Replies

The change in policy applies to any non-profit organization which will not embrace and condone homosexual activity or will not embrace and condone those that promote homosexual activity.

Exactly, the change in policy is legal. The governmental entity is not discriminating against the Boy Scouts, they are setting a policy which says taxpayer supported non-profits can't discriminate based on sexual preferrence. There is nothing wrong with that.

Berkely wishes to promote, support and promulgate homosexual activity within the community on the tax payers dime -the Boy Scouts do not serve that bizarre goal; as such, Berkeley will not finance "homophobic" & "heteronormative" Boy Scout activities e.g. camping...

So what? The elected officials of Berkley can spend the taxpayers money as they see fit. They set policies for the town regarding the use of public lands, they did nothing illegal here.

No one can discriminate against a subjective feeling held by another e.g. "homosexuality"... Discrimination applies to objective things only such as activities or innate characteristics e.g. "race"...

Well, the courts, all levels including the Supreme Court disagree with you. The city did nothing wrong here.

So what?

The attempted homosexualization of society is what it is. Something I oppose. Thats what!

The elected officials of Berkley can spend the taxpayers money as they see fit. They set policies for the town regarding the use of public lands, they did nothing illegal here.

Thanks for stating the obvious which by the way means nothing in regards to legitimate opposition to the homosexual agenda that Berkely promotes on the taxpayers dime.

Well, the courts, all levels including the Supreme Court disagree with you.

Again -the obvious -and again, no relevance...

The city did nothing wrong here.

You mean nothing illegal; however, promoting homosexual activity is very very wrong...