it.