whitewater

Merlyn said: ...I think the bigotry expressed by FOG illustrates how the Boy Scouts encourage hatred against atheists. That's a ridiculous argument and I hope you know it. If that is valid, then it would also be reasonable to assume that if the BSA allowed homosexual leaders, that Scouts would be in danger of being sexually abused by them just because there might be a few cases of such a thing happening.

I agree with the others. 17 boys out 80? That's not just a red flag, it's a red billboard. From the slim information, it sounds like the boys might not feel "empowered"- like the program isn't theirs. It's important not to get into a rut and do things just because "that's what we've always done". And the boys should decide what they want to do- adults should have very little input.

The fact that the BSA is singled out, when there examples of similar lease arrangements, supports my contention of viewpoint bias. Can you name such a lease? The City of San Diego leases real property to 123 non-profit organizations. Of these, 96 either pay no rent or less than the $2500 annual administrative fee that the Boy Scouts pay for Camp Balboa. Fifty of these leases are for 25 years or longer. Other exclusively negotiated leases were made to the Girl Scouts, several YMCA's, Hillel of San Diego, the Black Police Officer's Association, the San Diego Hebrew Day School, the Sherman

Bob's right. The BSA's policies haven't changed signiicantly. What I think has changed is the level of attacks on it by liberal groups, and the coverage those groups receive from the media. Since when is it a bad thing to believe in traditional values? Besides, everyone discriminates. If I'm not a college student, I can't join APO.

I'm very sorry. A loss like this helps us realize how special and short life is. You, your Troop and the boys family will be in my prayers.

I just think that whatever the BSA considers itself to be may not correspond to what their legal status should be in this case. There is legal precidence to NOT classify them as a religious organization here. My beef with the judge is not that he AGREED with the Boy Scouts' self-definition. My beef is that he apparently didn't consider some valid court cases in making that determination. I do think that the BSA declaring themselves a religious organization in a such a case may not have been a wise move from a legal standpoint.

I didn't miss anything, I was simply responding to your comment. The Judge apparently missed several other precidents for determining whether or not the BSA should be considered a religious organization. In EEOC v. Kamehameda Schools/Bishop Estate, the Ninth Circuit Court held that a group of private schools with a religious charter, daily class prayers, prayer before meals, required Christian religious intruction, and required attendance at worship services were not religious institutions because the curriculum was predominately secular. If these schools are deemed secular for le

"Well, you keep talking about the USE of public facilities, as if the judge ruled that the BSA can't use or rent public property, which isn't at all the issue. The city gave the BSA a special deal." I don't agree that it is a 'special deal' without knowing what deals were given to other groups. Therefor, the other leases aren't irrelevant. Even on its own merits, I'm not so convinced the lease is such a 'special deal' since the City received substantial value in return. Why would what the BSA considers itself, be relevant to the Judge. Shouldn't the definition of what the BSA, is

Merlyn, I have read the decision- I just don't agree with it. My impression was that the judge was against the Scouts from the beginning. The fact that he sided with the plaintiffs on their contention that the City's leases with other non-profit organizations was irrelevant, supports my feelings that he was biased. I think the other lease arrangements are very relevant. The fact that the BSA is singled out, when there examples of similar lease arrangements, supports my contention of viewpoint bias. I also don't follow his reasoning that the lease violates the establishment cl

Deloe, The difference, as I see it, is that the BSA morals also reflect those of the majority of society. The BSA also teaches its members to be respectful of other people's views. That is not the case with those attacking the BSA. They believe the BSA is wrong and must be changed. They are intolerant of the BSA's right to believe what they want. This is the true attack on the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has also determined that it is unconstitutional and violates the First Amendment to discriminate against a group or individual on the basis of their viewpoint. In other w

Have a good weekend. I hope you have good weather. I suppose you are correct about everyone wanting validation for their moral views. However, in this case it is the minority group seeking acceptance from the majority. There are still many people who do don't think a gay lifestyle is acceptable.

By discrimination, I meant unjustifiable discrimination. In my opinion, it is 'justifiable' discrimination because of the BSA's right to set its own membership requirements. Discrimination, by definition, is impossible to eliminate. Everyone discriminates. You and I discriminate by who we allow to be our friends. The restaurant next door discriminates by giving discounts to those over 65. The Girl Scouts discriminate because they run a program taylored for young girls. The question is does it do more harm than good? Senior citizens benefit from the discount since many are on fi

Bob, I agree with you that the SM is wrong based on what I've heard so far. The point of the question 'How long do you intend to hold him back?' is only to further understand the SM's motivation. Perhaps it was not a good question. I do think though, that questions and a discussion should be the first step and not a confrontation. Perhaps the whole story isn't coming out. My mixed feelings on 13 year old Eagles is only that I've seen a few that didn't seem worthy. I strongly support the program and agree that if they have completed the requirements they should receive it.

I personally have mixed feelings about 13 year old Eagles. I think sometimes they have been lead by the hand by a well-intending parent that does a little too much for them along the way. Often these boys are products of Troops that are merit-badge factories as well. That said, it appears that your son doesn't fit into that category. He sounds like an outstanding young man. I'd start with the Scoutmaster. If the requirements have all been fullfilled, then he has no grounds to deny the rank. But try to understand his point of view and discuss things with him. Why does he think yo

It's interesting how polarizing these topics on homosexuals and religion can be. They touch on individual core beliefs and those are not easily swayed. It's also interesting how a person's perspective is influenced by those core beliefs. Both sides can look at the exact same thing and come to totally opposite conclusions. It appears to me that the Boy Scouts were singled out in this case. It seems pretty clear that this is just one step in a coordinated effort to force the BSA into changing policies. Both sides of the issue probably agree on that. The Supreme Court upheld the