Merlyn_LeRoy Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 hunt writes, in reply to me: "If the school only recognizes one official PTA, then I would still go after sponsorship by that PTA, as it's an official school organization." You'd lose, though. The PTA is a private, not-for-profit organization. I also feel quite confident that the courts would draw a line between the school sponsoring the unit (endorsement of religion) and the PTA sponsoring the unit (no endorsement by the school of the Scout unit). I think it would win if the school only recognizes one, official PTA. A private PTA could, for example, exclude Catholics as members, but that would mean Catholic parents and students of that school are at a disadvantage compared to everyone else. A public school couldn't designate as its only official PTA one that discriminates on the basis of religion. The same is true of a PTA that runs a youth group that excludes Catholics (or atheists). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 hunt writes, in reply to me: "If the school only recognizes one official PTA, then I would still go after sponsorship by that PTA, as it's an official school organization." You'd lose, though. The PTA is a private, not-for-profit organization. I also feel quite confident that the courts would draw a line between the school sponsoring the unit (endorsement of religion) and the PTA sponsoring the unit (no endorsement by the school of the Scout unit). I think it would win if the school only recognizes one, official PTA. A private PTA could, for example, exclude Catholics as members, but that would mean Catholic parents and students of that school are at a disadvantage compared to everyone else. A public school couldn't designate as its only official PTA one that discriminates on the basis of religion. The same is true of a PTA that runs a youth group that excludes Catholics (or atheists). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cajuncody Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 I need the contact info for the ACLU. You see there is this kid at school and he almost always is the last person picked for sides in any game. This has to be discrimination and since it happens in school it has to stop. We should sue the school and have a computer randomly assign numbers to kids and pull them for any and all team sports or games. This religious cult of choosing sides should stop now or someones feelings are going to get hurt. I agree with those who think the ACLU is picking on the BSA. Why? WEll no one here has posted one story of the ACLU fighting the schools who have an FCA (Fellowship of Christian Atheletes). If schools can have those why not scouts? What is next, will my son not be allowed to wear his cub uniform to school because it is mixing church and state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 And we should thank Merlyn for compiling that list! The list contains private schools as well as public schools. And we all know private schools can do as they please. Sort of like the ACLU! They do as they please under the guise or protecting our 1st Amendment rights when in reality they are stepping all over them to pick on the BSA! Ed Mori Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molscouter Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Ed, you forgot to mention that he doesn't have time to correct the list himself and has to have others point out the errors. I have neither the time nor the desire to see if these errors are actually corrected. Some of the errors are so obvious it makes the entire list laughable. Sooner or later the ACLU is going to screw up and the Boy Scouts or some other targetted group is going to own every piece of tangible property the ACLU has. I'm reminded of the black man or woman (I forget which) who ended up owning a Klan building as the result of a suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backpacker Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 I agree with Eamonn when he says the BSA is losing more ground everyday. If we are not careful in a few years scouting could become a very minor player among exsisting youth organizations. This will result in less contributions and lead to loss of programs. I don't think too many people will argue that our legal system is in quite a mess today. Lawyers and judges interpret and twist the Constitution to suit their own prejudices, needs, or causes corrupting the original intent and meaning of the document. While one poster objected to the Shakespere quote I wonder if there isn't a prophetic message there for all of us. Eamonn I also second your comment ,"Where are those revolutionary types that founded our country today?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsteele Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 The ACLU through the then President of the American Atheist Association has already tried suing the PTA for sponsoring a Cub Scout Pack. It lost in either 1997 or 1998. Unc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunt Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 I am quite confident that a federal court would find that there was insufficient state action to involve the Establishment clause if a private PTA (even if it was the only PTA at the school) sponsored a BSA unit. There would be no expenditure of government funds, for one thing. Also, it would be even more futile than the current effort, since it would be easy enough to form a parents' group to sponsor the unit seamlessly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johndaigler Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 I'm sure I'm walking out onto thin ice and sounding too Merlyn-esque for many of you, but I have questions and I can't seem to find the answers buried within all the mud that gets thrown when scary words get mentioned in posts? So, without all the rhetoric, without all the anger . . . Can someone explain to me in simple, not threatening words, why they think a public school, funded by public tax dollars, is an acceptable owner of a Scout Unit, which by its chosen nature disallows some of those taxpayers and their children? Can someone explain to me why they believe they know more than the highly trained members of the Judicial Branch provided for in the Constitution, and established and formed mostly by the powers of the Federalists who designed the Constitution? I have yet to meet a Scouter who is a Constitutional scholar. Granted, we're all allowed our opinion, but I'm not very comfortable with bad mouthing generic judges because we aren't getting our way - especially when we seem to want it both ways! Can someone tell me why we keep saying "the ACLU is trying to destroy the BSA"? Again, without the VERY TIRED rhetoric and cliches, what has the ACLU or anyone else for that matter, asked of us? Again and again, threads like this take even the calmest of our heads down dirty paths. I think this conversation is important - vital, in fact; but please, take a breath and think before you let your fingers type worn out words and angst. YIS, jd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitewater Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 jd asks: "Can someone explain to me in simple, not threatening words, why they think a public school, funded by public tax dollars, is an acceptable owner of a Scout Unit, which by its chosen nature disallows some of those taxpayers and their children?" I don't see it as wrong or discriminatory unless the school only sponsors the Scout troop and uses the troop as its sole after hours youth program. It doesn't appear any more discriminatory to me than a school sponsoring a chess club. The chess club is for those that play chess. It would only be a problem to me if the school forced everyone to learn chess and join or refused to sponsor or allow other clubs. If a school sponsored a Scout group but refused to sponsor an atheist group that asked then I would see a problem. Also, some of us are distrustful of the ACLU because of their socialist origins and what we perceive as their agenda. Merlyn adds to this distrust because of his very apparent and outspoken vandetta against the Boy Scouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoutingagain Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 Whitewater, With all due respect, the difference is anyone who wishes to play chess can join the chess club. If there were a religious basis for membership of the chess club, it too would be in violation of the 1st amendment. Can anyone who wishes to participate in scouting join a Pack or a Scout Troop? Obviously no and I'm not saying they should. But it is just as obvious, at least to me, that if we are going to have a private organization that is open only to those that meet the membership criteria we specifiy, we should not expect support in the form of direct sponsorship from the government that is supposed to protect the interests of all its citizens, even those that choose not to live by all the elements of the scout oath and law as currently interpreted by the BSA. SA SA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitewater Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 ..and anyone that is willing to give the faith of their choice a try is welcome to join Scouting. My basic belief is that we can't totally sanitize government of religion as long as government is run by people who are religious. All we can hope to do is to be fair. I don't think that removing anything and everything with a religious conotation from sight is being fair. Rather I think we should see that there is equal access to all. Is it ok that a school sponsor a girl scout troop? They discriminate against boys. Is it ok for a school to have a boys basketball program? Isn't that discriminatory to girls? I don't see how this type of discrimination is any different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunt Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 Whitewater, your questions have been answered many times, but briefly: 1. This is not about access to school facilities; it is about schools owning and operating an activity which has a religious membership requirement. 2. First, schools don't sponsor girl scout troops in the same way they own BSA units. Second, religious discrimination is different from sex discrimination because it's explicitly treated in the constitution. Third, under Title 9 schools have to provide equal access to sports for boys and girls. If you have other questions, read a couple of the recent threads on this; the answers are really quite clear, although not everybody likes them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitewater Posted March 15, 2005 Share Posted March 15, 2005 I'm not arguing the legality of it. I'm arguing the philosophy of it. Sorry I wasn't clear. Yes religious discrimination is treated separately in the constitution but it is the interpretation of it that not everyone agrees with. I don't feel that it is necessary to completely remove everything religious from government to comply with the intentions of the constitution. I think it is going to go to far. When a tiny cross has to be removed from a city seal or a display of the 10 commandments along with other historic documents can't be displayed on public property we are getting too zealous. Soon we'll have to remove "In God We Trust" from the currency. Is it necessary to sterilize religion from everything public? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 BSA chose to take their case to the Supreme Court. And they won. They either knew the consequences and chose this path anyway - or they were hapless clods that never saw it coming. Either way, BSA won their case and got their way. Everything after that was predictable. BSA won their right to go private, so 'private' it is. It was a great legal victory and I don't understand why so many are whining and wetting their beds about the results. As I have said before, the victim stance doesn't work well for non-victims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now