From: anthropo@carina.unm.edu (Dominick V. Zurlo)
Subject: Re: Coming Full Circle?
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 21:08:18 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1dbb77INNbfa@crcnis1.unl.edu> rlosee@unlinfo.unl.edu (Robert Losee) writes:
>anthropo@carina.unm.edu (Dominick V. Zurlo) writes:
>
>>...  To allow the individual units the autonomy
>>to choose leaders is important to the basic infrastructure of the BSA.  
>>THe local leaders are from the community, are members of the community, and
>>the BSA should not dictate to the local community who should be their
>>role models and leaders.  ANyone disagree on this?
>
>Well Dominick, I currently probably tend to lean your way on this
>particular issue.  (If I sound wishy-washy on this I've succeeded in
>getting my meaning across.)  However I think this remains a dynamic
>thing.  In some cases in organizations and governments it's better to
>localize these issues.  In other cases I believe it's better to
>nationalize them.  For instance, the Federal government had to
>nationalize National Guard units in the South at times for the
>purpose of desegragation.  I think that was appropriate.  
>
>I know I'm against a national policy by the BSA to force acceptance of
>homosexuals, for example, to force Roman Catholic and Mormon (to name
>just a couple) chartering organizations to have homosexual scouts and
>scouters.  But if a chartering organization doesn't care then I don't
>know if I should care.
>
>>                                                     Now, the BSA has a 
>>policy to exclude lesbigays.  that interferres with the local community 
>>which may or may not have lesbigays who are qualified and willing to be 
>>leaders, and acceptable to the community (see San Diego).  
>>   Now, a troop is being sponsored (this is hypothetical) by the Metropolitan
>>Community Church, and the scoutmaster is gay.  the BSA says no.  WHy.  Two
>>reasons.  1). the scoutmaster has violated BSA policy and can not hold 
>>his position if he is gay.  2). MCC is a predominately lesbigay oriented 
>>non-denominational Christian Church.  Now, most of the boys in this troop
>>are the children of lesbigays.  In this scenario, the parents rights have 
>>been abandoned and disallowed by the BSA.  Is this a right or wrong 
>>situation?  It is wrong in that it has violated the BSA's stance of serving
>>the boys primarily and foremost. 
>>   As far as Camporees, I don't see a problem.  Being gay isn't really an
>>issue, but it has been made into one.  What would be a problem at a 
>>Camporee, the "offended" troop not participate?  Then that's their problem.
>>They are the ones' missing out.  they aren't being forced out, but they
>>are missing out.  Gays are being forced out.  We don't have a choice.  
>
>Well maybe.  For instance my workplace is generally smoke free.
>However I'm "offended" by all the smoke roiling out of the break room;
>I don't "participate" in the break room experience of sitting at a
>table with a coke and paper (I probably wouldn't anyway so this
>is a little hypothetical).  Is this "my problem" that I don't want to
>be impacted by the health effects of tobacco smoke?  I'm the one
>who's "missing out" if I really wanted to stay.  Am I not being
>forced out (feels like it to me)?
 Yes, and in certain places, (where I work for one, and which I support) 
if there is one non-smoker, then the place is non-smoking if there is an 
objection.  that is true instate facilities here in NM.  But that is a
different situation.  There, you are talking about actually health risks,
being lesbigay is not and does not pose a health risk to others.  But 
even there, you are given the CHOICE to be in the room or not.  lesbigays
don't even have the choice.  
>
>>So, we are fighting for that choice.  What problems do you see occuring at 
>>a Camporee?  I don't see any that aren't caused by fear and lack of education.
>>They can be overcome by some simple programs.  
>
>A camporee was just one of my example.  An actual case that causes me
>to pause and consider this is that my two best friends (they still
>are) were on camp staff about 20 years ago.  One of the other staff
>members (male) made a pass at friend A in friend B's presense.  This
>sorta set them both back for a time.  Now I don't want this to be a
>big deal, it's not had much of any impact on their lives that I can
>see. Still I'm not sure this is OK at a scout camp.

I don't see a problem here, I don't think passes made in a  camp are
acceptable, straight, gay, etc...  But if it hasn't had much impact on
them, then what is the problem?  I don't know what happened, so I 
can't really comment, but I don't see how that would be any differently
handled than a staff member of one sex making a pass at a staff member
of the opposite sex.  
>
>I really mean that last sentence.  I'm generally in favor of letting 
>units decide if they want to go co-ed, and certainly in such a setting
>hetersexuals will be making passes at each other.  

SO then in essence you're saying that it's a possibility you'd 
support a possible trial of this type of policy?
>
>>WWW
>>Dominick V. Zurlo
>>Eagle Scout '87
>>blacklisted '88
>>"If the world is my oyster, Why am I allergic to Mollusks?"
>> 
>--
>*-------------------------------------------------------------------------*
>Robert D. Losee                 BITNET: ucas402@unlvm
>University of Nebraska          Internet: rlosee@unlinfo.unl.edu
>Lincoln NE  68588-0496          Phone: (402) 472-7663

Dominick (again)

Newsgroups: rec.scouting