Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boy Scouts Vs. United Way In California
CBS News ^

Posted on 12/26/2002 4:01:14 PM PST by RCW2001

CAMARILLO, Calif., Dec. 26, 2002



 (CBS/AP)



After the June 2000 Supreme Court decision which affirmed the Boy Scouts' right to ban gays, about 50 local United Way chapters pulled their financial support - but that's only about five percent of chapters nationwide.


(CBS) A Boy Scout is always supposed to be prepared, but the Ventura County, California, scouts were blindsided when, after 57 years, the local United Way stopped funding them, reports CBS News Correspondent Sandra Hughes.

"We were getting allocations from United Way of about $50,000 a year," said Dave Graska of the Ventura County Boy Scouts.

The United Way decision was made after the Boy Scouts of America announced it would exclude gays from the organization.

The charity then passed an inclusiveness policy stating it would only fund: "...agencies that provide services ... without discriminating on the basis of ... sexual orientation."

"The reality is there are a lot of people in Ventura county who happen to agree with our policy," said Dave M. Smith, president of the United Way of Ventura County.

Not major donors Denny and Allyson Weinberg, who gave $100,000 to the United Way last year.

"This was very confusing because this inclusiveness policy came out of nowhere," said Denny Weinberg. "It wasn't promoted, there was no press release, there was no letter to donors about this."

The Weinbergs were so upset they stopped giving to the United Way and launched their own fundraising effort called "Friends of Ventura County Scouts."

Their ads urge supporters to donate: "The Boy Scouts of America are making a positive difference in our community yet United Way of Ventura County is ending their support for the Scouts."

So far the group has raised almost $80,000, much more than the United Way ever planned to give.

"People love scouting, it's an American tradition, it's like baseball for heaven's sakes," said Allyson Weinberg.

After the June 2000 Supreme Court decision which affirmed the Boy Scouts' right to ban gays, about 50 local United Way chapters pulled their financial support - but that's only about five percent of chapters nationwide.

"We don't base our policy on what the United Way chapter in Lexington, Kentucky, or Fargo, North Dakota happens to think the policy should be," said Ventura County's David Smith.

But the United Way did try to compromise, offering $50,000 to an educational program affiliated with the scouts.

For now, the Ventura County scouts don't want the money.

"We respect the right of the United Way to establish its values, just as we have the right to establish ours," said scout leader Dave Graska.

A sentiment shared by many in a town now divided between two of its most cherished institutions.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: boyscouts; bsa; bsalist; scouts

1 posted on 12/26/2002 4:01:14 PM PST by RCW2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *bsa_list
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
2 posted on 12/26/2002 4:03:06 PM PST by Libertarianize the GOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
Everyone who has been duped by United Way needs to disconnect ASAP.

Despite the HUGE corporate pressure, I have refused to knowingly give one penny to these Marxist parasites so they can fund abortion and man-boy-momo relationships.

Stand strong, you do not HAVE to give any of your life's blood to United Way.

GIVE to the charity that supports your world view, not the New World Order View.
3 posted on 12/26/2002 4:06:44 PM PST by HadEnough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertarianize the GOP
I quit giving to united way when that fiasco about planned parenthood was going on about a decade ago. But why would I use United Way anyway? I can give directly to charities myself.


After taking a "tour of organizations supported by United Way" about 11 years ago, I consider them a political organization, pure and simple. I yanked my support right after that tour. My boss at the time understood.
4 posted on 12/26/2002 4:08:21 PM PST by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HadEnough
Ditto. What you said. I quit giving several years ago for similiar reasons. Even their so-called directed giving, where they allow you to select charities to send your donation to is a scam, since they simply adjust the %'age sent to the charity. Interestingly enough, there isn't the corporate pressure that there used to be.
5 posted on 12/26/2002 4:21:58 PM PST by 1riot1ranger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
Go Boy Scouts! It breaks my heart that a group that truly exists for the pure purpose of building character, and understands the risks that the Catholic Church did not, is being pilloried. It's not a don't ask and don't tell equivocation, it's building character. God Bless'em.
6 posted on 12/26/2002 4:26:29 PM PST by Thebaddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
The idiots in the United Way haven't figured it out yet... When they cut off the Boy Scouts, they force donors to give directly to the Scouts, and cut United Way completely out! In every instance, the Scouts actually get more in donations WITHOUT the United Way (plus, United Way can't skim their "cut").

We have been avoiding United Way in North Carolina for years. I also refuse to knowingly do business with any company that forces their employees to donate to United Way.

7 posted on 12/26/2002 4:28:46 PM PST by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
bttt...rto
8 posted on 12/26/2002 4:33:21 PM PST by visitor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
I specifically designated that my Missouri United Way contribution go to the Boy Scouts. They have not returned my money yet, and if they don't give it to the Boy Scouts, they will have nice little lawsuit/public relations nightmare on their hands.
9 posted on 12/26/2002 4:39:19 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HadEnough
I quit giving to the United Way, despite the pressure, over this matter. I didn't care too much for the corruption within the organization, either.

It doesn't make sense to give to them instead of giving directly to a charity, anyway. They take a cut to perpetuate themselves and to enforce their politically correct view on the world.

10 posted on 12/26/2002 4:43:27 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
It's time for some "Camarillo Brillo".

FMCDH(fz)

11 posted on 12/26/2002 4:49:34 PM PST by nothingnew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
Ditto

Give to the Scouts directly

12 posted on 12/26/2002 4:49:40 PM PST by apackof2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
LOve it!

Being "P.C." will, perhaps, be the final nail in their coffin. Corruption and over-paid administrators started the mistrust. They will have to change their tune to survive. Get ready for the U.W.'s forthcoming chameleon act.

13 posted on 12/26/2002 4:56:44 PM PST by capt. norm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
The United Way is like the environmentalist groups. They simply exist to exist. Their aim is to perpetuate themselves--and their salaries--and they don't give a flip about their supposed causes.
14 posted on 12/26/2002 4:59:15 PM PST by Pushi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
For as many years as I can remember, the United Way has coerced people in the workplace to pledge. Several bosses told me that my pledge would be noted in my evaluation for a raise.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the big bosses go to the meetings and pledge to give a certain amount. And then they brow beat their employees to give so that they can get their picture taken with a check in the newspaper.

I loathe this organization.
15 posted on 12/26/2002 5:05:18 PM PST by Conservababe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Conservababe
One boss, in 1983, I believe, wanted me to donate ONE DOLLAR a year so our team could have 100% participation. I caved, and donated the dollar, but I was young and stupid.
16 posted on 12/26/2002 5:08:21 PM PST by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
United Way is part of the United Nations
17 posted on 12/26/2002 5:11:47 PM PST by FreeSpeechZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertarianize the GOP
simple solution.....screw the UNITED WAY...let the fags & homos pay the freight for the feel good & P/C stuff.
18 posted on 12/26/2002 5:14:23 PM PST by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
Reminder to self bump... GIVE TO BOY SCOUTS...

We need more groups that will stand up to, and stop, perverted agendas from being rammed down their throats.

19 posted on 12/26/2002 5:25:26 PM PST by 69ConvertibleFirebird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pointsal
simple solution.....screw the UNITED WAY...let the fags & homos pay the freight for the feel good & P/C stuff.

yep... I make a point of NOT giving to the United Way.

Every year I tell as many people as I can about the director hiring relatives and $300,000 salary. They are a joke. I work at a Catholic Hospital and make a point of telling the CEO and CFO that I'll donate to the Hospital Trust or fund the Charity Health Van but not a dime to the United Way. Then I hand the check right to them in front of the nurses or staff present. How can they refuse?

Find out the bosses favorite charity or church or school scholarship program. Then tell them why you aren't donating to the United Way and donate the money in the bosses name to the charity of his choice by presnting him with the check made out to the other charity and not the United Way..... that way you get brownie points and screw the United Way.

20 posted on 12/26/2002 6:15:14 PM PST by Dick Vomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
Thanks for the post. My husband works for a large retailer and is pressured to give to the United Way. He always tells them he gives at Church! It is time to put United Way on notice that we aren't going to put up with them any longer.
21 posted on 12/26/2002 6:25:01 PM PST by trustandobey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #22 Removed by Moderator

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: E. Pluribus Unum
I think it is best if Boy Scouts supporters give donations directly to the organization. If someone give donations to the Boy Scouts through the United Way (UW), the UW will keep at least 10% - 15% of your donation to cover administration fees before it goes to the Boy Scouts.
24 posted on 12/26/2002 8:39:23 PM PST by Kuksool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: madg
Dear madg

Please clarify your statement "The BSA had a "problem".....

the suit that brought the gay issues to the news was the dismissal of a gay scout leader who was recruiting scouts to go to gay activities. The man brought suit against the scouts for the action. Any person (male or female) who approaches a scout in an inappropriate way will be asked to leave the organization.

Unlike the Catholic church who was sued by it's victims, the Scouts were sued by the evicted scoutmaster. They were sued after they stood up to their beliefs and acted on them.

25 posted on 12/26/2002 9:54:53 PM PST by Dan12180
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool
I think it is best if Boy Scouts supporters give donations directly to the organization.

So do I, but I give to the United Way because my company wants me to and I am grateful for the job and the paycheck, having spent more of the past four years involuntarily unemployed than I care to remember.

I despise the United Way and its politically correct ways, but the fact that I can force them to support the Boy Scouts whether they like it or not gives me a perverse sense of satisfaction.

And to be quite honest, if I did not feel obligated to give to the United Way, I would not give anything to the Boy Scouts. I believe in what they do, but that does not make my house payment. Since I am giving to the United Way anyway, I divert my semi-voluntary contribution to them.

26 posted on 12/26/2002 10:03:06 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: madg
Are you Charlie Brown's teacher?
27 posted on 12/26/2002 10:59:32 PM PST by Blue Collar Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Comment #28 Removed by Moderator

To: madg
The BSA National Council literally FOUGHT for recognition of a specific stance that is contrary to social mores.

Whose social mores? A certain specific group? Sure. The majority of Americans? I don't think so.

Claiming that this specific UW satelite "passed a policy" that caught the Boy Scouts by surprise is just ridiculous.

There are about 1600 United Way Chapters in the USA. About 2 or 3 dozen of them have passed non-discrimination policies that have caused them to stop funding their local BSA Councils. The "national" UW organization has passed no such policy. So, the fact is that only a very small minority of UW chapters have passes such policies and thus there's no reason for any BSA council to presume that their policies will fall afoul of the local UW chapter.

29 posted on 12/27/2002 9:12:07 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: madg
Corporations, organizations, municipalities (not to mention individulas) all have policies (if not laws) that are directly contrary to the BSA's "private and exclusive" perspective.

All organizations have such policies? Hardly. Now, most corporations and municipalities do. But ...

(And all of them are just as entitled to their own policies as is the BSA.)

Actually, not true at all. Corporations and municipalities have generally adopted non-discrimination policies in most cases to comply with Federal and State civil rights statutes. So, they're not entitled to their own policies; they adopt numerous policies because they're forced to by law. Whereas the BSA, being voluntary and private, is entitled to it's own policies.

30 posted on 12/27/2002 9:22:23 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: madg
It's a little hysterical to say that ANY Scout Troop or Council was "blindesided" by losing a sponsor... ANY sponsor.

I didn't find it hysterical when it happened to me.

Our Cub Scout Pack had been sponsored by our local Park District for 25 years. Then we formed a Boy Scout Troop. A year later, the BSA found itself staring at a potential lawsuit from the ACLU because it doesn't allow atheists (kind of hard for an atheist to proclaim a Duty to God ...). The Park District then informed me that they were going to drop our sponsorship, 6 weeks before our charter needed to be renewed, because "atheists pay taxes too."

Well, we got them to put it off for a year so that we could find a new sponsor without losing our charter. But I had no reason to expect that after 25 years the Board would suddenly adopt such a policy.

31 posted on 12/27/2002 9:28:42 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
A sentiment shared by many in a town now divided between two of its most cherished institutions.
Ended with a lie, didn't they.
32 posted on 12/27/2002 9:48:14 PM PST by Libertina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

To: madg
Yes. The majority of Americans believe that gays should NOT suffer invidious discrimination.

HA! I've got $10 that says the majority of Americans can't define "invidious".

I doubt that most Americans would be in favor of discrimination against homosexuals in the workplace, or in housing. But OTOH, I'm pretty sure that they are quite in favor of allowing discrimination against homosexuals when it comes to whether or not they should be able to be in positions where they'd be responsible for leading and setting examples for youth.

So my comment on "invidious" actually has a serious point - what would the majority of Americans view as "invidious" in this case?

I don't think that's an accurate observation when it involves orientation. For goodness sake, they're trying to PASS a federal orientation non-discrimation act right now... because none exist. Only about one-third of States have such protection... and only a handful of municipalities above that.

Hm. Perhaps the reason only a minority of municipalities and states have such laws is because there's not majority support for protecting homosexuals against discrimination. Occam's Razor and all that.

Well... although I'm sorry to hear of your difficulties... whose fault is it that you didn't "expect it?" Who is to blame for not seeing THAT one coming from a mile away? Who was responsible for your "disaster recovery" plans? Who was supposed to "be prepared?" Didn't you realize that the BSA had convinced SCOTUS that they were a private and exclusive organization? You've had more than two years to realize: "Holy cow... things have changed."

I didn't mention it, but this all happened in 1997, well before Dale got to the Supremes and public notice. The Park District's been pretty decent about it, too. They still let us use their facilities for a fund-raiser every year, and we do a service project for them.

34 posted on 12/30/2002 5:36:37 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

To: madg
And, although the public agrees with a Supreme Court decision allowing the Boy Scout organization to prohibit gays from becoming Scout leaders, they disagree with removing from their posts "model Boy Scout leaders" who happen to be gay.

Well, according to the BSA, by definition a gay man can't be a fit model. In fact, it's the kind of model that an "avowed" homosexual presents that forms the BSA's whole objection.

invidious: Likely to incur or produce ill will, or to provoke envy; hateful; as, invidious distinctions.

I believe that any discrimination based solely on orientation would be invidious.

Well, then, it seems that according to Gallup, most Americans don't find the BSA's policies invidious.

36 posted on 12/31/2002 4:50:29 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: RCW2001
United Way does not honor your requests for gifts to be specifically designated. If the donor named organization is a member of the local United Way chapter, the designated gift is simply part of the previously allocated amount. If the donor named organization is not a member of teh local United Way chapter, the gift goes to United Way's general fund.

Each member agrees not to engage in competitive fund raising with United Way as the price of membership. thus they become utterly dependent upon United Way. Where is the anti-trust aspects of this addressed? Nowhere!
38 posted on 01/01/2003 7:58:51 AM PST by anton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
One of my special Christmas gifts to myself was going over to the Headquarters of the Daniel Webster Council, BSA and writing out a substantial check just before Christmas. The young lady who accepted it looked a little choked up, but not as much as the pukes at the United Way who didn't lay a finger on that money!
39 posted on 01/01/2003 8:14:32 AM PST by Redleg Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001
"We don't base our policy on what the United Way chapter in Lexington, Kentucky, or Fargo, North Dakota happens to think the policy should be," said Ventura County's David Smith.

Arrogant intellectual ass! Maybe you ought to consider it...unless of course, you want your organization to be reduced to the Queer United Way, dependent on queers for all of your funding.

40 posted on 01/01/2003 8:19:18 AM PST by Redleg Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anton
Each member agrees not to engage in competitive fund raising with United Way as the price of membership. thus they become utterly dependent upon United Way.

Actually, they just agree not to fund raise during the time of year that the UW is running it's fund-raising drive. The rest of the year they are free to fundraise.

41 posted on 01/01/2003 12:33:22 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson