Scouts' food drive moved to prevent possible electioneering

[Hunt 11]

Does this mean that any charitable group with any identifiable position on any issue would be electioneering just by being present to collect food for a food drive? Actually, as I think about this, maybe just having a food drive is electioneering, since concerns about poverty and hunger are so clearly associated with one of the political parties, right?

The whole thing is pretty silly. I don't consider it a big deal if they want charitable groups to be 100 feet from the polls to avoid voters having to run the gantlet, or because the groups might engage in electioneering. It's pretty far-fetched, though.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Hunt, the scouts only had to move for this election because there was a gay-connected issue on the ballot, and the scouts are (now) publically perceived as being officially anti-gay, so their presence by a polling place raised electioneering concerns. There's no general ban on charity drives near polling places, just organizations that are overtly political, like the Boy Scouts now are.

[CA_Scouter 11]

Gonzo... remember, ALL MEDIA IS ENTERTAINMENT!

 

All - So what if a gay atheist wanted to donate to the Scout's food drive?

 

[Gonzo1 10]

CA Scouter,Sure media is entertainment, but the media becomes a tool when certain words or phases become over-used by people in the media, like "gravitas". No one really used it, then all of a sudden, everybody used it.

 

When the media keeps beating the nagativity drum, that is, woe is me, woe is me, the economy is bady, immigration is bad, the war is awful, yada, yada, yada. The economy is actually pretty good. Unemployment is at all time lows, the war could be a little better, but we're winning, However, we NEVER hear (or read) about the good things going on, or, how many bad guys get to meet Allah.

 

So, I don't think the medai is ALL entertainment.

 

BTW, I'm OK with all groups being 100 feet from the door, even BSA, for all elections.

[evmori 11]

Hunt, the scouts only had to move for this election because there was a gay-connected issue on the ballot, and the scouts are (now) publically perceived as being officially anti-gay, so their presence by a polling place raised electioneering concerns.

 

Yeah kids collecting food are electioneering! That is funnier than a Road Runner cartoon! What a stretch that is! I'll bet if it was a gay atheist group that was forced to move 100 feet away there would be all kinds of accusations of discrimination & unfairness!

 

So what if a gay atheist wanted to donate to the Scout's food drive?

 

How would anyone know? And who cares!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[CA_Scouter 11]

Ed.. excellent. That's the point. Nobody would know or care. The goal is to collect food for the needy.

 

Gonzo... I submit to you that the media is the opiate of the masses. We all know people who base their opinions on headlines only, without examining the content/truth of what's being written, and who take the media at their word. To those people, the media is useful as a tool. To those who believe the media sometimes has an agenda ( oh, perish the thought! ), the ALL MEDIA IS ENTERTAINMENT mantra is accurate.

 

I am also ok with all groups being 100 feet from the door, including BSA. I just think the reasoning as stated in this case was a little silly.

 

 

 

[Gonzo1 10]

CA Scouter,

It is sometimes difficlut for me to convey my inflection and tone in written word. I mean that the media are to a large extent the mouthpiece of the democrat party. I'll stipulate that conservative talk radio host could be seen in the same light, but I don't believe that Limbaugh and Hannity get daily faxes with talking points as I believe the left media does.

 

It's a shame that some people only get their news from Leno and Letterman and other late night talk shows. BTW, I think Michael Savage is a kook.

 

[SSScout 1615]

So I arrive at my polling place, which is the local elementary school, and run the gauntlet thru political hcksters, past the little sandwich signs that proclaim "no electionering past this point, within 100 feet of the polling place", into the building, down the hall, past the cute kindergarten art work, past the Media Center (library in Old Speak), past the murals painted by past students about the town history, past the Main Office and its bulletin boards and pick-up tables ( ummm, no Scout literature, maybe I should... nah), down the hall past... the Lions Club selling Citrus Fruit and Mulch and Afghan throws, the PTA selling candy and brooms(!), past the group touting ESOL classes and... finally into the cafeteria/all-purpose room now turned into the basic tool of Democracy, the voting place. Ummm. Signs in Spanish.

I give the lady at the desk my name ("spell that please?") she checks the computer list, ("your birthday? address? No, don't need to see your drivers license.") the printer spits out a ticket ("check everything here, please and sign there... thank you."). I am given a computer chip and led to a touch screen set-up. Slide it in.. Chunk. Ummm -mmm- yep, him, not her, nope, okay, done. Release chip, shoop. Hand chip to next official, into cardboard box. Take offered sticker that reads "I voted" in english AND spanish ( I can get a free Taco at the local restaurant by showing'em this sticker!)

It is done til next time. Trust is the key here. Try not to think about All the Presidents Men or recent Robin Williams movies. Paper or Plastic?

 

YiS

[Hunt 11]

"Hunt, the scouts only had to move for this election because there was a gay-connected issue on the ballot, and the scouts are (now) publically perceived as being officially anti-gay, so their presence by a polling place raised electioneering concerns. There's no general ban on charity drives near polling places, just organizations that are overtly political, like the Boy Scouts now are."

 

But surely even you must recognize that this is a ridiculously broad definition of "overtly political." As far as I know, BSA has never endorsed any candidates, or taken any position on electoral issues. Wouldn't this mean, for example, that the same treatment would have to be given to the Knights of Columbus if they were collecting food there, because the Catholic Church is anti-abortion? Or if an environmental group was running a can recycling drive? Or if the American Legion were there giving out little American flags? Or what about the Lions Club collecting old eyeglasses--you know that the Lions Club holds consultive status with the United Nations, right? How much more political can you get than supporting the United Nations?

To be a bit more serious, I suppose there are charitable groups that are so identified with an political issue that their mere presence, even collecting food, could be deemed to be electioneering--two that come to mind are Planned Parenthood and the National Rifle Association. The Boy Scouts are nowhere near that category, except in the minds of a few people who have focused on BSA's membership issues. For the vast majority of people, the presence of Boy Scouts would not focus attention on any political issue, any more than would the presence of the Knights of Columbus or the Lions Club.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

I'd suppose that a group that excluded Jews would also be barred if there was an issue involving Jews on the ballot, no matter how much the supporters of the "no Jews allowed" club thought it was a minor aspect of their private, discriminatory club.

[evmori 11]

Totally absurd! By telling the Scouts they must move their food collection 100 feet from the doors to the polling place and letting anyone else closer is flat out discrimination regardless of what the issues on the ballot are!

 

What a joke!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Hunt 11]

"I'd suppose that a group that excluded Jews would also be barred if there was an issue involving Jews on the ballot, no matter how much the supporters of the "no Jews allowed" club thought it was a minor aspect of their private, discriminatory club."

 

Although I like my examples better, since they are closer to reality, I take it from your response that you would favor excluding the Knights of Columbus if an issue "involving Jews" was on the ballot? Knights of Columbus is also a private, discriminatory club (you have to be a Catholic man to belong--I guess they would accept a Jew who became a Catholic). What's the principle you are espousing: that if a charity group has a position that in any way relates to an issue on the ballot, their presence is by definition electioneering? That's a pretty broad principle, and it would result in essentially all charity groups being excluded--I have no particular problem with that. I just don't see how you could draw a line that would exclude BSA but include some other charitable group that you like better.

Perhaps the fallacy of your view is that you may think that BSA is to gays and atheists as the KKK is to blacks. But it isn't--although BSA doesn't let gays and atheists join, it is not on a campaign against them, and rarely says anything about them except in connection with the membership issue. The issue is really tangential to the vast majority of what BSA and its members do, and it is also tangential to what most people think about the BSA and what they see. That's why I point out that it's one thing to allow the NRA or Planned Parenthood to collect food--their whole reason for being is to promote specific issues--and something else to allow a charitable group for which the issues are more tangential, like BSA, the Knights of Columbus, the Lions Club, etc. While the line might not always be easy to draw, there is a distinction that a reasonable person should be able to see. To use your example, it matters whether the "no Jews club" is a religious group that requires members to be Christians or a group that is specifically anti-Jewish.

(I would note, just for the record, that it is certainly possible to agree with BSA's position on the morality of homosexuality and still favor legalization of same-sex marriage, so I disagree with the premise that the presence of BSA members constitutes electioneering on the specific issue on the ballot.)

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

I think your K of C example would go better with a pledge of allegiance issue on the ballot, since the K of C is largely responsible for inserting religion into a then-neutral pledge.

 

And requiring any organization that even remotely can be considered political on a ballot issue is the proper thing to do, since requiring them to be 100 feet away from a polling place is not a burden, and the BSA is clearly political when it comes to atheists and gays, even if you don't think so.

[CA_Scouter 11]

M... you forgot to add the '.. in my opinion ..' part!

 

Opinions are like belly buttons. We all have 'em and we all don't have any use for 'em.

 

Well, except for some of us Scouters.. we often use the lint that's collected there for firebuilding demonstrations. :-)

 

 

[CalicoPenn 729]

My opinion:

 

I don't think I'd be going to far out on a limb to say that most of us think the explanation seems a bit silly to us. However, perhaps we should be cutting the officials quite a large bit of slack here - they know their community much better than we do and likely knew they would be in for it if they didn't take this action - by doing so, they could disarm those who would object to the Scouts being there by stating they were within the law, and could disarm the critics by stating that they didn't prevent the Scouts from setting up shop - we may not think so but it's probably a win-win for the county taxpayers - they certainly have prevented cause for any serious litigation - and if it were my county, I'd be thanking them for trying to be evenhanded and saving my tax dollars by not getting the county involved in a frivolous lawsuit.

 

Now, that being said, I propose what is perhaps a radical idea - no electioneering at all on election day - not 100 feet from the polls - not 100,000 feet from the polls - you had until the day before to make your case, now let the people vote. Also no collecting for charity at polling places, no selling of brooms or knick knacks - none of it. It's election day - we should be concentrating on voting once we get to the day and polls. Lets start considering election day sacred - its a right, privilege and responsibility to vote. Lets start treating it as sacred instead of as a circus as it so often becomes at some polling places. When I go to the polls, I want to do one thing - vote - I've already made up my mind by the time I'm heading to the poll - I don't want to talk to the candidate or his/her people one last time. I also don't want to have to bring some canned goods with me, or sign petitions to save some local landmark, or buy a broom for a good cause. I want to vote. I don't even want to see my local homeless veteran, whom I give a buck to every time I see him, standing outside the polling place (Hey, Mr/Ms Candidate - need something to do on election day? Take a homeless veteran out to lunch - and maybe a little shopping).

 

Just dreaming, I suppose.

 

Calico