While I agree that these two organizations have the right to admit whomever they please, here in San Diego a controversy is brewing.
It seems a certain group known for defending the rights of oft-times unpopular individuals is requesting that a contract the City of San Diego has with BSA be declared void.
The City is leasing public land in Balboa Park to the BSA for some trivial amount - $1 a year or something. The argument being given is, of course, that the BSA discriminates and thus should not be given special treatment or favorable terms or whatever legal term they are using.
I'm afraid I agree - it's OK for the BSA to have any policy they want. It's also for the city to have certain requirements regarding the organizations they rent to. If the BSA policy doesn't match up with the city's well, too bad BSA.
Now, this presupposes that the city has these standards, which I don't think they do as far as Balboa Park meeting space rental goes. But one could make the argument that by supporting the BSA, the city is also supporting the BSA's discriminatory behavior. One could also make the argument that the city is simply being good capitalists and are renting to people without making judgement, except for that token amount thing...
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/u...m11scouts.html