So Much for Obama Rejecting the Boy Scouts March 4, 2009

So Much for Obama Rejecting the Boy Scouts

By Guest Contributor
March 4, 2009

A couple months ago, I mentioned that 19 non-theistic organizations had written a letter to then President-elect Obama urging him not to accept the title of Honorary President of the Boy Scouts of America.

Those efforts seem to have fallen on deaf ears. On Tuesday, Obama hinted that he would accept that title:

Obama was meeting with a delegation of the Boy Scouts in the Oval Office on Tuesday afternoon, at which time he was to accept the group’s 2008 Report to the Nation.

A Boy Scouts spokesman said Obama has indicated he will accept the title of honorary president.

It’s only a symbolic title, but it matters quite a bit to those of us who wish to see the Boy Scouts succeed while at the same time becoming inclusive for all those kids who want to join but are currently forbidden from doing so.

Obama’s decision sends another message (like his expansion of faith-based funding) that it’s ok for groups to discriminate against gays, atheists, and other non-Christians while receiving government funding.

I’m waiting for Obama to be the president I voted for when it comes to social issues. He hasn’t been that person yet.

Previous Post
Hey Pennsylvanians, Guess Where Your Tax Money is Going?
Next Post
Christian Conservatives Furious Over Homosexual Dance
"Cards Against Humanity, more like it"
Matri
Seattle Pacific U. Faculty Vote “No ..."
"You should asked him “why?”"
Matri
Seattle Pacific U. Faculty Vote “No ..."
"NO. But If Hitler said that one day woke "liberals" will refuse to buy books ..."
aminfaiz
Richard Dawkins Stripped of “Humanist of ..."
"Christians are the most persecuted ruling majority in the country!"
Matri
Seattle Pacific U. Faculty Vote “No ..."
Browse Our Archives
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Mathew Wilder

    I’m not surprised. I never expected Obama to be the social issues person so many people seemed to think he’d be. He IS a politician, after all- the lowest of all human forms of life.

  • Spurs Fan

    I don’t know. While I agree with the thought process here and wish that he wouldn’t have accepted the title, in his first month he has:

    — pushed through an economic stimulus package that benefits most middle class and poor Americans,

    — ended the “Mexico City” policy which forbade U.S. aid going to international organizations that practiced family planning,

    — signed a bill that furthers protections of women who file legitimate sexual discimination claims (in the workplace),

    — passed an expansion of the CHIP program to make sure more kids have heatlh care coverage

    — included “Non-Believers” in a positive manner in his inaugural speech

    — begun the process of shutting down Guantanamo,

    — begun the process of withdrawing most U.S. troops from Iraq,

    — encouraged dialogue instead of conflict with some “rogue states”, such as the recent example of he and Hillary Clinton sending two envoys to begin normalization talks with Syria, and

    — on several occasions, has pronounced the word “nuclear” correctly

    As a radical Progressive who was disappointed in some of Obama’s cabinet picks, I’m quite pleased with the high level of accomplishment and efficiency that has been shown in only (just over) a month in office. And while I understand that some of these issues are more economic in nature, I still feel that all of these actions have been important to the “social fabric” of the nation.

    I understand he could have taken a harder line on the symbolic Boyscout title, but I’m quite certain whenever he has to appoint a Supreme Court justice, it will be one who would be on the right side of the discrimination issue were it to come to the High Court again.

    Not perfect, but a pretty damn impressive start for our new President. Also, quite refreshing in comparison to the last eight years.

  • David D.G.

    I share your disappointment, Hemant, though on this particular issue, I really didn’t expect any better to begin with. With regard to “nonbelievers,” all we’ve really gotten from Obama is acknowledgement that we exist and are actual American citizens.

    While this is a distinct improvement over the expressed beliefs of, say, George Bush Sr. (who actually said that atheists don’t even count as citizens), it’s still a long, long way from actual support. Most of the country is still religiously oriented, so any savvy politician (and that certainly describes Obama) is unlikely to risk any religious backlash, especially for merely symbolic gestures.

    What I consider vastly more troubling is the expansion of support for faith-based initiatives — especially since Obama is a constitutional law expert who surely should know better! I gather that, whatever his personal religious views, he is doing this, and the Boy Scout thing, for any or all of the following reasons:

    1. He is trying to defuse any lingering fanatical claims that he is a Muslim and/or an antichrist figure.

    2. He is trying to build bipartisan support by bribing the religious base that the Republicans depend upon.

    3. He believes in belief — i.e., he believes in the idea that religion is inherently a Good Thing that accomplishes good. A very intelligent but strange-minded atheist friend of mine thinks the same way, actually encouraging his kids to go to church (one of whom has done so, joining a Mormon church); I find it hard to believe that Obama could be this naive, but it’s certainly possible.

    ~David D.G.

  • Ian

    I’m waiting for Obama to be the president I voted for when it comes to social issues. He hasn’t been that person yet.

    This.

  • Jon

    Obama is doing the right thing here. Look, the boy scouts were founded as a religious organization. You should expect some erroneous things. But you have to judge them on the whole. They do great things. My boy is a cub scout. He’s building pinewood cars, baking cakes, learning woodworking, going to the planetarium, going to the museum. These are things that cub scouts brings to the table that lazy parents like myself might miss otherwise.

    I would feel the same way about a Muslim organization that did similar things with their kids. Building character, teaching rules of safety, camping. If a group of Muslims wants to get together and do this and it helps to form quality people, what’s the problem? Yeah, they might exclude certain groups, and that’s too bad, but that’s not the entire story.

    When I was a Christian many Christians wanted to boycott Disney because they were offering medical benefits to same sex couples. At the time I argued with my Christian friends that while what they have done is wrong we need to judge them on the whole. Who else is bringing quality films to theaters that we Christians can take our kids to? You’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater here.

  • David D.G.

    Jon, Disney does not get supported by taxes. The Boy Scouts organization does. THAT is the problem here — that it is a dicriminatory organization receiving federal support.

    ~David D.G.

  • Jon

    The problem is the government puts their hands in everything in an effort to exert influence. The solution is not to make everyone conform so every organization is the same and there is no freedom of association. The solution is to yank government funding.

    Though I’m not aware that the government funds the boy scouts. I understand they are a federally protected monopoly, like major league baseball. That’s perhaps a stupid thing.

  • I am also disappointed here but not surprised. I suppose sometimes you have to choose your battles…

  • Reginald Selkirk

    Let’s send him an invitation to be the honorary president of the KKK youth brigade. See if he accepts that.

  • Brooks

    Though I’m not aware that the government funds the boy scouts. I understand they are a federally protected monopoly, like major league baseball. That’s perhaps a stupid thing.

    Here’s a quote from the article itself.

    Because of the Boy Scouts’ exclusionary practices, some public schools across the country tried to limit or end their ties with the organization. But in 2001 the federal government ordered public schools to keep their doors open to the Scouts. And Congress, responding to the threat of campus lockouts, voted to cut federal funding to any school that banned the Scouts or any similar group from “open forum” access.

    Taxpayers also fund Boy Scout activities with several millions of dollars through military personnel, federal land use and other assistance. Taxpayers doled out roughly $8 million for the 2005 Jamboree, held every four years.

    As Reginald Selkirk pointed out, if Obama was to accept an invitation to be the honorary president of the KKK, everyone would be justifiably outraged, but for some reason when it comes to homophobia and anti-atheist bigotry, everyone is expected to tip toe around the issue, but speaking as a gay atheist, I refuse to do so.

  • Vincent

    I’m not disappointed.
    What would be gained by refusing? Total political fuel for the opposition.
    Despite the fact we all now the BS is a bigoted organization at the national level, it’s also still a highly respected organization. The term boyscout is synonymous with someone who is cheerfully helpful. He can’t thumb his nose at them.

    What he CAN do, is accept the title and give an acceptance speech in which he states “I hope that the organization will take this opportunity to move into the future by becoming an inclusive organization that opens its doors to all who want to participate.”

  • Actually, Obama IS being the person I voted for; he was very clear that, where he thought that we (the secularists) deserved a seat at the table, weren’t going to run things.

    I wish that he were different, but he made it very clear that he was going to be this way.

  • I’m waiting for Obama to be the president I voted for when it comes to social issues. He hasn’t been that person yet.

    Are you really surprised? He’s a politician. Politicians do what is politically expedient, even BHO.

  • Erp

    The Boy Scouts do get special government support but less than before. Government entities are no longer suppose to charter (aka own and support) troops and packs (though some still do). The extensive federal support of the national jamboree every four years is being legally challenged.

    I’m not surprised Obama is agreeing. Refusing won’t cause the BSA to change or even hurt them and it would hurt Obama. I hope but won’t bet on it that he will be clear in his communications with them that he thinks gays/lesbians/atheists can be good Americans.

  • Jon

    See Brooks, this is how the federal government screws everyone over. They offer funding to the public schools, and nobody can bring themselves to say no. Then they start making demands that they have no business making, and everyone has to comply or lose money.

    If a local community wants to prevent the scouts from using the schools they should have a right to do that. But also if the local community wants to allow the scouts to use the schools, they should be allowed to do that too. But instead the federal government comes in and demands that one size will fit all. Everyone must be exactly the same. The problem is the federal government. Get them out of the picture and you can have a solution that more people are happy with. People in San Francisco that pay property taxes for schools can have that money go as they see fit, and people in South Dakota can do the same.

    But federal politicians want to run your life for you. They want the decisions in their hands, not yours.

    So in sum, vote for Ron Paul next time.

  • Wow, I guess the Scouts are way more progressive here in Canada. I hadn’t realized it was so bad there. I was happily a Scout for several years. And I am a) a girl and b) an open atheist. I was allowed to change all the “he’s” to “she’s” and omit the God reference in the pledges. It was a complete non-issue.

  • Dave Huntsman

    IF, instead of discriminating against people who happen to be homosexual, or happen to be non-theist, would Pres. Obama STILL be excepting the honorary Presidency?

  • Josh

    It doesn’t surprise me that Obama would support the Boy Scouts. He is already overly religious and he has publicly stated his anti-gay views (doesn’t think gays should have the right to marry and as stated he would vote against any attempt to give them that right) which he justifies based on the “but I have gay friends” defense.

  • Erp writes:
    The extensive federal support of the national jamboree every four years is being legally challenged.

    This is actually moot now. The original lawsuit was thrown out for lack of standing, but the BSA will hold future jamborees on their own property, and not on military bases like Fort AP Hill. The legislation that provided for a large amount of military support for past jamborees at AP Hill only applies for BSA events on military bases; a very small amount applies for BSA events elsewhere, and mostly consists of things like lending equipment and transportation.

  • benjdm

    Look, the boy scouts were founded as a religious organization.

    Then let them stay one and not ask the President of our secular government to be their honorary president.

    The Boy Scouts policy is not an innocuous ‘we’re just a theist organization.’ The Boy Scout vision is to ‘prepare every eligible youth in America to become a responsible, participating citizen and leader.’ ‘Boy Scouts of America believes that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God…The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship…this fundamental need of good citizenship should be kept before them.’

    The President is accepting the honorary presidency of an organization that explicitly declares that atheists & agnostics cannot be good citizens.

    See:

    http://www.bsalegal.org/duty-to-god-cases-224.asp

    http://www.scouting.org/Media/mission.aspx

  • Brooks: here is where your analogy to the KKK breaks down. At this time in our history, no one few accept a religious reason for racial bigotry.

    Unfortunately people do accept religious reasons for homophobia and for sexism, and these attitudes will not change overnight. In fact, I am sad to say, but what will lead to change in this area is for enough time to pass until the older people die off.

    The newer generations are much more reasonable than the older ones (and yes, I am 49 years old).

    I wish it were otherwise.

  • Brooks

    Ollie, if you don’t think religious-motivated racism isn’t still alive today, just look at this past election and witness all the accusations from the Religious Right about how Obama is a secret Muslim socialist terrorist. Just go to consverpedia.com and tell me half of their rants aren’t being fueled by racism. I still remember once this fundy lady at my parents’ church was trying to get my mother not to vote for Obama and she claimed Obama was from a country full of terrorists. And there are still some people who claim Obama isn’t a real citizen and demand to see his birth certificate but they didn’t make nearly as much of a ruckus about Mccain’s even though he had a shady birth certificate.

    It’s certainly hundreds of times better than it was during the Civil War era, but you just know that the fundies wouldn’t make half of these complaints if Obama was a white conversative Christian. And of course you’re right that these attitudes don’t change overnight but they don’t change by people keeping quiet and accepting bigotry either. Somebody has to start to speak up for these things. And if Obama is still trying to win the support of the Religious Right, I frankly think he’s foolish for bothering. Obama had Rick Warren pray at his inauguration to try to suck up to the fundies and that still hasn’t stopped them from complaining about him. The fundies won’t accept Obama until he becomes one of them and I think Obama should know better by now than to waste his time with them. Besides, I thought Jesus said to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, not render unto Caesar what is Jesus’, but apparently people seem to forget this when it comes to government-funded religious organizations.

  • zoo

    @cheerfulatheist:

    The Boy Scouts of America do allow girls to participate in “Explorers”, but not as a regular scout. The requirement for belief is very broad, one just has to believe in some sort of higher power, but of course that excludes atheists, and technically it should exclude those religions which do not subscribe to the higher power idea (though at the moment I’m not sure whether they do or not).

    In the US, except for generally not allowing boys to participate (since the point of girl scouts is teaching girls self-reliance and independence — something boys have never lacked instruction in), the girl scouts as a whole manage to be inclusive of all types of people (and they do allow men to hold adult positions in the organization).

  • @zoo

    Thanks, it’s interesting to hear how other countries are treating the same program! Ours was developed by the exact same man, for the exact same religious reasons. I’m not sure when, but the Canadian branch changed the named from “Boy Scouts of Canada” to Scouts Canada and is fully integrated. Still predominantly male, but the number of girls is increasing and they are treated the same as the boys. The only rule that I remember being different was that I could not sleep in the same tent as my friends, girls had to bunk together.

    I remember writing a lettre to the leaders of Scouts Canada. I must have been about twelve or thirteen at the time. I politely explained that I did not believe in a god, and therefore could not swear in properly like the other Scouts. They wrote me back and said that I should live by my own conscience and I could leave out the god reference if I wanted. So I did!

    We do have a separate program for girls, the Girl Guides. I was in that too, went through both the brownies and the guides system. I ended up quitting and joining the Scouts because they did cooler things. Screw learning how to sew, I wanted to go spelunking!

  • Mathew Wilder

    Ron Paul. Right. Just another fucking politician.

  • So far I haven’t seen Obama do anything inconsistent with the persona created in his books or on his website. That is, the persona of a conservative just a bit to the left of our previous president. He’s doing exactly what he said he’d do.

    A lot of people have written about this in the past couple of years. Obama supporters just didn’t want to listen. They assumed that because he is black that he’s progressive. The rest of us judged him by the content of his character: his actual policy statements, voting record, his actions, and found him only slightly to the left of Bush.

    If you didn’t want a conservative, perhaps voting for an actual progressive would have been a good idea. There was just one running. His name is Dennis Kucinich. If you didn’t support him in the primary season, then it’s entirely your fault that we have a centrist poser in the White House spilling money on the rich, giving lip service to the poor, and participating in bigotry against marginalized populations.

  • Chip

    A foundational issue of the Scouts, that has been a part of the movement since day 1 on Brownsea Island, is that for a person to fully achieve their potential in life they must acknowledge a belief in a Supreme Being. The Scouts are not saying a Christian belief, but a belief. This is not bigotry. It is a belief.

    As an atheist, I am sure that you disagree with this belief. Instead of trying to change the foundational principle of Scouting, I believe that you should start your own scouting-type program. This will allow our children and their parents to “vote with their feet.” You can even ask the President to be the Honorary President. I am sure that President Obama will agree, since he is the President of all Americans.

  • Spurs Fan

    So far I haven’t seen Obama do anything inconsistent with the persona created in his books or on his website. That is, the persona of a conservative just a bit to the left of our previous president.

    Justin,

    Seriously? Just a little bit? I voted for Dennis Kucinich in 2004, and would be thrilled to have him as President. Same for Ralph Nader in 2000. I’m just as much of a critic of Obama from the Left as anyone. Still, I would argue that using our current understanding of political ideology, that John McCain would be “a little bit to the left” of Bush. Obama is probably (at the minimum), slightly left of center. Which is still fine with me at this point. See my previous post about Obama’s accomplishments after just over a month in office — I must say this is not just “a little bit to the left”. Be an informed critic, but if you’re a Progressive, don’t misrepresent Obama’s ideology as only slightly better than Bush’s.

  • Anonymous

    Thank God (pardon the pun!) Obama was not foolish enough to reject the Scouts invitation.

    Kudos to those 19 non-theistic organizations for encouraging Obama to politically hang himself. They really do have the best interests of the country in their hearts. And they sure know how to keep repainting those targets on the backs of atheists. For that, I could not be more grateful: they “clearly” speak for me.

    It would be a shame if Obama didn’t mandate that “In God We Trust” be scratched off currency, get impeached, and then be unable to increase the minimum wage. (Sorry, but I have no love for symbolic victories for my fellow atheists at expense of actual losses to everyone. I guess that makes me a “bad” person.)

  • JW

    The Boy Scouts of America is not perfect, no organization or group is, but they have done more for kids and for the country over the past 99 years than just about any other organization. It would be penny wise and pound foolish to try to harm this fine organization. As another poster said, don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Look up the history, the efforts during war time the quality of citizens that the BSA turns out, the efforts to help at risk kids to have a better shot at life, the career mentoring that goes on and the list could continue almost indefinately. The BSA isn’t a monopoly. No one is forced to join. There are a lot of other groups, sports, Boys and Girls Clubs, 4H, YMCA, and the list goes on. Let the BSA do what they do best… help kids and parents have a better quality of life. There is not one word of ‘hate literature’ in anything they put out. They teach tolerance and respect. Al Gore and Gerry Ford were both Eagle Scouts. You don’t get much different in philosophy than that. Scouting teaches kids to think for themselves, to be responsible and to be good citizens. It doesn’t brainwash them. We need more programs like Scouting and we need to move on to other issues.

  • Josh White

    Obviously this person doesnt know what they are talking about. The Boy Scouts don’t entirely descriminate . You can be gay in the Boy Scouts, but you have to go on the “dont ask dont tell” policy. I mean think about it. A whole bunch of young boys and high schoolers and someone is gay. You have a big issue on your hands there. And with that comment about religion, the BSA clearly states that you must have a religion. It does not state, however, that it has to be christianity. They offer religous emblems for Budhism, Muslim and many other religions. Plus you can be a scout without a religion, but you can’t earn its highest rank. The Eagle Scout. In a day and age where the youth are horrible and morals are in the shitter, we need Obamas support to keep an organization going that is trying to bring all good things back and is training the leaders of tomorrow. Many of the greatest leaders of America were Eagle Scouts and were part of this organization that you dont want the president to be apart of. Well I say to you, shut your mouth unless you know what you are talking about.

  • Dave

    Call me the eternal optimist, but it has been quite some time since Obama’s meeting with the Boy Scouts and there still has been no official word from the BSA or the White House that the honorary presidency was accepted or even offered. I think there might be something going on here. The one quote mentioned in your post (citing an unnamed source, and from Fox as well) is the ONLY indication anywhere suggesting that this is a done deal. I say we should keep the issue alive and try to push for answers. Maybe Obama is trying (behind the scenes) to right the BSA’s wrong.

  • Scouting Develops Future Leaders

    We live in such a diverse culture and the fact that citizens have the freedom to choose their faith complicates almost any large organization that started with strong roots to faith. There are no laws preventing an atheist individual or group from starting their own organization. If you don’t like the rules of the BSA, you should do all of the hard work and make all of the efforts made by the individuals of the BSA and create your own program. If, as an atheist, you are so progressive, why do you try to ride on the coat tails of such an organization like BSA? BSA doesn’t require you to be Christian, just to believe there is something greater than ourselves. It is quite arrogant for you to think that an organization that has done so much for children in the past 100 years should bend in such a manner. This only discourages me from being open minded to even make an effort to understand the foundation for Atheist living and beliefs. The constant effort to throw a blanket over Christians and others that believe in a greater power by throwing a fit over even using the word God only gives you grand illusions that people are supporting you; they are merely just sticking a giant pacifier in your gaping mouth. Scouting recognizes all faiths that believe in a greater being and that are free will must be managed closely by abiding by morals….and not to have so much conceit that you can’t recognize that there are greater powers that be, regardless of what individuals prefer to call them. So, I challenge any Athiest to be a leader and not a whiner and start your own program. That’s the issue with American today…they compromise what they know works to keep the peace, in the end, this does nothing but comprise our moral fibers. The leaders of Scouts have enough sold character NOT to allow someone to bully them into changing something that has been a proven success for developing leaders for years. Do some homework and find out how many leaders were in Scouts. You might be shocked and then encourage to learn a little bit more about the program and why it works…as is. Good luck to you all, you will need it.

  • Mike

    I’m always amazed at the blissful ignorance of liberals.

    They know everything, and whatever they do is correct.

    But they are everything they claim to abhor. For the liberal, tolerance is a one-way street.

    “Accept me as I am, but I will not accept you.”

    Which is why they fundamentally hate the Boy Scouts. And their arguments are all based on lies and falsehoods.

    Jon, Disney does not get supported by taxes. The Boy Scouts organization does. THAT is the problem here — that it is a dicriminatory organization receiving federal support.

    ~David D.G.

    Besides, I thought Jesus said to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, not render unto Caesar what is Jesus’, but apparently people seem to forget this when it comes to government-funded religious organizations.

    First of all, the Boy Scouts of America is not taxpayer funded. It might help your case if they were, but they are not. For all the benefits that the Boy Scouts of America does for our country the probably should be, but they are not. They are funded by private individual donations from people who believe in helping young people grow into the best possible adults. They do not get “special government support”, although they should. The only possible support would be that of the National Jamboree, and that is simply an organization excercising it’s constitutional right to peacably assemble. It’s the same support that gay pride parades get, and unlike those functions, it actually provides a benefit to the government.

    For land use, the government gets a higher quality of citizen. One who is more likely to go to college, less likely to break the law. 26 of the first 29 astronauts were Scouts. Neil Armstrong was an Eagle Scout.

    Eagle Scouts are required to undertake and raise funds for a project to benefit their community. The real monetary benefit of these projects alone dwarfs any federal output to a 10-day affair every four or five years.

    “I understand they are a federally protected monopoly, like major league baseball.”

    Another outright falsehood. The Boy Scouts are not a monopoly by any means. Other youth organizations exist. The Boys Brigade, 4H, FFA, YMCA, Big Brothers Big Sisters would not exist if the Boy Scouts were a monopoly.

    You on the left ask others to make an effort to understand you, while making no effort at all to understand and accept anyone else.

    You talk of bigotry, and yet you constitute the greatest group of bigots in this country. You are the ones persecuting those who express their faith and their beliefs.

    The Boy Scouts develop young men and women into leaders. They develop character, citizenship and fitness in youth. They accomplish something.

    I’m not sure when, but the Canadian branch changed the named from “Boy Scouts of Canada” to Scouts Canada and is fully integrated. Still predominantly male, but the number of girls is increasing and they are treated the same as the boys.

    Again, another misrepresentation of the Boy Scouts of America. The reason why girls are not registered into the Scouting program is because studies have shown that little boys and little girls do not act as freely when mixed together until about age 14. That is, by the way, the exact age that girls are allowed to register as Venture Scouts. Little girls do participate in Scouting programs all the time. Attend a pinewood derby and you will usually see some cars built by girls. But their primary program is with the Girl Scouts. The Canadian Scouting program has been devasted by being forced to put elementary aged boys and girls together. While it is true that Scouts Canada has about an equal mix of boys and girls in their program, it is also true that their overall membership is about one-sixth of what it was before the merger.

    You liberals complain and protest and think you are doing service. You are serving your own egos. It is so much easier to justify your poor behaviour and lack of good judgment than it is to actually improve yourselves.

    You talk of your rights, while attempting to deny the rights of others.

    You have the right to your opinion. However, it is your goal to cause harm to youth for your own political motives, and that is where you must be stopped.

  • GullWatcher

    Mike, I’m always both amused and appalled when someone like you shows up here waving your cognitive dissonance high and proud. Here’s a tip: you can spout hatred and bigotry, or you can accuse others of doing that, but doing both simultaneously just makes you look like an oblivious twit.

    You also have some of your facts wrong.

    First of all, the Boy Scouts of America is not taxpayer funded.

    Some places they are, or were. Check out Philadelphia, where they were rented a building on prime city property for $1 a year. The fair market value of the rental should have been about $200,000. That is government support. Or at least it was until Philadelphia passed a law saying they couldn’t support discriminatory agencies, and told they BSA that they could stay there for $1 if they stopped discriminating against gays, or they could pay the fair market value. As of this point, the BSA has chosen to squat where they were and sue the city – anything except stop discriminating.

    26 of the first 29 astronauts were Scouts.

    So were Charles Joseph Whitman, Richard Angelo, and Arthur Bishop, serial killers or multiple murderers all. What’s your point?

    @Scouting Develops Future Leaders

    The leaders of Scouts have enough sold character NOT to allow someone to bully them into changing something that has been a proven success for developing leaders for years.

    Really? If this is such an integral part of scouting, why is that all other scouting organizations everywhere else in the world have no problems with atheists or gays? Including England, by the way, which is where scouting started. Looks to me like it’s the BSA who have taken their own separate way down the path of discrimination.

  • Scouting Develops Future Leaders

    Some places they are, or were. Check out Philadelphia, where they were rented a building on prime city property for $1 a year. The fair market value of the rental should have been about $200,000. That is government support.

    For you information, the building they resided in, Beau Arts Building, was constructed by the Scouts. 80 years ago, the Scouts and the city entered into a lease agreement, the Scouts building is on the city land. And I’m working on verifying the information, but it appears as if the Scouts turned the land over to the city with teh agreement that the council would continue to run the operation out of the building they built and pay $1 for the property in rent. So, in essence, the city is breaking an agreement. So, it was not tax payer funded..so lets stopping leaving out the parts that don’t suppport your argument. Unfortunately, in the 1920’s there was no need to sign a lease…that is when men had honor and their were no homesexual provisions in city leases even if they had to sign one.

    Scouting might have started in England, but it was not started by England. It was started by Lord Baden-Powell. The family members of the original founder, Lord Baden-Powell, have made official statements against the changes and clearly do not support them and are confident that Lord Baden-Powell would not support these either. Since the UKSA decided to align with the homosexual movement, Scouting membership in England has decreased by almost 20%.

    In the end, Scouts is a Private Organization and the Phildelphia chapter, as well as the rest of the councils in this country will not comprise character over money. Being a private organization, according to the US Supreme Court allows the BSA to protect our future leaders from those people that want to stifle their ability to discuss their God (whichever each Scout choses as his God) openly and it allows the BSA program to focus on developing these boys without focus on someone’s sexual preference. Bringing any sexuality into the program is a distraction to the objectives to begin with. Bringing in homosexuality is especially confusing…and yes…it is confusing…doesn’t matter if you support the lifestyle, hate the lifestyle or live that lifestyle, it is confusing especially to young boys. There just isn’t a place for it. There are also policies against unmarried straight couples staying the same tents on campouts…..or do you only care about the homosexuals and the Atheists?

  • Tony Walters

    I am not sure whether Obama accepted or rejected being the title, what I do know is my son received his Eagle today and Obama’s signature was not on the certificate. For all of you scout bashers, I read an article recently by a former prison guard. He mentioned in the article that he had several inmates over the years that proclaimed being Christian, Muslim, Athiest, Agnostic but he had never had a prisoner claim to be a scout. That is a pretty astounding thing.

  • Curious

    I find it intresting that most concerns with BSA revolve around inacurrate information. BSA is NOT “christian”.
    A Scout is reverent. He is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties and respects the convictions of others in matters of custom and religion.
    There is no “Religious” merit badge.
    SEX is not a part of BSA organization. Youth protection is.

error: Content is protected !!