From: pmm7@ellis.uchicago.edu (peggy boucher murphy (you had to ask?))
Subject: Re: Levis Drops Boy Scouts...
Reply-To: pmm7@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 22:44:25 GMT

In article <1992Aug7.200838.3026@awdprime.austin.ibm.com> jfh@greenber.austin.ibm.com (John F Haugh II) writes:
>
>But do recall that it was Levi Strauss which took the first action.  They
>are the ones (along with a few radical United Way branches) that are trying
>to use "might equals right" in this manner.

yes, following their own ethical code.  

>One of the business reasons behind giving to charity is improving public
>opinion.  Some people use the charitable actions of a company as part of
>the reason they do business with a company.  

i know i do.  perhaps levi strauss is responding 
to stockholders/employees/customers who believe
in equal rights for atheists and queers.  

>No, they aren't.  There is no principle in Scouting which says "Provide
>aid and comfort to those people who are trying to destroy you." 

i find it interesting that you equivocate protesting
against a policy of exclusion with attempted destruction.  
surely you aren't serious?  after all, the girl scouts 
are inclusive of both queers and atheists, and they 
are hardly destroyed, nor lacking in moral values, nor
lacking in benefits for young girls/women in our society.  

>The sad truth is that for the same
>reasons that parents didn't want their boys and girls camping with
>members of the opposite sex and therefore support was taken away from
>scouting, so too will the addition of openly homosexual scouts reduce
>support.  I, for one, will not permit my child to spend extended periods
>of time with someone who is likely to view them as a potential sexual
>partner - whether they are little boys, little girls, or Catholic priests.

or teachers?  do you home school your kids?  what about
teenage babysitters?  and (the most likely of all, 
especially if you have daughters) male family members?  
do you hide your children from all of these, or at least 
watch them with any of them?  pederasts/rapists/molesters
are everywhere, and in every guise.  

if you have teens, they are far less likely to be raped 
by a queer teen than they are to bash one.  especially 
considering the loving tolerance they've learned at home.  

>Childhood is a supposed to be a safe time for learning about life, not a
>minefield full of traps.

excuse me, what planet did you grow up on?  and what planet 
do you live on now?  adult life *is* a minefield.  full of
traps, bad people, and hard luck.  it takes hard work and
more than a little bit of luck to succeed.  protecting your 
children from reality is going to help them be good adults?  

i am truly glad that you were not my parent, and that
my three children have learned enough to deal with bigots
like you.  and they have *not* been shielded from reality.  
they get a's, b's, and c's in school, have nice friends, 
partake in clubs and sports, and are pretty well adjusted.  
*and* they have a real sense of the diversity of people, 
ethnically, religously, economically, and in sexual
orientation.  they have proven that they know how to 
take care of themselves in everyday life and in those 
"traps" in this minefield we call life.  tell me about 
yours.  

>If the BSA changes its position on morality, this is one former Scout
>that will NOT be sending his kids off for an adventure packed weekend.

that's a real shame for your sons.  obviously you are 
willing to deprive them of something you (and most likely
they) value out of your own bigotry.  i'm sure they'll
be missed.  i'm sure *you* won't.  

>Why Queer Nation (and Queer Scouts, et cetera ...) can't just start their
>own organization is beyond me.  If there is so much support for homosexuals
>and other social groups having a "Scouting" experience, surely the group
>will prosper.  That =is= what freedom of association is supposed to be
>about - you get to pick your friends and associates without having them
>crammed down your throat. 

<sigh>  idiocy speaks.  the whole point is that scouting
has *always* had queers and atheists in it.  do some 
reading on their founder.  many people, many of whom are 
ex-scouts (some not queer *or* atheists), many of whom 
financially or otherwise support scouting, want the
institution to include these people *who* *have* *always*
*been* *there* (and still are) openly, and without harming
them by making them hide who and what they are and believe.

i do feel sorry for your children.  and i hope none of them
is queer.  not that they'd tell *you* of course.  <sigh>

peg

Xref: sparky alt.politics.homosexuality:5450 rec.scouting:2458