The Girl Scouts of America congratulated the latest Supreme Court Justice on her appointment to the court, then they deleted it.
As part of their ongoing, founding mission of celebrating and furthering women and girls, the Girl Scouts wrote "Congratulations Amy Coney Barrett on becoming the 5th woman appointed to the Supreme Court since its inception in 1789."
Backlash was swift and fierce, and later that day, they deleted the post, saying: "Earlier today, we shared a post highlighting the five women who have been appointed to the Supreme Court. It was quickly viewed as a political and partisan statement which was not our intent and we have removed the post."
They followed that up by saying that they removed the post showing the five women who had been appointed to the court over the court's lifetime, by saying that "Girl Scouts of the USA is a nonpolitical, nonpartisan organization. We are neither red nor blue, but Girl Scout GREEN. We are here to lift up girls and women."
The original post, in service to celebrating the accomplishments of these great judicial and legal minds who have attained a seat on the highest court, was not partisan. In fact, it showed four women justices who are liberal, two of whom still serve on the court, in addition to Barrett, who is conservative, and has only just taken her post alongside her colleagues.
The Girl Scouts did not seem to realize the irony, that in removing the post by claiming to be non-partisan they were behaving in a partisan manner. Those who would deny women a celebration at Barrett's appointment are leftists who take issue with what they believe to be Barrett's views.
The Girl Scouts gave in to partisan retaliation against Barrett by taking down the post, and then made the very odd claim that deleting their congrats was the non-partisan thing to do. It wasn't, and Twitter users wasted no time in pointing that out.
The Girl Scouts had no problem lauding the first four women on the Court back in March 2019, when they posted: "Sandra Day O'Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor broke gender barriers in the nation's highest court, but that's only part of what makes them inspiring role models worth honoring." This indicates that political views alone are not the only reason to praise women justices.
The Federalist's Sean Davis wrote: "Awesome job teaching girls to cower before the mob. What an example you’ve set for them. Consider this your reminder that Girl Scouts is little more than a front for a wildly profitable cookie company that uses unpaid child labor to move product."
Townhall's Katie Pavlich said: "I thought the Girl Scouts was about female empowerment? Y’all lost your way a long time ago but this is a new low. Wow."
While author Anna James Zeigler said: "The Girl Scouts were bullied into deleting a simple tweet acknowledging all the women who’ve been elevated to the nation’s highest bench if you still wonder if there are quiet Trump voters."
Atheists for Liberty's Thomas Sheedy said that it's "Sad to see that @girlscouts have given into political partisanship. If women are being celebrated for being women and advancing politically in American society then women on both the mainstream left and the mainstream right should be treated equally."
But of course, that's not what feminism is about these days, and the Girl Scouts know it. In 2015, the Girl Scouts got on board with the idea that a child doesn't need to be a girl to be a Girl Scout. Their official policy is that "if the child is recognized by the family and school/community as a girl and lives culturally as a girl, then Girl Scouts is an organization that can serve her in a setting that is both emotionally and physically safe."
Supporting girls and women who are on board with progressive ideology is what the Girl Scouts are all about, not advancing women of diverse views.