From: WAHowland@AOL.COM
Date: Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:10:27 CDT
>>begin quote
Yes, if Dale "wins" the schism can result in the dramatic losses you
described. On the other hand, if BSA "wins", particularly if it further
radicalizes itself along the lines suggested by Davidson's "threat", the
schism can be equally dramatic, and the loses just as bloody.
<<end quote
When this comes up, I never hear a word about all the people who would never
let their boys in Scouting because they perceive it as a homophobic
organization. When someone starts wailing about the boys we'd lose if we
stopped fussing about this, let 'em consider all the ones we'd GAIN. My boy
is as non-sexist as you can find, god bless him, and since I find more good
in Scouting than is overridden by this one, um, blind spot I'm happy that
we're an active Scouting family. But I certainly understand that position,
and have little to say when people accuse the BSA proper of it.
I loved the point about our literature-- as in, how much of a burden would it
be to the Scouts if they had to change all their literature on this? And the
Scouts' atty said, ummmm, none at all, because it doesn't appear in any of
our literature. Makes a telling point about how central this issue really is
in our organization.
And someone here mentioned the question, would the BSA oust a leader who
merely believed that denying membership to Mr Dale was wrong? And the BSA's
answer was that it would only be a problem if the leader advocated a
pro-homosexual position verbally with the boys. Now, it seems to me that even
Mr Dale did not advocate any such thing with the boys, and even the BSA says
he hasn't,... and so....?
I dunno, folks, this is not going to be as cut and dried as you think. It's a
long time 'til October, though.
YiS
Auntie Beans
SA T47 Sandwich MA
Cape Cod & Islands Council
Abake MiSaNaKi Lodge #393
NSJ 1997 Nat'l Health & Safety and going in 01!
I useta be an Eagle...
<wahowland@iname.com>
