public schools as chartering partners

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

One issue I haven't seen addressed is the problem with public schools as BSA chartering partners. Please note I'm not talking about ACCESS to public school facilities in this thread, I'm only talking about public schools that *charter* Scout units.

 

According to the BSA's own figures, there are over 10,000 Scout units chartered by public schools; again note that I'm NOT talking about PTAs/PTOs, private schools, etc (the figures had separate totals for each of these, so they weren't included in the totals for public schools).

 

The problem with public schools as chartering partners is obvious; they can't legally do what the BSA requires chartering partners to do. Public schools can't reject a potential member because he's gay or an atheist.

 

The situation with Oak Park only makes it worse. The BSA refused to renew 7 units because the chartering organization said it would adhere to their nondiscrimination policy.

 

Is the BSA going to refuse to renew the 10,000+ charters to public schools? After all, NONE of them can e.g. enforce the BSA's requirement to promise a "duty to God". There is a pending ACLU class-action suit that would remove charters from government agencies, but shouldn't the BSA do this on its own as the honest thing to do?

[OldGreyEagle 5]

OK, I have watched this posting for awhile and no takers. So, rushing in where angels fear to tread, I ask the begged for question, what is the "honest" thing to do?

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Oh, drop the 10,000+ charters held by public schools and other government agencies, of course.

 

Do you think it's legal (or honest) for the BSA to expect public schools to reject members for not meeting the BSA's requirements? Public schools can't practice religious discrimination.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Sure, The Boy Scouts should drop the 10,000 units Public Schools charter since Public Schools CANT discriminate. Of course, that means no discrimination of any kind about anything. Convicted sex offenders, you cant be held out of a teaching job just say your religion required you to do the offense of which you were convicted, boys, sign up for the girls softball team after all, since in your religion all persons are created equal and we cant discriminate. Everybody on the football team HAS to play the same amount of minutes, cant discriminate based on talent, the same in all team sports because once again we are all equal, is that what you are saying?

 

Everybody everywhere do anything you want and based it on

[Mike Long 10]

How about making your point without being insulting or derogatory!

 

If you can't make you point AND keep to the conduct required a scout don't post here.

[eisely 13]

To reinforce Mike Long's point, personal insults have no place in these forums.

 

To the issue: It is not obvious that any given public school could not charter a unit if it chose to do so, regardless of scouts' policies on homosexuals. There is developing case law where schools have attempted to exclude youth prayer groups from the school grounds and the youth groups have prevailed. However, chartering is different from mere recognition or providing facilities.

 

Hopefully local councils will be on their toes and start identifying alternative charter partners, or encouraging parents to create their own non profit corporations for that purpose. I was not aware that public schools held charters or that the numbers were as great as stated here.

[Mike Long 10]

Legal or Honest? Interesting question.

 

Legal, most likely not depending on the laws of your community. There are still communities that have laws outlawing homosexuality and many more that do not have non-discrimination laws or policies.

 

Please note, a policy is not a law. Policies are guidelines for operation. Disobey a policy and you get fired of repremanded. Disobey a law and you go to jail. Policy = We prefer. Law = We must.

 

Honest, well that's a completely different issue. The BSA does not hide its code of ethics or its standards for membership. As a matter of fact the BSA has shouted both from the mountaintops for 90 years. So how could the BSA be depicted as dishonest? We are very honest in displaying our standards.

 

If there is dishonesty anywhere it would be in a Sponsor obtaining a charter with another organization with long standing policies and laws(the BSA) that the sponsor (Public Schools) either can not legally enforce, or willfully refuses to enforce. It makes one ask did these school boards bother to learn the rules and policies of the BSA? If they were aware of those rules and policies why didn't they then release their charters? I think its honest to assume that by accepting a charter the sponsor agrees to the situlations of the charter. It's just like getting a loan, you want the money?(Troop) Then agree to the terms of the loan.(Charter)

 

Most of these non-discrimination policies were written and adopted well after their charters were secured and it is the responsability of the sponsor to be sure that its policies are compatible AND REMAIN COMPATIBLE with the BSA. The logical extension of this is that it is also the responsablity of the sponsor to sever or adjust it's ties to the BSA (or anyone else) if their policies are at odds.

 

I do have to say that it is unscoutlike to ask anyone to disobey the law. Accept and obey the law or obey and work to change the law. If a BSA charter is in violation of the law then it needs to be removed until the law changes.

 

I don't like it but I don't have to like it. What we have to do is obey the law.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

Legally, religious discrimination is not lawful for public schools to practice *anywhere* in the US. It's a constitutional problem.

 

Furthermore, the BSA is dishonest in accepting charters from public agencies that it knows can't practice its discrimination.

 

Putting all the blame on the public schools doesn't wash; if you look at any of the court cases that have touched on the issue, the public school officials didn't realize that the school was supposed to reject members based on their religious views.

 

Look at your own answer - I talk about religious discrimination, you only talk about sexual orientation discrimination. Outlawing religious discrimination isn't new.

 

And, as I said at the start, isn't the BSA being dishonest by not severing the charters itself? The *BSA* knows public schools can't practice religious discrimination.

[jmcquillan 10]

Last time I checked, there was no 'religious descrimination' in Scouting. All religions are accepted, tolerated, approved, etc. That is, of course, unless you consider Aetheism to be a 'religion', which I believe most people understand to be the lack of any belief in religion. So that arguement lacks merit. Having been in Scouting for over 16 years, I've had the benefit of many religions within my troop, and it's always been a real bolster for learning about each. Religious intolerance? Not in the BSA!! Every one is accepted. Each and every Scout can practice any religion to which he and his family belong. As Mike said, the BSA has never hidden that policy, and as proclaimed it quite emphatically in its publications and presentations. It has always been that way. For any organization to say that it didn't understand after applying for and receiving a charter is disingenous at best. Of course it's the Chartered Partners responsibility to understand what they're getting into, schools or otherwise. That's why the BSA produces all the publications it does for the purpose of gaining Chartered Partners.

 

Now, of course, this begs the question: If a school is a public institution, owned and operated by a town for the purpose of providing education to the public, who then is a unit actually chartered to? The school? The town? Can a public school enter into a charter (contract) itself without prior approval of the school administration? And wouldn't that administration be likely to investigate all that they're entering into? Or are these units that are professed to be chartered to schools actually be chartered to private schools or PTA's or PTO's, and not the school (town) itself? Who in the individual schools has the authority to enter into a charter (contract) without higher blessings?

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

I'm afraid it's your argument that lacks merit; requiring a "duty to god" is a religious requirement, and public schools can't enforce this.

 

And yes, the BSA practices religious discrimination. They kicked out the Randall twins in California. They kicked Rick Sherman out of an Explorers post run by the municipal police department (back when the BSA expected government-run Explorer posts to discriminate; they don't now, but it wasn't the BSA's idea).

 

Like I've said, you can continue to ignore the problem by pretending it doesn't exist, but 1) according to the BSA itself, over 10,000 schools charter BSA units, and 2) requiring a "duty to god" is a religious requirement that public schools can't enforce.

 

If the BSA addresses this problem, they'd announce a withdrawl to give units some time to find new chartering partners. However, I'll assume they (and most of you, apparently) will deny any problem exists until the Illinois ACLU lawsuit cuts off all government charters at a stroke and people are left unprepared.

 

You DO know about the ACLU lawsuit, don't you? The Illinois ACLU was responsible for Chicago dropping 28 BSA units about 3 years ago, and they filed a lawsuit to do the same to all federal and Illinois state charters 2 years ago.

 

[eisely 13]

The ACLU sues so many groups and governmental bodies at all levels all the time, you will forgive us if we are not aware of the Illinois cases. It would be more productive if Merlyn_Leroy would be less sarcastic and more informative.

 

Concerning "duty to god," I am aware of the Randall twins, although I don't know the current status. I don't think I have heard of the Sherman case. Why don't you POLITELY bring us up to date. My view is that the "duty to god" is so vague as to likely fit under any umbrella if a governmental body such as a school board chose to address the issue.

 

I don't think that scouts is asking anybody to "enforce" all the scouts policies simply by granting a charter. "Enforcement" is more up to the unit committee. Be that as it may, local councils and concerned parents and leaders would be wise to consider these issues if the charter partner is in fact a governmental body.

[Mike Long 10]

I think it's obvious that we all realize that there is a problem and I even agreed with you in that if chartering organizations can't or won't uphold BSA standards then they probably shouldn't have a charter.

 

Rather than meet on common ground and attempt to move forward together you choose to attempt to browbeat those who respond.

 

Now that its painfully obvious that you are not a regular here, Welcome to the boards. Let's have a polite dialogue. Lose the scarcasm and vitriol.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

No, "duty to god" isn't vague enough for any government entity to be involved. The BSA has gone to court for its right to eject any member who refuses to make such a promise.

 

The Randall case the BSA won by arguing that it wasn't a business under the (California) Unruh act (which prohibits business in CA from practicing various kinds of discrimination, including by religion or creed).

 

The Sherman case boils down to:

1) Rick Sherman applied to join the Buffalo Grove police dept. Explorers, crossing off the parts about god in the application;

2) The BSA refused his application;

3) The police department, seeing that they couldn't possibly run a youth group that excluded people based on their religious views, dropped their Explorer affiliation.

 

The BSA stopped expecting government-run Explorer units to practice religious discrimination NOT after the Randall case, but only after the ACLU successfully sued the city of Chicago to drop all BSA units; the memo moving Explorers into Learning for Life came just one week after the Chicago suit was settled:

http://www.aclu.org/news/n041097a.html

http://www.aclu.org/news/n020498a.html

 

Now the ACLU is doing the same thing with all federal and Illinois state charters:

http://www.aclu.org/news/1999/n041499d.html

 

You can bet the BSA knows about these cases; what are they doing to move charters from public schools to organizations that *can* practice their discrimination? Nothing that I can see. When the government loses this case (and it's against the government, not the BSA), they'll get cut off without any warning.

[Mike Long 10]

Thank you for the information.(This message has been edited by Mike Long)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

It doesn't look like it's obvious to *everyone* here that there's a problem; some people are arguing that excluding people who won't promise to do their "duty to god" somehow isn't religious discrimination, or that there's some kind of compromise possible (which still allows the BSA to throw out atheists, and still has public schools running them and supporting the BSA's religious discrimination).

 

In fact, very few BSA supporters seem to even *see* a problem.