When the Boy Scouts of America established a policy of not allowing homosexuals to hold leadership positions in its organization, they came under fire from the gay community and its supporters.

However, the Supreme Court upheld a New Jersey lower court decision supporting the Boy Scouts. It seemed as though the final word had been spoken about the rights of private organizations to determine who could and could not belong.

Now the 4-H Club has cut ties with the Boy Scouts of America. As a group that receives public funding, the 4-H Club cannot actively support the Boy Scouts discriminatory policy.

While the 4-H decision is not a politically motivated attempt to send a message to the Boy Scouts, it can and should be seen as a sign of things to come. Members of 4-H should be proud to belong to a group that will not tacitly legitimize prejudice by waiting for a court to tell them they must cut ties with groups that casually hate gays.

The importance of this decision is that it comes from a very traditional group. Too often we are presented with arguments against homosexuality that cast it in the light of deviancy and make absurd suggestions that it is a lifestyle choice made by individuals who refute family values.

Conversely, anyone arguing with the Boy Scouts is somehow supporting alternative lifestyles and doing a disservice to everything pure and good in America.

You cannot get more traditional than 4-H. This parting of the ways will help demonstrate what is categorically true: Being gay is not a lifestyle choice; it is not deviant behavior. It is as traditional as livestock shows, strawberry preserves and the Boy Scouts.

Editorial Board: Carrie Tett, Greg Jerrett, Katie Goldsmith, Amie Van Overmeer, Andrea Hauser and Jocelyn Marcus