Kinda late for trolling...don't you think?
The crux of the matter is that you are being morally neutral. That stance doesn't really work, because you wind up falling on one side or the other. Same sex acts are not morally neutral, nor are they a benign condition like race or ethnic origin. Engaging in same sex acts is a choice, and it is not a good choice. The Boy Scouts also made a choice - a choice to exclude practicing homosexuals from its ranks. And that is a good choice.
Look what happened in the Catholic Church when they DIDN'T make that choice. So to remain morally neutral on this issue means that you side with the homosexual infiltration of the C. Church and the moral devastation that has followed.
IOW, the Boy Scouts have every right - and indeed, every obligation - to protect boys from the known predator influence of homosexuals, and this should be applauded and supported, not the opposite.
First - The united way conrtibuted to them before any of this sort of thing came to light. They found them to be a worthwhile cause. The united way changed their rules, the BSA didn't.
Second - People on here have the right, as does UW, to say they no longer feel an organization is worth sending money to for various reasons. The UW changed it's mind, and now many here are.
Do you want to play that game? Fine. Let's defund all the special items that cater to gay/lesbian/bisexual/transexual organizations and people. It comes out my taxes and I object.
The property was a gift to the city. The city didn't pay for it. The funds are going from the BSA to the city, not the other way around, to the tune of millions of dollars in the past in capital improvements and maintenance and staffing expense, and another $1.7 million now being put into the property that other organizations as well as the BSA use. Now the city wants to take that, apparently without compensation.