Growing Pains: Planning the Future of Los Angeles

Does the future of our city lie in a backwards dream impossible to reconcile with the ever growing megalopolis we are?  Can we really say that a region with 12.9 million people can "remain" a bastion of single-family dwellings?  Can such an already dense and ever growing city really expect our skyscapers to be palm trees rather than the grand buildings of a downtown core that draws much needed business to make such an urban center economically viable?  Or will we forge into the future with a plan to put us on par with, or even better than, the current great urban centers of the world?  Increasing density and traffic--both pedestrian and vehicular--CANNOT be denied.  What will our response be?  Reasoned or delusional?  Will proposals to alleviate traffic arteries and ameliorate density concerns continue to be consistently shot down with no other reasonable alternative proposed by the NIMBYs? Is it time for the delusional NIMBYs to move to town that more meets their impossible dreams?  I'll put a call into the Kansas board of tourism and chamber of commerce for them myself!
To be sure, the development of our city has been less than perfect.  From the ripping up of the rails of the largest urban light-rail transit system in the world to our lack of easily accessible green space to the straight-jacketing of our river which originally gave sustenance to our pueblo, we missed out on being a being a city prepared for the density and gridlock we encounter today.  We need bold, well-reasoned action now, to catch up to our future.  Have a read at the excellent article below from The Los Angeles Times:

Critic's Notebook: There's a growing disconnect on a better-connected L.A.

By Christopher Hawthorne, Los Angeles Times Architecture Critic

24 October 2010

We love your for your money, not for you.

Gay father of Cub Scout not allowed to be a Cub Scout Leader, but they are happy to take his money! 
Source: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-scoutleader_16met.ART.State.Edition1.33ce8ea.html

Gay father not allowed to be Scout leader

12:00 AM CDT on Saturday, October 16, 2010

	Print
	RSS
Yahoo! Buzz
Share

By JON NIELSEN / The Dallas Morning News
jnielsen@dallasnews.com

A University Park father learned this week that he will not be able to serve as a leader in his 9-year-old's Cub Scout pack because he's gay.

For the last two years Jon Langbert has organized a popcorn fundraiser for Pack 70 at University Park Elementary. Then at a September Scout meeting, someone complained about his homosexuality, Langbert said.

He said he was told this week that he can't wear the Scout leader shirt he was given last year and that he cannot serve in a leadership position because of his sexual orientation.

"What message does that send to my son? It says I'm a second-class citizen," Langbert said.

Robert McTaggart, the Cubmaster for Pack 70, said Langbert will be allowed to continue as a popcorn fundraiser. That position is not considered a leadership role and can be held by a volunteer.

The Boys Scouts of America has had a long-standing policy that rejects leaders who are gay or atheist. In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the organization's rules in a 5-4 decision.

"Our policy is not meant to serve as social commentary outside the Scout program," said Pat Currie of the Circle 10 Council, the umbrella organization that oversees Pack 70. "We respect people who have a different opinion from us. We just hope those same people will respect our right to have a different opinion."

The situation in University Park came to light after Park Cities Peoplereported it online Friday.

Currie said Langbert can continue to participate in the pack's activities as a parent.

"We wish him all the best in that endeavor, obviously," he said. "It's our hope and our desire that he stays in the program."

Langbert has agreed to continue raising money through the popcorn fundraiser, which ends in late November. But he said he's not going to let the Boy Scouts "brush this under the carpet."

He said he is angry the Highland Park school district allows the Boy Scouts to use its facilities in spite of their discrimination. He said he has contacted attorneys.

"My tax dollars are paying for their discrimination. And the next gay dad who wants to come along can't. I'm not going to let them," Langbert said. "My position is that the school cannot allow the use of their facilities to an organization that discriminates."

The Boy Scout organization can do whatever it wants!  It is a private organization.  I do, however, find it disturbing that the GAY father would have his son be in such a homophobic organization.  I was a Boy Scout and in an interview with my scoutmaster to achieve a higher rank, one of the questions asked was, "What do you think about the BSA policy of not allowing girls, atheists or homosexuals in to the Boy Scouts?" My reply, "This is a private organization and we can exclude who we want.  They have their own organizations and do the same."  I got my higher rank, and i still say the same thing today.  Let them be homophobic if they want.  Am i happy about it?  No.  Would i put my son into the organization?  No.  


The Boy Scouts of America is a great organization, EXCEPT for that homophobic thing.  It was great fun making friends, male-bonding, learning useful skills, learning how to serve our community, but because it endorses a homophobic viewpoint, i as a gay father, could not allow my son to be part of such an organization.  As an atheist i felt uncomfortable being sponsored by a Christian churches and having meetings on church property.  It is a shame that such a great organization excludes homosexuals and atheists, but this is America and as a private organization they can make such exclusions.  

---

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.