Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tortdog

ACLU to BSA: Heads We Win - Tails You Lose

Recommended Posts

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."

 

Yeah, sounds like a bunch of weirdo hippie commie crapola to me

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merlyn.

 

>Where has the BSA stated, in court, that it is not a religious organization?

 

I've already shown you where the COURT that you use for your authority points out that the BSA argues it is NOT a religious organization.

 

>You've only shown where the BSA has said it is "nonsectarian", but that's not the same, as the description of the BSA as both nonsectarian and religious has shown.

 

Oh...you must not have read the entire court order.

 

>And if you'll read the judge's decision, you'll see that the BSA lease was struck down because the city didn't have any sort of competitive bidding, which it can't do when dealing with a religious organization. How were those other leases granted?

 

That's because the BSA was the group that put all the improvements into the land. You think it's just to let the BSA spend millions in improving the land, open it up to everyone (including atheists), and then only ask for the right to do its own programs during part of the year on that property?

 

The ACLU is out to screw the BSA because the ACLU lost at the highest court of the land. It's still crying about it and is extorting money from cities (from the taxpayers), lining their own pockets, until the ACLU feels it's done enough damage. The ACLU did not fight self-admitted religious organizations with leases with San Diego because there wasn't any money there. Cash, Merlyn. Cash. Maybe if the ACLU had more believers in God and service to country it would do something with altruistic motives.

 

I won't hold my breath.

 

Now, directly from the court's order (and I provide more of the quote as it appears some have not read the order in complete form):

 

>The BSA-DPC contends that as a nonsectarian organization, it is beyond the reach of the establishment clause, but that even if it were sectarian, the leases satisfy the Establishment Clause because they are part of a program whereby City parkland is offered to a variety of groups, both RELIGIOUS AND SECULAR, on a netural basis for the secular purpose of providing recreational facilities.

 

Okay...the the BSA points out that it is nonsectarian. The BSA then argues that even if the court finds it is sectarian (which it is not), that the BSA still wins because the land is offered to groups for both religious AND secular groups.

 

In other words, in the BSA's argument (and the court's understanding), you have (i) religious groups and (ii) secular groups. A religious group (as being discussed by the BSA/court) cannot be a secular group (otherwise the argument does not make sense. You don't say something is offered to a religious group and a secular group if religious and secular mean the same thing. That would be like saying something is offered to a "religious group" and a "religious group".

 

Um...no.

 

And that's why those cases I presented you with stand as evidence of the BSA NOT being a religious group, because it is not a secular group.

 

And it's that simple. Or do you not believe the court that you cited to for your authority?

 

http://www.bsalegal.org/downloads/1DE211_July_2003_Order.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"nonsectarian" still doesn't mean not religious, as there are groups that are both, like the National Council of Churches (or whatever they're called now).

Also, "secular" is not the same as "sectarian"; you seem to think they mean the same thing, as you are saying that "religious vs. secular" shows that "sectarian" must be exclusive of "religious". No, "secular" is exclusive of "religious".

 

And if the ACLU wants to make money, why didn't they file lawsuits against some of the thousands of unlawful BSA charters to public schools, instead of just writing the BSA a letter telling them to stop?

 

In any case, the BSA has been ruled to be a religious organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am confused. Does the BSA want to be a religious organization or not? In Seabourn vs. Coronado Area Council they said.

 

"Boy Scouts of America is a religious organization, association or society, or nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with religious organizations, associations or societies within the meaning of the Kansas Act Against Discrimination, expressly permitted by the Act to limit the occupancy of its real property, which it owns or operates for other than a commercial purpose, to persons who believe in God or to give preference to persons who believe in God."

 

In 1998 Lawrence Ray Smith, Chairman of the Religious Relationships Committee said "Boy Scouts is an ecumenical organization which requires belief in God and acknowledgment of duty to God by its members"

 

Now after reading the messages above I think the BSA doesnt want to be considered a religious organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguments that BSA isn't a religious organization are just silly. It requires you to believe in God to be a member. Really, that's all it takes. Maybe it's not primarily religious in its goals and activities, but it simply is a religious organization. In fact, some of the same folks who are saying it isn't a religious organization are saying they'd quit if it dropped the belief in God membership requirement.

 

Of course, that still doesn't mean the San Diego case was corretly decided. It wasn't, and I expect it to be reversed on appeal, eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now ... I'm twirked the wrongest way with the ACLU! They are breaking up a great relationship that our Pack has with the Elementary School for the last 9 years!

 

This is part of an email from our DE:

 

The BSA has made a decision to no longer charter to any government institution, this includes schools, municipalities, military, police, or city fire departments. The reason is that the ACLU, in its ongoing campaign against the Boy Scouts, has started suing any government institution that charters a Scout unit.

 

In order to stop this avenue of attack, and to protect our friends in government from unwarranted harassment, BSA has instructed all of the Councils to identify new non-governmental Charter Partners for any of our units currently attached to a governmental institution.

 

We are working on this and will have all of our District's units moved before the end of the year.

 

If we could not find a CO, it looks as if it may be tail ... our boys lose! That's 100+ of them! I hope that the ACLU is very proud of their deeds!(This message has been edited by OneHour)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BSA could have decided that BSA units chartered to government agencies would not discriminate - but they didn't. Instead, the BSA decided not to charter units to government agencies. Would you have preferred the former decision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BSA could have decided that BSA units chartered to government agencies would not discriminate - but they didn't. Instead, the BSA decided not to charter units to government agencies. Would you have preferred the former decision?

 

That's because the BSA refuses to compromise it's morals & values. Something you wouldn't understand, Merlyn. Neither does the ACLU.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OneHour,

 

Just curious. What support did the school give your Pack that you will not get if you change charter organizations? There should be no reason you shouldn't be able to continue to meet at the school, unless the school doesn't allow any other group to meet there, or has restrictions on what types of groups can use the facilities.

 

SA

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ACLU is there to protect the rights of everyone. Being a leader in a Troop or a Pack is not a right, it's a priviledge and that priviledge is determined by the parents whose sons' interests are at hand.

 

The eagle award is an award for achieving the REQUIREMENTS set forth. It is not a RIGHT! If a requirement is not met, the award is not granted ... no "ands" "ifs" or "buts!" If a high school student who did pass a required class, do we grant him/her a diploma anyway?

 

There are no rights being trembled on. There are no group of people being denied of their rights! ACLU has more than enough of legitimate human rights issues to concentrate on.

 

'Nough said from me on this subject! Merlyn ... you don't have to preach to me about the needs to protect rights ... life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I should know about it well. From time to time in the 30 years that I am living in the States, I'm on the receiving end!

 

 

ScoutingAgain ... there is no problem of meeting at the school. It's the relationship that was built with the Principal and the school staff. It's also finding another CO who's willing to adopt a Pack our size. The area that we are in is packed with troops and packs. Many packs are being chartered by schools! I'm just fuming! That's all.(This message has been edited by OneHour)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OneHour,

 

I can understand the frustration of trying to find a charter partner. It is not always an easy task. However, you do have options. The pack my youngest son was in had been chartered to the elementary school and because of a change in school district policy, we had to find a new charter partner. We went to the PTO in that instance. That served well until declining enrollments forced the school to close. The PTO that had served the school disolved. The charter then moved to a local church that had a troop but no pack. We have had good luck with local service orgnaizations like the Lions or American Legion and have also used groups of concerned citizens to form units.

 

The scouts require a declaration of religious belief for membership. The government can not entangle itself with such a requirement by sponsoring units. The ACLU is acting on behalf of local citizens that complain about these arrangements. If scouting in the US is going to continue on this path of religious tests for membership, we as scouters need to find other ways to deliver the program. This will require energy and commitment not misdirected anger at the ACLU. The ACLU is simply acting on their core values as is the BSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the ACLU were committed to civil rights, it would consider fighting for the 2nd Amendment (which right to bear arms some of the founding fathers considered the most important right). The ACLU would also attack the religous groups that have leases from San Diego (but it does not).

 

It's about money; Cash on the barrelhead; Money talks. It's about pleasing its consituents: a bunch of people who are upset that the Supreme Court didn't write in a right to prevent groups from freely associating and refusing entry to gays.

 

>"Boy Scouts of America is a religious organization, association or society, or nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with religious organizations, associations or societies within the meaning of the Kansas Act Against Discrimination, expressly permitted by the Act to limit the occupancy of its real property, which it owns or operates for other than a commercial purpose, to persons who believe in God or to give preference to persons who believe in God."

 

The reason the BSA relied on this provision was Kansas only allowed certain groups to discriminate based on sexual orientation. The BSA looked at the law and...wa-lah...the legislators said that "any religious organization, association or society, or nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with religious organizations, associations or societies" can discriminate.

 

Period.

 

The BSA doesn't have to be a religious organization. It only has to be a nonprofit institution or organization (it is) that operates "in conjunction with religious organizations" (it does).

 

Therefore, the BSA wins.

 

It really is that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OneHour writes:

There are no rights being trembled on. There are no group of people being denied of their rights!

 

Yes there are; what happens if an atheist student wants to join a unit chartered by the school?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when is joining a private organization, or even a club, a "right?"

 

When my son was 5 he wanted to play baseball but the local team didn't start taking kids until they were in first grade. He didn't meet the eligibility requirements, so he didn't play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...