San Diego att'y explains why city settled with ACLU

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

I fight discrimination against atheists; the Boy Scouts are currently one of the largest offenders, by having government agencies practice such discrimination. I seem to have helped convince some people on this forum that the Boy Scouts should no longer charter units to government agencies.

 

I consider the Boy Scouts to be completely dishonest, because they are chartering discriminatory BSA units to government agencies which they know cannot legally practice religious discrimination.

 

One way to end such practices is to draw attention to it.

[Zahnada 11]

Fair enough, Merlyn. Thank you for your reply.

[evmori 11]

And how is chartering a BSA unit practicing religious discrimination?

 

And maybe you better start giving me lessons because I have read & re-read the 1st Ammendment & find nothing that prohibits a public school from chartering a BSA unit.

 

Ed Mori

1 Pster 4:10

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

No, ed. And as I've already said, both the principal and superintendent of the school agree that excluding atheists is something their school can't lawfully do, and they know quite a bit more about their legal responsibilities than you do. Your opinion in this is simply worthless.

[LovetoCamp 9]

I say the thing to do would be to accept a young man into the troop with open arms. Have him work with the troop's chaplain, pray with him, have him work on the God and Country award, help him see the light, and help correct the eternal mistakes his parents have subjected him to.

[evmori 11]

Merlyn,

My opinion is not as worthless as your cause.

 

If you won't defend your point you have no point.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

 

I have and will defend my points, ed, I just won't educate you on the first amendment; I've previously cited many supreme court decisions on-line that go into tedious detail on how the first amendment applies to atheists, and you refuse to educate yourself. Ignorance isn't the same as stupidity, but deliberately keeping yourself ignorant is gross stupidity.

[evmori 11]

How is a public school discriminating by chartering a BSA unit? They aren't requiring the students to become members? And by not allowing public school to charter a BSA unit, isn't that also discrimination?

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White 20]

First, having lived in four councils and been involved in chartering units for nearly thirty years I can say that I have never seen a public school charter a scout unit. I have seen the PTAs and PTOs and other parent groups within a school hold a charter, but I have never seen one chartered to a public school.

 

Second, my family discriminates against atheism. We look at the positive and negative elements of belief and disbelief and choose to believe. We are also prejudiced against atheists. I will not try to foster a friendship with anyone that let it be known they lacked the moral integrity to recognize God's hand in their life. I will not do business with them, they will not enter my home.

 

Can my son not attend the public school? Play in the band? Run on the track team? My family is no different an organization than the BSA. We are protected by the same constitutional rights. I can choose my associations just as the BSA can. The families of the communities we each live in can choose the organizations they want their children to join. Tens of thousands of groups of these families have chosen the BSA. THEY CHOSE the BSA, no one forced them to. No one MADE THEM charter a unit. No one MADE millions and millions of parents enroll their children to share the ideals of scouting.

 

Discrimination is the process of choosing based on a comparison of good and bad. The BSA has shown discrimination between belief in a God and how it affects a persons growth, and disbelief and how that affects growth. They have determined that their goals can best be achieved through a membership of believers.

 

Prejudice is pre-judging a person based on a specific trait. You can be prejudiced for or against something or someone. The BSA shows prejudice against anyone who tells them that they do not believe or give service to God.

 

There is nothing illegal or immoral in either discrimination or prejudice unless an authority sets specific rules for those it has authority over regarding these two issues. For instance the laws governing employment can restrict an employer from using discrimination in hiring in specific areas or information, such as age, sex, ethnicity. However, an employer can still discriminate in a multitude of other areas grooming, skills, knowledge etc.

 

They can also show prejudice in areas not specifically controlled by law.

 

The discrimination and prejudiced practiced by the BSA has been reviewed by the US Supreme Court, and they have determined that it is not illegal.

 

The problem is Merlyn you think it is immoral, and if the BSA and the majority of the organizations that it serves thought that atheists had the ability to make good moral decisions without a basis in religious service, then you would have been allowed membership.

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Bob White writes:

First, having lived in four councils and been involved in chartering units for nearly thirty years I can say that I have never seen a public school charter a scout unit.

 

This doesn't mean they don't exist, as shown by the BSA's own reports that show thousands of units chartered to public schools (and NOT PTAs/PTOs, as they are also listed).

 

Second, my family discriminates against atheism. We look at the positive and negative elements of belief and disbelief and choose to believe. We are also prejudiced against atheists. I will not try to foster a friendship with anyone that let it be known they lacked the moral integrity to recognize God's hand in their life. I will not do business with them, they will not enter my home.

 

That's about what I figured; a century ago, much the same was said about Jews.

 

...

Tens of thousands of groups of these families have chosen the BSA. THEY CHOSE the BSA, no one forced them to. No one MADE THEM charter a unit.

 

When a charter is FROM A PUBLIC SCHOOL, the atheists in that school system ARE being made to charter a unit.

 

...

Prejudice is pre-judging a person based on a specific trait.

 

You mean like not allowing people of certain religious views into your home?

 

...

The discrimination and prejudiced practiced by the BSA has been reviewed by the US Supreme Court, and they have determined that it is not illegal.

 

Because the BSA is a private organization. A public school is not a private organization and can't "own and operate" a no-atheists-allowed youth group.(This message has been edited by Merlyn_LeRoy)

[Bob White 20]

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Bob White 20]

"That's about what I figured; a century ago, much the same was said about Jews

 

No more like liver and onions. I do not care for the the taste. I will not buy any, nor will I use any in my home. I have compared them to other tastes and find I prefer many other foods more.

 

There is no discrimination between religions in the BSA, all are treated equally.

 

Atheism is discriminated against not because of its religious beliefs but becasue it has no religious beliefs. To characterize atheism as a religion is nothing short of a hoax.

 

You cannot measure the value of a void. It has none. Think of it as a restaurant that requires you to wear a tie. They do not judge each individual tie, only that you have one on. The BSA does not care what religion you practice only that you have one.You have no tie Merlyn. You cannot eat at our restaurant.

 

A building whose owner cannot discrimante, can still house our restaurant, because the law says they can. But you merlyn, still need a tie to come in.

 

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

"That's about what I figured; a century ago, much the same was said about Jews

 

No more like liver and onions. I do not care for the the taste.

 

People said much the same thing about Jews; nothing personal, they just didn't like Jews.

 

And you still can't grasp that the chartering organization, as the BSA says, "owns and operates" the unit, and public schools can't do this. You seem to have changed your stance from "public schools don't charter ANY BSA units" to saying they do, but it's legal. Which is your position?

[Big_Dog 10]

 

When a charter is FROM A PUBLIC SCHOOL, the atheists in that school system ARE being made to charter a unit.

 

So when does that mean anything? The gov't forces many of us through the use of tax dollars to do things we're opposed to. I, as a Christian, abhor the use of tax dollars to perform 1st, 2nd, 3rd term abortions. But the gov't don't care, they do it anyway. Welcome to the club...

 bd

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Adrian says, apparently in response to a post of mine in the "Is God Dead" thread:

 

Regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation, I must ask you if you are ready for the BSA to remove any barriers to membership related to it. I'll even give you a freeby and let you rule out all illegal actions. Do you feel that the BSA should allow all individuals of ANY sexual orientation who engage in legal actions? Some of them may be engaged in these actions publically, mind you. Where do you draw the lines within that category and how do you draw them? You realize, don't you, that a no discrimination policy in regards to sexual orientation or activity doesn't allow you to draw any lines within the group?

 

Adrian, does it have to be so complicated? I already explained what my "philosophy" was. It was basically this: "My line-drawing criteria would probably require only two questions: One, does the person represent a significant threat of harm to the youth (or others) in the program, and two, is the person's avowed or known conduct seriously inconsistent with the Scout Oath and Law and related values." It seems to me that this is really not very much different than the approach the BSA takes; the difference, obviously, is that in the case of every gay person, the BSA would answer yes to the second question, while I would answer, not necessarily, you have to look at the individual, just as you do for anyone else. In other words the categories are really the same, but the BSA places gay people in a different category than I do because the current leadership has adopted as the belief of the entire organization, a religious principle that is in serious dispute, namely that homosexuality is inherently immoral.

 

What I am really looking for is for the BSA to let units do what they do every day, and for which they are given a great deal of leeway, and that is to select their own leaders. Probably more than 95 of people who seek BSA leadership positions are NOT in any "group" that is "banned" such as avowed gays, avowed atheists or criminals. From this vast array of people, units get to choose their own leaders, but sometimes, especially for a "key" position such as SM, a person may not fill the bill. We have discussed a number of the ways this might occur. In the case of one major chartering organization (a church), the person may be a woman, which disqualifies her right off the bat, for units chartered to that church's local entities. In some units, the fact that a person is not a member of the CO, or a member of the right church, may be the disqualifier. And if the policy was as I believe it should be, any CO could include the fact that a person is avowedly gay as one of the disqualifying factors. Right now, the unit must exclude the person on that basis. I'm just giving the unit a tiny bit more of a choice than the BSA gives it currently.

 

As for what you wrote, Adrian:

 

You mention "ANY sexual orientation." How many are you talking about? I am aware of two sexual orientations, heterosexual and homosexual. (Maybe bisexual counts as a third one? I don't know.) Do you think there are more than that? And what are they? (Without scaring the readers too much, because I have a sneaking suspicion that that may the direction this is going in.)

 

And when you say "that category," which category? Everyone with a sexual orientation? That includes everybody. Or do you just mean sexual orientation(s) that is currently excluded by the BSA (of which I am aware of one). In that case, the BSA has already drawn the line, I am just saying that the line doesn't make sense where it is, in light of the BSA's own declaration that it doesn't make judgments about which religion is right and which is wrong.

 

And as far as me not being able to "draw lines within the group," first of all I have not accepted your basic premise (and have a feeling I won't when I finally understand what it actually is), so my line-drawing abilities remain intact. As I have told you, I am looking at people as individuals and not as members of "groups," and I want BSA units to be able to do the same. I suppose you could say that looking at people as individuals is the same as "drawing lines within a group," if you look at those individuals as members of a group. Therefore, I am not very likely to accept a premise that prevents line-drawing. (Meaning, not every gay person is acceptable as a BSA leader, just as not every straight person is acceptable. But again, for this particular characteristic, there is no need for me or the BSA nationally to draw a line at all. Leave it to the units to do that which they already do well.)