[17691] in APO-L
FW: BSA discrimination (WAS Addition to Alcohol Discussion)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Roberts)
Thu Nov 20 23:52:09 1997
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 22:44:43 -0500
Reply-To: "danr@netwalk.com" <danr@netwalk.com>
From: Daniel Roberts <danr@netwalk.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
On Tuesday, November 18, 1997 8:50 PM, Gerald A. Schroeder
[SMTP:gschroed@CAPACCESS.ORG] wrote:
> The mutually supportive relationship between BSA and APO continues by
> agreement between both organizations.
> For myself, I
> defend the right (not necessarily the righteousness) of private,
> voluntary organizations to determine their own membership because someday
> APO could be next on the list of those who would deny such organizations
> that right. That goes for BSA, GSUSA (admit males?), Gay/Lesbian Rights
> Organizations (admit heterosexuals?), Catholic Church (admit Methodists),
> Young Democrats (admit Republicans?), etc., etc.
>
Jerry,
Very well put. These are the points that so many people forget. Perhaps
allowing my own political prejudices to come forward, (G) I am always
amazed at individuals who allegedly promote diversity and openness who want
to impose their view of correctness and condemn private groups who chose a
different, also Constitutionally protected, path.
You'll see my comments elsewhere about membership policies. I don't agree
with all of BSA's policies nor APHIO's as applied but I believe that both
organizations should have an absolute right to make those policies for
themselves. Admittedly it is outside my area of practice but I have never
philosophically the attempt to equate BSA or similar groups with public
accommodations. I think I understand the Jaycee case but it still makes me
a bit nervous about the slippery slope potential.
Dan Roberts
Just Practicing Criminal Law.
