Resistance/backlash/response to Supreme Court opinions

[Frank Cross]

I'm just not sure what to make of the BSA defenders, who don't really
seem comfortable with the BSA themselves.  According to the opinion, Dale
was informed that the BSA policies "specifically forbid membership to
homosexuals."  Prof McConnell suggests that this policy is not really
enforced as a general rule (though without supporting evidence), but how
is this a defense of a policy?  If indeed the policy were a more general one
against promotion of sexual libertinism, that would be different but that
doesn't appear to fit the facts in Dale.  Sounds like he was pretty
circumspect in his BSA role and, while he was out generally, he didn't
associate
his public statements with his role at the BSA.  Tell us precisely what
behavior of his was objectionable, please

Of course, this is the new compassionate conservative position.  It's ok
to be gay, so long as you don't flaunt it.  However, the definition of
flaunting it is unclear and, as Prof Torres points out, includes activities
like
taking your partner to an outing, activities that would never be considered
flaunting for straights.

Does this remind anyone else of historic US discrimination against Jews.
They were fine so long as they changed their name and didn't appear
"too Jewish."  If they "flaunted" their religion, though, they were gone.






Frank Cross
Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law
CBA 5.202
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78712