Oregon high court rules for Scouts, against atheist mother

[fgoodwin 23]

Oregon high court rules for Scouts, against atheist mother

 

http://www.kgw.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8K0R7JG0.html

 

09/08/2006

 

By TIM FOUGHT / Associated Press

 

The Oregon Supreme Court rejected Friday the discrimination claim of an atheist whose son was required to attend a Boy Scout recruiting session in a Portland public school.

 

The Scout oath requires members "to do my duty to God and my country," but simply providing information to pupils in public schools isn't discrimination under Oregon Law, the court said.

 

Reversing a lower court, the justices denied the claim of Nancy Powell, whose son, Remington, was in elementary school when the dispute began in 1996. He is now a junior in a Portland high school, a lawyer in the case said.

 

The justices said the recruiting process on school grounds treats all students the same.

 

"It is in the later enrollment in the organization that the Boy Scouts differentiate among those who do not profess a belief in the deity and those who do," the court said. "That enrollment, however, is not done by the school district, nor is it done in any public elementary school activity."

 

Dissenting, Justice Rives Kistler said the Scouts' offer "appeared to be open to all the elementary school children without limitation," but that wasn't the case.

 

"That offer, both in fact and in operation, divided the elementary school children into two groups: those whose religious views agreed with the Scouts' views and those whose views did not," he wrote.

 

David Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon ACLU, whose lawyers argued for the Powells, called the decision "shameful" and "callous."

 

He pointed to a footnote in which the court said it didn't see how state law "prohibits an organization, even a hate group, from making a neutral presentation to students, or how such a presentation, even by a hate group, necessarily would subject a person to differential treatment or discrimination."

 

He said the Powells were disappointed by the decision but were pleased that one result of the long case has been to prompt some schools to prohibit the recruiting.

[evmori 11]

This will tick off the ACLU even more! Too bad!

[Beavah 205]

A similar case from Michigan, Scalise v. Boy Scouts of America and Mount Pleasant Public Schools, was taken all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court (cert. denied). School facility use, fliers & posters, and recruiting including classroom presentations were found to be acceptable.

 

https://nsba.org/site/doc_cosa.asp?TRACKID=&VID=50&CID=468&DID=35571

[Fuzzy Bear 12]

This decision makes me sit down and put on my thinking cap.

 

As a preface:

I realize and support the decision of the high courts and the Scouts.

 

I also believe that the act of advertising is non-discriminatory but I question the method.

 

Here is my reasoning. Let's say that company BB has a bright blue car for sale. To sell it, they believe that they must cast a long and wide net in a large circle to catch the few fish that might want to purchase one. They make their ads show how bright and blue the car is by showering it with light and putting it in front of a bright white background. It looks great! They say that it gets wonderful gas mileage and can carry 10 adults easily. Their engines and the entire undercarriage are made to last a lifetime and are guaranteed, no warrantees are needed. The only thing a person would need to do is buy new tires every 100,000 miles and perform regular maintenance along with refilling the gas tank.

 

The price is not discussed until you enter the showroom, speak with a salesperson and go back into one of those small rooms where the deals are made. It is only then that you find out that the car costs $500,000. You instantly go into Sticker Shock. You get up and stumble to the doorway, the world is whirling around you and your color becomes ashen gray. You hope that nobody is smoking any kind of tobacco product because you know that you will instantly hurl. You dont fall down until you reach the seat of your humble SUV and then you collapse by gearing the seat all the way back. A few minutes later, you return home where you are met by a an understanding wife and children.

 

Now, nobody has lead you astray and everyone is welcome to come in and look for themselves. If you have the $500,000 smackers, you can drive away in permanent Blue too. The company believes that most people would not come into the showroom if they knew the cost, so they keep the price hidden at all costs.

 

To me, it would make more sense to let people know in the ads about the costs. Instead of letting the buyer beware, it is more important to inform the buyer because a great product will sell itself and most of that selling will be done by word of mouth.

 

This was my challenge to the Scouts in the Troop that I was privileged to be the SM. If you like what you are doing and if you are proud of what you are doing, then you will tell your friends and bring your friends to let them see what you are doing. We had our own brochure that listed what we were to do for the new year.

 

We never had a problem with growth. FB

 

 

 

 

 

[evmori 11]

And the problem, FB, is ..............................?

[packsaddle 753]

I wonder what would have happened if she had attempted to have her son join....

[Hunt 11]

I don't know about this. To me, there's a problem where attendance at the recruiting session is mandatory--this is different from letting groups set up tables at back-to-school night. For those who support the court's decision, would you have any trouble if the school also allowed mandatory recruiting sessions by a Catholic youth organization? By the Young Atheists? By the ACLU Youth Division?

[evmori 11]

I don't know about this. To me, there's a problem where attendance at the recruiting session is mandatory--this is different from letting groups set up tables at back-to-school night. For those who support the court's decision, would you have any trouble if the school also allowed mandatory recruiting sessions by a Catholic youth organization? By the Young Atheists? By the ACLU Youth Division?

 

As long as all have equal access. I wouldn't like my kids having to hear the ACLU but as long as they had to hear the BSA or Young Life then that would be OK.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Never Forget 9-11

[packsaddle 753]

Hunt, I think I agree with your concern. It would be hard to justify MANDATORY attendance for anything that wasn't directly related to school. In this case her best avenue might have been to the school board. Schools around here don't even have mandatory attendance for many school-related activities, much less the non-school-related ones.

I wouldn't want my children to be forced to attend anything that was not school-related. Voluntary attendance would be fine. I guess it is just this parent's desire to make those decisions for my children.

Am I reading something into the article...did the schools decide anyway to prohibit the recruiting? If so, the mother probably wasn't too concerned about the court decision.

 

Edited Part: I just learned that this mandatory recruiting meeting was done during school hours. I would definitely oppose it. The court may be correct regarding discrimination but I'd be all over the school board to have extracurricular activities actually be extracurricular. From what I read this is going to happen.

 

Found it..FYI, here's the decision:

http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S52657.htm

 

(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Yes, the Portland school board prohibited any in-school recruiting, except for military, college, etc recruiters, pretty much as a direct result of the original lawsuit. Also any outside organization that hands out flyers or has notices on the district's web site has to include their non-discrimination policy.

 

Given the odd way the court ruled, it looks like the only reason this recruiting was not ruled as violating the law in question was due to the recruiters deliberately lying by saying any boy could join; if they had been honest, that would have constituted discrimination in the public school setting.

[packsaddle 753]

So...BSA won this one, right? Or did they?

[scoutingagain 20]

I have to agree with Packsaddle. The idea of spending school time to force a student to attend a mandatory recruiting session for any organization to me is ludicrous. It would appear that this ruling would also open the door for just about any group to hold recruiting sessions at public schools during school hours.

 

As a parent, I would want to have a decision in what organizations my children would be exposed to for the purposes of having them become interested in and join. Whether it's scouts, a local sports team, Christians for Kids, Youth Republicans to Stay the Course, Young Democrats for Change, Gay Bi Lesbian and Transgender Students, The White Male Pride Club, or Athiest Scouts of America.

 

I'm rather certain, this type of mandatory recruiting session during school hours wouldn't fly in my town. Any school board member that supported it, regardless of it's legality, would have a very short tenure in their elected position. Just because something is legal, doesn't make it a good idea.

 

SA

[evmori 11]

Man I love it! The only reason the the ruling went the way it did was because someone lied! My sides hurt from the laughter!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Never Forget 9-11

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Yes Ed, read the ruling:

http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S52657.htm

 

The BSA rep said "all boys" could join, but the court ruling states that the Boy Scouts require all members to profess a belief in a theistic god. So the BSA rep lied.

 

If the BSA rep hadn't lied, and said that only boys who believe in a god could join, that *would* have violated this law, as that would have discriminated against the students on the basis of religious belief. But since he lied, there was no discrimination on school time, only later.

[evmori 11]

Merlyn,

I read it. And it would have been discrimination if Remington wasn't allowed to attend the presentation because he is an atheist.

 

No one lied. Anyone can join if they meet the requirements.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Never Forget 9-11

 

(This message has been edited by evmori)