Calif. to punish Scouts for gay ban

16

California lawmakers are considering taking some tax exemptions away from youth groups that do not accept gay, transgender or atheist members — a move intended to pressure the Boy Scouts of America to lift its ban on gay Scouts and troop leaders.Some cities have withdrawn free rent and other subsidies from the Boy Scouts over the years, but legislation introduced by state Sen. Ricardo Lara would make California the first state to target the Scouts for its anti-gay policy.


The Long Beach Democrat’s bill, SB 323, is scheduled for its first committee hearing on Wednesday.

“Our state values the important role that youth groups play in the empowerment of our next generation; this is demonstrated by rewarding organizations with tax exemptions supported financially by all Californians,” Lara said. “SB 323 seeks to end the unfortunate discriminatory and outdated practices by certain youth groups.”

The Boy Scouts of America reaffirmed the Texas-based organization’s ban on openly gay members last summer then announced in January that it was revisiting the decision.

In February, the group said it would submit a resolution on rescinding the policy to the 1,400 members of Scouting’s National Council in May.

Deron Smith, a spokesman for the Boy Scouts of America, told The Associated Press on Tuesday that the organization was aware of Lara’s bill and would provide feedback on it to the Senate Governance and Finance Committee before Wednesday’s hearing.

“Beyond that, and our previous statements on membership standards, we don’t have anything to add at this time,” Smith said.


continue to source article at educationviews.org

16 COMMENTS

  1. If they have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century…so be it!

    Hit the bigots where it hurts the tax regime they enjoy and abuse!

    This is the only cure for the C of E…total buffoons they are….

    latest under a new boss worse, as in cluelessness, then the old one!
    This is his watch if he does not understand the problem they have tilting at reality and integrity like they are, they are not long for this world and he might be the shortest A of C on record!

  2. If you’re going to discriminate against people on account of religion or sexual orientation, you won’t get special privileges. That’s not punishment. That’s just the state refusing to subsidize your organization because you discriminate.

    • <div>

      In reply to #4 by Peter Grant:

      A “gay ban” should never have been permitted in the first place.

      Replying to this and some of the comments that followed it …

      You do know that Scouting was started in England circa 1905 by a military officer (Baden-Powell,1857-1941)? Scouts come from an era when the closets didn’t have doors yet. A biographer Jeal “conclud(es) that might have been a repressed homosexual”. I doubt the US had the fine tradition of homosexuality in boarding schools and university England was known for.

      It seems Scouting in Britain has been more progressive than in the US. On the 100th anniversary of Scouting in Britain this amusingly hung-up, homophobic, conservative and religious American “obituary”, NO MORE BOY SCOUTS IN BRITAIN, http://www.wnd.com/2005/06/30847/ It provides a pre-mortem autopsy diagnosing the insidious cause of death. The reader is thus enabled to diagnose the acute anxiety attack that’s got US Scouting in a such a tizzy.
      </div>

  3. Jeez, these are schoolboys right? What the hell has their sexual orientation got to do with anything? Why should anyone have to know about it?

    Surely the big guy upstairs sees all, knows all, and will deal with any sinners when the time comes?

    • In reply to #5 by Mr DArcy:

      Jeez, these are schoolboys right? What the hell has their sexual orientation got to do with anything? Why should anyone have to know about it?

      I suspect it is because like the catholic church the Boy Scouts has been an institution that has had its fair share of pedophiles over the years and has, like the catholic church blamed it on homosexuality rather than taking responsibility for its own structures. Its a pity I have fond memories of being a cub then a scout I would very much like my son to get involved if it weren’t for its attitudes to some of these things.

    • In reply to #5 by Mr DArcy:

      Jeez, these are schoolboys right? What the hell has their sexual orientation got to do with anything? Why should anyone have to know about it?

      That is exactly what I have been struggling to understand.

    • _In reply to [#5](#comment-box-5) by Mr DArcy:_

      > Jeez, these are schoolboys right? What the hell has their sexual orientation got to do with anything? Why should anyone have to know about it?
      >
      > Surely the big guy upstairs sees all, knows all, and will deal with any sinners when the time comes?

      my first impression too.

      i guess the initial interview with parents goes something like:

      “thank you for your interest in the scouts. while with us your son will learn imprtant life skills such as teamwork and helping the community, regular prayers, basic country craft and all within the safe environment of our institution, away from the influences that are the bain of our good, christian society. they’ll learn that fun is about togetherness, singing round camp fires, helping the elderly, all with a sense of belonging and purpose without recourse to alcohol, drugs, vandalism and all the other things you worry about when your bow is out in the evening.

      “just need to fill in some forms, tick a few boxes, you know how it is…

      “now. what are his sexual preferences?”

  4. The freedom of association is also the freedom to not associate. Where’s the issue, if these people don’t want gay, transgender or atheist members?

    For example, as a Caucasian, can I join the Congressional Black Caucasus of America? Where by the way, membership is exclusive to African-Americans.

    If I created an Atheist group, I would not want theists as members of that group, stipulating membership as Atheist only.

    Or if I created a men’s club, I wouldn’t want either women nor children in that club, nor goats, lamas or chimpanzee.

    • The problem is that they are being given special status that essentially amounts to the very people being banned PAYING for the “club” that they have been banned from.

      Christ, have all the “exclusive” clubs you’d like to have. But, do not ask African Americans to foot the bill for the KKK. Can it be any more plain than that???

      In reply to #9 by tyga:

      The freedom of association is also the freedom to not associate. Where’s the issue, if these people don’t want gay, transgender or atheist members?

      For example, as a Caucasian, can I join the Congressional Black Caucasus of America? Where by the way, membership is exclusive to African-Americans.

      If I created an Atheist group, I would not want theists as members of that group, stipulating membership as Atheist only.

      Or if I created a men’s club, I wouldn’t want either women nor children in that club, nor goats, lamas or chimpanzee.

    • In reply to #9 by tyga:

      The freedom of association is also the freedom to not associate. Where’s the issue, if these people don’t want gay, transgender or atheist members?

      I broadly agree with the principle of freedom of association. The issue here is not to ban or change this association but to take away its privilege of state funding, which I fully agree with. The state may have to tolerate some groups but it shouldn’t have to support them.

  5. In reply to #9 by tyga:

    For example, as a Caucasian, can I join the Congressional Black Caucasus of America? Where by the way, membership is exclusive to African-Americans.

    You have the right to create a blacks only organisation, or a whites only organisation. But what you’re not allowed to do is create (say) a cooking club and hang a sign on the door saying, “Niggers keep out!” Skin colour has nothing to do with cooking. Sexuality and religious belief has nothing to do with youth activities.

    There is a difference between having membership standards (professional qualifacations for example) and discrimination because you’re a bunch of biggoted jerks.

  6. It only makes perfect sense!!! Tax exemption should be for organizations that serve ALL of the people who pay taxes. Do gay people pay taxes? If the answer is “yes”…. then ANY organization with tax exemption should BY LAW be made to serve ALL.

    Again, extend to all people the rights you claim for yourself…

  7. If the Boy Scouts said “No Jews, no blacks, no Italians” you would expect the state of California to say “shape up or forget about public subsidy”.

    Why would “No gays, no atheists, no transgender” be treated any differently?

    If you want a public subsidy, you must serve the public. If you don’t, that is like selling tickets then refusing admission to selected hated groups.

Leave a Reply