I don't think this hould even be here,it isn't a world event,definitely nor a religion or politics...................................... maybe organisation? but it's not listed.. so i think that this thread is going to get locked.
It actually has quite a lot to do with politics. BSA is often in the media for different things. Granted, not very good things, such as child predators...
But I think BSA is a good thing overall. My brother used to be in it, and he had a lot of fun and learned a lot of useful things. It teaches a lot of responsibility and real world experience. Granted, they don't always do a good job. And I REALLY disagree with their whole gay policy. That does piss me off. But for the kids and adults that they do let in the program, I think it makes a positive difference.
Oh yes, and shermz, I don't think it will get locked, because what I meant was it probably belongs in the tavern, but it could fit here as well. I don't know, Carlie is probably right.
I don't know it if if is a specific rule, but they will not allow any gay members in BSA. Whether it be members, or mentors. Homosexuals are not allowed to participate.
As much of a gay rights supporter I am (hell, I'm bisexual), I do support the Boy Scouts decision to not allow gays. They are a private organization and have the right to reject members based on anything they want.
Hm, this is a very interesting point of contention.
Is it necessarily true that private organisations have the right to exclude members on any criteria at all? I'm not sure this uniformly applies but then again I'm not in the know when it comes to jurisprudence, so I'd like some official sources that could shed some light on this.
Assuming that there is little justification provided for this, I think though that this somewhat arcane policy should be rectified by a good dose of social campaigning.
Hmmm... I support what thelistman says, that private organizations have freedom to exclude, but it is now illegal for privately owned restaurants to prohibit serving of backs, so one could make an argument that everyone deserves equal protection under the law... So in the interest of protecting a degree of legal fairness, although regretfully taking away a small level of liberty, I would probably sign Strop's petition.