What do you think about the Boy Scout's being kicked out of PHILADELPHIA!?

Question

From a building they built in 1928. Where's Jesse Jackson now?

Answer 1

I think that it is terrible. The BSA is a great organization. It is a serious mistake for the LGBT community to pick on the BSA. Those of you who oppose the BSA are jerks. You won't get us any respect with that crap, just more animosity.
It is cowardly too. You don't oppose the muslim groups. Why doesn't the LGBT groups oppose muslims? Because of fear of violence. The Boy Scouts won't hurt you so they are easy to pick on. It's pathetic, I'm ashamed that the LGBT community acts this way towards the BSA.

Answer 2

There are, obviously, a lot of elements to this story.

On a national level, the BSA has a visible and vocal anti-gay, anti-girl, and anti-atheist. Many of us who have been Scouts and Scout leaders do not agree with this, and in fact there is little local enforcement of this policy. After all, the applications do not ask about it, and there is no reason to ask prospective members about it.

Sadly, in the last several years, the national program has been figuratively hijacked by the sponsoring organizations who contribute so much time and money (most BSA troops are sponsored by Mormon and Catholic churches) and it is widely thought that this all is the direct result of pressures from one of these groups.

On a different level- it would be interesting to know exactly what the terms of the agreement between the Scouts and the city were when the building was built- it may be that the city is acting in bad faith and violating at least the spirit of the original lease, or, as the story in the Washington Post stated, they owe the Scouts something for the improvements, etc. on the property. After all, if the value the building is 200,00/year in rent, then it is only such because of the building that the Scouts built and they deserve some compensation for it.

Anger at the Scouts is socially popular right now- it is easy to be mad at a group that supposedly discriminates wholesale against gays or atheists (even though, as I said, most actual units ignore that).

However, apparently other programs have 'sweetheart deals' with the city, and many of them are not open to the public or practice some form of discrimination as well. It would be interesting to see what would happen of all such programs were treated the same.

The Scouts need to rethink their policies on a national level- they are pretty hard to justify.

But, the city needs to rethink itself as well. The Scouts, flawed policies and all, offer a cost-effective youth program that serves a big chunk of Philly's youth. What does the city need more- youth programs or the few bucks it would get from the building?

A compromise on behalf of the council that violates the national policy seems pretty unfair, although active discrimination is as well. Considering that Scouts are ready to help, offer a large cheap labor pool, and need service hours, it seems that they could have worked out a deal to 'work off' at least some of the rent.

It is also sad to me that a few years ago (ok, decades ago) the Scouts could have rallied and used sheer force of numbers and public sentiment to negotiate a settlement but the program today is such a shadow of itself that it seems to be circling the drain.

Answer 3

My understanding is that the building is a school building and that the scouts (who did NOT build it) were paying 1$ a year to use it. They have not been kicked out, but required to pay the same rent that any other tenant would pay -- now I happen to disagree with the decision because the Philly boy scouts are in defiance of the national and already have atheistic and gay members -- and therefore should not be punished for what the national says or does -- regardless, let's at least not deliberately exaggerate what's happening by saying things like "kicked out of Philadelphia" -- shall we?

Regards,

Reyn
[e-mail]

Answer 4

As I understand it, the Boy Scouts' stance is that they are a private organization, therefore they can exclude whoever they like.

If that's true, then they have no right to expect to use public facilities for free as they have been doing. Either they need to pay rent at the going market rate as any other private organization would be expected to do, OR admit everyone without discriminating, as a group using public facililties for free would be expected to do.

They can't have it both ways.

Answer 5

There is more to the story:

The BSA changed their stance on gay's being in leadership roles within BSA. Within weeks they kicked out an 18 year old employee who public ally came out.

The BSA building is built on public land and they pay no rent to be there. the city position is that since the BSA is on public property they should not discriminate. The BSA was given one year to either move out or change their policy.

Answer 6

They violated a law and it's a public building. I would also be upset if they were evicted from a privately held facility. The city maintains that bigots cannot occupy public spaces. Jesse Jackson would approve of that, I'm sure.

Answer 7

The Boy Scouts of America have actively discriminated against gay children in the past. I doubt you're going to find much empathy here.

Answer 8

What on Gods Green Earth did they do?

Answer 9

They shouldn't have violated the law. I have no problem what so ever with it.

Answer 10

They've discriminated against gays in the past...I can't believe I was actually a part of them.