Posted on 11/13/2003 7:41:48 AM PST by WinOne4TheGipper
After a 76-year partnership, the United Way Capital Area and the Boy Scouts are parting ways because the Scouts organization excludes gays.
"Our value is that we raise money from the entire community," said Clarke Heidrick, chairman of the United Way board. "We need to allocate the money to agencies that serve the entire community."
Boy Scouts of America, Capital Area Council, will lose approximately $157,000 a year, a little more than 5 percent of its $2.9 million budget. The group will ask its supporters to make up that loss with additional contributions, said Bruce Walcutt, the organization's president.
"Frankly, the Boy Scouts are a resourceful bunch," he said. "That's what we're taught to be. We'll continue to keep our programs alive."
Under the terms of an agreement unanimously approved Wednesday by the United Way board, the Scouts will remain a partner agency until June 30, 2004 and will receive about $157,000. Then -- although it will no longer be affiliated with the United Way -- the group will receive another $157,000 for 2005 as transition funding, Heidrick said. Then funding will stop.
Both sides say the split is amicable. The Boy Scouts have been a United Way Capital Area partner since 1927.
"The Scouts have conducted themselves very honorably during this process," Heidrick said.
Wednesday's decision comes after more than two years of discussion.
In June 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts have the right to exclude gays.
That decision spurred more than 50 local United Ways to change their relationship with the Scouts.
Some immediately cut ties with the group. Some phased out funding.
Others started working with Learning for Life, a Boy Scout-affiliated organization that allows gays to participate in its programs.
Many have remained firm supporters of the Scouts, which provides educational programs focused on character, citizenship and personal fitness.
United Way of America, the parent organization to the 1,400 affiliates across the country, did not take a position on the issue.
"We're convinced that's a decision that needs to be made on the local level," said Philip Jones, spokesman for the United Way of America.
After the 2000 court ruling, United Way Capital Area -- which raises money for 44 health and human service organizations -- scrutinized requirements for its agencies.
In March 2002, the board adopted an inclusion policy requiring all partner agencies to serve people without regard to issues such as race, color, gender or sexual orientation.
Of the 44 groups, 43 were in compliance with the policy. But the Boy Scouts organization was in violation because it does not accept "avowed homosexuals," according to the Scout's literature.
United Way and Boy Scouts officials met several times, then agreed to a friendly divorce.
Donors -- who can use the United Way to donate to any 501(c)(3) nonprofit registered with the IRS -- will still be able to give to the Scouts through their workplace campaigns.
But the Scouts will not be entitled to money raised through the United Way's community investment fund, which totaled $4.1 million last year.
The Scouts received about $157,000 from that fund in 2002.
"It's a big deal," Walcutt said. "We have a lot of supporters in Central Texas and we're going to ask them to do more."
Randall Ellis, executive director of the Lesbian/Gay Rights Lobby of Texas, called the split a "bold step" for the United Way.
"It will go a long way to fostering tolerance and acceptance in Central Texas," he said.
Others say the United Way's decision smacks of political pressure that will hurt families.
"I think what it says about the United Way is that they are easily intimidated by a very politically active homosexual lobby that pushes a homosexual agenda," said Cathie Adams, president of the Texas Eagle Forum, a Dallas-based conservative group. "It's a travesty."
Heidrick said the United Way did not receive pressure to cut ties with the Boy Scouts.
The group cannot determine whether it has lost donations because of its affiliation with the Scouts, he said.
The Boy Scouts will remain a partner agency of the Georgetown Area United Way and the United Way of Hays County.
or donate to your local troop.
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TUL, Check out the link. Scroll to the "child abuse" section and pick an article. The predisposition of those who practice homosexual behavior to also molest children is proven fact
On the contrary, it shows the intolerance of the homosexual community in our notably socialist capitol for anyone who does not "celebrate" their lifestyle.
Dump the United Way. Give to the Scouts directly.
A United Way Capital Area partner agency http://www.uway-austin.org/communityinvestmentfund/partneragencies/junior_league_of_austin.htm :
The Junior League of Austin: Hispanic Mother/Daughter Program offers support services and resources to its student participants, preparing them for college with the assistance of their mothers.
client eligibility: Hispanic girls at targeted schools (eight middle schools and five high schools in Austin ISD)
Considering that homosexuals make up 1-2% of the population, I would expect this would be true.
The question is, what percentage of homosexual men molest children (under 18) compared to the percentage of heterosexual men who molest children.
For the answer, I turn you over to the expert on homosexual statistics.
Scripter?
Shalom.
You must not have been a Boy Scout, because had you been, youd know from experience how preposterous that suggestion is.
The Scouts are no more set up to treat homosexuality than they are set up to handle juvenile delinquents. Those problems are completely outside of their intended purpose.
Let me tell you, having a declared homosexual join the Scouts would be very disruptive influence. A homosexual boy would be subjected to some rough treatment by the other kids and have no one to share a tent with, etc. The shower room would clear out when he'd show up, or worse yet, he'd get some rough treatment if he tried to enter. You may say its not fair, but it is realty.
As far as I'm concerned, homosexuality is a serious mental disorder. It's not up to the Scouts to accommodate it. If he's on a structured road to recovery and no longer identifies as a homosexual, that's another story and perhaps certain accommodations could be made. But, that should be left up to the troop, not someone forcing an agenda on them.
I appreciate your comments. I have been a Scout Master and my son is an Eagle Scout.
I was intending to say that the child should not have a real notion of his sexuality so young. We are sexualizing children much too young in our country. When my son was going through the program, they were not talking about getting laid, they were talking about lighting f@rts.
As for the Scouts treating problems, I know of more than one potential J.D. who was set on the straight path just because of the example the boys and men of character in our Troop set for them. We didn't psychoanlyze them, we just gave them a proper standard to live up to. The same would happen with sexually confused young boys. Put them in an environment where there are true men around and they will learn from the example.
I'm with you 100% on the mental disorder part. But from my research, one important thing that homosexual boys and men need to help them come out of the lifestyle is other boys or men who accept them without being involved sexually. Shalom.
Yes, it's true that percentage wise, gays molest children at a higher rate than heterosexuals.
Even homosexual activists have admitted the 10% fallacy. The actual percentage of homosexuals is close to 2%, including bisexuals.
Quoting from here we see the following:
If 2% of the population is responsible for 20% to 40% of something as socially and personally troubling as child molestation, something must be desperately wrong with that 2%. Not every homosexual is a child molester. But enough gays do molest children so that the risk of a homosexual molesting a child is 10 to 20 times greater than that of a heterosexual.From here:
Homosexuals additionally charge that most molestation cases involve heterosexuals. One frequently-cited study, Jenny, Roesler and Poyer, 1994, published in Pediatrics, supposedly demonstrated that 98% of men who abused children self-identified as heterosexual. But in a review of the Jenny study, Dr. Paul Cameron of Family Research Institute said the researchers merely examined hospital charts: [N]either the victims, perpetrators, nor even those who prepared the charts were interviewed to discover their sexual orientation. In fact, said Cameron, in the only study (Erickson, Walbek, and Seely, 1988) in which perpetrators were asked to declare their sexual orientation, almost the opposite was found to be true: 86% of child molesters identified themselves as homosexual or bisexual.From here:...
homosexuals are at least 8-12 times more likely to molest children than are heterosexuals.
...In other words, although heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by a ratio of at least 20 to 1, homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses.More of the same from this detailed PDF report:
...
Child Molestation and the Homosexual MovementIt's quite clear the evidence supports your statement, ArGee. That is, percentagewise, homosexuals are more likely to molest children.
True. I've made it really easy to read the stats in the above post.
And that, my FRiends, is one of the greatest rip-offs of all time.
DO NOT contribute to the United Way. Rather, donate directly to the charity of your choice. Don't fall for the "donate through your workplace" scam. Why give money to the United Way, let them take their cut and give the rest to some charity you never heard of? Instead, just give the money directly.
Check out this three part series on the United Way that was printed in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel this past September:
Fewer donors, more choices put squeeze on agency; United Way struggles with identity ^
Donor choice a negligible factor at United Way ^ <<-- Particularly damning
United Way finds turf crowded ^
Personally, I prefer donating to local causes where my money has a reasonable chance of staying here in town.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.