After the furor over "the letter" I decided to look for a USMS charter or similar statement. I expected to find something that said something like USMS serves to promote adult swimming open to all (etc.).
Instead I found nothing. The FAQ is mostly about nuts and bolts of USMS and why join. The Administration pages on this site describe how USMS is run.
I could not find anywhere a general statement of USMS's purpose for being other than to give adult swimmers their own group. I couldn't find any language about non-discrimination or to promote adult swimming, etc.
Shouldn't USMS have something like that?
Parents
Former Member
With trepidation I wade into a topic fraught with emotion. Hopefully with more light than heat.
First, re the charter and related documents, there is well-written USMS anti-discrimination language. In today's society, those policies could be displayed and repeated as prominently as possible without any negative effect. In other words, parade anti-discrimination policy upfront. Shout it from the rooftops.
Second, re the letter, it should not have been published because it can be construed as an incitement. While approximately half the country still believes homosexuality is immoral, these days very few believe it is an unprosecuted crime. The letter compares homosexuality to thievery, an undeniably criminal activity, and states ominously that it "should not be tolerated." Unfortunately statements of this nature can be construed as calls to action. The letter goes on to accuse homosexuality of destroying lives; not just of the participants, but "of the society as a whole."
Third, re free speech, a wise, award-winning editor of a local newspaper and website, when criticized for disallowing or deleting vile opinion, said something like: "The Bill of Rights guaranteed you free speech, but not the right to publish it in my newspaper. I decide what goes in these pages."
With trepidation I wade into a topic fraught with emotion. Hopefully with more light than heat.
First, re the charter and related documents, there is well-written USMS anti-discrimination language. In today's society, those policies could be displayed and repeated as prominently as possible without any negative effect. In other words, parade anti-discrimination policy upfront. Shout it from the rooftops.
Second, re the letter, it should not have been published because it can be construed as an incitement. While approximately half the country still believes homosexuality is immoral, these days very few believe it is an unprosecuted crime. The letter compares homosexuality to thievery, an undeniably criminal activity, and states ominously that it "should not be tolerated." Unfortunately statements of this nature can be construed as calls to action. The letter goes on to accuse homosexuality of destroying lives; not just of the participants, but "of the society as a whole."
Third, re free speech, a wise, award-winning editor of a local newspaper and website, when criticized for disallowing or deleting vile opinion, said something like: "The Bill of Rights guaranteed you free speech, but not the right to publish it in my newspaper. I decide what goes in these pages."
