Hi Mary Anne,

I remember the discussion we had on Flame a few years past, I think your main objection then was that the Boy Scouts get funding from the government and have discriminating policies. Take one or the other away and I think you would be mostly fine with it even though I bet its the descriminating policies that rankle you the most.

Having been a part of scouting since I was a kid, (and the fact that I have been a scout leader, donate to Friends of Scouting, and still volunteer my time when I can), I have some pretty strong feelings on the matter. That being said, I can understand the argument that perhaps the organization should not be in any part taxpayer funded. If we are to exclude the boy scouts from getting taxpayer funding, than obviously we need to apply the rule across the boards.

As far as the discriminatory part of the Boy Scouts, I feel a private organization should be allowed to accept whomever it chooses to be its leaders based on its own moral litmus tests. If that pisses people off so be it, they shouldn't join or contribute to the organization. Its not a right to be a member of scouting, therefore the organization can't be forced to allow anyone in it doesn't wish to.

Given the choice to either have scouting lose its federal funding or be forced to acept everybody, I will choose for it to lose its funding. The programs would have to scale back and it would cost parents much more, but imo the alternative would be dangerous to both the organization and the boys.

-Steve G.