BSA not subject to Am. with Disabilities Act

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Eamonn, what would/should have happened if, say, a deaf kid who's an atheist wanted to join that special needs pack?

 

Like I said, it looks like about 90-95% of government charters have been re-chartered, but since that figure was about 9,000 at the start of 2005, that still leaves a few hundred. I've been looking at Illinois first, and Pack 817 & Troop 817 in Glen Ellyn still appear to be chartered by Philip J Rock Center and School, which is a public school. There are a few chartered by Fire Depts, like Pack 3220 by Holiday Shores Fire Dept in Edwardsville. And yes, I'm not counting charter partners that say "friends of xxx school" or "xxx fire dept auxiliary" and such.

[Fuzzy Bear 12]

Lets say that the BSA had lost the suit. Some might say that the BSA would then be required to purchase an interpreter for every meeting, all events, campouts and planning sessions at $35 per hour or that they would need to provide an aide for a week at camp at $200. per day or they should provide a bus service for anyone with a disability that needs a ride (*purchase of a small bus plus gas, insurance and maintenance). They would not need to comply simply because of the obvious reason that it would be unreasonable. Units and Councils are legal entities and would not have the funding to comply.

 

But the BSA didnt lose and they arent required to abide by the ADA, so they are off the hook. Yet, they have made an attempt at including young men with disabilities that want to be Scouts. There are several provisions for including PWDs. Most Councils have Special Needs volunteers or Committee Chairs. They have modified requirements for badges and extended time requirements. Some run Special Needs Camps. Many units attempt at accommodating special needs Scouts with less than optimal provisions using the resources within those units. Many Councils build accessible trails for Scouts in wheelchairs. The BSA does have faults but it does try. Still there are many PWDs that would like to be Scouts, including women with disabilities and people with atheism, not a disability but it comes with BSA limitations.

 

Because the BSA is attempting inclusion, it still needs to give voice to those that desire to be there. It would be optimal if they allowed PWDs to grieve/appeal problems not because there is a legal issue involved but because there is a desire that justifiably needs to be heard. Problems involving limitations/barriers are regular events when planning for PWDs involvement. Most of the time it is not a lack of resources that disallows participation but it is a lack of resourcefulness. It takes a committee of people with experience to lend insight into many problems so that proper adjustments can be made. It does not always have to include money either. Justice is greatest when those without a voice are given a hearing even when it is not required. fb

 

[nldscout 18]

Merlyn,

 

Well seems your wrong again. You need to update your info

 

Pack and Troop 817 don't exist anymore. And The Holiday Shores Fire Dept is volunteer, so they can sponsor if they want.

 

Got anymore wrong examples?

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Well, the BSA's websites still report Pack and Troop 817 as existing, though I haven't checked with the Three Fires Council, so it's possible the BSA's online data is out of date. Have you contacted them?

 

And I don't know why you say the Holiday Shores Fire Department isn't a government agency:

http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lru/SpecialDistricts.pdf

Legislators Guide to Local Governments in Illinois

...

This lists the Holiday Shores Fire Protection District under "Fire Protection Districts"; these districts are "governed by boards of trustees and may levy property taxes and issue bonds" and are created by referendum. The firefighters are volunteers, but the fire department is still a government agency.

 

The fire chief is also listed as an Illinois public official here:

http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/library/pod/pod2004/WebPOD2004-MadCo.pdf

[nldscout 18]

Your wrong on the fire dept. Just because they levy taxes does not make them a government agency. Here in NY we have the same thing, but tey are not a government agency, but have the legal right to set a tax rate for fire services.

 

You say there are hundreds of units, come on list them.

 

You should know BSA website is always behind on units.

[Eamonn 61]

Merlyn_LeRoy

I owe you an apology.

I miss-read what you posted.

I thought it read that 5 or 10 percent of the units chartered were still chartered by public funded organizations.

Please accept my apology.

Eamonn

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

nldscout, the Holiday Shore Fire Dept. was created by referendum, is supported by tax money, and is listed in the "Legislators Guide to Local Governments in Illinois".

 

More from the Legislator's Guide:

"Local governments are key partners in our intergovernmental system. They maintain and enhance the quality of life of Illinois residents by providing vital public services. Police, fire, sewer, water, emergency, and road services are among the most visible, but by no means the only services they provide."

 

"This guide covers special districts, the most numerous and least understood of all local governments."

 

"Special Districts differ from general-purpose governments such as counties and municipalities in that they provide a single service or group of services. The functions they undertake range from basic services such as fire protection and water supply to more quality-of-life enhancing services like historic preservation and mosquito abatement."

 

Special Districts are local governments. The Holiday Shores Fire Protection District is a Special District. It's listed with all the other Special Districts, in a government publication that exhaustively lists all these Illinois Special Districts, and which is only about Special Districts.

 

It's quite obviously a government agency.

 

Eamonn; no problemo.

[Gonzo1 10]

Merlyn,

It's funny you mention Glen Ellyn. I grew up there and I had to do a google search on the school. I had almost forgotten about it. Turns out it's a school for the deaf and blind and has enrollment of about TWENTY students.

 

I don't know why "publicly funded orgainizations" can't charter scout units, I don't care. But, why do YOU care? Are you bothered that a school that houses children all day might actually have them for a few hours after school? ... I'd have to guess that it's because the BSA has the DRP and schools are government institutions. Then you'll make a claim about 'separation of church and state', right?

 

Allow me to give you the First Ammendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

A "separation of Church and State" is not found anywhere in the Constitution. In other words, freedom of religion doesn't guarantee anyone freedom from religion. If you are upset by the sight of a cross, look away. Does the sight of people praying before eating bother you? look away. Do you drive by public schools on Tuesday nights at 7 pm and wonder if scouts are in there? So what! They are the same kids who were there earlier ar 2 pm

 

It seems to me that atheism has almost become a religion in itself. Many atheists are so shackled to your cause that you can't let others live life without forcing us to kick God out of ours.

 

I've been to many Scout meetings, outings, campouts, etc. For the life of me, I can't recall anyone ever being forced to pray a certain way, worship a certain way, I don't remember hearing anyone preaching, witnessing, testifying, or thumping. We have had non-demoninational worship services, brief ones. Usually led by scouts. I've never been offended at any of them I even attended a Catholic mass conduted by a priest, not bad for a Methodist.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Gonzo1, I care because when public schools charter BSA units, the school (a government agency) is unlawfully discriminating against atheist students by running a private club that excludes them. The first amendment prohibits federal, state, and local governments from running private clubs that have religious requirements for membership, like a cub scout pack.

 

If thousands of public schools ran private clubs that allowed everyone except Methodists to join, and the club's bylaws said only non-Methodists could be the best kinds of citizens, you might understand. But I doubt it.

[Gonzo1 10]

I think you're working youself up into an unecessary frenzy.

I'm trying to picture you driving by a school and getting all worked up.

 

I'll give it to you AGAIN:

Allow me to give you the First Ammendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

Please see the part about 'nor prohibit the free exercise thereof' and the 'right of the people to peacably assemble'

 

It seems that you got your collective noses out of joint because you really want what we have, but just can't have it.

 

You know, if your atheism is the only thing holding you back (and I doubt that's the case), pigeon hole youself into some religion and join. But, I think it's deeper than that. I think you mentioned in another thread that you have a "partner" and we know what that means.

Besides, that wouldn't be ethical, would it?

 

Has your Scouting for All group tried to get your units chartered at schools? public organizations? If not, why not?

 

I personally believe that since you can't have what we have, you don't want us to have it either. Like it or not, I'll pray for you.

 

Edited part added:

Actually, if schools had clubs that only allowed non-Methodists, I'd say "way to go!, good for them!" Much like when I see a Jewish Community Center. They are great places for people to go to, but I guess I'd have to be Jewish, I'm not. Do you know what? I'm not offended. I wouldn't be offended by the school having clubs for people based on gender either, like fraternities and sororities. How about clubs based on language? Can you join the Spanish Club? I can, I'm bilingual.

(This message has been edited by Gonzo1)

[evmori 11]

Right on the money gonzo1! By not allowing the BSA to be chartered by public schools or police departments is actually a violation of the 1st Amendment.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Hunt 11]

Sigh. Guys, even BSA has realized that a public school or other public entity can't charter a troop or pack. The reason is simple: the chartering organization actually OWNS the unit, and a school can't own an organization that discriminates on the basis of religion. It's that simple. Again (for the thousandth time)this isn't about units being allowed to MEET at public schools. It is not about schools "having clubs" of various kinds. It is about whether the school itself can OWN an organization that discriminates on the basis of religion. I really think you should give this argument a rest, since BSA itself has dropped it. Of course, Merlyn invites this kind of response by trying to root out every Cub Scout pack sponsored by a firehouse in Back of Nowhere, Montana and then talking about it here, which I guess is designed to incite you guys.

Meanwhile, the ADA case--the subject of this thread--was clearly correctly decided.

[nldscout 18]

Merlyn,

I called the Fire Department. The are a totally Volunteer outfit, so you lose again.

 

Now you got any good examples or are you going to continue to spout outdated statistics.

[CA_Scouter 11]

I'm with you Hunt. We've been through the charter thing ad nauseum. Splitting hairs and arguing down to the nth degree is boring. A lot of Merlyn's posts serve to incite the others, the others bite, and here we go again... another hijacked thread!

 

aaargh... move on folks...

 

 

[Eamonn 61]

I don't visit the BSA legal website that often.

The post about the law suit was the first I had heard about it and I'm glad that thanks to Merlyn_LeRoy I know what happened.

 

I freely admit that I don't spend a lot of my time worrying about some of the things that seem to be very important to others. I also own up to at times feeling "I'm all right Jack!"

I don't get that worked up about the uniform.

I'm not gay.

I do believe in God and as a Roman Catholic I'm OK with calling God by that name.

The reason I don't spend a lot of time on this stuff is that I'm a busy little fellow.

I do think some sort a uniform is nice, if for no other reason that it is some place to hang the patches and badges that our kids earn. I don't think it would be the end of the world if jeans replaced the pants or units were allowed to come up with whatever pants they wanted.

I have over the past few years started to understand how people of the same sex can have deep feelings for each other. Not being gay I don't understand gay sex. To my way of thinking the equipment doesn't seem right. The avowed thing confuses me? If I woke up tomorrow and found that the BSA had left the selection of leaders and membership requirements in the hands of the CO, I don't think I'd lose any sleep. The CO's could take care of the "Duty To God" requirement as well.

If it happened that some CO were unhappy with the wording of the Oath, there are people who are very clever with words who should be able to come up with something that works. Something along the lines of the Outlander Promise.

Still as I'm not worrying about this I'm happy to carry on playing this game and following the rules as they are.

If the BSA said that Cat owners were no longer able to be Scouters! I'd still feel that "I'm alright Jack" If they said Pet owners, I'd quit.

To be very honest I wish that all this stuff would all go away and stop coming up. I do think in time things will change.

The BSA seems OK with not having God in the LFL program and as far as I know (I'm not sure) Gay adults can serve in LFL programs.

So if they are OK with it there, the traditional program stance must be coming from some place else?

I'm guessing the members of the National Council?

At this time I don' see some of the organizations that charter large numbers of Scout units agreeing to change. Still change is in the air, some religious organizations, churches and service clubs are having a change of heart and I think in time they will apply pressure to the National Council and compromises will be made.

That's the big picture. As for me? - Right now I'm busy doing my best trying to deliver a program to the 28 Sea Scouts we have.

Eamonn.