public schools as chartering partners

[jmcquillan 10]

I'm afraid I still do not see a problem. And to that end, perhaps I agree with your statement that most Scouters don't see a problem either. If I join an organization, or if my children join an organization, I know right up front what their criteria are. And if that criteria spells out that a 'duty to God', no matter what God, be it higher deity or a tree, is a necessary part of the program, then so be it. I accept it or I don't join. Simple as that. And, I believe, that's the way most Scouters see it.

 

If a governmental agency, or a town, or a school sees fit to not sponsor such an organization, then so be it. Find a sponsor who can accept what the program requires. That is NOT religious descrimination. It's freedom of association. There will likely always be organizations who can not accept another organizations requirements for association, it's a free country. And that, I believe, does not mean that I need to agree with your criteria, nor do you have to agree with mine. The important point here is that you agree to let me have my criteria and beliefs, and I agree to let you have yours. I do not want the ACLU or anyone else telling me what I should or should not believe in , or whom I should associate with, nor what program requirements the group I associate with should have. If one chooses to belong to a group that espouses belief in 'a' God, 'a' higher deity, there must be a good reason. And the ACLU should not be trying to tell us otherwise. Obviously, you have a belief that is somewhat counter to many of us. That's fine. I accept that. What I don't accept is your attempting to tell me that me belief is wrong, or that your way of thinking on this subject is better than mine. I accept the rules that I read and understand before I get involved. I would expect that others would do the same.

 

If the ACLU sees fit to get Scouts thrown out of each and every public institution that does not agree with their particular point of view, then I guess I don;t have as much respect for them as I might have otherwise. Freedom of association is what we're talking about here. Not every organization is, or ever will be, open to each and every individuals interpretation of what their rules should be, as opposed to what they are.

 

So, if the ACLU wins, Scouting loses. But I'm sure that Scouting will go on. Many of us would see to that, I'm sure.

 

But I thank you for sharing your commentary with us. It's interesting to see how others view the institution.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

Well, I guess you'd have no problem with public schools running "no Jews" youth groups either.

[SouthPoleScout 15]

Merlyn_LeRoy -

 

You are comparing apples to oranges.

 

The membership criteria is right up front. Duty to God - your choice of a God, whether it be mine "or a tree"... Tolerance of different types of religion IS promoted.

 

Your commment "Well, I guess you'd have no problem with public schools running "no Jews" youth groups either" is completely inappropriate to Scouting philosophy.

 

Would YOU have a problem with the schools NOT discriminating against child abusers and other criminals? How about groups that promote hatred?

 

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

I'm not comparing apples to oranges as far as how public schools must act with respect to religion.

 

Public schools can't run a "no Jews" youth group.

 

Public schools can't run a "no trinitarians" youth group.

 

Public schools can't run a "no polytheists" youth group.

 

And yes, public schools can't run a "no athiests" youth group, either.

 

ALL of the above are examples of religious discrimination. NONE can be practiced by public schools.

 

You equivocate on the meaning of "discrimination", by claiming that the absence of discrimination means we have to let child molesters in.

 

Has anyone READ the Chicago ACLU case? Do you know why the city didn't even bother to TRY to defend religious discrimination?

 

Schools CAN'T impose ANY kind of religious requirements at all; this *includes* mouthing a "duty to god" promise. Schools CAN'T reject students based solely on their religious views.

[eisely 13]

Dear Mr. Leroy,

 

Get a life.

 

While your contribution to this thread has been informative, your logic in your last shot at jmquillan is flawed to say the least, and totally uncalled for. I visited the ACLU sites you referred to. Very helpful. Needless to say, my previously negative view of the ACLU has been reinforced.

 

This of course leaves open the question of how these charters will be handled.

 

Interesting question concerning Scott AFB. If the allegation is that the government is improperly supporting religious belief in accepting charters from BSA, how does that square with the military providing chaplains, whose salaries are paid by taxpayers, and chapels on bases? While the ACLU may be able to beat up on local governments, it seems to me that a different set of hurdles crop up where the feds are concerned. I suspect that there are scout units chartered on most military bases, both in the US and in foreign lands, where there are large numbers of dependents present. What policy prescription would prevent the military from cooperating with youth programs like scouts in isolated areas where there are no alternative sponsors, when the military more actively promotes religion with chaplains and facilities dedicated to worship?

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

Ah, the last refuge of those without an answer: "Get a life"

 

I guess stopping religious discrimination is unimportant to you; that explains your view of the ACLU.

 

And, if you would look into army regulations, thay can't discriminate on the basis of religion, either. The chaplains have to serve all soldiers, regardless of religion; there is even a regs page on how to serve satanists. But the military can't discriminate against atheists, they can't make soldiers take a god oath, and atheists can get consciencious objector status (even though the original legislation only allowed for religious objections, the court ruled that nonbelievers had to be covered).

 

Perhaps you're angry because I've shown how ugly the BSA's discrimination really is? Do you support the BSA throwing out two nine-year-olds because they had "unacceptable" religious views? Does it make any difference if "unacceptable" is atheist, agnostic, Jew, polytheist, Catholic, trinitarian, non-trinitarian, Protestant, Baptist, monotheist?

 

Now, would you like to address the very real problem of the BSA losing 400,000 members because of a lawsuit, and the BSA doing nothing to prepare those units to get new charters?

[eisely 13]

As I was saying, get a life. You seem to think that everbody with a different viewpoint is stupid or supportive of discrimination. You are the one pushing intolerance in this thread. Suggest you read another thread under "issues and politics" about discrimination against agnostics.

 

Your points about what the military does and does not require are well taken.

 

From my understanding of the situation of the Randall twins, I think the local cub scout leader behaved very foolishly. I think the boys' father was every bit as foolish.

 

If some youth, parent, or adult volunteer, objects to the scout oath, and the twelfth point of scout law, they are welcome not to join. I personally would not have handled the Randall twins the way they were handled initially as cub scouts.

 

Even if the scouts have no policy on religious belief comparable to the policy on avowed homosexuals, there is still the requirement for eagle rank that applicants provide a letter from a "religious leader." I heard about a more recent case where two boys were suing about their right to an eagle rank. I don't know, but I infer that this is the same Randall twins. I also don't know the status of this more recent case. It could be that these youth ran afoul of the specific eagle requirement. So what? If such youth want to be as adamant in their views as to not meet the rank requirements, they have made a personal choice.

 

The statement of "religious principle" as I understand it would not preclude an atheist from being a volunteer. The statement does not require that the adult be a believer, but that the adult support the scouts' view that a duty to god matters. It would be entirely possible for an atheist adult to be supportive of believer youth in a manner consistent with the statement of religious principle. This would be no different than an adult follower of a particular religious belief system supporting youth with different beliefs. Contrary to the unfortunate treatment in the media, scouting is a large tent. The only line drawn in the sand is on open homosexualtiy.

 

It is unfortunate that the ACLU persists in its war on religion. It does that organization little credit.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

As I said, "get a life" isn't an argument.

 

I've read your agnostic thread; it shows an ignorance of agnosticism as well as atheism.

 

As I stated when I started, this thread is about PUBLIC SCHOOLS chartering scout troops. Your last reply contained nothing about that. If you'd like to agree that public schools can't charter troops, fine; there are still other people who don't seem to understand this.

 

[eisely 13]

This will be my last response to LeRoy's continued insulting attitude. I neither disagree nor disagree that public schools can be chartered organizations. You have raised an issue that indicates that such charter relationships are in jeopardy. That is potentially useful information and we thank you for that.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

As I said, "get a life" isn't an argument.

 

I've read your agnostic thread; it shows an ignorance of agnosticism as well as atheism.

 

As I stated when I started, this thread is about PUBLIC SCHOOLS chartering scout troops. Your last reply contained nothing about that. If you'd like to agree that public schools can't charter troops, fine; there are still other people who don't seem to understand this.

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Well, Well, Well,

 

What I have wrought...

 

I answered this thread only to see what type of reactions I would get and I must say I feel a little like the original atomic physicists working at the University of Chicago under Stagg Field. I knew I would create a chain-reaction, I just didn't know how big it would get. I am amazed.

 

First a thank-you to my fellow scouters who did not reference my "outrageous" second entry. At least I dont think any scouter referenced the comment which was exaggerated to the wildest extreme to make a point. That point may have been lost in the many comments back and forth.

 

Any Organization that has members has a right to expect its members to meet qualifying requirements. I beleive its in the best interests of Boy Scouts to continue to do so. The Latin Club does not accept those who are only interested in attending Toga Parties and Boy Scouts should not accept those who do not meet our qualifications.

 

And yes, a desire to study Latin is a far cry from "Duty to God", but when did that become such a bad thing?

 

Can anyone here point out in the US Constitution where its says that belief in God is a bad thing or at least not tolerated in public buildings? I am a Counselor for the Citizenship in the Nation merit badge and dang if I can find it.

 

If I understand the Alchoholics Anonymous process, acceptance of a higher power is one of the 12 steps. Does that mean if an AA group uses a public building, it should be turned out?

 

The 12th point of the scout law is a scout is reverent. In my troop we have Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and a Buddist. The Buddist follows a strict vegatarian diet and we are pleased to accomadate him on camp outs. We all worship together, each to his own "higher power".

 

The 12th point of the scout law is not new. It has been around for 90 years, why should it be an issue today?

 

Mr LeRoy, if this is what you are looking for, ok here it is

 

I have said before in various postings that the measure of a man is his behavior in stressful times as anyone can behave well in good.

 

I do not beleive the Boy Scouts should be where they are not wanted. If public schools dont want them, then they have to leave and find another Chartering institution. It will give the boys in the program a taste of what being persecuted for their beliefs feels like. And I beleive they will find an organization to charter them.

 

And if the Boy Scouts are full of Idiots and the like, why are so many people spending so much time and energy trying to change it?

 

I think an excellent solution would be for all the people who think Boy Scouts should radically change its founding principles is form a group of their own.

 

Write your own rules and develop your own program since ours is, as you point out, seriously flawed and dishonest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank-you to all my fellow scouters who did not reference my first reply in any of their comments (at least I didt think I saw any references, thank-you because you knew I did not beleive what I was writing, it was only to prove a point by hyper

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

You still don't get it; it isn't a question of whether public schools "want" scouts, it's whether public schools can charter troops; they can't, because chartering a unit requires that the school discriminate in ways it can't.

 

If you don't understand this, you won't understand why government agencies are cutting ties to the BSA; you'll be making emotional arguments that the scouts ought to be supported, and your opponents will make legal arguments that government agencies can't legally support them. The legal arguments will win.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

First, I do not agree that Boy Scout's require Chartering Institutions to discriminate, we do require our members to have certain qualifications as I have pointed out all along.

 

If you choose to call those qualifications discrimination, that is your right under the First Amendment as is your right to call me an idiot. I have been insulted worse by better.

 

As I alluded to before, if communities want the program, then chartering organizaitons will be found.

 

And for someone who disects all the other replies, why no comments over why so many people who aver disgust for the Boy Scouts program wish to change it so badly?

Wouldnt the best thing to do is ignore us and hope we will go away?

 

The scouting organization has its reputation and success because of its core principles and beliefs, why should its members change them?

 

If these beliefs are outdated then the program will suffer and perhaps its leaders will have to look into the reasons. But I dont see that happening soon. I cant say I am 100% behind everything that BSA does, but then again I am not 100% behind everything my government does either but I am proud to be called a Boy Scout and an American just as well

 

You may think I still dont get it, and perhaps to whatever you are trying to say, I dont.

 

I dont peruse papers looking for scout related stories, I dont have time for that. I am in Scouting for one reason, I loved being an scout. I received my Eagle in 1969 in the Chicago Suburbs which was not exactly the best place to wear a Boy Scout uniform, especially after the 68 convention. However, my father was an Asst Scoutmaster in the troop and I treasure the memories of that time. I met another man during that time, a friend of my father who passed a long time ago who taught me songs I teach today.

 

Now my own son stands on the brink of Eagle, I am proud and humbled by the experience. Once while lashing together a monkey bridge in the back yard, not for any requirements, just for fun, he looked at me and said, "I am lucky I have a father who likes Scouting as much as I do", I choked back a tear and replied, "I am lucky to have a son who likes Scouting as much as I do".

 

And I beleive many of my fellow scouters feel the same way. We are in scouting because a special person(s)helped us when we were in scouting. They made the time special for us and we wish to do the same for the next generation.

 

Perhaps I dont get it because I am too busy working my job and planning the next findraiser,(Coke trailer at the local Wal-MArt), Camp-out (backpacking in March, always a thrill)and being a Scoutmaster at the National Jamboree (hey any of you scouters going? I'd love to meet you all) and the like. Furthermore I do not think I am particularly exceptional in this regard. I know several other parents in our troop who do the same thing. In our district dozens more and in the council hundreds. Do we all get what you want us to, probably not, we are to busy attending the boys.

Is this an emoitonal response? Yeah, but then again love for our sons would have to be called emotional and I do not apologize for that.

 

What do you want us or me to say? That Public Schools cant Charter Scout units, if the Courts say no, then its no, and life will go along. Those of us interested in Scouting will assure the life of the program, after all, there are always alternatives

 

If you are trying to give us information, then give it without editorializing, and I guess I should have asked this before, but since you are so well versed on the court cases what is your interest in this? Are you a Scout Leader or an ACLU rep or what?

 

What were you hoping to accomplish by your orignal posting and has that been met? if not what can I do to help meet it?

 

And yes, I ramble, any of the regulars will tell you that this is normal for me, so

 

Whattauthink?

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

Why should I not editorialize? Isn't that what everyone else here is doing? I guess I can voice my opinion only if it agrees with yours, then.

 

If the BSA wants to be a private organization, they'll have to BE a private organization, which means no government charters of scout units.

[jmcquillan 10]

OldGreyEagle,

 

I commend you. I haven't seen a better reason to be in Scouting than yours posted anywhere, for a long long time. I thank you for that. That one is worth sharing.

 

And Mr. LeRoy, you're dead wrong, again. As I stated up above, I agree to let you have your opinion, and you do. You've made that very clear. But it truly seems to me that the shoe you seem to be trying to put on our foot is the one you're wearing yourself. We accept the fact that you have an opinion. That's fine. Please accept the fact that we all have our own opinions, too. And the fact that they don't agree with yours is something you should just accept, with civility, as we accept yours as yours.