Published: Thursday, Feb. 21 2013 12:00 a.m. MST
"But do it on your own dime"Seriously? The BSA and its
largest promoters (LDS Church, Methodist Churches, etc) are some of the most tax
exempt and thereby heavily subsidized organizations in the country. The BSA,
nor its main supporters, definitely did not build it "on their own
"Tax-exempt" does not mean "publicly funded". If the government
wants to replace every charitable organization with a tax-payer funded charity,
let them try. Does anyone really think that with the government's
overhead, any tax-payer public "charity" would ever succeed? Just look
at how many people government has helped to get out of welfare in the last
eighty years. Good people all over the nation volunteer their time,
their money and their resources to help boys become men. Unfortunately, a very
small percentage of the population thinks that they have the right to change
anything that doesn't allow them total access to our youth.
isrredyes, they did.
to liberals like isrred, unless the government decides to take a big chunk out
of something in taxes, then it is "heavily subsidized".So
when I choose to give $100 to the Red Cross for disaster relief (after I paid
about $60 in taxes on $160 earned to leave me with that $100), the fact that the
government does not take another $30 or so bite out of my donation before it
reaches the victims makes the Red Cross a heavily subsidized organization that
is getting a free ride on the taxpayer dime.Did I get that right?
The problem with Mr. Soulier's reasoning is his assumption that the people
who "donate their hard-earned money, their precious time, talents and
anything else" or who "purchase land for camps" and develop
handbooks or build their own buildings and pay "full-time executives and
recruit an army of volunteers" are exclusively not gay. Just like the
military and professions from every walk of life, gay people have served and
performed in those organizations for as long as they have been organized, but
they have done it while hiding their sexual orientation because of social
pressure. I lived and worked in the Salt Lake Valley for the first 12 years of
my professional career and in my line of work I had significant interaction with
gay people. I think most residents of Salt Lake would be somewhat surprised by
the size of Salt Lake/Utah's gay community. And all this time they have
been doing the same things other cisitzens have been doing, including joining
and serving the Boy Scouts.Mr. Sourier and others can promote a
separate Gay BSA but I hope they won't be surprised when the "Non Gay
BSA" starts to lose members.
Mike, you ask who the government has helped get off welfare in the past 8 years?
Me. I was on unemployment for almost 3 months after the 2008 recession hit.
Without that welfare I wouldn't have been able to pay my health insurance
for a pre-existing condition. Without COBRA laws frok the government, I
wouldn't even have had the ability to keep my insurance after getting laid
off. Thanks to that help, I was able to look for a job instead of fretting
about insurance and my health. I found a good job quickly. I'm anet
positive tax payer, having paid back more then what I took from the system, and
I am happy to do so. No man is an island, we all need each others help from time
to time, and I am happy to contribute my part.
I don't think anyone wants to create a "Gay Scouts", rather a
scouting organization that is all-inclusive. After all, the Supreme Court has
told us that "Seperate but Equal is inherently unequal"
Sort of like what the Nazis did in Germany. They put a star on those they
wanted to target for their hate. The notion of separation of
Americans by state, religion, race, and for what ever other reason, is not in
compliance with the American creed of “One Nation Indivisable, With
Justice for All”.I think the benefits of Scouting are
desirable and needed by every boy in America, regardless of the other
affiliations he may have. And they tend to bring America together rather than
Charity for profit is not charity.
Omni Scent: The dilemma the BSA is wrestling with is the possibility that by
becoming "all-inclusive" the organization may lose the sponsorship and
membership of many who do not wish to be associated with an organization that
accepts openly gay men or boys, whether that is right or wrong. It would be
ironic indeed if the BSA became less inclusive in practice by adopting a policy
of broad inclusion.And speaking of inclusion, why is no one
clamoring for merger of the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts?
Let's put to bed once and for all the fable that homosexuality is in any
way even remotely comparable to the civil rights struggle of blacks. This is a
comparison that is desperately pushed by gay activists because it muzzles actual
debate, and manipulates people into not using their brains in considering gay
marriage by just slapping evil labels on people that are opposite of their real
hearts ("bigot", "hateful", etc.)So preserving
traditional marriage under the law is somehow the same as the Jim Crow
"separate but equal". Okay. So that means it's also "separate
but equal" to not recognize polygamist marriages, group marriages, marriages
to refrigerators & animals...ridiculous, you say? I agree; now you tell me
why. But wait, you can't...doing so would be bigoted and hateful! How
dare you refuse my joint marriage to thirty men & women!Still
absurd? Fine, make your argument, and I promise not to call you a bigot. But
also let me make mine without cynical labels designed to muzzle free speech and
skip over the use of brains with hot-button labels.
I think society can become more inclusive to gay people without having to
suddenly let people marry major appliances. We've done it before. We can
do it again.
@omni scent"I don't think anyone wants to create a "Gay
Scouts", rather a scouting organization that is all-inclusive."----------So, in other words, the boy scouts should accept girls -
because according to the liberal agenda, they can't have gender
discrimination. And the girl scouts should accept boys. Not to mention, that
boys older than 18 would have to be accepted - because the liberal agenda
excludes age discrimination. So, they would have to include 70 year old men and
women. Also, since the boy scouts have physical requirements then they would
have to change those requirements to accommodate those with physical
disabilities because the liberal agenda prevents this. In fact, they would have
to eliminate camping, swimming, hiking, etc. This sounds like an
organization that accepts everybody, but cannot do anything. Just what the
Voice of Reason: a marrage is a legal agreement between two people.
Refrigerators and animals have never been able to enter into any legal
contract.Plural marriage I'm actually okay with, as long as all
parties are in agreement, and all willing and able to enter into that agreement.
That would even fit the "historic definition" of marrage as expressed in
the bible, not to mention Utah history. There, I'm not doing anything
bigoted and hateful to you or your potential spouses.However, your
arguments lack reason, and have done nothing to persuade me there is no
difference between homosexuality and the civil rights movement.
Utes Fan: I don't know any liberals who say you can't make distincions
between minors and adults. And the scouts already do accommodate those with
physical disibilities. My troop back in the 90's had an Eagle Scout in a
wheelchair.As for merging with the girl scouts, let's face it: it
would not be practical. I can't really see that same argument for gay
scouts not based in unrational fear.
Doesn't "Gay Scouts" follow the old flawed "Seperate but
Equal" laws from the Segrated South -- from over 100 years ago?Conservatives just need a big old time machine - so they can all go back right
from where they came from.
Voice of ReasonLayton, UTPlease name anyone who is sitting in
jail for polygamy?FYI - Warren Jeffs and the like are sitting in
jail for child rape.
Amen Scott Soulier!!!The Boy Scouts have put in the hard work, been
honest about who they are, and what values they have and teach. If people
don't espouse those values, make your own group. Don't destroy someone
else's. Next thing you know these people will be telling
religions and political parties they have to change their values and practices.
Oh wait! They are already doing that.Well I am not
caving to your craving and raving!
Voice of Reason and Utes Fan - Thank you for articulating many of the excuses
that people like to use to justify their phopbias and exclude those who are
different. Welcome to America, the land of the fr.....oh wait a minute. As has
been stated so well by Curmudgeon, the Boy Scouts are wrestling with an issue
that might not be as noble and honorable as we all want to think. They're
worried about money! Which decision will help them most in that regard?I have to say that I, personally, choose not to be part of any
organization that looks down on other individuals or tries to make them less
that they are. If the Boy Scouts want to make the choice to continue excluding
gays from their rolls then they are free to do that. How's that for a
"liberal agenda"?Someday, hopefully, we will look at people
simply as children of God and treat them accordingly. And by the way Voice or
Reason, it is not a "fable that homosexuality is in any way even remotely
comparable to the civil rights struggle of blacks." It is every bit as
Simple solution:1. The BSA will allow all boys and all leaders who
are approved by any chartering organization to participate in Scouting.2.
The BSA will define "morally straight" to include prohibition of
extramarital relations, and to define marriage as "the legally recognized
union of two individuals who may, in principle, produce children without
assistance from a third party".3. By biological definition,
heterosexual unions may, in principle, produce children. Whether they actually
do is beside the point.4. The BSA can hold, as it has in the past, that
those who do not uphold the oath to be "morally straight", as defined,
will not participate in the organization.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments