In response to:

The Scouts Versus the Ugly Moods of 2013

Sandy511 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 7:54 AM
The Scouts have a Constitutional right to determine their own membership. The Supreme Court has deemed it so. So why is it that now, as they choose to reconsider the terms of their own membership, is it necessarily being "forced" upon them? Don't they have a right to include gay people, as per the same Constitutional right that allowed them to exclude them? Could it just be that in this day and age, being exclusionary to gays is not only considered old-fashioned but just plain wrong? States have legalized gay marriage everywhere, using courts, legislatures, and ballot boxes. Prominent gay actors, newscasters, politicians, and even athletes are a part of our culture, and show that this is being accepted more and more.
Bill1895 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 11:45 AM
James2517 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 12:48 PM
Bill is incapable of understanding something that is 7 lines long and has some big words. Great post BTW, Sandy.
Jim69 Wrote: Feb 17, 2013 4:12 AM

The Boy Scouts of America got front-page ink, as we say in the newspaper trade, for their currently postponed meditations on the topic of admitting avowed gays to membership.

Word had leaked out that the Scouts were considering a local option solution to the vexed question of their supposed right to determine who can become a member and who can't. At a top-drawer meeting in Irving, Tex., the topic proved too vast and complex for immediate resolution. Consultation and deliberation will take place prior to May meeting of Scouts' national council.

I spoke of the Scouts' "supposed" right to oversee their...