Blue Crab Boulevard

Certainly Not For The Children - Update

Las month, I posted about the city of Philadelphia threatening to evict the local chapter of the Boy Scouts of America from the building they have used since 1928. The city wanted the local council to renounce the national policy against gays serving as scoutmasters. The local was caught between a rock and a hard place. Or a rock and no place at all, if you prefer. Well, the city has gone ahead and evicted the Scouts from their building.

Municipal officials said the clash stemmed from a duty to defend civil rights and an obligation to abide by a local law that bars taxpayer support for any group that discriminates. Boy Scout officials said it was about preserving their culture, protecting the right of private organizations to remain exclusive and defending traditions like requiring members to swear an oath of duty to God and prohibiting membership by anyone who is openly homosexual.

This week the Boy Scouts made their last stand and lost.

“At the end of the day, you can not be in a city-owned facility being subsidized by the taxpayers and not have language in your lease that talks about nondiscrimination,” said City Councilman Darrell L. Clarke, who represents the district where the building is located. “Negotiations are over.”

Mr. Clarke said talks ended this week when the deadline passed for the local chapter to change its policy; on June 1 the group will be evicted.

“Since we were founded, we believe that open homosexuality would be inconsistent with the values that we want to communicate with our leaders,” said Gregg Shields, national spokesman for the Boy Scouts. “A belief in God is also mentioned in the Scout oath. We believe that those values are important. Tradition is important. Our mission is to instill those values in scouts and help them make good choices over their lifetimes.”

In 2000, the Supreme Court decided a case — Boy Scouts of America v. Dale — involving an openly gay scout from New Jersey who was barred from serving as troop leader. The court ruled in a 5-to-4 decision that, as a private organization, the group had a First Amendment right to set its membership rules.

One thing that might yet complicate things is that while the city does, indeed, own the land, the building itself was built and paid for by the Scouts. From a cost standpoint, the impact of the city's demand for $200,000 annual rent would result in some big negative impact on local programs:

Jeff Jubelirer, a spokesman for the local chapter, said it could not afford $200,000 a year in rent, and that such a price would require it to cut summer-camp funds for 800 needy children.

“With an epidemic of gun violence taking the lives of children almost daily in this city, it’s ironic that this administration chose to destroy programming that services thousands of children in the city,” Mr. Jubelirer said. He added that the organization serves more than 69,000 young people, mostly from the inner city, and that its programming focuses on mentoring and after-school programs instead of camping trips.

Regardless of whether the Scouts relocate or not, the city of Philadelphia will have done damage to much-needed programs that serve inner city youth. This was, as I pointed out last month, a needless fight that serves no good purpose. With a skyrocketing murder rate, the last thing Philadelphia needs is fewer programs that may divert boys from crime.

But the children come last in Philadelphia.

News | Gaius Thursday, 6 December , 2007

By DavidL, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 10:23 am

Looks like the city fathers are trying to redine the meaning of the City of Brotherly Love.
By Ubu Walker, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 11:31 am

I have mixed feelings about this whole situation. As a former scout, I feel that scouting is a positive force for youth. On the other hand, as a member of society, I think that it is unfair for the city to subsidize a private organization which won’t allow atheists or homosexual (or bisexual) boys to be members of the organization. Before 2003, many people turned a blind eye to the whole matter because a scouts personal beliefs never really mattered, and the rule was never actually enforced. As a former scout, we definitely had open atheists and gay kids in our troop. Now, the rules are enforced.

A scout takes an oath to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. Being reverent means showing great feeling and deep respect towards others; it does not necessarily mean being religious — it also means being ethical. And while I am not gay or bisexual, there is nothing dirty or unclean about homosexual activity. How is the scouting movement being helpful or loyal or friendly by not allowing these different kids to participate in scouting?

It is hypocritical. But that is what happens when a largely once secular youth group is infiltrated and taken over by a bunch of religious wack jobs which move Troops from American Legion halls and Firehouse to Churches, and enforce their beliefs onto their members.
By syn, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 11:40 am

Ya know the horrid aspect of dreadful identity politics is that even a couple of friends of mine are sick up to their eye balls with the gay agenda, are over the rainbow, and want their lives back.

Of course whenever they say this around gay identity groupers they’re ostrasized as homophobic homosexuals!

I used to think being a woman living in a progressive regressive Leftist NYC who rejected the feminist identity groupers around 2002 was the worst thing out there until I met homosexuals who have rejected the gay identity groupers.
By EAinCT, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 11:49 am

I got my Eagle badge in the 70’s and carry my Eagle card (signed by Richard Nixon, no less!) to this day.

What I learned in scouting was invaluable. As a father I want to be able to send my son out with grown men into the woods and off to summer camp with one less thing to think about. I guess that is too much to ask. Kids 12-17 aren’t getting enough indoctrination in school.

Look at the lawsuits surrounding firefighters being forced to march in gay parades or lose their jobs. To have to endure the whistles and gestures and not be allowed to remove themselves from the harassment. You think there would not be a lawsuit over a scout (much less a leader) wanting to dig a separate latrine to have some privacy? The trail lawyers are rubbing their hands together.
By Gaius, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 12:05 pm

You know, ubu, that is a serious allegation which you simply assert with no proof. In fact, the Scouts had a number of very, very bad incidents with pedophiles. That is not saying homosexuals are pedophiles, of course, but that had rather a lot to do with the rules being enforced.

It is a private organization and has the constitutional right to freedom of association. Projecting your view of what constitutes reverence is irrelevant.

The fact is, no matter how you cut it, that the inner city kids of Philadelphia are being made to suffer because of a political move. That’s what happens when an agenda takes precedence over the good of those young people.
By FedUp, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 1:04 pm

Glad the Scouts are taking a stand!!! I’m tired of atheists, gays and whatever other flavors are out there wanting to be inlcuded in activities solely because it makes noise!!! The Scouts stand for morals, decency and a belief in God and IMHO that excludes the loud gays and others. If those people want to start their own scouting organization… let them! Keep them out of the Scouts! I’m pretty damn annoyed at the unregenerate part of our society ( a minority) trying to disrupt organizations that have been in existence - quite happily - without them. Form your own groups - but in any case… SHUT UP!!!
By Al, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 1:29 pm

Watch this video as it explains Modern Liberals. It’s about more than just letting gays in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
By Gaius, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 1:36 pm

That’s been posted before. It’s a great video.
By Alex Darr, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 1:49 pm

I too am an Eagle Scout and I fully support the stance the Boy Scouts of America have taken. I too carry my Eagle Scout Card (Signed by G.W.) and am proud to carry it today. The fact is, the city tried strong arming the Boy Scouts, and the Boy Scouts stood up like the fine young men/men they are and said, “We have values and morals; and we are one organization that is not going to sacrifice said morals for money.” We should be applauding the Boy Scouts for their great efforts, and their great leadership in these difficult times.

Ubu Walker you quote the Scout Law well. But you only paint half of the picture. What about the Scout Oath?
On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.
I will do my duty to GOD. To be an open atheist and pledge those words at the same time is an act that I feel makes an individual worthy of severe condemnation for being two-faced and hypocritical.

I am exceptionally proud to be a Scout because of this beautiful display of courage and loyalty to values.
By syn, Thursday, 6 December , 2007 @ 2:27 pm

‘there is nothing dirty or unclean about homosexual activity’

I would agree that the act itself is not however the propensity to have sex in public bathrooms or openly in the public square, for example the Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco, offers quite an image problem for those who wish to be treated with respect and dignity.

The ‘keep it in your pants while in public’ applies to everyone.
By FedUp, Friday, 7 December , 2007 @ 7:53 am

I know thta this is politically incorrect, but God would take exception to the following quote!

‘there is nothing dirty or unclean about homosexual activity’

I don’t care if they want to practice this kind of sexual behavior, but it is deviant and should be done in private and not trumpeted in the public sphere!