Atheist leader to be expelled from BSA

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

bob white:

>My point that Merlyn continues to avoid is that his disagreement is with the governemrnt agencies that willing use the scouting program.

 

The point you continue to avoid is the BSA's lying to continue these disagreements; as I've already said, FECBSA agreed to the Navy's nondiscrimination requirements in CNFJ 5720.11F. If the FECBSA was honest, they would NOT have agreed, because FECBSA is promising to not discriminate on the basis of religion.

 

If the military requires the BSA to not discriminate, yet the BSA does by falsely entering into nondiscrimination agreements, why is my disagreement with the military agencies that the BSA is defrauding? Shouldn't the blame go to FECBSA, for entering into a nondiscrimination agreement it knew it couldn't and wouldn't follow?

 

There are similar examples of various BSA councils signing nondiscrimination agreements with the local United Way to receive funding.

 

And this is an organization teaching ethics to atheist children in public schools.

 

And to OGE: yes, you seem to understand the issues I'm going after.

[Bob White 20]

Merlyn, Your lack of knowledge of the scouting program has caused you to write a number of inaccurate statements.

 

The most misleading being your representation of CNFJ 5720.11F which creates the operstional procedures for the FECBSA in serving military families and the managerial oversights and obligations of the DOD in regards to the BSA and the Girl Scouts.

 

That document recognizes the BSA as a Private Organization serving youth members of DOD families. as well as non-DOD members. It does not require the BSA to change any of its values. It does say in section 4.5.4.1. that the FECBSA and the USAGSO-WP Will not: Permit unlawful discrimination in their membership based on race, color, religion, or national origin.

 

So they see the BSA as a private organization and they cannot permit unlawful discrimination. which takes us directly back to the supreme court ruling which says that the BSA as a private organization does not discriminate illegally.

 

The DOD reviews the FECBSA on an annual basis. If you believe that every military base in the far east is turning a blind eye to discrimination then your complaint is woth the US military.

 

As far as your tax money you need to read that document again. Scouts are given proportional support equal to any other family member involved in a other activity on the base. The cost of service provided the scout units must be re-imbursed. So there is no additional tax obligation to you whether there was a scout unit there or not.

 

There is no dishonesty on the part of the BSA you keep saying there is but that does not make it so. By the evidence you sited yourself the BSA did not alter its values or violate the agreement with the DOD.

 

So what do you hope to accomplish for your cause by posting here?

 

Bob White

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

bob white:

>That document recognizes the BSA as a Private Organization serving youth members of DOD families. as well as non-DOD members. It does not require the BSA to change any of its values. It does say in section 4.5.4.1. that the FECBSA and the USAGSO-WP Will not: Permit unlawful discrimination in their membership based on race, color, religion, or national origin.

 

>So they see the BSA as a private organization and they cannot permit unlawful discrimination. which takes us directly back to the supreme court ruling which says that the BSA as a private organization does not discriminate illegally.

 

This was actually the first question I asked the Public Affairs office at COMNAVFORJAPAN; of course, given your interpretation, the regulation makes no sense at all, since, as a private organization, the BSA could practice discrimination in their membership based on race, color, religion, or national origin, so the clause has absolutely no purpose.

 

What the Public Affairs office told me was this:

>The reason the FECBSA or USAGSO-WP cannot or will not discriminate is because our instruction says so. That is the law.

 

Ask them yourself at n01pas@cnfj.navy.mil; they clearly expect FECBSA to not discriminate on the basis of religion, based on CNFJ 5720.11F.

[ASM7 10]

Merlyn

I am anxious to know your opinion of the origin of the laws that you you think are being broken. Where do these morals come from. Why are laws based on good

rather than evil. What one human decided that stealing, murder, rape and any other crime is against the law. It had to be human, right? I'm looking for the origin. What do you think?

 

Doug

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

doug:

>I am anxious to know your opinion of the origin of the laws that you you think are being broken. Where do these morals come from.

 

Humans, of course.

[Bob White 20]

You keep misrepresenting the contents of the CNFJ 5720.11F. It says the BSA cannot take part in unlawfull discrimination, and the courts say that the BSA DOES NOT discriminate unlawfully. Did you mention that to the PA officer? What evidence do you have that the Supreme court did not see that would change that legal decision?

 

By the way the CNFJ 5720.11F also says that the FECBSA and Girl Scouts are responsible for public relation matters relating to their programs.

 

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

bob white:

>You keep misrepresenting the contents of the CNFJ 5720.11F. It says the BSA cannot take part in unlawfull discrimination, and the courts say that the BSA DOES NOT discriminate unlawfully. Did you mention that to the PA officer?

 

Yes, I just got through *telling you* that. The first thing I did was point out that the BSA can legally discriminate on the basis of religion, race, national origin, etc. so the clause appears to be meaningless. The Public Affairs office said it means that FECBSA has agreed to not practice religious discrimination.

 

Tell me, why does the clause exist, in your view? Since the BSA can legally discriminate in ALL the ways described in CNFJ 5720.11F, what's it FOR?

[SR540Beaver 116]

Merlyn,

 

Why would an atheist want to join an organization that values religious principles? Simply to be disruptive? Why should hundreds of thousands of people who formed, joined and support an organization based on certain principles have to change their program to accomodate a single individual who does not support those principles?

 

How would an atheists organization feel if a religious person went to court to force their organization to allow him to join and push his religious agenda within that organization. When the atheist organization holds their monthly potluch dinner, are they all going to be bowing their heads in reverance as this person says grace?

[Bob White 20]

Merlyn,

My guess is to let anyone reading the document or questioning if the scouting program is doing any unlawfull activity on military bases know that the military will not allow any group to practice unlawfull activities with its member families.

 

Thankfully the Scouting program does not do anything unlawfull in its membership rules.

 

Keep in mind there are no membership policies in the BSA allowing discrimination based on race or color. There is only a rule on lack of religion (I realize we disagree on that being religious discrimination.)

 

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

bob white:

>My guess is to let anyone reading the document or questioning if the scouting program is doing any unlawfull activity on military bases know that the military will not allow any group to practice unlawfull activities with its member families.

 

Uh, no. That particular clause was strictly about nondiscrimination, and I think we both agree that the BSA, as a private organization, can choose to discriminate on the basis of religion, race, national origin, etc. So the clause is meaningless given your interpretation. Which is why I went to the trouble of actually asking the COMNAVFORJAPAN Public Affairs office about it.

 

to kwc57:

>Why would an atheist want to join an organization that values religious principles? Simply to be disruptive?

 

You might want to ask other people that; I'm trying to remove government support from the BSA, which I consider to be a dishonest organization that promotes bigotry against atheists.

[Bob White 20]

"Uh, no. That particular clause was strictly about nondiscrimination,"

 

No it's not. Here read it again..

4.5.4.1. that the FECBSA and the USAGSO-WP will not: permit unlawful discrimination in their membership based on race, color, religion, or national origin.

 

It does not say that the BSA will not discriminate. It says very specifically that it will not unlawfully discriminate. And the courts agree that the BSA in not unlawfull in its actions.

 

Your personal disagreement with the supreme court decision does not change the fact that the BSA does not engage in unlawfull discrimination.

 

Bob White

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Bob White 20]

So Merlyn is it your contention that the BSA is wrong because you think the organization is bigoted or because it is bigoted toward athiests. And what is your definition of bigotry?

 

Bob White

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

bob white:

>>"Uh, no. That particular clause was strictly about nondiscrimination,"

 

>No it's not. Here read it again..

>4.5.4.1. that the FECBSA and the USAGSO-WP will not: permit unlawful discrimination in their membership based on race, color, religion, or national origin.

 

>It does not say that the BSA will not discriminate. It says very specifically that it will not unlawfully discriminate. And the courts agree that the BSA in not unlawfull in its actions.

 

But then the clause is totally meaningless; the BSA can lawfully discriminate in ALL the ways that the clause prohibits, so WHAT IS THE CLAUSE FOR?

 

Then you come back and say it's about "unlawful ACTIVITIES", which it isn't. It only addresses nondiscrimination, as I pointed out.

 

And, as I also keep pointing out to you, I've actually CONTACTED COMNAVFORJAPAN and asked them about this specific question, and they disagree with you as to what the clause means.

[SR540Beaver 116]

Merlyn,

 

I understand your "stated" argument about the Government's not allowing descrimination based on religion and therefore can not sponsor a Scout unit. However, after viewing a good number of Atheist websites, they all define atheism as the "absense of religion" and that atheism IS NOT a religion. To exclude atheists because the BSA says you must believe in some kind of supreme being to be a member is not descrimination. If they said, "you must beleive in a god to be a member" and then said, "we are all Christians and you can't join because you are Muslim" would be descrimination. The BSA does not descriminate based on religion. They descriminate on the "absence of religion". There is a world of difference between discriminating against a particular brand of religion and descriminating against no religion. If atheism isn't a religion, then the government has no problem sponsoring the BSA.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Sorry, you just don't understand what "religious discrimination" means. Read some actual court decisions.