Public "Servants" at Work

California legislators apparently have nothing better to do.

California Senate scolds Boy Scouts
Passes resolution slamming group for not accepting 'gays,' atheists

Alternate headline: "Fiddling While Rome Burns."

The California state Senate has passed a resolution criticizing the Boy Scouts of America for its policy of excluding homosexuals and atheists.

Because that's a far more important task than extracting California from it's actual problems. The lesson here: when your plans and policies bring about disaster, the magnitude of which begins to disaffect elements of your political base, find a convenient innocuous target for a gesture behind which your die-hards can rally.

Sure, why not? It's worked for every despot in history... ought to work this time.

The legislation, which passed last week on a 22-15 vote, begins by praising the group for the work it does in the community, but in the end demands the organization accept applicants "without discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or religious belief," reported the Roseville Press-Tribune.

"Keep doing your charitable work - but on our terms, not yours." Memo to the state Senate: get bent. Not everyone is such a coward as to accede to your demands.

The Boy Scouts has come under increasing pressure to change its policy, which has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, and has lost countless dollars in donations due to its stand.

In other words, the Scouts' principles are more important to them than the donations are. Bravo for them, I say. Most politicians, parties, or advocacy groups have never met a principle they wouldn't compromise for a buck. It's actually rather refreshing to see people who won't compromise.

The legislation was sponsored by Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, D-Los Angeles, herself a lesbian.

No surprise there. I'd be more interested in who the co-sponsors were.

"I think it's important for the state of California to speak up and not be silent, and to say to the Scouts, if you have a religious belief, that's your belief. But keep it separate from a youth-serving agency that serves kids in all neighborhoods," Goldberg told the paper.

... conveniently ignoring the fact that the way the Scouts serve youths is dependant on their moral standards.

The Scouts exist, essentially, to equip boys to be good men. Men who have standards of Right and of Wrong, men who adhere to Principle - these are things the Democrats controlling the state Senate seem to not want. I wonder why...?

"I hope we put pressure on them to make this open to all kids. Anybody who knows me and my family knows we love scouting. This is out of concern for (Scouts)."

Sure it is. Apparently we're dealing with a whole new variety of "scouting" in which an Oath and adherence to standards is optional.

Goldberg's bill passed the state Assembly by a vote of 43-2. Nearly half the 80 members did not vote or abstained on the resolution.

Can't you just feel the moral authority radiating from Sacramento?

Opponents of the bill see it as government intrusion into the policies of a private organization.

Well, nothing really new there... this is a world, and California in particular is a state, in which the term "civil servant" has been twisted to mean "civil master."

"Our moral values in Boy Scouts are being treated as if they were inferior values," Republican state Sen. Rico Oller told the Press-Tribune. "Gay and lesbian groups are saying that we with traditional Christian values have to accept people who are avowedly opposed to those views. The Boy Scouts should be able to be the Boy Scouts, an organization based on faith, God and duty. You can't have it both ways."

Exactly.

Continued Oller, "This is about hate on the part of the radical gay and lesbian community, on organizations that are founded on more traditional values."

Couldn't have said it better myself. Well, maybe a little better... but I don't have to run for office.

It's not just the "radical gay and lesbian" communities - it is the environmentalists, the peaceniks, the trial lawyers... in short, any of the core constituencies of the Democrat party. They cannot abide private groups that teach moral standards, ethical behavior, and a respect for God, because these things are antithetical to the accumulation of power in the hands of those who would sell their own mothers for it. Their opponents must be destroyed, or must be rendered ineffective - a "mission kill," to use the military term.

And besides, it's not like the Senate has anything better to do, right? Like, oh I don't know, ensure the doom of the state or anything?

Posted by Russ at 08:30 AM, September 4, 2003 in Idiots