Debate about gay members unlikely to end well for Scouts

Yesterday was Scout Sunday in the United Methodist churches that sponsor more than 11,000 Boy Scout troops and Cub Scout packs. That figure ranks the Methodists second among all sponsors of Scout units, right behind the Mormons and ahead of the Catholics.

Together, those three churches essentially own the franchise for nearly half of all Scout units, serving two in five boys in the program nationwide. Including all other faith-based organizations, both figures rise to roughly two-thirds.

That’s about half of what you need to know to understand the difficulty the Boy Scouts of America faces as it deals with calls to admit gay youth and adults after 103 years of disallowing them.

The other half is that pressure put on the BSA by secular groups, such as businesses and large non-profits, comes largely in the form of financial contributions they withhold from the organization until it meets their core conviction that excluding gays is wrong.

Which runs counter to a core conviction for many of the BSA’s largest religious sponsors that homosexuality is a sin.

It’s no surprise, then, that the Scouts’ board members decided Wednesday to wait until May to decide whether to keep the ban or lift it completely or in part, by allowing local Scout groups to decide whether to admit gays.

No one should expect their decision, whatever it is and whenever it comes, to resolve this conflict of convictions. Or to portend a bright long-term future for the BSA.

It would not last long as an organization that allowed some local units’ policies to, in the eyes of other local units’ sponsors, violate the Scout Oath’s dictum to keep oneself “morally straight.” A house divided against itself will not stand.

Its secular donors and ex-donors make clear the BSA will continue to lose critical funding if it keeps the ban. Its dominant cohort of religious sponsors make it equally plain they will not countenance ending the ban.

Anyone who understands the vital role played by Scouting’s sponsoring organizations – as I do, having spent 11 years as a Cub Scout and then Boy Scout, eventually serving in a multi-state, regional role — knows the threat the religious groups issued is an existential one for the BSA.

The charters for the troops they sponsor are up for renewal every December, so the fall could be both severe and swift. The churches could render the BSA a shell of its current self, if not dead, as soon as next year if they stopped sponsoring Scout units.

So, many of us wonder if those seeking change are ignorant of the BSA’s structure, naive about the likely fallout, or just less interested in its fate than their agenda.

All the more so, because most disputes about the ban — like almost all fights within the BSA, frankly — center on adults who used to be Scouts or adults who want to be Scout leaders. That is, they chiefly center on “adults,” not “boys.”

It would be far simpler if the debate were only about the boys: only about who learns how to tie knots and how not to burn eggs over a campfire. There has long been a de facto “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy for youths in Scouting. Simply making that official might assuage faith groups’ concerns while expanding access for boys.

But it wouldn’t comfort those who demand a complete change, those who know national treasures make good trophies, and those who would prefer the BSA serve no one if it won’t include them.

– By Kyle Wingfield

Find me on Facebook or follow me on Twitter

229 comments Add your comment

gdrla

February 11th, 2013
9:33 am

just take out the words gay, homosexual, or similar & insert the word BLACK, Colored, or other racial designations – this perfectly plays out the same drama & hysteria that played out 40+ years ago with racial integration & desegration – it’s all a bunch of BS – I found out in later years that a couple or 3 of my fellow scouts were gay – we shared tents together on weekend or summer camping/hiking expeditions, went to national jamborees together, etc., & I was never once propositioned.

As to the adults in leadership positions – if they can control their urges and impulses then they should serve – procedures are already in place for the majority of society – and yes, I am aware that things happen – I work for the GA prison system – but get real people – it’s gonna happen – it is just a question of how long, how easy or rough will the road to the destination be, etc. And (full disclosure) my Grandson (12 years old) is a Scout – if some adult leader did happen to molest him I have a plan & procedure in place to deal with it. But my grandson has been counseled & advised – we are monitoring the situation -

middle of the road

February 11th, 2013
9:33 am

“From the BSA founder Baden-Powell himself: “We aim for the practice of Christianity in their everyday life and dealings, and not merely the profession of theology on Sundays”

And I say again – if the BSA wants to be a solely Christian Organization – they should market themselves as such. No Jews allowed. No Muslims allowed. No agnostics or atheists allowed.

Just don’t pretend that you are just a camping and service organization if your true motives are to introduce religion. Where are the Bilble reading badges?

The way it will splinter the BSA is if it becomes just a Christian organization that doesn’t want inclusiveness, then perhaps a second organization devoted to the “other” side of BSA – the camping, the socialization, the service would come along and take the donors money from the BSA. And the churches could support the “old-time” BSA.

Google "NEA" and "union"

February 11th, 2013
9:35 am

Given a choice of forfeiting donors—or forfeiting one’s principles—there can be little doubt which option Scouting’s founder, Lord Baden-Powell, would choose.

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

February 11th, 2013
9:36 am

Aesop is brilliant. You know, because homosexual is synonymous with child predator.

Oh, I see, now there is a distinction between deviants, some deviants are better than other deviants, yeah, I’m so sure.

bu2

February 11th, 2013
9:37 am

@MOR
You probably haven’t been involved with scouts. They are a faith based organization. They are open to all religions, but they are not intended for atheists or agnostics.

middle of the road

February 11th, 2013
9:38 am

“Interesting group…seems to me that the Catholics and Mormons should keep their eyes on the rampant sex scandals that are internal to their organizations.”

You could let each BSA troop to determine its own theology. Mormon troops could teach polygamy and taking multiple child brides. Catholic troops could teach about the proper way to be an altar boy. At least they wouldn’t be GAY!

SBinF

February 11th, 2013
9:41 am

“Oh, I see, now there is a distinction between deviants, some deviants are better than other deviants, yeah, I’m so sure.”

You stake out such asinine territory that anyone would be a fool to actually engage you in a discussion on the merits of your argument.

Gerald

February 11th, 2013
9:43 am

Of course, the left doesn’t care about the future of the Boy Scouts because it is a male organization that helps males, including large number of white males from middle and upper class backgrounds. The left figures that we’d be better off without such an organization than with it. Do you honestly think that Barack Obama’s vision for America includes an organization that teaches young males – white males in particular – self reliance? Beta male liberals like Obama hate alpha males because alpha males remind them of their own weakness. They’ll be glad when the Boy Scouts are gone and the country will be that much safer for beta males like them who like to cry and eat chocolate ice cream while watching Oprah and Tyler Perry movies.

Del

February 11th, 2013
9:43 am

The homosexual community along with the far-left want homosexual lifestyles to be viewed as a perfectly normal sexuality. Such thinking is in conflict with true Christian values and will be unacceptable to a very large segment of society so long as true Christianity exists in America. DADT was repealed for the military even though it worked only because of politicians who pandered to a minority only in the interest of gaining their votes. Hopefully, the BSA will stand up to outside pressure as difficult as it may be and reject this attempt that places young people in the middle of a special interest groups sexual agenda challenging BSA leadership.

Edward

February 11th, 2013
9:43 am

Kyle lets people like Aesop and Lil Barry post their vile screed here because Kyle actually agrees with it. Kyle couldn’t get away with posting it himself, I doubt even his protectors at the AJC would stomach that, but Kyle’s alter-egos can post their disgusting spew with impunity. You are known by those you associate with, Kyle.

DeborahinAthens

February 11th, 2013
9:50 am

Aesop, more Scouts have been molested by heterosexual child molesters than have been molested by homosexuals. Don’t believe it? Research it. You narrow minded blot.

Gerald

February 11th, 2013
9:51 am

@Edward:

Kyle also lets liberals post their equally vile stuff. So how come vile conservatism is bad but vile liberalism isn’t? Liberals say the most evil, hateful stuff about conservatives all the time and don’t even know that it is hateful. That is the amazing part.

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

February 11th, 2013
9:51 am

Pope Obama the 1st.

You heard it here first.

Aquagirl

February 11th, 2013
9:53 am

Hopefully, the BSA will stand up to outside pressure

Let’s see if the shrieking GAYZ R PERVS crowd will pick up the financial slack. If they open their checkbooks as much as their mouths, this will be a non-issue.

CC

February 11th, 2013
9:55 am

Homosexuals will use any cause and any group of people to advance their ’cause’ without regard to harm caused others. Now, they are using children. The BSA now feels tremendous financial pressure to abandon a principle. The answer is really quite simple. Set the example! Do not compromise a principle for the thirty pieces of silver. If the leadership of the BSA is unable to withstand the pressure placed upon them to abandon their principle, I submit that the BSA is not worthy of saving and should be dissolved.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
9:56 am

Which runs counter to a core conviction for many of the BSA’s largest religious sponsors that homosexuality is a sin.

Maybe some of these “religious sponsors” will grow up and begin to practice what they’re preaching one of these days. But, based on the ignorant responses of people like Aesop and Lil Barry this AM, I’m not going to hold my breath waiting.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
10:01 am

Homosexuals will use any cause and any group of people to advance their ’cause’ without regard to harm caused others. Now, they are using children.

CC–At some point, I can only hope you pull your head out of your butt and realize that we’re all children of God.

Beyond the Middle of the Road

February 11th, 2013
10:04 am

On this issue the Boy Scouts have turned out to be UNPREPARED.

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

February 11th, 2013
10:10 am

Kyle also lets liberals post their equally vile stuff. So how come vile conservatism is bad but vile liberalism isn’t?

Basic decency and morality as taught in the Bible is not “vile,” no matter how loud the heathens shriek about it.

And if you think it’s “vile,” then you have already lost yourself.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
10:11 am

Attention Libs–As painful as it is for me to acknowledge, there is a segment of us Cons that does fit your stereotype of the angry, non-thinking Neanderthal type of person. Please don’t hold that against the rest of us.

The bottom line is that there are laws already in place which prohibit immoral contact with children. And with sensible guidelines in place, such as two-man leadership teams, I would guess that the risk to anyone would be close to zero. My feeling is that if someone is crazy enough to try to become a scout leader to molest kids, they likely would have gotten in trouble already.

Politico

February 11th, 2013
10:15 am

Bruno

Great point. The broad brushes come out way too often on both sides.

Thanks for your input on this issue.

indigo

February 11th, 2013
10:20 am

Aesop – 7:55

You’ll probably be surprised to know I totally agree with you on this.

Any Boy Scout group foolish enough to admit gay Scoutmasters will have the pedifiles running to it like starving Hyenas chasing a meat wagon.

I can only hope parents will have sense enough to keep their children OUT of such groups.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
10:22 am

Basic decency and morality as taught in the Bible is not “vile,” no matter how loud the heathens shriek about it.

Aesop–The Bible contains a long, long laundry list of “sins” that we laugh at today, such as the prohibition against tattoos. If you’re arguing for strict adherence to the Bible, then I’m sure I could find reasons to condemn you to hell pretty easily. You’ve never gambled in your life, have you?? Slept with anyone before you got married?? Perhaps eaten shellfish?? Gotten a tattoo??

Understandable, homosexuality is a bit more emotionally charged than receiving a tattoo, but unless you’re prepared to enforce ALL of the prohibitions listed in the Bible, then I say you can’t use it to create laws of conduct. In a secular society, we make laws to protect people from harm from one another. Simply saying “The Bible says so” doesn’t cut it.

Dave

February 11th, 2013
10:24 am

“But it wouldn’t comfort those who demand a complete change, those who know national treasures make good trophies, and those who would prefer the BSA serve no one if it won’t include them.”

Uppity gay folks! What is this, if we can’t have something neither can you garbage! First thing you know we’re going to have a gay civil rights act, like that Johnson guy did for the black folks fifty years ago come next year.

Separate but equal I say! States Rights! Oops: “A house divided against itself will not stand.”

Doggone it, which is it?

Aquagirl

February 11th, 2013
10:26 am

As painful as it is for me to acknowledge, there is a segment of us Cons that does fit your stereotype of the angry, non-thinking Neanderthal type of person. Please don’t hold that against the rest of us.

Unfortunately Cons have coddled and pandered to these people. I don’t hold anything against you personally but when Kyle lets his regulars spew like a teenager who tried his first beer keg stand, it’s a problem. There’s been all sorts of wink-wink-nod-nod from conservatives on too many issues.

Frankly it’s on display when you see conservatives bemoan what they formerly extolled, like freedom of association. And why is Kyle lauding a DADT he claims existed up until now? Lying by omission is lying.

Like I said Bruno I’m not ragging on you but nobody is going to hold their nose and embrace conservative thought when it’s riddled with this stuff. I do applaud your efforts though, not enough conservatives speak out when the ugly bubbles to the surface.

Del

February 11th, 2013
10:27 am

DADT overall worked well in the military until it was repealed because of political motivation. I wonder why DADT shouldn’t apply in scouting. Why should sexual orientation be a subject of discussion in an organization for and about young people growing into their adulthood. It sounds more like a special interest social agenda motive than a true desire to participate in adult leadership within the BSA.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
10:33 am

Any Boy Scout group foolish enough to admit gay Scoutmasters will have the pedifiles running to it like starving Hyenas chasing a meat wagon.

indigo–Most likely there is a segment of the homosexual population which seeks contact with children for the wrong reasons, just as there is an equally large or larger segment of the heterosexual population which does the same thing. In the old days, it used to be primarily men who were guilty of that, but the latest wave of female teachers sleeping with their students challenges even that notion. So, in order to be totally safe, you would have to prohibit all contact between adults and kids, which isn’t very practical. In fact, because there are cases of parents molesting their own kids on file, you would also have to prohibit all contact between parents and their own kids according to your logic.

The answer is to have appropriate safeguards in place. Admittedly, Scouting does introduce an additional layer of risk due to camping trips, but that seems to already have been addressed by requiring two adults to be present at all times.

Kyle Wingfield

February 11th, 2013
10:37 am

A few points to note:

First, the BSA is explicitly an organization rooted in religiosity. It does not require one to be of a particular faith, only that, as I recall it from my days as a Scout, members acknowledge the existence of “a higher being.” Admittedly, that may have been a colloquialism that doesn’t fully express the official policy. But bu2 pretty much nailed it @ 9:37. That’s why the convictions of the faith-based sponsors of Scout units have to be taken fully into account on this issue (and any other issues).

Second, my distinction between youth and adults is above all a practical one. My interest is seeing the BSA continue to exist more or less in its present form, because it has been a force for good in this country. I believe it would be much more likely to do this if the change, even the more or less tacit one I’ve proposed re: DADT, is limited to youth. Furthermore, I really do not care if any adults get their feelings hurt about this, just as I’ve never cared before when adult feelings and egos were at the center of other BSA controversies (and in 11 years, I saw plenty of those that had nothing to do with sexual orientation or behavior). For me, the only consideration is what’s good for the boys. And that’s not an oblique reference to molestation; as others have noted, otherwise “straight” individuals have been involved in plenty of same-gender sexual-abuse cases, and the two-deep leadership policy and extensive training required for Scout leaders have gone a long way toward minimizing the possibility of any adult abusing a child. (Not, sadly, that we will ever completely eradicate that problem.)

Third, the analogies to racial segregation do not hold water imo. The BSA was founded in 1910. Within its first decade, there were black Scouts. Before WW2, there were black Scouts in nearly every council in America, even in the South. The question of integrating individual troops was a thorny one, and it was not solved overnight. But it was not the same question as the one posed today about gay members and leaders. Furthermore, when it came to integration, there was much less of a split between the (mostly faith-based) sponsoring organizations on one hand and the (mostly secular) donors on the other. That’s not the case today.

Fourth, the “local control” argument works to a point, but there’s a lot about the BSA that exists beyond that point. There are shared facilities from the council level (e.g., Scout camping reservations) to the national level (e.g., Philmont in New Mexico and Sea Base in Florida). There are district, council, sectional, regional and national events that happen regularly. In short, there’s a lot about the BSA that transcends the local level. Again, it is my belief that a DADT policy, for youth only, would not cause friction wrt these facilities and events because that’s already the effective policy today.

Fifth, there is nothing that says any change made this year will be the last change ever made wrt this issue — unless any change made this year is considered a bridge too far, and ends up splintering the organization. And, again, I believe it’s in the best interests not just of the BSA but of the entire country to avoid such a schism.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
10:39 am

Like I said Bruno I’m not ragging on you but nobody is going to hold their nose and embrace conservative thought when it’s riddled with this stuff. I do applaud your efforts though, not enough conservatives speak out when the ugly bubbles to the surface.

If you like, Aquagirl, I can start listing the obvious faults of far-Left liberal thinking as well, such as giving elementary school kids condoms, not requiring parental permission for minors to receive abortions, partial birth abortions, etc. By your logic, then, nobody should hold their nose and embrace liberal thought when it’s riddled with this stuff.

But, I won’t wait for you to criticize your own party, however, since the crap I listed above is pretty much “mainstream thinking” over on the Lib side. Maybe one day you’ll grow the stones to call out the ugly on your own side.

Georgia

February 11th, 2013
10:41 am

This is a cultural issue, not a moral one. Americans aren’t ready for openly gay anything, except drag queen burlesques, which are terrific. Would anyone let Ru Paul be a scout leader? What about Barney Frank? What about Ellen and the girl scouts? Elton John and the brownies? No, no, no, and NO!

We need another couple of generations before we elect a gay president. We’ll probably elect a woman before that happens. We won’t fulfill the founding father’s vision until we elect a black lesbian communist jihadist as our president. Aw, the conservative family values people would only gerrymander their way out of that ever happening. I guess we’ll always be a talent-contested, halftime-show-wardrobe-malfunction based oligarchy with too much makeup. Eh, It’s not so bad. At least we have an Amazon as first lady.

Kyle Wingfield

February 11th, 2013
10:42 am

Aquagirl @ 10:26: I’m not sure what points you’re trying to make about freedom of association — which, as the Supreme Court has ruled, protects the BSA’s right to set its own membership policies and requirements — or with the DADT thing.

Btw, there’s plenty of spewage from both sides of the aisle. If I got rid of everything that qualified as spewage in someone else’s eyes, I’d have time to do nothing else, and there’d be maybe a dozen comments left on each post.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
10:48 am

DADT overall worked well in the military until it was repealed because of political motivation. I wonder why DADT shouldn’t apply in scouting. Why should sexual orientation be a subject of discussion in an organization for and about young people growing into their adulthood.

Del–I would be comfortable with a policy like that. I can’t speak for any homosexuals who desire to be Scout leaders, but I don’t think they’re volunteering in order to line up new recruits any more so than gay folks would want to become teachers in order to advance any type of agenda.

I’m sure if josef were here he could express it more eloquently, but the bottom line is that homosexuals are people, pretty much like the rest of us. Their motivations for getting involved with youth groups is likely the same as for their heterosexual counterparts. I don’t think we need to fear the bogeyman here.

xxx

February 11th, 2013
10:50 am

Homosexuality is not the issue with BSA, as with all things, it’s the religion.

Dave

February 11th, 2013
10:51 am

“The question of integrating individual troops was a thorny one, and it was not solved overnight. But it was not the same question as the one posed today about gay members and leaders.”

I’m having trouble seeing your logic.

BSA and black people: No black people. Segregated black people. Integration of black and white people.

BSA and gay people: No gay people (at least none that admit that they are gay). Do gay people have to go through the segregation step before integration?

To my mind the question posed is exactly the same. Should BSA discriminate against gay people? I don’t care if the reason for discrimination is based in religion. Invoking the name of God to excuse bigotry is not a good thing.

MiltonMan

February 11th, 2013
10:52 am

“Homosexuals will use any cause and any group of people to advance their ’cause’ without regard to harm caused others. Now, they are using children.

CC–At some point, I can only hope you pull your head out of your butt and realize that we’re all children of God.”

Typical lib “theology”: We are all children of God; We are all good; We are all going to heaven.

Crack open the Bible every so often: The chosen children of God were murdered & the those “lucky” enough to survive were exiled as slaves to the Assryians & Babylonians.

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

February 11th, 2013
10:54 am

Aesop–The Bible contains a long, long laundry list of “sins” that we laugh at today, such as the prohibition against tattoos.

Read the New Testament and get back with me, Bruno.

Don’t just thumb through it either.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
10:54 am

If I got rid of everything that qualified as spewage in someone else’s eyes, I’d have time to do nothing else, and there’d be maybe a dozen comments left on each post.

Plus, you would have the most boring blog in the Universe. I think a little spewage goes a long way keeps the interest level a little higher. In fact, I’ve suggested in the past that the AJC could make a few bucks by setting up a parallel blog which contains all of the deleted comments, then charge admission. I know that some of my best zingers have been pulled in the past.

As I like to say, if you haven’t been banned from a blog yet, you’re just not trying hard enough. ;-)

MiltonMan

February 11th, 2013
10:56 am

“I don’t hold anything against you personally but when Kyle lets his regulars spew like a teenager who tried his first beer keg stand, it’s a problem. There’s been all sorts of wink-wink-nod-nod from conservatives on too many issues.”

WaterGirl – high maintenance that one. She has a problem with Kyle & “his regulars” but has absolutley no problem with Jay & “his regulars”???

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
10:57 am

Crack open the Bible every so often: The chosen children of God were murdered & the those “lucky” enough to survive were exiled as slaves to the Assryians & Babylonians.

Read the New Testament and get back with me, Bruno.

I’ll gladly stack up my familiarity with the Bible against either of you two pretenders any day. Not accepting the conclusions of a particular document does not equate lack of familiarity with that document, as Sister Dusty tries to imply at times.

Kyle–Would you be okay with a Bible throwdown today??

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 11th, 2013
11:01 am

Ruh, roh.

To those that were tracking thread counts: 156 – 89.

Better get busy over here.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
11:03 am

Typical lib “theology”: We are all children of God; We are all good; We are all going to heaven.

Out of curiosity, MiltonMan, where do you see yourself in this scheme?? Got your own ticket to heaven punched already?? If so, how do you know that??

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

February 11th, 2013
11:05 am

The censorship whining of aq serves a purpose, all liberal courses of action start out small and gain momentum until they reach their full filthy blossom. Like striking down laws against deviant behavior that were never enforced anyway, then you move on to DADT, and then the Boy Scouts and pretty soon you require homosexuality to be taught to kindergarteners. I know how this works, I’ve seen it before.

Back to the censorship, remember obozo setting up a tweet page so you could report opposing political comments? Notice how bookman resides in an ever shrinking bubble? Ever wonder how what used to be good and decent is now radical and extreme?

breckenridge

February 11th, 2013
11:05 am

Homosexuality is a sin because the Bible, that font of Christianity, says so. And US Law is based on the Bible, ergo Christianity, so gay marriage should be outlawed.

Oh wait a minute…..

“Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.” Thomas Jefferson, February 10th, 1814.

Bruno

February 11th, 2013
11:06 am

For Aesop, maybe we should start with Matthew 5:18– “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”

Looks like your “New Testament only” theology is contradicted within the New Testament itself.

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

February 11th, 2013
11:06 am

I’ll gladly stack up my familiarity with the Bible against either of you two pretenders any day.

Bruno – I wouldn’t brag about not knowing why Jesus lived and died.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

February 11th, 2013
11:06 am

Notice how bookman resides in an ever shrinking bubble?

Dittoheads say, “What?”

Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed

February 11th, 2013
11:07 am

While I was not surprised by the beginning and on-going rhetoric about gay men just waiting to get into Scouting so that they can molest young boys, it took me all of one minute to find a resource which debunks that argument – if only the religious right would bother to read it.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/10-myths

“The Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.”

For those of you who are both reading challenged and statistically challenged, it is impossible to link gays to pedophilia due to the almost exclusive targeting of family members or friends.

Unless you think that suddenly the entire country has become gay.

Any of you want to throw up another false accusation that can be knocked down as quickly?

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

February 11th, 2013
11:08 am

For Aesop, maybe we should start with Matthew 5:18– “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”

He said that while he was alive, Bruno, come on man.

What do you think “accomplished” means?

Burton

February 11th, 2013
11:08 am

This is complete journalistic garbage. Gross mischaracterization of the human call for equal treatment by organizations that hold themselves to serve the American public is not par for the course of editorialization. Embarrassed for you right now. In 5 years I whole-heartedly believe this will be a non-issue and those who promote invisibility in the stead of justice will have the blood of generations of boys denied equal opportunity on their hands.

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

February 11th, 2013
11:08 am

Ooops while He was alive