Last week, I wrote a column about the Boy Scouts, and the brouhaha over the admission of gay Scouts to their ranks.
What I missed was that the BSA was not making a statement in saying it would admit gay Scouts. It was retreating from its position that it would no longer prohibit membership to gay Scouts.
I think the column I wrote is largely unaffected by how the BSA got mixed up in all this. My point was that the organization should have always maintained a position of inclusiveness rather than exclusiveness.
Once the BSA crossed that line, well, the results have been obvious. The tenor of the column was always that the BSA should be about the boys and instilling the characteristics of leadership and self-reliance.
The column did light up my email inbox to some degree, although all my letters were decorous and stuck to the issues.
That is, no one called me a dunderhead.
But I want to devote the rest of my space to two letters in response. I thank them for their thoughts.
This story appeared in the June 27 edition of the Johns Creek Herald.