E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Darrell Byers/Reuters file
Scouts attend a prayer vigil at the Boy Scouts of America headquarters in Irving, Texas, on Feb. 6, 2013, while a decision to change the membership policy banning gays was being deliberated. The BSA decided to postpone that decision until May.
A proposed law in California to remove a state tax exemption for youth groups like the Boy Scouts that don’t allow gay members would set a dangerous precedent, according to an association of nonprofits.
The legislation, introduced by Democratic State Sen. Ricardo Lara on Tuesday, would deny exemptions from state corporate taxes and taxes on items such groups sell. It would also require them to pay corporate taxes on donations and other forms of income.
Lara and LGBT advocacy group, Equality California, said the bill was aimed at groups like the Boy Scouts of America, which has faced increasing protests over its longstanding policy banning gay Scouts and leaders. An expert said she believed it was the first time such a law had been proposed, though it follows the loss of corporate sponsorship dollars to the BSA due to the policy.
The California Association of Nonprofits, which has 1,500 member organizations, said it opposed the legislation in its current form, even though the group opposes discrimination based upon sexual orientation or gender identity as outlined in the bill, SB 323.
“ … we are against using the tax exemption as a way to compel change in a nonprofit's policies,” Kris Lev-Twombly, the group’s director of public policy, wrote late Wednesday in an email. “Stripping nonprofits of tax exemption on ideological grounds is a slippery slope. Nonprofits are the embodiments of free speech in our society. When we disagree with a nonprofit's policies, we should vote by moving our donation dollars and our volunteer feet elsewhere.”
The association said it is difficult to estimate how many of California's 50,000 nonprofits could be impacted because there is no reliable data on how many discriminate based upon sexual orientation.
“To lose state tax exemption in California could be significant for a nonprofit organization,” he said. “The bill is narrow in the sense that the provision applies specifically to youth organizations, but the question is how many organizations in California might be found to discriminate as outlined in the bill.”
The law would require two-thirds approval of both houses of the state legislature to win approval. Lara said the state already bans discrimination based on sexual orientation in public accommodations and government programs.
“Our state values the important role that youth groups play in the empowerment of our next generation; this is demonstrated by rewarding organizations with tax exemptions supported financially by all Californians,” he said in a statement. “SB 323 seeks to end the unfortunate discriminatory and outdated practices by certain youth groups by revoking their tax exemption privilege should they not comply with our non-discrimination laws.”
The Boy Scouts of America declined to comment on the legislation, which comes about two weeks after it postponed a decision on whether to end the policy at the national level and leave local sponsoring organizations free to decide for themselves whether to admit gay Scouts.
The BSA, a private youth organization, said it had received an outpouring of feedback on the membership guidelines after the potential change was announced in late January, and that it would take action on the issue at its national meeting in May.
Boy Scouts: We need more time for decision on gay membership
More than two-thirds of Scouting groups are affiliated with religious bodies. Among the top religious sponsors, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have called for more time to discuss the issue, while the Southern Baptists on Tuesday passed a resolution rejecting the proposed change, according to the Baptist Press.
Pat Read, an independent consultant for nonprofits and foundations nationwide, said she believed such legislation was a first. However, she said there was a precedent, noting a 1983 Supreme Court case in which the IRS said it would no longer provide tax exempt status to private schools that practiced racial discrimination – a fight the federal tax agency won.
Read said the bill would have a financial impact and could potentially deter people from making donations.
“When the federal government or a state government stands up and says that this nonprofit is not a good nonprofit because of some policy it has adopted, it affects the ability of people to support that group, it affects how much money it has available to support its programs versus paying taxes, and it affects public opinion about the value of its work,” she said by phone from Boulder, Colo. “And all three things are important and all three things are at stake in this legislation.”
She said this legislation could wind up in court if it is approved, noting private organizations would likely object and say, "you have no right to try to tell us what to do.”
“Some of them will be saying, you know, 'well tough we don’t need the tax exemption,'” she added. “But there will be a price to be paid for that.”
If you are a current or former member of the Boy Scouts and would like to share your thoughts on how your troop, pack or council is handling the BSA's decision on the membership policy, you can email the reporter at miranda.leitsinger@msnbc.com. We may use some comments for a follow-up story, so please specify if your remarks can be used and provide your name, hometown, age, Boy Scout affiliation and a phone number.
Related:
'Nasty internal fight' or 'strategic pause': Boy Scouts supporters weigh delay on gays
After years of heartache, gay Scouts and supporters react warily over proposal to lift ban
'Gravely distressed': Religion looms large over Boy Scouts decision on gays
Gay teen denied Eagle Scout: 'Change is happening' over Boy Scouts anti-gay policy
Leave a Comment:
politicians do not care about sexual preference, they @!$%# everybody
BSA should be treated the same as any other private non-profit. That being said, I would rather see all tax exemptions for these groups go away, no exceptions.
As for the many who say that government should not promote a particular agenda, we do that all the time. All tax laws essentially do this, as do other types of laws, eg. voting rights, trade laws, health laws, labor laws, etc. Laws by their very nature are designed to promote certain types of behavior, or to inhibit certain types of behavior in the case of criminal law. As such they are promoting a particular agenda. If the proposed law were to be enacted, it would not be unusual really.
a scout is helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful,thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
I NEVER LEARNED TO BE A BIGOT in the scouts. I see no mention, of race, sex, age, origin, etc in my oath.
So why be bigots ?????????? There is too much hate in the world.
I love all of these comments about "using my tax dollars to fund...." Do any of you have any idea what tax exempt even means????
It relieves you af the requirement to PAY taxes. It does not put government money in the coffers.
WOW!!! Amazing!!!
It means that the government services the organization uses (such as the cost of electricity for a school room where the Boy Scouts meet or the rent of government land where they have their jamborees) are paid for by tax payers other than the Boy Scouts. So, they are getting tax money.
Rick...they truly don't get it.....amazingly so. Wow, I just thought of something.....that's how OBAMA got elected!
It means that all the other taxpayers are subsidizing you.
For example, since churches don't pay property taxes it means the taxes on the rest of the property in town are a bit higher.
We will be actively fighting against this legislation.
You can read our full press release here:
sure thing bubba - now if you ONLY were a higher classed member, you could post links...
"Pacific Justice" is the same group of religious nutjobs who are trying to defend the right of licensed medical practitioners to perform that "ex-gay" quackery on gays, something that is widely recognized as malpractice.
So if they don't allow perversion in the boy scouts they get their Tax exempt status taken away? Sounds like Blackmail to me. Facebook got over Four Hundred Million dollars in Tax refunds and never paid a dime in Taxes from what I understand. And they are going after the Boy Scouts? America and the Nut Jobs that are running it are #$%^%@$$ Crazy.
.....So if they don't allow discrimination in the boy scouts they get their tax exempt status......
Now it makes sense.
tarzan -- can you do your yell? it might make more sense than your post...
I must be out of touch with demographics in America. There must be about 500 billion gay people in America. There has to be, in order for the sudden full court press on the Boy Scouts. This wouldn't make sense if there were but a small minority wanting to gain admission, against Boy Scout policy, and in such a way as to jeopardize sponsorships and aid from religious organizations. So I have concluded that there must just be way, way more gay people in America than I had previously believed, because giving them the whole enchilada is turning out to be VERY important.
It just means that most straight folks aren't dumb bigots, and oppose the BSA's bigoted policies.
For similar reasons the BSA's racist policies came to an end in the mid-1970s.
This is outrageous. That senator needs a good spanking.
Ever noticed how often homophobes want us to think about spanking pro-equality people and about what Eagle scouts do with their penises?
Stop it brian...you getting hellfire excited
How do I get a trom boner? That might be fun.
dunno about that - you get brass balls and a flare at the end plus it slides back and forth making strange sounds...
EWWWWW....we really don't want to hear that.
Three cheers for this idea. After you terminate tax privileges for homophobic "public" groups, consider taking tax exempt status away from churches who house more political meetings than religious meetings.
YES YES YES
The fact of the matter is that we all pay taxes and our taxes go to support any number of things we as individuals may or may not support. Unlike the days of 'no taxation without representation," we now have out of control taxation with representation. In any event, this proposed legislation is not good for the country and, if passed, would set a bad precedent. Folks, we live in the land of the free. Free to have your own opinion; free to celebrate our differences; we do not have to agree with each other; we do not have to support everything that everyone wants to engage in; that's why we call it the land of the free. You have a right to defend your position and your beliefs even if they are the very things I would spend a lifetime fighting against. You cannot force others to accept something just because you think they should. If I don't agree with your lifestyle or your religion or anything else about you or any issue in this country, that is my right. I'm entitled to feel as I do; I'm entitled to my opinion. They are mine and nothing to do with you. If I choose not to support an organization because of their beliefs, motto or creed, that's my choice; I have no right to force them to change simply because I or a loud majority thinks it's right. I have the option to walk away, start my own organization and live my life as I see fit. Of course, I say all this with the belief that I also will not tear you down due to our differences. I may disagree with you, I may not like something, but I can do that without attacking you. If you believe my difference of opinion or feelings are wrong, that's your issue, not mine. In any event, the Boy Scouts of American do many, many great things and should not lose their not-for profit status simply because they don't support the gay lifestyle in their ranks. That is their right. In our attempt to legislate morality, force the changes we believe are right and compel others to accept our way of life, we run the risk of turning into a country that is no longer about the land of the free; that is not a place i want to leave to future generations of the great people of this great Country. Be careful what you ask for.
"we do not have to support everything that everyone wants to engage in"
Such as tax exempt status for a bunch of bigots.
that's just it, the boy scouts are supported by those who want to support it
The Boy Scouts are suppoted by all tax payers including those who don't want to support them.
And your only gripe is that the Boy Scouts are for hetersexual boys? Somehow, I don't feel your rage, when a similar tax exempt organization can be organized at any time for gay scouts, or for a mixture of gay scouts and scouts whose parents insist that they be part of a mixed troop. Form your own.
My only gripe is that government money is being used to support an organization that arbitrarily discriminates. It'd be just as wrong to support an organization that allowed only gay scouts.
As are abortions. Get over it.
65, abortions don't discriminate any more than cancer does.
sure thing pastor - go back to your sheep. These are KIDS - the issue was brought up by a kid who had completed the requirements for the highest RANK but was denied based on his being gay. How did they find out? beats me (oh wait, that would be a sadist)
The biggest issue is about PEDOPHILES - not gays (particularly not very young gays who probably don't even KNOW their sexual orientation.)
Oh, but it's a disease... a contagious disease... and we can't have any scout with any gay tendencies anywhere near a troop of non-gay (or should I say "straight"?) kids. (notification made about the dripping sarcasm)
I cringe when some LGBT groups go to the unjust extreme to fight for rights and risk losing some of the support that we have just gained for gay rights and marriage equality.
The Boyscouts, as pervasive as they are, still remains a private non-profit organization. They are allowed to have selective policies on membership (like it is for boys and not girls and belief in God) but they can still keep their non-profit status.
The idea, if we as a country still accepts, is to support non profit organizations and not have to regulate their beliefs. We should tax organizations that are no longer non-profit, like large "non-profit" hospitals that are making a mint that I just read about:
30 years ago the United States Supreme Court ruled an organization that engaged in discrimination could not be considered charitable and was therefore no tax exempt. The ruling was about racial discrimination. How is this issue different? As far as I am concerned, not at all.
being black is not perverted, abominable or un-natural. that is how. Being homosexual is NOT a civil right and is a slap in the face to every African American, trying to make the two equal.
Abominable? Unnatural? A century ago, blacks were thought to be these things.
Pastor - Being gay is not perverted, abominable, or unnatural. Professional mental health associations state that homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexuality.
well pastor - who gave YOU the authority to make the rules? Are you a politician? a wannabee politician? Or just a bigoted religionazi?
I am currently forced under penalty of fine or imprisonment to support and spread religious beliefs I disagree with. That is a violation of my right to free worship.
I am paying for the public services tax exempt orgs receive through my tax dollars. I have no choice.
The Boy Scouts Org has a choice.
I have had sons in the Boy Scouts and daughters in the Girl Scouts. They had almost symmetrical gender policies. That is, the Boy Scouts didn't permit girls/women/homosexuals in overnight campouts, etc. Nor did the Girl Scouts permit boys/men on overnight campouts, positions of leadership, etc. Hence, if a the law in question is "designed" for the Boy Scouts, it will surely apply to the Girl Scouts also. What's good for the gander, in terms of "gender orientation" laws, is good for the goose -- right???
eastridge54 If you have daughters in the Girl Scouts how are you not aware that they have been open to LGBT scouts for many years. Unlike the Boy Scouts it is a non-issue with the Girl Scouts.
Just another "proof" that the gay agenda is alive and well. This has nothing to do with "rights". Homosexuals have all the same rights as any one else. They have a right to start their own scout group, tax exempt, of course.
Now WHO is shoving their lifestyle on everyone else? Please. What a joke.
You offend me calling yourself a "Pastor". There's nothing Christ-like in your position. Charity is not a "gay egenda". Government supported discrimination is not a right.
Pastor, That separate but equal thing was tried already in the south. Didn't work out too good, did it?
Brian....the truth usually offends. My position IS the position of Christ, as I only preach Christ, and him crucified. Jesus was not tolerant of sin. Jesus never preached individual rights. Jesus preached repentance and change, not salvation while continuing to sin.
This is just that 'big government' you all wanted getting involved in something that is otherwise a private enterprise
Exactly. Giving the Boy Scouts tax exemption is government interference.
Taking it away is...?
Pastor - Gay agenda = Legal and social equality. Gays do not have the same rights as heterosexuals. Straight people can marry who they love, gays cannot in most states. Straight people can join any gay organization, but gays cannot join the Boy Scouts. That is not equality.
The "Gay agenda" is the excuse straights use to discriminate. The same as segregation in the 1950's-60's. Open your eyes and stop this blatant discrimination now. America is a nation of freedom for all, not just those that are thought to be "good enough".
Gay organizations are free to not admit heterosexuals. I find it hard to believe that straight people would desire to join any homo organization, I know I wouldn't. Our founding fathers are continuing to roll over in their graves at the state of the country they founded. Here are a few quotes.
"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible" -George Washington
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -John Adams
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity." -John Quincy Adams
"I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus. I have little doubt that our whole country will soon be rallied to the unity of our creator." -Thomas Jefferson
The atheistic/agnostic/liberal debaters of course post their lies and out of context quotes, from the founding fathers and the constitution. It is humorous to watch them try to debunk truth.
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it, we have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capac - ity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." -James Madison
"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great Nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For that reason alone, people of other faiths have been afforded freedom of worship here." -Patrick Henry
Nonsense. The church is constantly complaining about having to pay for things they offend their morality. Why should the American taxpayer subsidize discriminatory institutions? History is not on their side; tax non-profits that refuse to abide by common human decency.
This same California law should be applied to ALL tax exempt organizations, like the Church of the Latter Day Saints and the Catholic Church that openly discriminate against gays, lesbians and transgender people.
I don't want my federal taxes supporting bigotry in any organization no matter what their excuse is. We have a massive deficit and tax exempt status is great place to start collecting long overdue debts.
If it isn't changed then I want tax exempt status to discriminate against the Republican Party!
The power to tax is the power to destroy. The governments are destroying the USA. We must shut off the money to governments, all governments, especially the fed.gov because they are destroying everything American.
Write your representatives and demand they stop spending and substantially reduce taxes. If they don't listen, recall them. Spare no one, both majorly inept parties must go.
Cutting of our money is only solution to their malversational derelictions. ©2013
PS The sequestration is the greatest hoax ever foisted upon the American people. (Mark these words.)
A very interesting approach, will we be able to remove the tax exempt status of churches that discriminate, will we be able to remove the tax exempt status of land owned by private golf courses, or the tax exempt status of the republican party? I think that too many or those that could be punished for their bias will group together to stop this.
It's not a Democat vs. Republican thing. Obama played that game, beat that horse dead, when he promised to fight for equality, but has continually fought against equality. He fought against the repeal of DADT. He reversed his campaign promises the day after he won the election. Then, he acted like he flip-flopped again, but was careful not to make any actionable promises. People who think Obama is pro-equality are chumps.
Brian, I have to disagree with you 100%. Obama has been very good (if not brilliant) on all the gay rights issues, but sometimes the administration needs to take a certain legal position which seems contrary to common sense but actually has a valid purpose, like their defense of the Witt v Air Force DADT case while simultaneously working to repeal DADT and arguing for heightened scrutiny. He's really delivered on his campaign promises regarding DADT and DOMA - the former is history, the latter will be history in 4 months.
And it largely is a Democrat vs. Republican thing, both legislatively and in public opinion. The bigots are overwhelmingly Republican and conservative.
Read the rticle titled, "Obama's False 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Narrative Is the president really the gay rights hero he says he is?" on the web. It will show you how wrong you are. Obama has fought against equality at every step.
Why do too many of you people not realize that this isn't going to punish the organization, it is going to punish the KIDS.
Noli, that's what we're upset about - how it hurts the kids to discriminate against them and their parents because they are gay, to grow up in organizations which promote bigotry and prejudice. Keeping the Boy Scouts going punishes kids.
So in plain English you are saying is that it is perfectly logical to judge and stereotype a group of people in order to teach them that it is wrong to judge and stereotype people based upon their differences?!?!? And how wise do you think it would be to show our children that it is perfectly ok to punish an entire group of people based solely on the actions, or in this case the opinions, of the very few?!?!? Look, I am not in favor of the ban but because I don't think the boy scouts should be worried about anything related to sex.
You're confused. In plain English, I am saying that bigoted organizations should not be supported with government money (including tax exemption). I'm not stereotyping anyone as bigoted. I'm saying that those who, by the words coming out of their own mouths, -are- bigoted, such as the Boy Scouts, should not be supported with government money (including tax exemption).
Clearly then, you are the guy to contact to determine what bigoted is and is not. And if you aren't, who should then be called? Yes, that is EXACTLY the problem.
Who should be asked who is bigotted? Take a national poll. The average citizen knows who are the bigots. The bigots are those who express intolerance or prejudice (and, no, intolerance of intolernce doesn't count).
I smell another Chic-Fi-La moment in the making.
Chick-Fil-A got support, justifiably so, because the government tried to prevent them from doing business. i'm pro-equality and I supported Chick-Fil-A, not because I support -them-, but because I support the First Amendment. Government is not trying to shut down the Boy Scouts. Government is simply working on taking away their tax exemption. Boy Scouts will continue to have the right to be a bunch of bigots.
Speaking of government, we are only talking about California government in this issue. Their form of government is a model in how not to do something. Don't ever move there if you are interested in sanity.
Of course there are some nice people out there where the sun finally sets. I know about ten of those nice ones. As for the rest, at least we've got all the wackos bottled up in one sad state.
As long as Christian hate groups like LBGT Equality California are allowed to spew their hate and get tax exempt status, any org including the KKK should be tax exempt.
La raza, naacp, national negroe college fund, and especially the black churches who are really only left wing fund raising machines should be stripped of their status. Remember the ugly immigration marches with the mexican flags and hate filled speeches?
If obama and his hateful democrat party can spout inflamatory words about any conservative group they disagree with and can write off expenses, anybody should be able too.
A group fighting for equality is not a hate group. A person has to have been struck on the head, repeatedly, to have missed that obvious fact.
Bam, Bam, Bam. Every church in the United States supports equality. Just not your version.
Rick, there is no other version. People are equal or they aren't.
Brian, its not that simple. If all people were really equal, how would we justify different treatment in the same circumstances? We cannot. But people in all walks of life - from parents and kids, to the Congress and the courts, to churches and the markets - do that every single day.
We do this for many reasons. Sometimes to redress past conduct, sometimes to preserve the status quo, and sometimes to ensure future opportunity. And sometimes just because its easier than trying to manage something utterly complex.
While I feel we are all equal under God, there are those among us who feel it perfectly logical and acceptable to substitute social equality for real equality. Instead of promoting equality of opportunity, they want to ensure equality of result. And that to me is totally unacceptable.
Just as you should not be burdened simply because of who you are, you should not be expected to benefit simply because of who you are.
We are all different and our opportunities and obstacles are all different. The very imbalances we hope to "fix" for some because we view them as a deficit, do create unfairnesses somewhere else. We might decide to overlook this unfairness for the public good, but it's there just the same. And we may think we can account for every eventuality in our enlightened decision-making but we are human and fallible and there will be no achievement of any ideal.
That said, knowing in advance we are unable to achieve an ideal is no reason not to pursue it. I support allowing gays in the BSA because I think people should have the opportunity to participate not on the basis of who they are but what they actually do.
At the same time, I don't think simply declaring that all people have every right to do everything is appropriate or advantageous. Nor do I think there is some ideal violated when we recognize our limitations in managing the results of any attempt to do so.