scouts-l Mail Archive for May of 2000: Re: At the Supreme Court
Wed May 03 2000 - 08:21:17 CDT
One of the respondants, because of his own set of beliefs, does not
believe that he could be an acceptable role model to those who are not
like him. I beg to differ. Generally, we have far more in common than
we have that separates us.
It depends whether BSA is viewed as monolithic, or units can
independently choose the type of citizenship and character messages
they wish to convey. If the latter is the case, then families and youth
can choose between (or form their own) units that reflect their values,
rather than be forced to choose between BSA or no BSA. That would be
the equivalent of a "free market economy".
BSA may not overtly say that persons are bad, but through its actions
(exclusion) it implies that as a class they are not suitable to
associate with and may be shunned. At one time BSA conveyed that
message about african-americans. Impressionable minds take that the
extra steps and accuse, judge, possibly go further.
BSA does not promote sexuality at all. Neither hetero- nor homo- should
be promoted. Respect and responsibility (personal and group) should be
the message towards all others who share our fragile planet.
In my view, if one truly trusts in G-d, then he or she must trust in the
meaningfulness of the diversity that has been wrought.
Irrespective of a persons race, ethnicity, religious, or political
beliefs, etc. a unit should be free to choose a leader (not necessarily
the only leader) for some of the specific gifts that she or he can bring
and can impart. Depth of leadership can be matched by breadth of