Congratulations to Rector Rich and the leadership at St. Luke's for this compassionate, courageous decision. It's also encouraging to see that our local chapter is working to make the Scouts inclusive. Sadly, we have felt that we've had no choice but to keep our boys from scouting due to the national organization's bigotry.

I am very proud of St. Luke's, the site of a meeting I attend weekly where there is no discrimination.

Two thoughts.....1. How about the troop signing a declaration opposing the national stance, allowing them to stay at St. Luke's and 2. the troop" doesnt check credentials at the door".....maybe they should start, in order to weed out the potential child abusers,who are heterosexual and not homosexual in most cases.I would much prefer a gay couple as my next door neighbor rather than a heterosexual, beer swillin' ,wife beatin',profanity usin' manly man.

I am so impressed and excited about St Luke's choice to promote equality and stand up against discrimination. I know Pack 4 is not guilty of any wrong doing, it is the organization. We too kept our son out of scouting because of the bigotry.

I hope pressure like this keeps up on BSA until they reverse their stance. Nicely done St. Luke's.

Bravo St Luke's.

It almost makes me want to rejoin a church. Good for you, St Lukes!

Fortunately for these young boys and other young boys around the nation, there are people who are striving for social change in a more positive way. There were many ways that this charter group could have sent a message to national and to the community without affecting the children of this community who have absolutely no control over a nation policy. To exclude a group of people because they exclude a group of people seems to me to be the wrong lesson to teach our children. I have never heard the caring lesbian mothers who are working a a national level to be den mothers ever suggest kicking out scout groups. Fortunately they are more patient. During the time of segregation would you have suggested closing down schools as a method to promote social change? At some point the many people who are working to make things better in a helpful way, will likely succeed in creating a better organization but there will be no organization if everyone acts in a like way. Other sponsors have said, “We don’t agree with every policy of every organization we support, nor would we expect them to agree with us on everything. Our belief is that change at any organization must come from within to be successful and sustainable.” I'd like to thank the groups who patiently support the boys and at the same time have faith that real change is possible.

Why not make it coed? And, include atheists ... like the church does of course.

Does the church accept Muslims? If not, it appears they are discriminating!

When Jesus stopped the stoning of the woman accused of being a prostitute, did he tell her "Go and sin no more" before or after he agreed to intercede on her behalf? I don't think a church-any church- can survive by being "exclusive" in order to prove its "inclusiveness".

If you shut down scouting in socially liberal states, you should not expect a change in national policy. There will be noone to fight for it!

WOW, I am truly impressed, I hope this story emanating from a quaint little town in NE goes viral! And why not, it is every bit as righteous as our forebear Roger Williams! His freedom of religion stance still reverberates globally! Great move!

So St. Lukes is going to allow gay marriages in the church as well? I don't believe there has ever been one there. If you're going to stand up against scouts, then they must support gay marriage in their church as well right?

Does the church accept, endorse, encourage polygamy in its membership?

The message is simple, the church is taking a stand against those who hate and vilify. No surprise that those haters in our midst cannot accept this! This church chose to speak out against hate, commendable and courageous!

Do the scouts hate and vilify by expressing their beliefs?
Does the Catholic Church hate and vilify by expressing their beliefs?

Jim, there are many people who would like change and work for change especially in this state where noone has ever been removed from scouting for their sexual orientation. This is a very hurtful way to introduce these young boys to gay rights issues. An eye for an eye. But now you've gone on to label people as hateful and hate begets hate as one would expect from the way this group decided to take a stand.

If you ask any scout packs or troops you'll find little support for the National Council's decision but as scouters we feel the program still has it's merits and we never ask scouts sexual orientation or religious beliefs. I guess it's like the military's don't ask/don't tell policy. Maybe the church could have given the pack sufficient notice or let them stay until they find a new place to meet. Not doing so harms the children that don't even know what gay means yet. These are 1st-5th graders mind you. As a cubmaster I would never broach the topic of religion or sexual orientation, even if council asked me to. Scouts do a lot to give back to the community and teach them to be more productive members of society. They learn topics that have been lost in our school system. Many CEOs of major companies are eagle scouts, google it. Since scouting focuses on it's 2 deep leadership and safety rules of scouting, I wish they would change their decision too.

“Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? “Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."
Matthew 7:3

TBII - At St. Luke's - ALL are welcome to worship with us and take communion - no exceptions. I think that's the point. ALL are welcome. St. Luke's is abiding by their principals - just as the BSA is abiding by theirs.

Jean, so they're welcome to marry in the church as well right? Otherwise you're inviting them to join the church but still discriminating against them aren't you? Heterosexuals are the only ones allow to attend and marry in that case. Do you allow aethists to join the church as well and take communion?

This is an amazing thread of comments, EG is certainly no microcosm of the US, just the opposite, it was recently cited or noted as being among the richest and for being the stingy-est or least charitable towns, deep pockets and short arms! The wealthy retaining every last dime, charity, no, not this year! There certainly is a correlation to this selfishness and lack of support or tolerance for gays, something needs to be addressed, not sure what it is or how to begin, but there certainly is a stark deficiency of enlightenment. When support weighs in for a politician who advocates that pregnant rape victims give birth and raise the child of the rapist, certainly gives one pause, doesn't it, and that almost half the states have no laws restricting custody for the rapist, well, I just don't know, or maybe it's me being too judgmental. Time for this country to do some reflecting, take a walk in the teenage rape victim's shoes who is being forced to relive the violent rape every minute of her life. Or the gay Cub Scout being ostracized for feelings that he is utterly confused about, has compassion left society or has society lost its compassion.

I'm very happy to see St. Luke's and Rector Rich take a stand against hate and discrimination but I am even happier to see such positive remarks from fellow EG'ers!

Rector Tim Rich put his name right out there! And spoke for his entire congregation, I love it! Freedom of speech in all its glory, thank you Patch.com and for letting the rest of us express our opinions, BUT, I would like Patch to go one step further and promote this freedom by pulling the cloak off those who wish to hide behind a moniker. Let's have everyone be proud of who they are and proud of their opinions by stating who you really are. Let's keep it real, anyone can hide behind a keyboard and bash someone but how about we step out into the light of day, how about it Patch, real names, real people, real opinions! Be first to support true transparency, accountability, and responsibility!

I support gay rights and I belong to a church that supports gay rights. I have also had two sons in scouting and served as a volunteer leader in Pack 3 and Troop 2. \I oppose BSA's anti-gay policies, but I also recognize the good things scouting offers, particularly in this area where scouters do not teach homophobia.

I could understand St. Luke's making a long-term decision to ask Pack 4 to move, but pulling the rug out like this at the last minute appalls me. This isn't true liberalism, this is using little boys as pawns. St. Luke's has some things to be ashamed of.

Two wrongs don't make it right

What a wonderful statement made by St. Luke's. When will all religious institutions recognize that we are ALL God's children? I am Jewish, but I believe Jesus would cringe at the intolerance preached by so many religious factions, be they extreme or mainstream.

I didn't understand the speck and log story earlier but now I think I get it but can anyone explain to me why the Episcopal church is being judged at a local level and thre scouts are not? Both are kind and compassionate to those with different beliefs. The difference is that the scouts are being condemned for a national anti-gay policy and the Episcopals are not for their policy against gay marriage.

I am so proud of St. Luke's. As for the boys themselves, it is an example of what scouting teaches them. That's why so many Eagle scouts turned in their Eagle awards in protest of this policy. Perhaps if the boys and their families agreed and protested the policy, then there would be change from within the organization. I am so tired of discrimination in the name of God and religion, and St.Luke's is rejecting this and affirming what religion is really all about. Accepting all people.

I'm not sure because the Bible doesn't go into detail....but I wonder....did Jesus tell Matthew he had to stop collecting taxes before he could follow Him or did He welcome all to His table? Obviously, this thinking goes both ways, but who in the story above is representing Jesus Christ and who is the (comparatively speaking) secular organization?

I think we need to reflect on what Jesus would have done given analogous circumstances. I don't pretend to be a theologian, but I honestly believe based on what The Bible tells us about Jesus' reaction when in the presence of sinners, and in the presence of children, that he would have embraced these kids, not thrown them out as if they were reviled. Where is the message and the compassion and the love of Jesus in the actions of St. Luke's?

I think that this has been an excellent discussion, lots of constructive opinions, the absence of rancor has been refreshing. The cubbies will find a new den in someone's garage, and they will have been part of this catalytic and galvanizing moment. I do not believe that BSA will continue this bias very much longer, heads at the top will roll before the organization's bottom falls out. The Eagles have spoken and I, for one, have heard them. Humanitarian badges for all of them, and you BSA guys at the top, no soup for you!

My and husband and I attend St. Luke's and we are very proud of Rev. Tim Rich and the vestry to stand against the BSA's decision to discriminate against gays. My husband is an Eagle Scout and I was cub scout leader in my home years ago. It has been too long in coming that the leaders and scouts should stand against their un-Christian hierarchy that pretend to be honorable stewards of God's words to be our brother's keeper and to honor God's wishes. It is time for the Scouting organization to fight these rules and follow God's commands for He created us all!

Local scout groups give a lot to Saint Luke's, this is a shame this had to happen. Often times scouts are seen at the local Saint Luke's dinners, lending a hand. Troop 2 EG also made a great donation to the church to help with their dinners. So now will the church turn away people who strive to help the community and the church? I think this could have been resolved in another way, but an inconvenience to a cub group can greatly effect other Troops and packs in the area, as it goes, " a threat one is a threat to all". I think hurting kids in a youth group is not the way to solve a large issue eminant in the program. My personal opinion is let BSA do as it wishes. No one tells you how to run your family or the way you do things. Also look at the situation from a standpoint of a scout...

In 2014, the leadership of the excutive board of the Boy Scouts will change. AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson will be taking over leadership. Stephenson and other members such as Ernst & Young CEO James Turley have vowed to make the Boy Scouts more gay friendly. These CEO are in charge of companies that have won praise from activists for their policies on gay rights. Perhaps everyone could just be patient and support these young folks until the opportunity for change arises in 2014.

"Let the children come to me."

Unlike those who've sued Christian-run businesses for declining to host same-sex weddings and such, I believe everybody should be able to determine access to their own property. But this reeks of political vanity... hurting local children, explicitly ostracizing them as unworthy to gather on church property (which, I gather, is available for other non-Episcopal activities),to make a statement with little reach beyond the East Greenwich Patch. And that with minimal warning and no effort, at least as reported, to help in locating a new meeting place.

Throwing down the "gauntlet" is one thing. Throwing it in the faces of children is quite another.

Buch of hypocrites! You discriminate against gays just like the BSA! God job taking it out on 6 ye olds hope youre all very proud! I know Jesus would be, way to love your neighbors as thyself!

More on Randall Stephenson, AT&T CEO and the next President of the executive board of the Boy Scout (2014). He is not only supports an end to the ban but is committed to ending it. AT&T has a 100% ranking on HRC’s Corporate Equality Index, and has been honored as a top place to work for LGBT employees. In addition, AT&T has active LGBT employee groups. Banned Den mother Jennifer Tyrrell says of Stepheson's imminent rise, “This is a huge new development and could mean that the Boy Scouts are preparing to end this anti-gay policy sooner rather than later. I’m very impressed with Mr. Stephenson’s leadership and his new commitment to helping the Boy Scouts stop discriminating, a position that is totally consistent with AT&T’s record as a champion of fairness and equality in the workplace.” The next opportunity for change could actually be as early as 2013. If you would like to help, sign Jennifer Tyrrell's petition on change.org

Several of EC's comments were to me, and this forum doesn't allow replies to replies, as I was trying to step away from the mic, but would like to speak to those comments. David and Goliath, both of our views are solid, because neither is a perfect fit, but still quite sound, you could even factor in a little King Solomon and the two women-one baby story, as Rector Rich essentially put the cubbies out there to make his point, knowing that the sword would never come down, but would instead bring truth to the forefront. Almost like Romney's callous sounding remark, "I'm not concerned about the really poor, they have their safety nets" I haven't viewed the cubbies as collateral damage because their inconvenience will be rectified, and they were not holding the slingshot that slew Goliath, although one could view the cubbies as the stone that took down the beast. One thing that I am absolutely certain about is that the kids will find a new place to gather, I didn't realize that there are 50 or so, 50 years ago we had maybe 10, but if there is one thing you can count on is that this group of scouts and leaders is ALL about resourcefulness, if they have to pitch tents on Academy Field, they will do what it takes to hold the Pack together. My hope is that the new BSA leadership will restore those Eagles who sacrificed their awards in protest, and to address those concerned that these kids are too young to gain from this lesson, maybe so, but they will remember being party to it.

Thank you, Katie! We all seem to disagree with the national "don't ask, don't tell" policy of the BSA, but we are stuck on the local decision of St. Luke's and how it is negatively impacting our local cub scouts.

I mentioned in an earlier post that the national BSA administration will probably not even hear about the St. Luke's decision. But, why shouldn't they? A more productive action would be for us all to sign Zach Wahls’ petition on change.org (Boy Scouts: Stop the secrecy! Allow your Board to VOTE to end the ban on gay scouts and leaders) and the ones Katie mentions by Jennifer Tyrrell (“CEO of AT&T: Urge the Boy Scouts to Drop Ban on Gay Leaders and Troops” and “Boy Scouts of America: Reinstate Cub Scout leader who was removed for being gay”). We can share these petitions on our Facebook pages. We can even write old fashioned letters to the BSA:
Bob Mazzuca is the chief executive and Wayne Perry is national president of the Boy Scouts of America. The HQ address is:

The National Boy Scouts of America
1325 W. Walnut Hill Lane
Irving, Texas 75015-2079

Whether you have children in scouting or not, these are things we can all do to help change the policy. Kicking our young cub scouts out of St. Luke's won't have a direct impact. I suspect that the St. Luke's decision makers hoped that an indirect grass roots effort might result, and while I might not agree with St. Luke's approach, I can't argue with their desired outcome.

FIREFLY, how about flying out into the light of day rather than hiding being a tiny "firefly". Show your face rather than the cowardly way of calling yourself "firefly". Why not host these cub scouts in your own home as I did many years ago? We went to many interesting places, that included the cub scouts climbing all over the National Guard helicopters at Quonset, visiting the State house in session, making homemade kites and many other wonderful projects. Or why don't you offer your church for the activities if you see nothing wrong with the discrimination against gays? Science has now confirmed that gays are born this way with the blessing of God who created them! Who is worthy of condemning them?? Does that please God?? Frankly, the groups are too large and would be better to be broken into neighborhood dens as we did. But, that would require moms and dads to do a little extra in hosting them in their homes. Is anyone up to the task?

I stand corrected, did not realize it was demeaning, my comments were nothing less than totally supportive of the pack, so no apology will be forthcoming, but I am earnestly appreciative to Katie for her most germane and enlightening contributions to this thread.

FIREFLY, Why don't you come out into the light of day? Without that, who can verify your claims? If your church has agreed to be the host, then the situation is resolved. We believe St. Luke's felt it was supporting this policy of continued descrimation. But, the BSA policy needs to change NOW (not patiently, as "patiently" has gone on way too long! That is the true discrimination. Why don't you start an immediate petition to the BSA NOW throughout East Greenwich in all the public places to get the BSA to have these descriminatory leaders resign so that the policy can be changed at once?

Instead of the church having to ban the troop (which you know those on the right will pounce upon as making kids suffer for the politics of adults), with many Scout leaders against this ridiculous anti-gay policy, how about if the church and troop stand together in criticism/defiance of the national board's policy? Sure, national may try to pull the troop's charter, but then they would be the ones denying the kids the benefits of Scouting. You know some in the media will try to make Pastor Rich the villain in this. Instead, let the national organization be the villain if they want to enforce this misbegotten policy.

I don't know that anybody in this discussion has supported discrimination against gays, but Jan and Sam are now suggesting that Firefly,or anyone else who would be willing to host Cub Scouts must therefore support discrimination against gays. That's not just false, it's classically false. In logic it's called a false dichotomy, a variation on "if you're not with me you're against me." Or in other words, if you don't agree with me on how to achieve the desired end, you opposed that goal. People of good will can disagree on how to accomplish good ends. LEt's get away from making false accusations like that.

I also want to note that making blithe assumptions that relocating the pack is no big deal are unrealistic and incredibly annoying to anyone who has ever volunteered time to run such youth organizations. If St. Luke's had allowed them to continue to use the space for a while so they would have time to find a space, that would have been civilized. Trying to line up a space quickly when recruiting time is coming up is not something you can laugh off, although I suppose it's easy when people are filled with self-righteousness and busily patting themselves on the back for their supposed goodness.

I am a member of St. Luke’s and I support Fr. Tim and the Vestry’s decision one hundred percent. With regard to the children, themselves, I would rather be criticized for my support of this policy than allow anyone to feel abandoned and unwanted for being gay. As a mother, I wouldn’t ever want any young person to feel like they don’t belong just because of who they are. That’s why I support this decision.

I cannot speak to the timing regarding when the decision was made, when they notified the scouts, or how soon the scouts will need space. However, as a member of the community, I am sorry if this has been disruptive for these young people. I know how challenging it is to keep them out of issues like this.

Regarding meeting space, there are many public options for meeting space at the schools, Swift Community Center, rec building and the police station. I believe the school department still makes a special exception for the scouts to use any of the school buildings with the normal usage fee waived. However, there may be an additional fee if the activity is held on the weekends. For the school facilities, Contact Bob Wilmarth at 398-1241 or rwilmarth@egsd.net. For Swift Community Center or the rec building, contact Cathy Bradley at 86-8626 or cbradley@eastgreenwichri.com; and for the police station community room, contact Deb Gregory at 38-1241 or dgregory@eastgreenwichri.com. I certain these people will go out of their way to help find a space.

As a last comment, I personally know many of the bloggers in this discussion such as Jim Halsband, Bill Pett and Justin Katz. They are all fine people and I respect their views. There are some issues for which it is very difficult to find common ground. However…as a community, we can come together and make sure the kids have a place to meet. We can support our houses of worship for standing by their beliefs. And, as individuals, we can continue to work towards making sure that no child, adolescent, young adult or adult is ostracized or made to feel less than because of their sexual orientation. This truly is the civil rights issue of our era and I don’t apologize for taking a stand against it.

My entry into this discussion was entirely with regard to Rector Rich's action, which I find to have been abominable. Keep in mind that he was a close associate of the figure whose elevation to bishop caused international controversy, bordering on schism, within his Church. Not being an Episcopalian, I'm not inclined to offer opinion on that matter, here, but I would suggest that application of that approach on the local level is like applying a giant spike in the heart of a community.

On the broader debate, though, I wonder whether due consideration is being given to the predicament that the Boy Scouts face. For the Cub Scouts, sexual orientation is absolutely irrelevant, I'd say, for both the scouts and the participating adults, inasmuch as den mothers are allowed and I believe reasonable people (Rector Rich perhaps excluded) will agree that it would be inappropriate to propagandize children of that age in either direction as part of scouting.

But as a former teenage boy and a former Boy Scout, I'd suggest that it doesn't evidence bigotry to think that special care must be taken when absorbing certain examples of "social evolution." It's well and good to proclaim the "civil rights issue of our era," but we risk losing sight of messy human reality in our righteousness.

What a shame that we can't have a candid public discussion of such matters.

Katie, I cannot speak for Father Tim, but I believe he felt the need to act because of the re-affirmation of the policy issued by the BSA on July 17th. For me, I simply believe that any house of worship, in this case, St. Luke’s, has the right to make their own decisions with regard to support for an organization (ie: allowing them to use their facilities). The individual scouts and their families are always, always welcomed, embraced and accepted for who they are. By the way, we have a scout working on his Eagle Project who is trying to help kids in the Dominican Republic by collecting backpacks and school supplies – there is a drop off box at St. Luke’s if anyone can donate something.

Jean Ann and Heather, I think that you are missing an important piece of the dynamic, probably the most important part. You do not seem to be recognizing the great importance of the intermediary. You move between the individual and whole. Think of it in three levels. the individual, the band of brothers and the tribe. Individuals can achieve their own glory but they often focused on work for their band and they learn to trust each other through common challenges. They're a team. No individual can succeed while their band fails. Enter into the picture the band of little brothers. The band of big brothers teaches the little ones and is responsible for them. Obviously the band of little brothers grows up to be the big ones. Probably only every four years when the entire tribe meets does the band of brothers even think about or feel like part of the tribe. You have just removed a band of brothers, for a tribal policy while still supporting individuals. The boys who would ask you for individual help are Boy Scouts. You are telling them that their band of little brothers, part of their scout family, is not welcome in their church family. Also the cub scouts you ask to leave today are the ones who will or would have (that is the question) have asked church for help tomorrow. There are a lot of interdependencies. It can feel very complicated in the real lives of people.

I don't want to say much more unless I have something new to say, but I have to respond to Heather's statement that I misconstrued the Hopps' comment. They invited Firefly to take the pack in and said, specifically, "if you see nothing wrong with the discrimination against gays." That's a pretty clear condemnation against anyone who finds a home for the pack. And it's still a logical fallacy--someone can want to work with Cub Scouts or find a home for Cub Scouts and still be opposed to homophobia quite strongly. It is a false statement to say that anyone who believes in a goal must agree with one particular strategy to achieve that goal, or that anyone who rejects a particular strategy must not feel strongly about the issue (to use Heather's approximate words). What gives anyone the right to say that?

On a couple of other angles: one of the biggest progblems in tackling this issue, a problem that no one has mentioned so far, is that many people of faith do believe that homosexuality is a moral flaw, for example Catholic, Mormon, and probably some or many fundamentalist Protestant churches and even synagogues. If BSA does liberalize under new leadership, the best we can probably hope for is a local option for indidual troops and packs--anything further would drive many churches out of the organization. Is that such a good thing? Do we want to move more and more to an America where people who disagree can't work together?

Bill, your second paragraph is very significant. And I would think it would parrallel the difficulties people of faith have on supporting gay marriage. There is another conclusion to be drawn from the BSA problem though. I have read that with the new president and AT&T CEO R. Stephenson, the BSA might risk the change and the Mormon money because the deep pockets of AT&T would easily make up for the fiscal gap. AT&T is already in it for the long haul as the recent heros of new Summit Bechtel Reserve investing a considerable amount into it's completion. And while Stephenson is committed to the cause the one who is truly passionate and the one to watch is Ernst & Young CEO James Turley.

On a local level, Mr. Pett, I have heard that there are some gays who are supporting accepting the cub scouts into their churches including a former scout leader. I have to say I am not surprised. Good eggs.

And regarding diversity of thought, we are on the same page. I think that it is so important for growth. I actually seek it out too. Which is why I consider Harrison Bergeron is a horror movie. But some people like conformity. I think that it is comforting or helps their confidence. And when people think of their political bent, it’s usually just left or right and doesn’t take into consideration authoritarian vs. libertarian. The decision here seemed more authoritarian rather than libertarian to me. More Pope John Paul II than Gandhi. When you spoke of it not being truly liberal I think that that is where you might have had a disconnect. I think that they might have been viewing it on a linear scale rather than a political compass.

We do need to learn to disagree and listen to what the other person is saying, Maybe it;s too much TV. Actually yours and Justin's post were the most interesting to me and I think you are quite different politically. I've popped over to his blog and I thought it was thought-inspiring like his posts. I bet the you two would have worthy debates.

Regarding scouts, I don't find it to be very political so I'm not sure I'd classify it as expanding our horizons. I also don't feel that I need to justify my participation. I probably should. It's probably a bit of stubborn independence but I feel more connected to my region than the nation and as you said we don't teach homophobia here. And when a boy does discover he is gay, I have not seen it be a problem here. He seems to be protected.

The Story of the Almost Banning at Yawgoog Scout Camp. Some time ago, a boy came out at Yawgoog and they were going to have him leave for it. When his mates discovered this, they devised a plan. All of the boys on staff walked off the job to support him and they had to let him stay. THAT is the Band of Brothers. It is what boys seek in scouts and what they fight to keep. It's just their nature. And it is because of incidences like the Almost Banning that make it seem simply wrong IMO to punish the boys for the opinions of adults. If the gay boys are being protected, I would hope that openly gay men could wait it out since they are adults and not ruin the fun for the boys.

The other challenge when a boy discovers that he is gay is the same for all of the boys. They're just busy with their boyfriends and girlfriends. Other things seem more important.

Bill, Best BSA Discrimination Web Site
http://www.bsa-discrimination.org/index.html
and Blog
http://www.bsa-discrimination.org/blog/
Check out last months "Inclusive BSA? LGBT Youth" and "Inclusive Councils" and "Returning an Eagle Award"

Can't find other article, Bill. Excerpt from "Inclusive Councils"
http://www.bsa-discrimination.org/blog/2012/08/03/inclusive-councils/

"In 2001, the presidents from the largest BSA councils (Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, New York, San Francisco, and Minneapolis) drafted a resolution that would ban sexual orientation discrimination within the BSA. The BSA’s professional staff was adamantly opposed to any change in their discrimination policies and sent letters to council scout executives attacking these volunteer BSA leaders and telling professional scouters to oppose the resolution.

By February 2002, the BSA rejected any and all calls to drop its discrimination policies. This rejection was problematic for many of the councils who signed off on the 2001 resolution. In an effort to stem the exodus of community support (financial and otherwise) from their local program, many of these councils adopted “non-discrimination,” “inclusive,” or “tolerance” policies. The news media bought these policies as evidence that the local councils were defying the national council in Texas and that openly gay scouts were accepted as members. Not so fast!.

Two of these councils – Philadelphia and Boston – attempted to adopt a non-discrimination policy that included sexual orientation. They were threatened by the BSA national council of having their council charter revoked, if they continued with their non-discrimination policy,"

Scouter,
Perhaps it never occurred to you that these boys (ages 6 to 10) may, in fact, know what gay means--some of them know children raised by gay or lesbian parents, have gay or lesbian relatives, and there are certainly LGBT role models in sports, entertainment, politics, history. My 7-year old son not only knows what gay means, he knows that the Boy Scouts do not welcome his parents and many of their close friends as members. No one is calling for the dissolution of Pack 4, but when the Boy Scouts reaffirmed their discriminatory policy, local councils probably should have had a contingency plan re: meeting space.