It's All a Matter of Money

Pressure on Mass. Businesses Causes
Discrimination Against Boy Scouts

Main Story: Boston Boy Scouts Honor Man with Sexual Disease

MassNews Staff
June 13, 2002

Jews and blacks are comparable to homosexuals, said Bill Van Faasen, the President of Blue Cross/Blue Shield and the President of the Minuteman Council last year.
Van Faasen's position was explained in a column in the Boston Globe by Derrik Jackson as: "A white man who reached the ranks of Eagle Scout in Detroit, Van Faasen's first experience with African-American and Jewish boys came at 11 and 12 years old at Scout camp."

Is that what Van Faasen said?

Would he really allow homosexuals to lead the boys in the Minuteman Council, regardless of what the national organization says - because of this experience? Why would an intelligent man make such an absurd statement about blacks and Jews?

According to the president last year, Dick DeWolfe of the real estate firm that bears his name, the entire question comes down to that of money and of pressure from other Boston businessmen.

He told the Globe that urban Scouts are much more dependent on funding from businesses which have nondiscriminatory clauses for their employees. Therefore, the Scouts in Boston have little choice but to follow their demands.

The paper quoted DeWolfe, "The cat is on our back no matter what, and we cannot proceed without the confidence of Boston businesses."

Following the Money

The whole matter of homosexuals in the Boy Scouts in the Boston area is a matter of "following the money." The businesses in Massachusetts will not give money to the Scouts unless homosexual leaders are allowed to lead the boys. These large businesses all have "nondiscriminatory clauses" that are forced on them by the state of Massachusetts. Therefore, they must discriminate against the Boy Scouts. No one forces the Girl Scouts to enroll heterosexual men to lead their teenage girls, but we do force the Boy Scouts to have homosexual men as leaders of the boys.

This is what caused the silly statement from Van Faasen. Does he really expect us to believe that he lived to the age of 12-years in Detroit before he had his first "experience" with blacks or Jews? Are we really supposed to believe that this exposure to "different people and different cultures and different perspectives was hugely influential" to him? What did he find to be "hugely" different between him and blacks? Or between him and Jews? It would be interesting to hear him stammer as he tried to answer those questions.

His words are obviously those of public relations experts who advise presidents of large corporations what to say when the state of Massachusetts is on their backs.

Many blacks and Jews will be upset to hear that Van Faasen believes that the color of their skin or their religious practices and their ensuing struggles are comparable to homosexuality. The blacks and Jews realize that homosexuality is a choice that some adult men in our society make because they have a desire to engage in foolish and dangerous sex practices. Some of them encourage young boys to also engage in that foolish and dangerous behavior because the adults wish to use them.

After all, what is being discussed is nothing but the desire of those men to put their penis in another man's (or a boy's) rectum. That is the way you become a practicing homosexual. This is hardly an item of Constitutional proportions. It certainly cheapens the struggles of blacks, Jews and many others to mention them in the same breath. And yet the businessmen of Massachusetts are so frightened by the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination that they will do whatever they are told.

And they will do so regardless of what it may mean to a young boy who is looking for leadership and guidance.

Pressure Is Enormous

But we must understand that the pressure that we exert on these business leaders is enormous. And we are all responsible for that pressure. What can a business do when the full power of the state is brought against it mandating who they can hire? These leaders are trying to run their businesses, not spend their time at the Commission Against Discrimination and in the courts fighting groundless lawsuits. Even if they win those suits, they lose because of the time, effort and poor public relations they must endure.

They have no chance of winning at the MCAD because the Commissioners there are advocates who assume from the beginning that the businesses are guilty. So any business who wants to fight will spend a year or more in the MCAD offices, paying lawyers and enduring tremendous hostility from the Globe which will report what a terrible company they are. If the business chooses to spend a lot of money appealing to a court, they will have a tough time in that forum also with the judges we have in this state. But almost no case ever gets to that level.

So they "settle." They are always advised to "settle." Even though the claim against them is a lie, they are always told to keep it out of the newspapers. If they do have the courage to fight, their lawyer apologizes to the judge (who would rather be playing golf), out of earshot at sidebar, because the lawyer has a client he "can't control."

DeWolfe Sees Only Money

DeWolfe reiterated to the Globe that he sees the world in terms of money. He said he doesn't see the Boy Scouts changing their mind, but it's possible the national office might say, "Go ahead and run your business the way you want. Send us the membership reports, send us our money."

So DeWolfe believes it is only a matter of money to the people who run the Boy Scouts. And Van Faasen agrees. "The folks in Texas [at Scout headquarters] are probably smart enough to know that a fight of those dimensions serves nobody's purposes."

But it may surprise these men from Massachusetts to learn that there are still people who believe in things more important than money.

We all agree that all homosexual men are not pedophiles just as we agree that all heterosexuals are not. But we do not allow male leaders in the Girl Scouts. So how do we justify treating these two groups of men so differently? Are homosexual men more trustworthy than heterosexual men?