Forums → WEPR → The Boy Scouts of America

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.

Could you ask a question a little more directly

Well BSA is a good place to go if you have nothing to do in the Summer or for Vacation.

It Doesn't help get the girls in high school

It may fit in better in "The Tavern," but anyways, boyscouts was alright for the first couple of years, but then it got a little too...odd.

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.

Carlie said: And I REALLY disagree with their whole gay policy.

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.

There is a boyscouts thing in England however it has never encountered any problems with homosexuality. Why does it have problems with this in America

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.

Tru but just because they have the right to does it make it right? I myself am neutral am just wondering what you think.

I don't think it makes it right. It is blatant discrimination.

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.

Who's up for a petition?

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.