"The LGBT community does not have the civil or moral right to shove their alternative lifestyle down BSA throats. No pun intended."

Which is sort of what businesses like Woolworths used to argue when they wouldn't allow blacks to sit at lunch counters. And eerily similar to what some southern states and governors argued when forced by the govt. to end segregation.

And don't forget about women. The nerve they had, fighting for equality.

Remember when interracial marriage would've been called an "alternative lifestyle"?

>Remember when interracial marriage would've been called an "alternative lifestyle"?


Still is, to a lot of people.

It is an alternative lifestyle...



marriage versus bachelorhood :)

[x]

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/07/2013 15:33:03 MST.

Sorry, I don't get the connection between non-profit and groups that conform to all-inclusive government standards. From my understanding, tax-free status is based on not making a profit, not based on whether the government likes what you are trying to accomplish.

"...all-inclusive..." is a long way off when it comes to government rules.


There are IRS rules that describe the requirements to operate in a tax-free mode. The IRS doesn't really care what you do, provided you follow their rules.

One of them is -

"The [social] club's governing instrument may not contain a provision that provides for discrimination against any person on the basis of race, color, or religion."

Notice that sexual orientation is not a "protected" class.

So, discrimination is condoned.



(Nor is gender equality mentioned - hence the allowed status for all-male clubs)

Edited by greg23 on 02/04/2013 09:06:16 MST.

Roger - You are incorrect about the Mormons. All LDS scout troops are chartered under the BSA.

[x]

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/07/2013 15:31:52 MST.

"The [social] club's governing instrument may not contain a provision that provides for discrimination against any person on the basis of race, color, or religion."

And isn't this the crux of the matter?

If any organization is going to receive any sort of tax-exempt (read: preferential) treatment from the United States government, I think they should be held to a basic standard of non-discrimination.

And it's high time that "sexual orientation" be added to that list.

I suspect (and hope) that in 50 years our children will be wondering why it was ever OK to discriminate against people on the basis of sexual orientation; much like my kids have difficulty today even comprehending how the US government once legally discriminated against non whites and people thought it was acceptable.

Is it okay to have seperate groups for boys and girls? Like the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts?

You could argue that segregating them will have less distractions or whatever.

Or you could argue that advantages of being integrated exceed disadvantages.

Seperate subject, is it okay for a country club that hosts the most famous (?) golf tournament not allow black or women members? Or have they finally moved into modern times?

So when are some of you tough guys going to go down to the local mosque and complain about their exclusion of GLBT? I've noticed everyone is pretty brave when it comes to the Boy Scouts or Christians, but the silence is deafening when it comes to Islam.

Jerry,
I think that both groups should be open to kids of any gender. Most will choose the one that matches their own, but some won't and they shouldn't be ostracized for that. Maybe in the future there will not need to be two groups, but we're not there yet.

"So when are some of you tough guys going to go down to the local mosque and complain about their exclusion of GLBT? I've noticed everyone is pretty brave when it comes to the Boy Scouts or Christians, but the silence is deafening when it comes to Islam."

Damn right Joe, glad you agree. Nobody should get a free pass. I'd be happy to send you some links to groups fighting for reform in Islam.

I am a very tolerant person. The only thing I am intolerant of is intolerance.

However, sexuality covers a broad spectrum. Many people try homosexuality for a while, then go back to hetero. Many people just like variety and live happily as bisexuals. So I would be interested to know if BSA has defined what constitutes a homosexual? You know, sometimes sexual orientation IS a choice, and not hard-wired from birth. Sometimes it is not a choice. I would hope the BSA doesn't lump anyone who has tried homosexual encounters out of curiosity as homosexual. That would eliminate a very large portion of the American male population.

And a pedophile is a pedophile. I guess it would be OK for a heterosexual male pedophile to work for the BSA, as they pose no risk to the boys!

I am an atheist (AKA Buddhist). I wonder if the BSA would let me in? I am also pretty much asexual, and many people find that to be the oddest and most uncomfortable of all orientations. Shouldn't be a problem with the BSA though.

But as many other posters have pointed out, these are topics that shouldn't really come up in a scouting encounter. However, on principle alone I certainly would never consider working for such an organisation. I also think it's time for the government to amend its discrimination policy to include gender and sexual orientation. Then, if the BSA wanted continued government funding they would HAVE to change their hiring policy.

If any organization is going to receive any sort of tax-exempt (read: preferential) treatment from the United States government, I think they should be held to a basic standard of non-discrimination.

-----------

Here is an easier solution. No one gets exemptions, preferential treatment, special franchises, etc.

OK, so I get that some folks disagree with the IRS policy towards tax exempt status. Sounds like a good issue to take up with your lawmakers. The BSA didn't write the law, they are just conforming to it.

"Then, if the BSA wanted continued government funding they would HAVE to change their hiring policy."

Again, Where is this so-called "government funding" that the BSA receives? To my knowledge, the only funding the BSA receives is from donations and membership/activity fees. I don't count tax-exempt status of a non-profit organization as "funding" any more than my annual tax refund is "funding". The federal government doesn't own all private resources by default - not yet at least. ;)

Eric,

What would you say if the IRS didn't tax your income?
Make you "tax exempt" as long as 1) you smile, 2) pretend to be a nice guy and 3) do good work.
Sound like a good deal?

Sound like "indirect funding"? You just gained 25% more spending power.

BTW, I won't qualify,something about the "nice guy" clause. But my taxes will go up to cover what you are not contributing. Doesn't sound like a good deal to me.

Edited by greg23 on 02/04/2013 15:16:45 MST.

How about special leases of Federal Land. For over 50 years Camp Whitsett (80 acres) has been leased to the Boy Scouts. Even though the USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs.

But in all fairness they lease land for mineral extraction, lumber operation, grazing, etc.