Tom W. Watson: Rite of Passage
Worst And Best Countries For Maternity Leave
Boy Scouts: No free ride for discrimination
Filed under: Gay Parenting
In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the local Boy Scouts of America council has enjoyed the free use of a city-owned building for its headquarters for more than three quarters of a century. The Cradle of Liberty Council, the nation's third largest, has had the use of the half-acre property since 1928 when the city council voted to let the scouts use it for nothing.
Philadelphia, however, has told the council their free ride will end unless they change their policies which prevent gays from becoming troop leaders. The council will either have to pay fair-market rent or move their headquarters if they do not change their ways. In 2003, the council adopted a nondiscrimination policy regarding homosexuals and then turned around and ousted an openly gay 18-year-old scout.
Council spokesman Jeff Jubelirer condemned the city's move, saying "With an epidemic of gun violence taking the lives of Philadelphia's children every day, it is ironic the administration chose this time to destroy programming that services 40,000 children in the city." Jubelirer's argument, however, is entirely specious. The city should not allow the council to discriminate just because they also do some good work -- that would be like saying that what the Nazis did to the Jews was okay because they rebuilt Germany in the process. In fact, it is the Boy Scouts that is destroying the programming by not conforming to the laws of their community.
I was never in the Boy Scouts myself -- my family simply couldn't afford all the fees and uniforms and other costs -- but I was an explorer scout. In fact, being in that explorer post had a huge impact on who and where I am today. I still have to side with the city, however, on this one. The Boy Scouts are simply wrong. What might have been acceptable in 1928 is not now and if they want to continue to get handouts from the taxpayers, they need to follow the rules and guidelines those taxpayers have set up. What do you think? Should the scouts toe the line or is the city in the wrong?
Philadelphia, however, has told the council their free ride will end unless they change their policies which prevent gays from becoming troop leaders. The council will either have to pay fair-market rent or move their headquarters if they do not change their ways. In 2003, the council adopted a nondiscrimination policy regarding homosexuals and then turned around and ousted an openly gay 18-year-old scout.
Council spokesman Jeff Jubelirer condemned the city's move, saying "With an epidemic of gun violence taking the lives of Philadelphia's children every day, it is ironic the administration chose this time to destroy programming that services 40,000 children in the city." Jubelirer's argument, however, is entirely specious. The city should not allow the council to discriminate just because they also do some good work -- that would be like saying that what the Nazis did to the Jews was okay because they rebuilt Germany in the process. In fact, it is the Boy Scouts that is destroying the programming by not conforming to the laws of their community.
I was never in the Boy Scouts myself -- my family simply couldn't afford all the fees and uniforms and other costs -- but I was an explorer scout. In fact, being in that explorer post had a huge impact on who and where I am today. I still have to side with the city, however, on this one. The Boy Scouts are simply wrong. What might have been acceptable in 1928 is not now and if they want to continue to get handouts from the taxpayers, they need to follow the rules and guidelines those taxpayers have set up. What do you think? Should the scouts toe the line or is the city in the wrong?
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
TheTalkies:RelatedVideos
-
How Boy Scout Experience Informs Conservation Career
In Chapter 7 of 11 in his 2010 interview with Capture Your Flag host Erik Michielsen, East African venture capitalist and conservation investor Josep Oriol shares how solving problems as a young Boy Scout taught him early on to leave the world a better place than he found it. Oriol applies this approach in his East African conservation work in Kenya.
-
Young Scouts Spread Awareness About Bird Flu in West Java, Indonesia
UNICEF's Suzanna Dayne reports on the involvement of girls and boy scouts in spreading awareness about the dangers of avian influenza in West Java, Indonesia.
-
Girl Scout Team Designs Prosthetic Hand
A Girl Scout team named the Flying Monkeys have created a prosthetic hand that is changing the life of a 3-year-old.
-
Scout Bassett on Winning Challenged Athlete of the Year
Scout Bassett talks about winning the Challenged Athlete of the Year award at the Endurance Live Award Show.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
7-24-2006 @ 11:16AM
Ginny said...I think the city is right. If they don't want to conform, then they can move. Of course, they'll have to sell alot more popcorn now.
Reply
7-24-2006 @ 11:39AM
ann adams said...They're subject to the same laws as everyone else.
The Scouts can't have it both ways and this isn't the only issue that causes them problems. If they want to insist that all their members profess a belief in God (or pretend to) and are heterosexual (or pretend to be) then they shouldn't take public funding.
The Girl Scouts, by the way, don't do this.
Reply
7-24-2006 @ 11:46AM
LS said...Churches and other charitable/nonprofit organizations often enjoy the free use of city owned buildings... should they have to change their policies before they can continue? The Boy Scouts is a private, charitable organization. They have the right to decide who is, and who is not, a member because they are a private organization.
True, the city also has the right to decide who gets to use the buildings, but if they are going to toss the Scouts, they will also have to toss every church and charity that wants to use them, as well.
Reply
7-24-2006 @ 12:28PM
The Zero Boss said..."True, the city also has the right to decide who gets to use the buildings, but if they are going to toss the Scouts, they will also have to toss every church and charity that wants to use them, as well."
Fine by me. Being a religious faith shouldn't exempt you from the law. If you want total freedom, don't expect to levevrage tax dollars and community resources to fuel your agenda.
Reply
7-24-2006 @ 12:58PM
Marcia said...That's right Zero!
The Boy Scouts should either obey the laws or pay for their own space to gather. Teaching children that they can get away with excluding others just because of their sexual orientation isn't something the scouts should be participating in. Just because a prospective scout leader may happen to be gay doesn't mean he's also a pedophile so why shouldn't he have the same opportunities to instruct children? Are we going to ban gay teachers next? Not a chance.
Reply
7-24-2006 @ 1:44PM
Jason said...What ever happened to the right to free association? If the Boy Scouts don't want to associate with homosexuals, then they shouldn't have to. The Supreme Court has already ruled that if you allow any outside group onto a school campus after hours, then you have to allow all groups -- including the Scouts and Good News clubs. There's no reason why the Scouts can't continue to use the property for free.
Reply
7-24-2006 @ 5:07PM
skybluepink02 said...Free association is certainly protected, but the right to use city property to promote discriminatory practices that are against the constitution is not.
And I agree with the Zero Boss. You can't have it both ways. I am a Christian, but I have no problem with the seperation of Church and State. It's for my protection as well as everyone elses.
Reply
7-24-2006 @ 7:21PM
Uncle Roger said...Jason, Jason, you wrote "If the Boy Scouts don't want to associate with homosexuals, then they shouldn't have to." I agree completely.
You went on to say that "The Supreme Court has already ruled that if you allow any outside group onto a school campus after hours, then you have to allow all groups" ... "There's no reason why the Scouts can't continue to use the property for free." I don't know about the first part -- I'll accept that that is the case. But that has no bearing on the second part -- sure, the city cannot discriminate against one group or another. The city cannot tell the scouts they can't rent a meeting room they rent to others, but that's not relevant to this situation. This is a building that only the scouts use. The city can choose not to let anyone use it, or they can choose to rent it out. If the scouts want a special deal, though, the city can put conditions on it. If they want to rent it at fair market prices, then they can do what they want (including, discriminate), but if they want it for free, they have to follow the city guidelines. They can't have their cake and eat it too.
Look at it this way -- if you have an apartment building, you cannot discriminate when renting out those apartments. You can, however let your friends stay there for free if you want. And, yes, you can choose which friends you let stay there. It's the same here.
Reply
7-24-2006 @ 7:41PM
Uly said...Jason, your argument is inherantly flawed.
You're right. There is no reason that the Boy Scouts should associate with gay people if they don't want to. I mean, I think it's a silly policy, but, whatever. I don't have to associate with the Boy Scouts of America, so it's all good.
However! They do not get the right to use the building for free just because they're the Boy Scouts. The city has the right to limit access to the building. And the city's right to demand that the Boy Scouts either follow the general anti-discrimination policy or pay up is perfectly fair.
Otherwise, what you have is the Boy Scouts asking for *special* rights, not *equal* rights. And that's not right at all.
Reply
7-25-2006 @ 10:32AM
S.M.Mehdi Hassan said...Uly you wrote " The city has the right to limit access to the building. And the city's right to demand that the Boy Scouts either follow the general anti-discrimination policy or pay up is perfectly fair."
I agree with you. There is nothing wrong with the government's decision.
Reply
7-25-2006 @ 11:13AM
ann adams said...I keep hoping the Boy Scouts will change their discriminatory ways but that's a separate issue. For me it meant that both of my sons missed out on scouting because I wouldn't allow one son to join a group that excluded the other. Pity really; the Scouts have a lot to offer.
Philadelphia has extended its anti-discrimination rules to include GLBT persons.
The Boy Scouts have an absolute right to continue their practices. They don't have a right to do it at taxpayer expense.
Jason is correct about "all or none" incidentally. Many school districts have chosen to have no extracurricular organizations rather than allow a Gay/Straight Alliance. Many others are looking for loopholes (including my own high school district).
It saddens me.
Reply
7-25-2006 @ 4:13PM
JMM said...Don't forget that the Boy Scouts also discriminate against the non-religious.
Reply
7-26-2006 @ 5:09AM
ann adams said...JMM
See comment #2.
Reply
7-26-2006 @ 4:53PM
Nancy Toby said...Using government property isn't ever "free". It's subsidized by every taxpayer. This taxpayer, for one, doesn't want to pay her taxes to support the activities of any organization that excludes people based simply because of their homosexuality or atheism.
Reply