# Did the Senate sanction discrimination against gays? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 14, 2001, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-senate-sanction-discrimination-against-gays/68845 "2001-06-14T21:18:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2001, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-senate-sanction-discrimination-against-gays/68845/21 "2001-06-15T23:08:05Z")
Perhaps then only public organizations should be allowed to use public spaces? I dunno, just a thought. I don’t see any reason for GLAAD, the KKK _or_ the Boy Scouts to use public schools. Esprix ---
**Author:** ![Tenar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/35a633/32.png) [@Tenar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tenar)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2001, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-senate-sanction-discrimination-against-gays/68845/22 "2001-06-16T00:04:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MGibson \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Tenar \* > > \*\* > > In other words, access for the Boy Scouts = access for Evangelical Christians. So naturally the Senate acted to ensure continued access for the Boy Scouts by blackmailing school districts with the threat of lost federal funds. > > > > Talk about a coup! Advancing the Christian agenda while legislating homophobia – all in one week! > > > > (Hope this is coherent! I previewed it, but I am up way past my bedtime. – Tenar \*\* > > How does this advance the Christian agenda or promote homophobia?\*\* Actually, you put it better than I did. You said “promote homophobia,” which is accurate, while I used the phrase “legislate homophobia,” which is a trifle histrionic and overstates the case. I should have said the Supreme Court decision and the Senate vote combined to advance the Christian agenda while legislating school access for an organization (the Boy Scouts) which promotes homophobia. As far as “advancing the Christian agenda,” let me start with a confession. I chose this phrase deliberately as a provocative parody of the references to the “Gay agenda” which I have frequently read in homophobic utterances by members of the Christian Right. Unfortunately, I can not refer to a neatly enumerated list of Christian Agenda items, so perhaps I should have refrained from using the phrase in such a rigorous forum as Great Debates. My perception of the Christian Agenda in the broadest sense is that it involves the promotion of Christianity, the legislation of so-called “Christian values” and a relentless drive to increase Christian access to schools. (One big difference between the “Christian Agenda” and the “Gay Agenda” is that I have never seen any indication of any attempt by the Gay community to actively recruit children!) > [@](#): > > \*\*It is a double edged sword my friend. Schools can’t exclude groups like GLAAD from meeting in their schools either. > > Marc\*\* Well, I’m not so sure about that. The gist of the article which I linked to (and which has expired already, to my dismay) was that the Supreme Court said that there was no particular distinction between the teaching of loyalty and morality by the Boy Scouts and the teaching of overtly Christian religious morality by a Christian group, so that as long as the school allowed the Boy Scouts on the premises, they could not exclude the Good News Christian club. Here is the complete text of the Supreme Court decision. Reading it is a tough slog and IANAL, so I may be missing something here, but let me quote from the decision itself: > [@](#): > > **When the State establishes a limited public forum, the State is not required to and does not allow persons to engage in every type of speech. the State may be justified "in reserving [its forum] for certain groups or for the discussion of certain topics."** As far as I can tell, there is absolutely nothing here to prevent schools from allowing the Boy Scouts and the Good News Club while excluding GLAAD, unless it could be proven that the schools already gave access so some other group whose goals and message paralleled those of GLAAD. > [@](#): > > \*\*I don’t see any reason for GLAAD, the KKK or the Boy Scouts to use public schools. > > Esprix\*\* For the record, I agree with Esprix. Schools were built for education, not to provide cheap meeting places for private organizations. ---
**Author:** ![Tenar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/35a633/32.png) [@Tenar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tenar)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2001, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-senate-sanction-discrimination-against-gays/68845/23 "2001-06-16T00:21:47Z")
Oh, and [(hope this link lasts longer than the last one!)](http://www.dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/2001/pl/congress_education_18.html) by the way, for anyone who doubts that homophobia is a major issue here: > [@](#): > > **Helms said his amendment was meant to combat "the organized lesbians and homosexuals in this country of ours."** Oh, Jesse? IT’S OUR COUNTRY, TOO! Love, one (dis)organized lesbian. (Hope that doesn’t qualify as an inappropriately posted flame. I just couldn’t help myself.) ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2001, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-senate-sanction-discrimination-against-gays/68845/24 "2001-06-16T17:25:59Z")
Those interested in such things may be interested to know that the presidents of the New York City, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, East Los Angeles, West Los Angeles, Orange County, and one other large city’s Boy Scout councils sent a petition to the national headquarters asking that the decision on whether or not to allow homosexuals be made by the host organization for each troop. While not representing a majority of the organization, these nine cities do represent a decent portion. I think it’s a sign that the organization is heading to the point where it will change. ---
**Author:** ![betenoir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@betenoir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoir)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2001, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-senate-sanction-discrimination-against-gays/68845/25 "2001-06-16T20:47:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tenar \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > **Helms said his amendment was meant to combat "the organized lesbians and homosexuals in this country of ours."** > > Oh, Jesse? IT’S OUR COUNTRY, TOO! > \*\* No kidding. A United States Senator gets up and says there are certain people who, if they form a political organization, it is the Senates business to combat? _Shiver_ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-senate-sanction-discrimination-against-gays/68845.md?page=1)