[17593] in APO-L
Re: BSA discrimintation (WAS Addition to Alcohol Discussion)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Benjamin A. Kuperman)
Mon Nov 17 19:03:37 1997
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 19:02:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Benjamin A. Kuperman" <kuperman@CS.PURDUE.EDU>
From: "Benjamin A. Kuperman" <kuperman@CS.PURDUE.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <199711172017.PAA20286@arthur.cs.purdue.edu>; from Theodore W.
Love on Mon, Nov 17, 1997 at 03:15:22PM -0500
Subject: BSA discrimintation (WAS Addition to Alcohol Discussion)
Date: Mon, Nov 17, 1997 at 03:15:22PM -0500
It was rumored that Theodore W. Love (love26@ns3.potsdam.edu) said:
[ NOTE: this is not being propagated to the listserv, feel free to
forward it on if you think appropriate, but I believe it is not ]
[ a portion of my original comment removed ]
>
> Being well versed with BSA policy, I challenge your statement above that
> claims that the BSA discriminates on the basis of gender, sexual
> orientation, or religion. I feel that I could disprove any of your
> misconceptions. If you take things out of prospective it may appear to be
> so, but it is not. Even what appears to be obvious discrimination against
> not allowing girls into the BSA has not once been overturned in the many
> many times it has gone to our legal system.
I have never stated that the BSA has been following illegal practices.
However, your challenge will serve to illustrate that our two
organizations are different entities.
I am under the understanding that those individuals who are vocally
homosexual are not permitted in the BSA. I am under the understanding
that females are not permitted to be members of the Scouting program
and participate in advancement such that they could ultimately obtain
the rank of Eagle Scout. I am under the understanding that youth
members of Boy scouts must take an oath affirming their "duty to God"
and adult leaders must subscribe to the Declaration of Religious
Principles (DRP) which states, among other things, "no member can grow
into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to
God." and has not accepted the applications/revoked membership of
individuals who have proclaimed themselves to be atheists.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
These are BSA's policy's which they have proved that they are legally
able to hold. I am not placing a value judgment on such policies,
but simply noting that they exist in the BSA and do not in APO.
> I feel that any organization, is a collective group of people that give
> up certain "RIGHTS" to benefit the group.
> I give up the "freedom" to murder by being a citizen of the United States of
> America. I give up the "right" to drink alcohol at dry fraternity events.
Certainly, but does that mean that the fraternity is responsible for
prohibiting you from ordering a beer or glass of wine at a dinner,
even if the dinner is held in a public restaurant. And which principle
of Leadership, Friendship, or Service does a non-alcoholic rule
promote?
> Further more, I believe that any set of ideals is objective, and it is
> absolutely absurd to say that you can say the same thing (such as Scout Law
> or Oath) and mean something different! I believe that what you do with
> those ideals is neither up to an "outside" entity, nor our organization,
> rather it is up to each individual who repeats the Oath and Law accepting it
> and choosing to act accordingly.
Two individuals can indicate that they believe a Scout is reverent.
One might think that this means that a Scout is tolerant and
respectful towards other peoples religious beliefs (including a lack
thereof), and the other can believe that only religion leads to good
citizenship. Same words, different meanings.
I am continuing this dialogue not in the hopes of confrontation, but
for promoting our mutual understanding. I don't pretend to know if
these policies are "right" or "wrong" and if they are for the "good of
the group". Hopefully, you can give me more insight on the opposing
viewpoint so I can understand it better.
LFS,
-Benjamin Kuperman.
