On Tuesday, the Boy Scouts of America reaffirmed their ban of gays from the organization. The longtime ban, which was reaffirmed after a two-year review, bans gay boys from being Boy Scouts and gay adults from serving as troop leaders.
According to The New York Times, the decision came after years of debate. In 2000, the Supreme Court upheld 5-4 the right of the Boy Scouts to expel a gay assistant scoutmaster, saying that as a private organization, it had the right to decide what values it wanted to inculcate.
A statement released Tuesday by the Boy Scouts of America reads as follows:
After careful consideration of a resolution asking the Boy Scouts of America to reconsider its longstanding membership standards policy, today the organization affirmed its current policy, stating that it remains in the best interest of Scouting and that there will be no further action taken on the resolution.
This decision follows a nearly two-year-long examination, started in 2010, of the policy commissioned by the Chief Scout Executive and national president. Under their leadership, the BSA convened a special committee of volunteers and professional leaders to evaluate whether the policy continued to be in the best interest of the organization.
“The vast majority of the parents of youth we serve value their right to address issues of same-sex orientation within their family, with spiritual advisers, and at the appropriate time and in the right setting,” said Bob Mazzuca, Chief Scout Executive, Boy Scouts of America. “While a majority of our membership agrees with our policy, we fully understand that no single policy will accommodate the many diverse views among our membership or society.”
Do you support or oppose the Boy Scouts' decision to ban gays from the organization? Do you think the organization's actions are justified? Where do you stand on the issue?
they get funding from both state and federal. cases in point In 2011 in San Diego, the Scouts kept their office in a city park, and the city charged only a $1 annual fee for use of the space, while paying nothing to use many other city properties etc. In Berkley, the Scouts had received free berths at the docks until the city finally revoked the privilege and said the Scouts had to pay like all other citizens and private groups. The US Government spends an average of $2 million a year towards hosting of the jamboree. The price tag for the Pentagon was close to $10 million from 1997 through 2001 Costs for preparing the military base for the event, use of the space, etc is all taxpayer funded. the BSA have been privileged to receive outright donations of surplus military goods and property. in 2008 Boy Scout group in Alaska got nearly $1,000,000 worth of federal funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development need i really go on? sources: pathos u.s. dod u.s. hud u.s. white house washington post
Equal rights do not depend on the popular vote. It should be clear a majority can and will restrict the equal rights of a minority if given the chance. Our founding fathers were well aware of this fact, and that is why we have a constitution complete with a bill of rights. They never intended mob rule. Equal fundamental rights should never depend on popular opinion of the majority: "The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections." (SCOTUS) As you note, the female half of the gay population is the lowest risk group for HIV. Anyone can catch it, and more straight people are infected than gay people. But we don't deny equal rights based on a virus, even if everyone in any group was infected.
While a private organization like the scouts can discriminate against whoever they choose, there is no scientific justification nor legitimate governmental interest sufficient for denial of equal legal rights, as required by the constitution.
Hiv/Aids is still primarily a male homosexual event.
Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM)[1] of all races and ethnicities remain the population most severely affected by HIV. CDC estimates that MSM account for just 2% of the U.S. population, but accounted for 61% of all new HIV infections in 2009. MSM accounted for 49% of people living with HIV infection in 2008 (the most recent year national prevalence data are available). In 2009, white MSM continued to account for the largest number of new HIV infections of any group in the U.S. (11,400), followed closely by black MSM (10,800).
Ignorance of the cause of AIDS led to the short lived label of GRIDS. By the time the HIV virus was identified, it was clear the virus was spread by sexual intercourse as well as sharing needles and blood transfusions. Sexual orientation is irrelevant. The virus does not care. Again, we do not deny equal rights based on infection by any virus. The desire to falsely label gay people as diseased is simply a demonization tactic intended to justify denial of equal rights to gay people based on something that affects straight people as well, while not denying those same rights to straight people. There is no scientific justification nor legitimate governmental interest sufficient for denial of equal legal rights, as required by the constitution.
2% of the population ie.. (Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men) account for 49% of the people living with HIV.
Worldwide, far more heterosexual people are infected, while gay women worldwide have the lowest rates of infection. Sexual orientation is irrelevant. Again, the virus does not know or care about your sexual orientation. It is passed by unprotected intercourse with an infected person. At best your figures demonstrate the importance of encouraging monogamous relationships including marriage, and practicing safe sex, irrelevant of sexual orientation. Your desire to further harm all gay people while ignoring the fact even more straight people have the virus, is irrational and illogical. You provide no legitimate excuse for denial of legal equality.
Not only are you laughably ignorant of facts, you are an ignoramus, a bully, and mean-spirited bigot of the worst type. I am not gay but I have gay friends, and none of them bear even the slightest resemblance to these demons living inside your twisted mind. The vast majority of them are loving, committed couples, many of them raising children. So think about that next time before you shoot your mouth off about something you know absolutely nothing about.
Just as not all straight married couples practice monogamy, there is no reason to believe all gay couples will either. However, we know marriage has a stabilizing effect on relationships in general, and it is therefore reasonable to expect marriage would provide the same stabilizing effects for gay couples it does for straight couples. It is irrational to suspect marriage equality would have the opposite effect. Despite your reliance on demeaning pejorative terminology, every mainstream medical and mental health organization it the country agree being gay is a natural expression of being human for a minority of the population. Your insults reveal your irrational prejudice is your best excuse for refusal to follow the Golden Rule. "The highest numbers of HIV cases are in population centers like New York and California. However, many of the areas with the highest rates of HIV — that is, the highest proportion of people with the AIDS-causing virus — are in the South, according to the data map, which has information for more than 90 percent of the nation's counties and Washington, D.C" http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31489453/ns/health-aids/t/hiv-infection-rates-are-highest-south/
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/resources/factsheets/us_overview.htm - It is not predominantly a young persons disease either. As a matter of fact, ages 30-54 of AIDS infections comprise 70% of all 2009 AIDS infections. Shouldn't they know better by age 30? http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#hivaidsexposure - Cumulative Estimated # of AIDS Diagnoses, Through 2009: Male-to-male sexual contact 529,908 (2% of the population) Heterosexual contact 198,820 http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#plwha You can continue to blather and opine your political agenda, but it does not change the data.
If you can't look at the truth because it's just that disgusting, fine, but don't try and sugar coat this debate!! You know what grown men do to little boys?! EXACTLY!!! This stuff is EVIL!