No, Boy Scouts Of America: “Tolerance” Isn’t Good Enough

[MagicSabbath]

Accepting gay Boy Scouts, but only until they turn 18, isn’t acceptance at all. posted on May 23, 2013

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

They chose the slippery slope.

 

[DaisyDay]

They're still excluding young atheists, though.

 

[MagicSabbath]

Probably because though non-denominational the BSA is still a religious organization. It makes sense they wouldn't include atheists due to the oath that is involved in order to join.

At least that's how it is now. If the gay agenda success in this is any indicator, that'll probably change in the future too. Intolerance for the religious while demanding tolerance for the godless. But we'll have to wait and see.

Now it's a matter of allowing openly gay boys into the Scouts, while gay agenda driven organizations like the one in the article proclaim that's not enough!
Interesting though how gays want to be tolerated but have no tolerance for organizations or groups, or even individuals religious commitment.

 

[IanCG]

Are straight people and religious people excluded from the BSA? If not, your last post makes no sense.

 

[I Eat Pie]

They're a private organization. Why do you care?

 

[yasic]

They chose the slippery slope.

The slippery slope started a long time ago. If only people listened to use when we said "If you allow interracial marriage, soon you will allow gay marriage" we would not have had an issue. Curse those people who started down this evil slope by allowing interracial marriage!

 

[yasic]

They're a private organization. Why do you care?

Because they get government funded support, such as (exclusive) access to 'public land'

 

[I Eat Pie]

Because they get government funded support, such as (exclusive) access to 'public land'

Then people should be protesting to get the gov to stop funding them, and let them make up their own rules.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Boy Scouts Of America, isn't that a private group, that's supposed to follow Gods laws?

 

[Savior2006]

Then people should be protesting to get the gov to stop funding them, and let them make up their own rules.

I agree with this.

 

[Lethe]

Boy Scouts Of America, isn't that a private group, that's supposed to follow Gods laws?

Fine.

So the military can stop subsidizing the annual national Jamboree and other local events (like orienteering) by granting military time and resources free of charge.

So cities across the US can stop subsidizing local BSA troops and district councils by offering free or reduced price office and meeting spaces on city properties.

 

[keith99]

The slippery slope started a long time ago. If only people listened to use when we said "If you allow interracial marriage, soon you will allow gay marriage" we would not have had an issue. Curse those people who started down this evil slope by allowing interracial marriage!

Shouldn't we go back farther?

If you free the Blacks next thing is they will want equal rights. And once the blacks start wanting to vote so will the women!

 

[katautumn]

Shouldn't we go back farther?

If you free the Blacks next thing is they will want equal rights. And once the blacks start wanting to vote so will the women!

Voting is a right, whereas membership to an extra-curricular club is not.

 

[MagicSabbath]

How Scouting is Funded

 

[katautumn]

I don't understand the one comment in the article where someone said the reason the BSA need gay Scout leaders is because they're the only ones who can sufficiently understand and help gay Scouts. I'm pretty sure most of those kids have understanding, loving parents who are not gay, so why the need for gay leaders?

 

[Lethe]

Local United Ways provide a very large chunk of the funding (varies by region). My understanding is that the BSA's decision rested primarily on threats by local United Ways to withdraw funding. Very principled as usual.

 

[Cearbhall]

Now it's a matter of allowing openly gay boys into the Scouts, while gay agenda driven organizations like the one in the article proclaim that's not enough!
Interesting though how gays want to be tolerated but have no tolerance for organizations or groups, or even individuals religious commitment.

The Supreme Court said in 2000 that the Boy Scouts have the right to discriminate in their membership policy because they can be classified as a private organization. That was the last time anyone tried to make them change by force of law, so you're wrong. This change happened because people within the Boy Scouts voted to change it.

No group is entitled to tolerance beyond their legal rights.

By "gays," do you mean the entire LGBT+ community?

I'm surprised that you hold those views when you also hold this opinion:

People are born atheist.
If they became Theistic and then reverted back it's because they stopped believing in mythology and invisible friends to save them from the life they're wholly responsible for.

There we go. Didn't take millions of dollars to arrive at that conclusion and sure saved a lot of tree's from having to write more than 1/4 of a page to speak the obvious.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Then people should be protesting to get the gov to stop funding them, and let them make up their own rules.

This is what I was going to say.

If they're getting public funding then they can't tout the "we're a private org" argument.

However, get rid of all public funding, they can exclude or include whomever they please and nobody should have a say.

 

[Cearbhall]

If they're getting public funding then they can't tout the "we're a private org" argument.

However, get rid of all public funding, they can exclude or include whomever they please and nobody should have a say.

No one else has a say now, even though they do get public funding. This change in policy was nothing but a private organization deciding that a policy change was in their best interests. They were pressured but not forced.

California just introduced a bill to get their public funding taken away, though.