One of the most outrageous injustices occurring in our society is the homosexual activists' relentless assault on the Boy Scouts of America (BSA), all because the BSA will not conform its standards to accommodate their lifestyle.

It's not enough that even the liberal United States Supreme Court ruled in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale that the Constitution guarantees the BSA's right to exclude homosexuals from leadership positions in its organization. Homosexual activists will not take no for an answer. Their brand of tolerance insists that no tolerance be accorded the Scouts.

Forget the BSA's constitutional right to freely associate with whomever they please. No one dares to withhold approval of the homosexual lifestyle lest they invite the unquenchable wrath of homosexual activists who, ironically, insist their aim is to prevent hatred.

Have we turned our backs on traditional morality so completely in this country that we won't even stand up for one of the last remaining groups that has the unwavering integrity and fortitude to resist the onslaught against decency so rampant in our popular culture?

How many times have you heard people, your own friends and acquaintances, lament the demise of our moral fabric? Yet when that rare group fights to preserve traditional values we mostly sit idly by as the culture unleashes its vengeance against it.

Ever since the Dale case, the homosexual lobby has redoubled its efforts to cripple this fine organization through sheer bullying tactics and intimidation. When will those who appreciate the work of the Scouts begin to speak up on their behalf and denounce and perhaps even boycott those organizations conspiring to hasten their capitulation to the culture?

No, homosexual activists and some of their political supporters will not be denied. In Madison, Wis., the Boy Scouts volunteered to assist with the city's Fourth of July celebration in exchange for a modest donation. But the Madison City Council passed a measure to compel the organizers of the fireworks display not to donate to the Boy Scouts because of the BSA's "anti-gay" stance.

Though it is not a city-run event, the council felt justified in intervening because the city contributes $60,000 toward it. Councilman Steve Holtzman said, "This is an inclusive event, and we simply will not support organizations that have a discriminatory policy." The mayor disagrees, saying, "It sends a terrible message. I think for the city to be dictating where the funds go is a little presumptuous."

In keeping with their character, the Scouts said they would nevertheless help with the event, even without the donation. But such graciousness will not take them out of the line of fire. This is a war, and the homosexual lobby seems to have plenty of allies.

Take the United Way in Portland, Ore., for example, which cut off $150,000 in funding to some 53,000 inner-city children because the Boy Scouts help them with a number of activities. United Way chapters in other major cities have also severed ties with the Scouts, including San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Madison, Sacramento, Hartford, Seattle, Dallas, Tucson, Providence, Santa Fe, Miami, Portland, Maine and Portland, Ore.

There's more. The city of Berkeley, Calif., denied the Sea Scouts free berthing rights at a local dock because of their relationship with the BSA. The California Supreme Court decreed that state judges working with the Scouts must not sit on any case involving homosexuals. The state of Connecticut prevented its employees from using their voluntary payroll deductions to donate to the Scouts, though they have been among the eligible beneficiaries of the state's charitable program for more than 30 years. And get this, when the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the right of the state to discriminate against the scouts, Judge Guido Calabresi blistered the Scouts in a footnote to the ruling, essentially saying the state could make the scouts "pay a price" for their position on homosexuals.

A federal judge ruled that the city of San Diego could not lease public park land to the Scouts because they were a religious organization. Keep in mind that the Scouts fervently deny their aim is to promote religion. But since they do promote traditional values, which some in the popular culture find offensive, they have now been deemed a religious group. Is that the point at which we've arrived in this nation: Any group that adheres to Christian values will be speciously classified as religious? Can you think of a better way to secularize a society by coercion?

I simply don't understand the silence from those who say they support the Scouts.