Merlyn_LeRoy

bob white writes: The federal government does not give any direct funding to the traditional divisions of the BSA I'd consider HUD Community Development Block Grants to be federal funding.

littlebillie writes: Merlyn, I checked out that site, and - you're right - it's anecdotal and represents a single arbitrary decision on the part of someone who doesn't have a problem in making up awards, either. I'd really like to see a more in-your-face example - a la Lambert - where the nat'l org would pretty much have to comment. Again, the organization lets you certify yourself 'spiritual' - I am interested in a real test of that vs atheism at a media spotlight level. I still think the GSUSA has never been tested to that degree, and I'd be really fascinated by how they spin it. What would be your take on the situation athttp://www.diversityingirlscouts.org/ if the waiting game fails, it goes to court and the GSUSA wins? As I said, the GSUSA doesn't have the government violating the civil rights of atheists, like the BSA does; if the GSUSA successfully argues that it's a private organization that doesn't have to follow the ADA, they'll probably lose a great deal of public support, and they should. I don't see them gaining anything by winning such a lawsuit, and, of course, they'd start losing government support, too, and I'd help in that.

bob white writes: Sorry to post so soon again but Merlyn asked a direct question of me I would like to resond to. "Tell me, do you approve of a public school running a youth group that excludes atheists?" I believe in the American judicial system. I believe that public Schools should do what is legal and within their authority. If a local comunity should pass a law making it illegal for public schools to charter a scout unit then I would expect them to comply with that law. That however does not give them autority to change the scouting program, it gives them the choice to not have one, a choice they had even before the law existed. Well, you don't seem to understand the first amendment, then. No government agency can run a "no atheists" youth group, just like a public school couldn't run a "no catholics" youth group by having membership go through a private organization that excludes all catholics. ... If your problem is that you don't want the governemnt to support groups that discriminate against Atheists, why aren't you spending time telling the government. I am; why do you think I'm not? ... But I resent the implication that we can be forced to change our values through financial coersion as you suggest. Where am I suggesting that? I'm working to get rid of all government BSA charters. ... "This is why the BSA will have to forgo 10,000 units currently chartered to government agencies; the government can't treat people differently depending on their religious beliefs." A total wish on your part and not required by any court decision or federal law to date. No government agency has successfully continued a challenged BSA program that discriminates against atheists: Rick Sherman being denied entry into the Buffalo Grove Police Explorers resulted in the PD dropping Explorers. Chicago dropped all 28 BSA charters it held and agreed to not charter any more as long as the BSA discriminates, after the ACLU sued them. That same ACLU is now working on removing all HUD grants and DoD charters. The 19th circuit court dropped troop 19 after pressure from the ACLU. The only court reference I know about is the New Jersey Dale decision, which noted that even if the BSA could legally discriminate, the 750 or so New Jersey government agencies that chartered BSA units were still subject to the NJ law against discrimination, and would still be subject to it. And the supreme court didn't change this part of the decision.

evmori writes: merlyn, Make no difference if they were kicking out gays when you were in Cubs. You said you didn't say the God part thereby making you nothing more than a hypocrite! Plain & simple! Hey ed, I already pointed out that the BSA didn't tell me that atheists couldn't join, and, as a nine-year-old only familiar with two other oaths where "god" was entirely optional, I assumed the cub scout oath was similar, and I omitted it. And nobody said a thing about it. It's the BSA's fault for not informing members of the requirements, and they're STILL doing it, because they know that they'd lose government charters even faster if they were up front about their religious discrimination. If the BSA had made it clear back in the late 1960's that atheists couldn't join, they would have faced a lawsuit over it much sooner than the late 1980's.

Bob White writes: Merlyn again does not give a clear picture of the scouting movement. First, how is it the BSA is to remove reigious foundations but accept the UU's an Wiccan religious Awards? Isn't that a catch-22. No, any government agency has to treat all religions equally. That means if catholics can have BSA recognized religious awards, UUs get to, also. Atheists too, for that matter. Unitarians and Wiccans are not barred from membership as individuals as long as they accept and meet the membership requirements. Most Unitarians are not Athiestic and there are Wicca's who do meet the BSA membership requirements for religious obligation. A BSA unit chartered by a government agency would be compelled to accept any of them for membership, whether they were atheists or not. The two "organizations" do not qualify as charter organizations or with their religious awards since they both insist on allowing homosexuals as members in thier units, and their religious awards include philosophies not in keeping with those of the Boy Scouts of America and so are not recognized by the BSA. This is why the BSA will have to forgo 10,000 units currently chartered to government agencies; the government can't treat people differently depending on their religious beliefs. Do not be decieved by Merlyn. His goal is not to change Scouting. His goal is to end the program, period. Tell me, do you approve of a public school running a youth group that excludes atheists?

littlebillie writes: Merlyn, So the GSUSA can meet at a public school while the BSA cannot? No, I'm not talking about units meeting at schools, I'm talking about units chartered by public schools and other government agencies. The BSA itself says that a unit chartered by organization X is that organization's youth group; they are just using the BSA program as part of its (organization X's) youth group. Government agencies can't run a "no atheists" youth group under any circumstances. Any public school that has facilities open to noncurricular groups has to allow anyone, regardless of their viewpoint, so GSUSA and BSA can meet at the school, just like any other group (including groups you might not want). Additionally, does this mean that an atheist with a conscience is deemed spiritual by the girl scouts? Since this is something I'm interested in at a number of levels for a number of reasons, can you point me to any site that discusses girl scouts that have "come out" religiously - as total atheists, and self-declared as without a spiritual side - and what the national body response has been? Here are a bunch of letters about Darrell Lambert being expelled from the BSA for being an atheist, including a letter from Susan Lundman of the Girl Scouts Totem Council, who says "The Girl Scout organization is secular and is founded on American democratic principles. The organization values diversity and inclusiveness and therefore does not discriminate." http://www.thesunlink.com/opinion/2002/november/1110let.html Most atheist girl scout stories are just anecdotal, because they don't turn into court cases. Here's one: http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4sdvla%24n55%40piglet.cc.utexas.edu&oe=UTF-8 And like I said before, I don't know of the GSUSA kicking anyone out for being an atheist.

littlebillie writes: Merlyn, just out of curiosity, the GSUSA does not, contrary to popular belief, vary so much from the BSA insofar as religion goes. Their website - go to http://www.girlscouts.org/adults/beliefs.html - puts God in the picture, and explains that "The 'motivating force in Girl Scouting' is spiritual. Girl Scouts respects the spiritual values and beliefs of its members, leaving the interpretation of spirituality to each individual and the family." Now, basically, I see this self-interpretation of 'spirituality' as an invitation to the atheist girl simply to lie about being spiritual if she really wants to join up... but maybe I'm just getting cynical in my old age. Or maybe it's all just hypocritical window dressing. oops - darn, cynical again! gotta watch that! Anyway, given its officially stated position, and standing "united by a belief in God", I'm just wondering - do you also address the GSUSA? They spin smarter, maybe, but they don't seem so different..? There are a few important differences: First, the unit organization is different; GSUSA units aren't chartered to government agencies, and the GSUSA doesn't try to have the government practice religious discrimination on its behalf. The BSA does. Second, the GSUSA explicitly says: Girl Scouting is a values-based organization, not a religious one. The Girl Scout Promise and Law are its guiding principles. The Girl Scout Promise On my honor, I will try: To serve God and my country, To help people at all times, And to live by the Girl Scout Law. The word "God" can be interpreted in a number of ways, depending on one's spiritual beliefs. When reciting the Girl Scout Promise, it is okay to replace the word "God" with whatever word your spiritual beliefs dictate. The above says it's OK to substitute another word; a completely nonreligious term like "conscience" could be used. Third, when the atheist issue came up for the GSUSA in 1992, they added the above word-substitution option in 1993. I haven't heard of any atheists being kicked out of the girl scouts, unlike the boy scouts. There are some religious discrimination issues in the GSUSA, but since they don't have government agencies violating the first amendment by excluding atheists, I'm concentrating on those who do, like the BSA. And if not, what would the BSA have to do, in your view, to step back across that particular line? As long as the BSA has *any*, and I mean ANY, religious requirements, I'm going to work to remove all government support. This means any required god oaths, any sort of belief requirements, any discrimination against UUs or Wiccans concerning their religious awards, etc.

evmori writes: Merlyn, An atheist Cub Scout? WOW! And you question our morals & values yet you lived a lie as a youth! Those who throw stones shouldn't live in glass houses. No, this was in the 1960's, long before the BSA kicked out atheists (I think the first such incident was Paul Trout in 1985, who was reinstated). I was about nine years old, and at that time, the only other oath I was familiar with was the pledge of allegiance and for President of the United States, and I knew that "god" in these oaths was completely optional, so I omitted "god" when I joined the cub scouts. Either no one noticed (there were about five of us reciting en masse), or no one cared. The BSA certainly didn't make it clear at that time that atheists couldn't join, as my mother was also a den mother, and she was also an atheist. So no, I wasn't living a lie, as the BSA never informed me that atheists weren't allowed. The BSA is lying nowadays when it advertises that "any boy may join", when this clearly is false; I suggest you urge the BSA to be honest and stop using that phrase in what it now hands out to first-graders, as it gives atheist boys the false impression that atheists are allowed. OGE writes re: the Alton grant: Again, what happened to the money? Did it end up helping Alton's youth? I mentioned it went to Learning for Life, which was a decision by the Alton city council. They can allocate it to any organization that meets the HUD requirements.

dsteele writes: TJ and Merlyn -- How you consider yourself good scout leaders while not living up to the BSA's standards of membership is beyond me. Easy; I'm not a scout leader. I was a cub scout a few decades ago (and yes, I was an atheist even then), but that's all. Now I'm an atheist activist working to remove all government support of the BSA. I have since realized that my commission comes from the Boy Scouts of America and that I should at the very least point out that homosexuals and atheists, by BSA policy, are not granted registration. And I'll continue to point out that the US government can't support a group that discriminates on the basis of religious belief. I suppose I could read TJ's 217 (to date) posts and Merlyn's 247 (to date) and, like a forensic pathologist, track down where they are registtered and their real names, but my conscience hasn't pushed me that far. I've actually been doing something similar, but I've been tracking down government involvement with the BSA. For example, the 19th circuit court used to charter troop 19 as part of their juvenile delinquency program, and joining troop 19 was actually mandatory. They recently dropped troop 19 due to pressure from the ACLU and Illinois atheist activist Rob Sherman, because I alerted them to the situation. Rob Sherman also recently scuttled a $10,000 HUD grant that the city of Alton, Illinois was about to give to the Trails West council for their Scoutreach program; HUD grants require nondiscrimination, and the Scoutreach program excludes atheists (it was changed to Learning for Life, which does not discriminate). Again, I was the person who informed Rob about the grant, and I just sent him information about a similar HUD grant from Rock Island, IL, which he's now working on. I was also the person who contacted the So. Cal. ACLU about a $15,000 HUD grant to the Old Baldy council, which is now being sued for defrauding the government (by falsely signing a nondiscrimination agreement to fund their discriminatory program). I'm also helping the Illinois ACLU with their HUD and DoD lawsuits to stop all HUD grants and BSA charters by the military. As I mentioned many threads ago to OGE, I'm also working on a public school that uses Venturing for its extracurricular programs; they must be aware that Venturing doesn't allow atheists, because the principal of the school is also chair of the local BSA district (and sorry, OGE, I still can't reveal the school as yet; the ACLU moves slowly at times...) Even the scouts-l mailing list has helped, since I probably wouldn't have found out about the US embassy in Kyiv (Kiev) chartering troop 980 via the BSA's Direct Service program; of course, the US embassy, being part of the US government, can't legally do this. Merlyn and TJ, I'm not judging your life or lifestyle. I am, however, willing and duty-bound to enforce the policies of the Boy Scouts of America as far as I am able. Hey, knock yourself out. I'm not part of it. I'm part of the USA, and I'm all for enforcing the first amendment, which means atheists can't be treated as second-class citizens by any agency of the US government. Which means roughly 10,000 BSA units chartered by public schools, the military, police departments, US embassies, etc, have to go.

jbroganjr writes: As for change, (correct me if I am wrong) but National has only excluded adult membership on the basis of morally straight as well as a belief in G-D. They have not expelled a youth that I have heard about. (Youth being under 18). National BSA has thrown out a number of youths due to their unacceptable religious opinions: Mark Welsh (at age 6) in 1989, William and Michael Randall (both in cub scouts at the time) in 1991, and Rick Sherman when he tried to join Explorers in 1997, which was chartered by the Police department (the police department was forced to drop their Explorer affiliation when the BSA required them to exclude Rick Sherman, which, of course, they couldn't lawfully do). Also, Larry Otto, Executive of the Cascade Pacific Council, testified under oath (in 1999) that first-grader (by this time, forth-grader) Remington Powell could not join the cub scouts in the still-ongoing lawsuit against Portland public schools (though I don't think he actually applied for membership, as his mother knew they didn't admit atheists). And just to hold off protests that kids this age can't be atheists, first, I'm a lifelong atheist, and second, if it's reasonable to accept that kids this age CAN believe in god(s), it's also reasonable to accept that there are also kids who don't.

OGE writes: Maybe I misunderstood you, you write the only reason that BSA started a program that does not base membership on religious beliefs or sexual orientation was because of law suits etc. And you complain it has only been for the last few years. If my above summary is wrong, please correct me. Wasnt the intent of the laswsuits to do just that? TO have the BSA run a youth program that did not base membership requirements on religious beliefs or sexual orientation? The intent was to get the BSA to stop discriminating along these lines in ALL their programs, not just a "separate but equal" subdivision.. The BSA saw that it couldn't possibly continue to have Police departments or municipal Fire departments to run Explorer programs that excluded atheists and gays, but instead of stopping their discrimination, or at least stopping it in Explorers, they split it into Exploring and Venturing, with one section discriminating (Venturing) and one not (Exploring). However, the BSA still continues to charter discriminatory BSA units to government agencies that can't legally practice their discrimination. You complain the BSA has only made the changes in the last few years, but they made a change. If the BSA admitted gays and atheists into Boy Scouts, would you then complain that it should have been done 20, 10, 5 years ago? The BSA actually started the group that many here on the forum say others should do. Thats is start a youth group where sexual orientation and religion are not prerequisites for membership and instead of congratulating, you claim its not enough. Can you put yourself in the shoes of the conservative members of this forum and see why some feel "nothing ever makes you people (said without malice) happy?" I will NEVER be happy as long as one government agency charters a discriminatory BSA unit, whether it's a public school, or a military base, or a fire search & rescue department. The BSA continues to dishonestly charter discriminatory BSA units to these government agencies; if the BSA were run by honest people, there would be a policy of NOT chartering discriminatory units to government agencies. This still constitutes a large fraction of the BSA's charter units, and they all have to go, because the government simply can't practice the BSA's invidious discrimination.

Bob White writes: Thank you, Merlyn, For admitting that the BSA has a program that does not determine membership based on religion or sexuality. Only for the last few years, and only because gays and atheists sued government agencies that were running the BSA's "no gays, no atheists" groups. If it were up to the BSA, there would still be no gays or atheists admitted to the Explorer program. A national program for youth that is larger than any similar program sponsored by or directed toward gay youth members. Why are you so hung up on only comparing it to organizations "geared toward gay youth members"? That's an artificially restrictive comparison, since most youth groups DO NOT CARE if you are gay or straight, or a theist or an atheist; the BSA is about the only one left. You ought to compare it to youth organizations that do not discriminate, but then you'd be vastly outnumbered.

There is not one organized program I have ever heard of lead by gay leaders for gay scouts. Why is that? I don't know -- why haven't you heard of Scouts Canada's Rover Crew 129? Most Scout units that accept gays wouldn't be just for gays, just as most Scout units that accept Jews aren't just for Jews. Girl Scouts don't kick out gay members; the BSA's own Explorer program doesn't kick out gay members.

The way I see it is National is not going to do anything until it becomes public knowledge (in the news) that there is a homosexual leader in this council. That's already happened: http://boston.com/dailynews/149/technology/Philadelphia_scouts_decide_not:.shtml ... ''The camp staff I work with know I'm gay,'' 18-year-old Life Scout Gregory Lattera of South Philadelphia told a news conference to protest the national ban on homosexuals in the scouts, which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000. ...

The 1964 civil rights act says an employer must accommodate an employee's religious practices, unless they can show that this constitutes an "undue hardship" for the company: http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-relig.html An "undue hardship" can mean more than a de minimus cost, or a "business necessity": http://www.boli.state.or.us/civil/religion.html Rescheduling a meeting or having someone cover for an employee doesn't sound like it would constitute an "undue hardship" for the company under normal circumstances, but if there was some reason it had to be held that particular day, it could qualify as a "business necessity". Scenario #3 sounds like the meeting day & time were chosen arbitrarily. I object to Scenario #1, answer B; "offensive" and "not funny" are independent properties of a joke, and are not synonyms.

I would like to turn the question up side down. If the BSA were denied a HUD grant because they are a faith based organization wouldnt that be discrimination on the basis of religion? But that isn't the reason why the BSA would be turned down; it would be turned down because the HUD grant itself would be used in a way that religiously discriminates (Old Baldy used theirs to fund a scoutreach program to increase membership, and, of course, atheists couldn't join). If an organization, faith-based or not, wants a HUD grant, they have to agree to and abide by the nondiscrimination requirements of that grant. to OGE, I don't want to publically reveal specific information about the school just yet, because we're still looking for plaintiffs for a possible lawsuit.

The government frequently discriminates---giving a minority applicant preference over a non minority applicant is discrimination based on race. And there are plenty of laws regulating this. That is most certainly discrimination and its funded by our tax dollars--have you taken a stance against that or do you prefer to spend your time bashing youth organizations? I'm not "bashing" youth organizations, I'm trying to get a dishonest youth organization (the BSA) to stop defrauding my government. The discrimination you're complaining about is known and regulated by the government; the discrimination I'm complaining about are violations of the laws as they are now written, by BSA councils that are lying to the government. When a BSA council signs a nondiscrimination agreement and then violates it by still practicing discrimination, that's fraud. When the BSA charters a Venturing crew to a public high school to be used as the school's main recreational provider, the school has set up a situation where all students (except atheists and gays) can participate in basketball, theatre, pottery, and water polo. That's violating the civil rights of the students being excluded.

I discriminate by prefering NY strip steaks to porterhouse, I discriminate by prefering blonds to brunettes (although my brunette wife will be offended to hear that), and I discriminate by prefering to asociate with people of high moral character (by MY definition) rather than low life scum. I believe none of these are illegal, and I also believe none are immoral. It is my right as a citizen of this planet to discriminate in this manner. And none of this would disqualify me for a HUD grant. If you went to HUD and said you'd like a grant, but you'd only allow blonds access to your program, that would quite possibly be classed as racial discrimination and you'd be turned down (some races have few or no blonds, so your arbitrary criteria would impact different races disproportionally). Let's face it - You are promoting discrimination against groups you believe discriminate. No, I'm not. I'm promoting equal treatment. ALL applicants for HUD grants have to agree to follow their nondiscrimination requirements - there's no special exemption for Boy Scouts. The same requirements that disqualify the Boy Scouts for excluding atheists would also disqualify an organization that excluded polytheists, or Jews, or that only allowed atheists. If it is an absence of discrimination you fight for, than allow yourself to accept the government not to discriminate against certain groups, among which are the BSA. I'm only asking that my government treat the BSA the same as any other religiously discriminatory private group; no charters from public schools, no HUD grants to expand their membership, etc. Unless for some reason discrimating against atheists is religious discrimination (which until I see some clause that says so, I don't think it is, and, even if shown evidence, I'd say it was ridiculous), then the BSA has done nothing wrong here. Discriminating against atheists is certainly religious discrimination; it's a credal requirement. Requiring someone to subscribe to the tenet "god exists" is no different that requiring "jesus is lord" or "gods don't exist"; any of these requirements constitute religious discrimination. Here's the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission http://www.eeoc.gov/docs/threshold.html ... c. Religion The Commission defines "religion" to include moral or ethical beliefs as to right and wrong that are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views.(25) This broad coverage ensures that individuals are protected against religious discrimination regardless of how widespread their particular religious beliefs or practices are. It also ensures that the Commission will not have to determine what is or is not a religion, something which it would be inappropriate for the government to do. Religious discrimination also includes discrimination against someone because s/he is an atheist.(26) ... You also might want to read Torcaso v. Watkins: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=367&invol=488

Mark: Is it being too simplistic to say that the BSA does not descrimnate based on religion, they don't have any care what religion you are, they just require a belif in God? Yes, it's too simplistic. That isn't religious descrimination in my book. Well, it's religious discrimination in the legal books. They aren't descriminating against anyone belonging to a specific religion. If the BSA required all members to believe in only one god and started kicking out polytheists, that wouldn't be discriminating against a specific religion, either. It would eliminate members of a number of polytheistic religions, however. If you want to say they descriminate against atheists, well that's another discussion. Athiesms isn't a religion. The BSA does not practice religious descrimination. By the legal definition of "religious discrimination", it does.

You don't seem to be able to follow a conversation. Remember my earlier answer? Because HUD grants prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion & creed; some single-sex programs ARE allowed under certain circumstances, which is also why public schools can have boys & girls basketball teams, but can't have a basketball team that excludes atheists or Jews. Now you're just trying to equivocate on the term "discrimination"; yes, the Boy Scouts discriminate on the basis of sex. The government *can* discriminate on the basis of sex in certain circumstances; they *can't* discriminate on the basis of religion or creed.

I think there ought to be one US Scouting organization umbrella, and let the individual charter partners decide if they're going to have an all-boys, all-girls, or mixed unit.

The online archives of the Star-Ledger don't include photographs, so a NJ library is probably your best bet. This interview with James Dale says the photo was taken during the conference by the Star-Ledger: http://www.generationq.org/jdale.htm Q: How did your being Gay come out? JD: I was speaking at a conference. The School of Social Work had a conference for teachers and guidance counselors on how they could be better about Lesbian and Gay issues in their classrooms. I was nineteen at the time. The Star Ledger was there. I guess they photographed me. I didn't think too much about it. The Boy Scouts saw it (The article) and then suddenly I was persona non grata. So it was just an ordinary picture of him at the conference.

Here's the decision from Cornell's web site: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-699.ZO.html The first part is the findings of fact section; I don't think either side disputed any of these findings: ... Dale applied for adult membership in the Boy Scouts in 1989. The Boy Scouts approved his application for the position of assistant scoutmaster of Troop 73. Around the same time, Dale left home to attend Rutgers University. After arriving at Rutgers, Dale first acknowledged to himself and others that he is gay. He quickly became involved with, and eventually became the copresident of, the Rutgers University Lesbian/Gay Alliance. In 1990, Dale attended a seminar addressing the psychological and health needs of lesbian and gay teenagers. A newspaper covering the event interviewed Dale about his advocacy of homosexual teenagers need for gay role models. In early July 1990, the newspaper published the interview and Dales photograph over a caption identifying him as the copresident of the Lesbian/Gay Alliance. Later that month, Dale received a letter from Monmouth Council Executive James Kay revoking his adult membership. Dale wrote to Kay requesting the reason for Monmouth Councils decision. Kay responded by letter that the Boy Scouts "specifically forbid membership to homosexuals." ... Stevens' dissent quotes the relevant part of that newspaper story: "James Dale, 19, co-president of the Rutgers University Lesbian Gay Alliance with Sharice Richardson, also 19, said he lived a double life while in high school, pretending to be straight while attending a military academy. "He remembers dating girls and even laughing at homophobic jokes while at school, only admitting his homosexuality during his second year at Rutgers. " 'I was looking for a role model, someone who was gay and accepting of me,' Dale said, adding he wasn't just seeking sexual experiences, but a community that would take him in and provide him with a support network and friends."

So you see it's not so much that the BSA refuses athiests, it's really more that athiests have refused the ideals of scouting. This is the same rationale that Restricted clubs used to exclude Jews. A practicing Catholic cannot be a Jewish Rabbi. Does that give him casue to hate Jews or to be hated by them. Of course not. The Jewish faith requires that to be a member or a leader in the faith you must share their belief system. That makes perfect sense to me. If the Catholic sues the synagogue should he expect to win? Of course not. (That by the way that was an analogy to the relationship between scouting and athiests.) Do you think a Catholic would be justified in stopping a public school from running a basketball team that only allows Jews, or allows everyone except Catholics to join? Do you think a Catholic would be justified in stopping a synagog from using a HUD grant to increase their (Jewish only) membership, even though the HUD grant requires nondiscrimination, and the synagog signed an agreement stating it would not discriminate?

But discrimination is discrimination regardless of what you are discriminationg against. This is called "equivocation"; it's a logical fallacy. HUD grants can discriminate on the basis of many things, such as economic status (many grants are for poor people); HUD grants cannot be used to discriminate on the basis of religion. You're trying to dismiss the whole issue by pretending all discrimination is the same; using your "logic", it would be OK if HUD grants could only be used by white people, since HUD discriminates on the basis of economic status, and that's just more discrimination, and all discrimination is interchangable. And in the BSA's case, the Supreme Court agreed with the BSA so that makes it legal! You sure can't follow a conversation, can you? The BSA can't use a government HUD grant to practice discrimination. That's got nothing to do with the BSA's right as a private organization.