Pentagon agrees to tell US bases not to sponsor Boy Scout units

[Hunt 11]

When I asked Merlyn if he thought military bases should provide access to groups that discriminate, his answer was: "Not on US military bases, no. They aren't public accommodations, and the military has a legitimate government interest in preventing religious discrimination on their bases."

Now he'd like to backtrack from that statement and suggest that he doesn't care who gets access, as long as it's equal. Which version is the truth? I know Merlyn wouldn't lie, because Merlyn would never let anybody--himself included--misrepresent his views.

I should add that his vitriolic approach and readiness to label those who disagree with him as "liars" makes it pretty easy to believe that his agenda goes beyond equal access. If he was just trying to promote equal access, he would (presumably) make respectful, persuasive arguments--as some Scouters do. But that's not what he does--he comes to gloat, and to insult. I have to agree that Ed doesn't seem to understand the Constitution very well, but I think Ed understands Merlyn perfectly well.

[LovetoCamp 9]

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200411\CUL20041117b.html

 

That's the Legion......fighting the good fight!!!

[evmori 11]

NJ,

My answer is the DOD already has another plan in the works to keep BSA units on military bases. Where there is a will there is a way!

 

And BTW, when did congress enact that law that the ACLU states was violated?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Ed says to me:

 

My answer is the DOD already has another plan in the works to keep BSA units on military bases. Where there is a will there is a way!

 

That's ok with me, but that "plan" is a matter of "access," not of "ownership." I am not trying to keep BSA units from meeting on military bases or keep military personnel from volunteering on their own time. I realize some may not see the legal difference between the "access" and "ownership" issues, but I do, evidently the DoD does, and I am pretty sure the courts would, if given the chance to decide the issue (which is probably why they weren't.)

 

BTW, when did congress enact that law that the ACLU states was violated?

 

Oh, Ed, must we? Again? And again? It's the Constitution, as it has been interpreted. But I know it is futile to say so, because you will just say some version of where does it say, where does it say, where does it say, I don't see where it says, etc. etc. etc. over and over and over again, until the end of time. I guess that's what I like about you, Ed, that kind of persistence is tough to find these days.

[acco40 95]

Trail Pounder, are you a secret plant by the Democratic Party to discredit Republicans?

 

The ACLU is 100% Democrat??? Is that why they "rushed" to defend that stalwart Democrat Mr. Limbaugh in his court case? Maybe the ACLU tries to defend civil liberties!!! My goodness, if that were the case no wonder they came up with such a name for their organization!! Now, if you believe civil liberties are the domain of one particular party alone I think you need some basic civics classes.(This message has been edited by acco40)

[Its Me 10]

 

Why is a youth group such as the BSA such a target for Gay and atheists groups?

[nldscout 18]

The DOD plan which oh by the way has been in effect for a few years always was to move all group sponsorship to it community based activities so that the government sponsors NO groups of any kind. The Army has been moving that way slowly for a couple of years, this will just speed it up a little. Will there be any less troops and packs? nope, not because of this. Will they get the same level of support, yes they will. Will this make a differance, nope, not in the least.

 

The MWR folks (Morale, welfare and Recreation) does not pick and choose what groups are allowed. If a legitamate youth organization wants to organize on base, has a couple of military or family members of military to run it, signs a standard sponsorship agreement with MWR, then they are in. They can set membership standards, recruit youth and meet on base. Its really not a big deal. They have lots of organizations including religious ones that discriminate because you must be of a certain faith to join. There is even a Gay youth group on some bases.

[evmori 11]

Thanks NJ. I know it has been interpreted. And my opinion is it has been interpreted incorrectly. I will never back down from that!

 

So now that the ACLU seems to successfully gotten the US government to stop chartering BSA units, when will they go after them to stop sponsoring them? I know this is a legal hair splitter but the ACLU is great st splitting hairs the way they see them!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[dsteele 20]

It's Me said, "Why is a youth group such as the BSA such a target for Gay and atheists groups?"

 

Excellent question. I don't have the answers, but I have some theories:

 

1) The Gay and Athiests want to feel good about themselves. That's a human trait and I don't deny it to anyone.

 

There's a large organization, nation-wide that excludes gays and atheists. That organization is generally perceived as good.

 

When that organization does not accept individuals who are of the same mind set as yourself (even if you don't want to join that group,) the typical reaction is outrage. Of course that's after the dis-belief fades.

 

I don't have a problem with people fighting for American Civil Liberties -- which in my mind include, but are not limited to: the right to vote, the right of free speech, the right to bear arms, the right to a speedy trial, etc.

 

However, the priviledge of belonging to a country club, diner's club, Sam's Club, or other institution such as the Boy Scouts of America is not a civil liberty.

 

Meryln understands this -- that's why he's opposed to government entitiies chartering units and unopposed to equal access. Fair enough.

 

However, I think that the underlying effort to get the BSA to change it's policies comes from hurt feelings more than anything else.

 

Gays want to feel like their lifestyle is accepted by all. Recent votes taken in 11 states have proven otherwise.

 

Athiests want the world to accept them and don't want to have to deal with religious people who argue with them or listen to what they see as usless idolatry. I don't see that happening anytime soon, either.

 

These issues are pretty well entrenched. The minority is very vocal. The majority is relatively silent, but very strong.

 

We'll continue to go round and round with stuff like this for quite a while, I expect.

 

Unc.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Hey Hunt, I called you a liar because you falsely claimed that I would try to bar the Boy Scouts from access to government facilities. I've said that the Boy Scouts should be treated exactly the same as other discriminatory organizations, and since the military has the authority to require that all private organizations on base not discriminate, the question becomes whether the BSA and other discriminatory organizations should all be excluded or all be allowed. Since allowing the BSA would mean allowing e.g. whites-only groups like the KKK on military bases, I think the current military policy of excluding all discriminatory organizations is preferable, because of the prejudice that such groups can bring. However, military bases are not equivalent to "government facilities", and I would never bar the BSA (or the KKK) from e.g. demonstrating in city hall, a very different sort of government facility.

 

beaver1onit, the Boy Scouts have religious requirements for membership; asking what religion the Boy Scouts discriminate against isn't the problem, it's that they reject some members solely due to their religious views, and the government can't do that, of course.

 

acco40, thanks for the email explaining how I was misreading your opening sentence, now I see what you mean. I don't think there will be any effect on the jamboree until judge Manning issues a ruling, and even then it's certain to be appealed.

 

NJcubscouter, see why I've given up trying to explain legal issues to ed?

[acco40 95]

nldscout - that is all well and good but when the US Army or West Point sponsors a unit the money flows rather freely sometimes. Out at Selfridge the troop committee chair out-ranks the base commander so when the CM requests monetary support from the CO - it happens! With the CO now becoming a different entity I would bet that things WILL be different. It is all speculation for now.

[scoutingagain 20]

I've followed this thread for a while and agree with Acco, Hunt and NJ. The issue seems quite straight foward to me. A private group, which practices lawful discrimnation against certain segments of society should not expect to recieve preferential treatment from the government which is expected to represent and protect the rights of all in society. I'm not against the BSA, and fully support the concept that it is a private organization with the right to determine it's own membership criteria, although I may not entirely agree with it. But as a private organization we should be prepared to pay our own way and not ask for favors from the rest of society as represented by our government whether it be the military, school districts or other agencies that are not available to other private organizations.

 

 

It seems like the ruling will have little effect on the lives of individual scouts. Units will still be sponsored by non-governmental organizations and will enjoy the same rights of access to military facilities or public lands that any other private group has.

 

It's Me asks, "Why is a youth group such as the BSA such a target for Gay and atheists groups?" Well, it might have something to do with the fact that the BSA has stated homosexuals lack the moral character to be leaders and practices lawful discrimination against both groups. I could be wrong though.

 

Having said the above, it has seemed to me at times there has been selective enforcement against or prosecution of the BSA.

 

 

SA

[evmori 11]

Merlyn,

Billy Joel wrote a song that describes you to a T! The title is "Angry Young Man". If you haven't heard it you should give a listen.

 

How anyone can justify the removal of BSA charters from military bases is beyond me. The DOD has chaplains on the payroll! Your tax dollars, Merlyn, help pay these people! Plus, the BSA is a federally chartered organization! The military discriminates against gays! Maybe your tax dollars shouldn't support the military at all because they discriminate!

 

You won't answer my question because you can't, Merlyn.

 

Typical of an ACLUer. Declare the person questioning your motives inept therefore eliminating the need to address their valid question.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Its Me 10]

The assault on the BSA by the gay and atheistic organizations is shameful.

 

This is a proxy fight against society through a youth group.

 

To rejoice and continually post articles regarding such attacks on the BSA on this scouting forum, shows a contempt and loathing for an organization that knows no bounds.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

You're right ed, I can't answer your question, because you can't understand the answer.

 

I could answer the same question asked by someone else, though.