Is the Boy Scouts an "expressive association?" Is one of the purposes of the Boy Scouts to associate "in pursuit of ...political, social, economic, educational, religious, and cultural ends." (casebook p. 1603)
If so, will "forced inclusion" under public accommodation laws of openly homosexual "activists" such as Dale "affect in a significant way the ability of the group to express those views, and only those views [right not to speak], that it intends to express." [Dale "became involved with, and
eventually became the copresident of, the Rutgers University
Lesbian/Gay Alliance. In 1990, Dale attended a seminar addressing
the psychological and health needs of lesbian and gay teenagers. A
newspaper covering the event interviewed Dale about his advocacy of
homosexual teenagers' need for gay role models. In early July 1990,
the newspaper published the interview and Dale's photograph over a
caption identifying him as the copresident of the Lesbian/ Gay
Alliance." edited from casebook opinion]
Would forced inclusion as a leader of a LGBT Youth Group of someone who had publicly expressed his view that homosexual conduct is sinful and immoral (perhaps, someone like Franklin Graham or Jack Phillips), interfere with the group's right of expressive association?
What about forced inclusion of David Duke (a KKK member) as a leader of the NAACP Youth Group?
Do you see how groups speak through their leaders, and thus the right to select who speaks for a group is related to freedom of expression?
Does expressive association threaten society's commitment to diversity?
Mike McConnell responded to this concern in his brief for the Boy Scouts in Dale.
The argument is that not only does expressive association not threaten
diversity, it is absolutely essential to the very idea of diversity.
McConnell put it like this: "A society in which each and every
organization must be equally diverse is a society which has destroyed
diversity."
Do you understand the point Mike was making here?
No comments:
Post a Comment