Golden Girl leaves $300k to a homeless gay youths centre

[derspiess]

Or are you questioning a need for having a shelter for gay youth?

I am

You say you want your kind to feel like they are part of society, aren't thought of differently, etc. but then you support something like this that furthers their, ehm, 'apartness'.

[Valmy]

So then what's the issue?

I don't have one.  I thought I was simply making sure Marty understood what BB was trying to say

[garbon]

I don't have one.  I thought I was simply making sure Marty understood what BB was trying to say

Yeah but BB's issue seems ridiculous.  It is pretty clear that 300,000k for a general homeless charity would not be sufficient.

[Barrister]

Because a lot of these centers are run by religious organisations who are hostile to gay people, and will likely send a message to these kids that it is wrong to be gay, resulting in the gay kids either resenting the center (even if they are not kicked out of it outright) or having to resent themselves.

You have a source for that?

Yes a lot of shelters are run by religious organizations - namely the Salvation Army.  But they absolutely do not kick out people for being gay, and in fact do very little to proselytize.  I'd be shocked to find absolutely any homeless shelter either refuse service to a gay youth or say a single negative word to them.

Marty I in fact deal with youth homeless issues pretty routinely as a part of my work.  And I find that we have an issue with over-specialization of services.  For example we have some great services here for youths with FASD, but not for other mental deficits.

As a homeless youth it is better to have a number of more generic shelters that are easy to find, than a number of distinct and specialized shelters.  Last thing you want is for some kid to turn up on the doorstep and be told "Oh sorry, this is the shelter for african-american lesbian homeless youth.  You want the shelter for asian-american transgendered homeless youth.  It's on the other side of town".

I think you perceive an anti-gay message in my comment when there isn't one.  Gay people are people first and foremost, and nobody regardless of sexual orientation should be out on the streets.

And I don't mean to disparage Ms. Arthur's bequest.  Certainly not.

[Valmy]

Yeah but BB's issue seems ridiculous.  It is pretty clear that 300,000k for a general homeless charity would not be sufficient.

I am sure any charity would be more than delighted to recieve a donation of that size.  She was only donating to this center she was not starting it up.

[Martinus]

Because a lot of these centers are run by religious organisations who are hostile to gay people, and will likely send a message to these kids that it is wrong to be gay, resulting in the gay kids either resenting the center (even if they are not kicked out of it outright) or having to resent themselves.

You have a source for that?

Yes a lot of shelters are run by religious organizations - namely the Salvation Army.  But they absolutely do not kick out people for being gay, and in fact do very little to proselytize.  I'd be shocked to find absolutely any homeless shelter either refuse service to a gay youth or say a single negative word to them.

Marty I in fact deal with youth homeless issues pretty routinely as a part of my work.  And I find that we have an issue with over-specialization of services.  For example we have some great services here for youths with FASD, but not for other mental deficits.

As a homeless youth it is better to have a number of more generic shelters that are easy to find, than a number of distinct and specialized shelters.  Last thing you want is for some kid to turn up on the doorstep and be told "Oh sorry, this is the shelter for african-american lesbian homeless youth.  You want the shelter for asian-american transgendered homeless youth.  It's on the other side of town".

I think you perceive an anti-gay message in my comment when there isn't one.  Gay people are people first and foremost, and nobody regardless of sexual orientation should be out on the streets.

And I don't mean to disparage Ms. Arthur's bequest.  Certainly not.

The part was just one leg of the three leg of my post - I agree it is probably less of the concern that the other two.

I wish (and I know I am guilty of this myself) people would actually read through the thread first and then respond, rather than respond to posts made way back, by raising concerns and questions that have already been addressed.

Essentially, you are arguing a strawman, as I explained in the subsequent posts.

[Barrister]

I don't have one.  I thought I was simply making sure Marty understood what BB was trying to say

Yeah but BB's issue seems ridiculous.  It is pretty clear that 300,000k for a general homeless charity would not be sufficient.

No amount for any group is ever sufficient.  But I'm pretty sure the Salvation Army could do a lot with $300,000, for example.

[garbon]

I am sure any charity would be more than delighted to recieve a donation of that size.  She was only donating to this center she was not starting it up.

Yes but to a specialized charity.  A general homeless kid charity would likely not be able to do as much good per kid they help.

[Martinus]

I don't have one.  I thought I was simply making sure Marty understood what BB was trying to say

Yeah but BB's issue seems ridiculous.  It is pretty clear that 300,000k for a general homeless charity would not be sufficient.

No amount for any group is ever sufficient.  But I'm pretty sure the Salvation Army could do a lot with $300,000, for example.

I think this line of reasoning is pretty fallacious. Unless you actually believe that a GLBT youth centre is unnecessary, then you could essentially make this argument against any charitable donation - because you could always find a "more worthy cause".

Why give money to a shelter for homeless animals if you could give it to war veterans? Why given money to war veterans, if you could give them to children suffering from leukemia. And so on.

[Barrister]

The part was just one leg of the three leg of my post - I agree it is probably less of the concern that the other two.

I wish (and I know I am guilty of this myself) people would actually read through the thread first and then respond, rather than respond to posts made way back, by raising concerns and questions that have already been addressed.

Essentially, you are arguing a strawman, as I explained in the subsequent posts.

I've read every post in this thread, but can only reply so quickly.

That one of three legs of your argument isn't just the least important, it's downright false.  No charity would ever turn away a gay youth.

[Barrister]

I think this line of reasoning is pretty fallacious. Unless you actually believe that a GLBT youth centre is unnecessary, then you could essentially make this argument against any charitable donation - because you could always find a "more worthy cause".

Why give money to a shelter for homeless animals if you could give it to war veterans? Why given money to war veterans, if you could give them to children suffering from leukemia. And so on.

You're right, which is why I'm not making the argument that some other charity is "more worthy" than another.

I am only making the argument that we should not provide overly-specialized services and should try to keep them open to serve as many people as possible. 

[Martinus]

The part was just one leg of the three leg of my post - I agree it is probably less of the concern that the other two.

I wish (and I know I am guilty of this myself) people would actually read through the thread first and then respond, rather than respond to posts made way back, by raising concerns and questions that have already been addressed.

Essentially, you are arguing a strawman, as I explained in the subsequent posts.

I've read every post in this thread, but can only reply so quickly.

That one of three legs of your argument isn't just the least important, it's downright false.  No charity would ever turn away a gay youth.

I didn't say they would turn him away - but he wouldn't get a "it's ok to be gay" message in ALL of them either, no?

Self-acceptance is a significant part of a healing process for any gay youth, especially one that has been kicked out of his home by parents who think being gay is a sin. Having to stay in a place run by an organization that considers it a sin to be gay as well is not going to be exactly helpful either.

[Barrister]

I am sure any charity would be more than delighted to recieve a donation of that size.  She was only donating to this center she was not starting it up.

Yes but to a specialized charity.  A general homeless kid charity would likely not be able to do as much good per kid they help.

The downside to that then is you may be able to do more for the kids you can help, but you are helping fewer kids.  IT's great for those that can get in, not so good for those who aren't.

Again that's an issue I deal with.  We have some great services for, say residential alcohol treatment.  And a 6 month waiting list to go to it.

[garbon]

should try to keep them open to serve as many people as possible. 

Why? With the scarcity of funds, we can't save them all. Better to a smaller amount than give pittance to the masses.

[Martinus]

I think this line of reasoning is pretty fallacious. Unless you actually believe that a GLBT youth centre is unnecessary, then you could essentially make this argument against any charitable donation - because you could always find a "more worthy cause".

Why give money to a shelter for homeless animals if you could give it to war veterans? Why given money to war veterans, if you could give them to children suffering from leukemia. And so on.

You're right, which is why I'm not making the argument that some other charity is "more worthy" than another.

I am only making the argument that we should not provide overly-specialized services and should try to keep them open to serve as many people as possible.

BB, you said you had dealings with homeless youths. Considering you are a state prosecutor, I can guess at the nature of these dealings, but just in case let me ask - are these kids usually well-adjusted, socially-adapted, tolerant and open-minded?

Even in a centre which does not preach a religious anti-gay message do you think such kids would be welcoming, accepting and supportive of a "queer" kid in their midst?

As I said, I very much doubt a "queer youth" centre would turn away a hetero youth seeking help. They are there because queer kids are ostracized and would have a very hard time in a "normal" centre.