Morally Clean and Straight? The Boy Scouts and Discrimination

David Knapp, now 81, was expelled from the Boy Scouts after a lifetime of scouting and service when the organization “discovered” he was gay.

In the late 1990’s, lawsuits all over the country challenged the Boy Scouts’ discrimination against gay men and youth.

Boy Scouts of America v. Wyman in Connecticut was one of the successful suits, in which the Scouts were barred from a state employee fund-raising campaign because their anti-gay policy violates Connecticut's non-discrimination law.

David Knapp and GLAD attorney Jennifer Levi tell the story of Boy Scouts and discrimination in our podcast, Morally Clean and Straight: Boy Scouts of America v. Wyman.

Tell us your story:

Were you a Boy Scout? Were your children? Share your thoughts on the Boy Scouts’ anti-gay policy.

Religion and Equality

We received news this week that our friends at the Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry (RCFM) will be closing their doors here in Massachusetts – for the best of reasons. “We’ve accomplished our mission!” said RCFM leader Rabbi Devon Lerner. While marriage equality is secure in Massachusetts, Rabbi Lerner also told us that she recognizes that the work of religious leaders is not done: “We know we have more work to do in our denominations and in our faith communities for GLBT equality, but it will be done through new and different coalitions.”

Our partnerships with religious people over the years have subverted the idea that religion = bigotry, and that the religious right speaks for all people of faith when they denounce gay equality. In our work throughout New England, we’ve seen religious coalitions for equality grow in strength and numbers in Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Maine, and of course here in Massachusetts.

One of the most powerful moments on the June day that our Massachusetts legislature was to vote marriage equality up or down came early in the morning. The Religious Coalition held a rally and prayed at St. Paul's Cathedral, then marched en masse across the Boston Common to the State House. Religious opponents to marriage equality, praying across the street, had to part ways to let the supportive clergy through. It was only one of many times and many ways over the years that RCFM has demonstrated its support for equality, and we are extraordinarily grateful.

School's Right to Teach About Family Diversity Upheld

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit yesterday unanimously affirmed District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf's dismissal of a lawsuit brought by two sets of parents against the Lexington school system. In the suit, parents David and Tonia Parker and Robert and Robin Wirthlin claimed that a Lexington elementary school violated their constitutional rights by exposing their children to books portraying many different kinds of families, including non-judgmental depictions of families headed by same-sex couples.

Judge Sandra Lynch wrote for a unanimous court that the parents who brought the suit have no constitutional "right to be free from any reference in public elementary schools to the existence of families in which parents are of different gender combinations." Her decision further stated, "Given that Massachusetts has recognized gay marriage under its state constitution, it is entirely rational for its schools to educate their students regarding that recognition."

We're delighted that school systems remain free to include age-appropriate material featuring a wide variety of families, including those with two moms and two dads. As a result, gay and lesbian parents and their children can feel safe and supported in their schools, and all children can learn about the true diversity of the society we live in.

Sex on the Margins - The More Things Change...

We recently had the pleasure of hosting writer/sex educator Susie Bright, writer/cultural critic Michael Bronski, and GLAD founder Attorney John Ward at Boston's Old South Meeting House. The event, Sex on the Margins: The More Things Change..., was meant to foster a provocative discussion about the past, present, and future of the LGBT rights movement.

And it did.

Our panelists did not disappoint, posing questions about whether the gay community in the U.S. has become too assimilationist for its own good while reminding us that almost everywhere in the world you are still at risk - physically, legally, politically - if you are not heterosexual; suggesting that we have practically settled the question of marriage equality and now need to come up with the next big thing (an "exit strategy" as Susie Bright put it); and taking the gay community to task for not coming to the defense of Senator Larry Craig when he became the victim of a bathroom police sting - just like the 103 men whose arrests at the Boston Public Library prompted the founding of GLAD in 1978.

The audience, too, raised important issues - reminding us that many in our community don't have the luxury of pondering assimilation as they continue to struggle for things like jobs, health care, and basic safety; that marriage equality is still a distant goal in many parts of this country; and that, while their concerns and strategies may differ from those of their predecessors, there is a vibrant, active, and engaged young LGBT community out there pushing the movement forward.

Were you at this event? Join the conversation - where are we and where should we be heading?

Teaching Diversity in the Schools – Dispute Continues

The dispute over the notion of teaching about family diversity in the public schools continued December 5 before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Parents David and Tonia Parker and Robert and Robin Wirthlin have appealed the earlier dismissal of their suit against the Town of Lexington and the Lexington school system over the inclusion of three books – Who’s in a Family, Molly’s Family, and King and King – in a Lexington elementary school’s diversity curriculum. The books, which the town of Lexington states were a part of its policy of teaching about diversity, include representations of families headed by same-sex couples. (See our earlier post on this case).

GLAD’s position - argued in an amicus brief submitted in support of the town and school system - is that Lexington was correct in including age-appropriate material depicting the growing diversity of American families. Because public schools are responsible for teaching values essential to a democratic society, the use of materials depicting diverse families – including gay and lesbian-headed families - is entirely proper.

Not surprisingly, interest in this case is high, as evidenced by the spectators who packed the courtroom and the very active and engaged judges, who requested that both sides provide further information on key issues raised. GLAD is watching the case closely, and will be assisting counsel for Lexington in replying to the additional questions raised by the Court.

We commend the town and school system of Lexington for remaining committed to a diversity curriculum throughout this challenge, and hope that the First Circuit will ultimately affirm Judge Wolf’s thoughtful decision in his initial dismissal of the parents’ suit.

Further Reflections on ENDA

After the House passed ENDA last week, a New York Times editorial called the vote “a significant, if long overdue, breakthrough for equality and fairness.” There’s no question that it was good to see such a high level of support in the House. And there’s no question that it is outrageous for gay men and lesbians to lose their jobs because of their sexual orientation. I am reminded that many gay men and lesbians across the country are much more vulnerable than I am in my employment. They may live with greater economic insecurity, in a social environment more openly hostile than mine, or in a state that provides them no legal protections on the state level.

Yet it’s also frustrating that we will have no vote to measure the House’s support for similarly protecting transgender people – and we are left with the sense that we could have done more. Since the president will not sign this bill into law (if it makes it through the Senate) what was accomplished by leaving transgender people outside the circle of its protection?

Lee Swislow

Incrementalism and Progress

There has been much talk in the recent debate on ENDA about the reality of political compromise and the need to accept incremental progress.

Incrementalism is a fact of political life, it’s true. It is not, however, something we need hold up as ideal, or even the best we can do. In the midst of political maneuvering and discussions of the need for compromise, it is critically important that we remain strong in voicing our vision of full equality, lest we cease to aspire to more than a compromised version of it.

GLAD’s work is primarily in the realm of impact litigation, where we have an opportunity to make dramatic progress on civil rights; attempting dramatic change through incremental, compromise-based legislation nearly inevitably results in some level of disappointment.

But the legislative process, imperfect as it may be, is also key to advancing civil rights. And it is therefore critical that those of us who have a vision of what equality truly means not be complacently satisfied with incremental change, but continue to raise our voices and work together to ensure that that uncompromised vision remains a part of the political conversation.

Lee Swislow