Comments on: The Boy Scouts approach is balanced

By: gsingjane

gsingjane — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:39:51 +0000

Well, all I can say is, it’s easy to be a purist on the internet. I guess I’ve been guilty of it myself too!

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 01:05:00 +0000

“Finally, the fact that the resolution doesn’t address atheism/lack of profession of belief in God should not, in my opinion, argue in favor of its defeat either. The way I see it, these two issues are not inextricably linked and BSA is right to only take on one issue at a time.”.

The BSA is wrong not to take on both issues immediately. They are in no way right on either issue.

By: Neon Genesis

Neon Genesis — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:04:12 +0000

So because people have been working for years to get changed done, that means people should stop trying to work to get change done? I don’t get it. There are lots of gays out there who are atheists too so to say they should be allowed if they’re gay but you’ll accept kicking them out if they’re an atheist is a ridiculous double standard.

By: gsingjane

gsingjane — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:59:01 +0000

I don’t think Tim is being a back-stabbing weasel or secretly anti-gay here, I think he’s being realistic and fair. To call what BSA is thinking about doing a “tiny step” is incorrect. For this organization, at this time, to be considering this policy change, is in fact a giant leap and an absolutely remarkable step forward. It may not be to people who aren’t familiar with BSA, but that’s the truth of it.

Another truth is that folks have been working quietly, all these years, from the inside, to turn BSA around. I understand the temptation to call names or demonize National, but, again, it’s the people in the trenches (including folks within the organization itself) who don’t get the publicity but who have been doing the work that has led to this day.

I am truly concerned that telling BSA, at this point, that it’s “all or nothing” is going to lead to more of what we’ve had since 1978, which is nothing. Tim’s editorial at least tries to address what is really a very serious concern for people who have been involved with this issue.

Finally, the fact that the resolution doesn’t address atheism/lack of profession of belief in God should not, in my opinion, argue in favor of its defeat either. The way I see it, these two issues are not inextricably linked and BSA is right to only take on one issue at a time.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 15:20:35 +0000

Neon said “And won’t somebody answer my question if atheists will still be banned from joining the BSA under this “new” policy?”.

I think it goes without saying that they will. Polls consistently show atheists are the most disliked group of people in the United States – most people would greatly prefer to vote for a gay president rather than an atheist one. As George Bush senior said, “I don’t think they are citizens and they shouldn’t be considered citizens.”

By: Jay

Jay — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 15:10:49 +0000

Yes, the BSA has the right to discriminate. The Supreme Court has said so. What is galling, however, is to have this site, which purports to be a site for the promotion of equal rights, to be falling over itself with delight that the BSA is going to continue to discriminate. They will issue a non-position paper that they hope will continue keeping the money rolling in from foundations who have nondiscrimination policies, while giving their blessing to the large majority of their regional and local scouting boards that will continue to discriminate.

The BSA is making even this tiny concession only because they are feeling the heat from the public at large. Kincaid wants to turn the heat down.

By: Neon Genesis

Neon Genesis — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 08:54:50 +0000

We most certainly have the “right” to join the BSA if the BSA continues to have the “right” to meet in public elementary schools to recruit children (I thought it was we evil gays who were in the business of recruiting children but I guess it’s fine when Christians do it?) and be given free access to government resources. The BSA can’t on the one hand claim to be a private organization when it wants to maintain its “right” to be bigots but then pretend to act like a non-profit government funded organization on the other hand when it wants to get into our schools to promote itself. Either the BSA is a private organization or it’s not; take your pick but it can’t be both. And won’t somebody answer my question if atheists will still be banned from joining the BSA under this “new” policy?

By: Michael C

Michael C — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 04:54:53 +0000

I agree, Neon Genesis, but only when it pertains to civil rights. The Boy Scouts of America is not an arm of the government. No U.S. citizen, not one, has the “right” to be accepted into the Boy Scouts.

When it pertains to issues like ENDA and DADT and DOMA, we should accept no compromise.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 03:49:58 +0000

Hear Hear Neon.

By: Neon Genesis

Neon Genesis — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 01:23:47 +0000

In my response to the “slow” approach, I point to the words of Dr. King in Letter From Birmingham Jail, “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”