Philly raises scouts rent $199,999/year

[Ohio_Scouter 10]

I'd like to see the post. It disappeared before I could read it.

[onehouraweekmy 10]

The moderators don't like it being pointed out who it is or what groups are interested in forcing the BSA to change its no-homosexuals policy.

 

The push is really on to get the BSA to change... even the moderators of the board are jumping on the bandwagon squelching folk's speech in the process.

 

[hops_scout 9]

It's a great thing to live in America. You can believe whatever you want. If you want to be an atheist, you've got that right! If you want to be a Muslim, go for it! If you want to be Catholic, go right ahead!

 

So why can't people leave others alone? Why must an atheist attack a Christian and why must that Christian attack an atheist?

 

I like that you can be whoever you want to be. I get to believe what I WANT to believe; not what the government TELLS me to believe. Because I like that freedom, I believe others should have the same opportunity. I might not like that this person is atheist, or that person is Muslim, etc but I realize that he or she has the same freedom that I do.

 

It upsets me to see the City of Philadelphia doing this to the local council there, but laws are laws. The BSA is the one who decided to go against the law. Sure the Supreme Court decided that the BSA has the right to do it. But with everything, decisions come with consequences.

 

Keep the thread on-topic. If you want to express feelings about the ommission of a specific post, feel free to PM me.

[FScouter 24]

It is worth pointing out here that there is no "right" to free speech on these forums.

 

 

[erickelly65 10]

It's true there is no right to free speech in this forum but at the same time a discussion forum that won't allow an open discussion with varied opinions is of much use to anyone. Except perhaps "sheeple" waiting for someone to tell them what to think.

[onehouraweekmy 10]

The moderators absolutely have the right to squelch any content they chose. Point is, we should wonder, "why?" since my comment simply pointed out that certain advocacy groups have a vested interest in attacking the BSA for excluding homosexuals. To exclude fair comment on who is attacking the BSA and why seems more like taking a position in the argument than merely policing the board.

 

Simple as that.

 

And yes, I suppose Philly is following the "law" they made; I don't know, I hope BSA has lawyers loooking at it. But the point here is not whether the law is being followed, but whether the law is right or just, or whether, of all the laws they have in Philly, this one needs to be enforced, esp. given all the civic good the BSA contributes to the community.

 

Could the city just be pandering to a certain interest group, which cannot be named on this board?

 

[eolesen 10]

Hops_Scout writes "It upsets me to see the City of Philadelphia doing this to the local council there, but laws are laws. The BSA is the one who decided to go against the law. Sure the Supreme Court decided that the BSA has the right to do it.

 

Point of order 1: I suspect the BSA policy pre-dates the City policy/ordinances by a fair margin.

 

Point of order 2: The BSA is not in violation of any laws -- they have a lease that the city has approved, and are in compliance with the terms of that lease. The city is stating that they will not renew the lease at below-market rates without "violating" their anti-discriminatory fair-practices ordinance.

 

If the City Council really wanted to, they can permit variances to ordinances, just as state and federal legislatures can write amendments to laws which permit variances to already established laws.

 

I share the opinion voiced by others that the City is chosing not to in order to placate special interest groups who believe sexual preference deserves the same level of protected status that gender or race do.(This message has been edited by eolesen)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

How about religion, eolesen? Or is that another special interest group?

[onehouraweekmy 10]

How about freedom of association, which the city is impinging. That's a constitutional right that trumps any local ordinance prohibiting so-called discrimination against homosexuals.

 

The Scouts have rights to freedom of religion, freedom of association, and certainly a due process right not to be punished after the city has condoned BSA practices for years.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Lets review a few things here. First off Hops implies he is the one who edited the comments, then the discussion on how the moderators (plural) are controlling what can or cannot be debated. I didnt see the comments Hops edited, I dont know if I would have edited it or not but I respect his right to do so.

 

I would also expect the forum members to realize the moderators are a disparate group of individuals doing their best and not immediately assume we are some organized cabal out to control discussion on the board.

 

When someone says a moderator did a good thing, there usually follows a host of comments on how much people appreciate what the moderators do, but if a moderator does something someone doesnt like, and posts a negative comments, then it's like we have become editors in Pravda

 

I dont think the moderators are as good as we are sometimes told we are nor are we as bad as presented either. And as far as pushing an agenda, I doubt if we were ever together we could handle ordering lunch

[Lisabob 13]

While we're clarifying things: Freedom of association does NOT mean extending a ridiculously cheap lease deal. Freedom of association means the gov't cannot bar you from meeting with other people, under most reasonable circumstances (courts have ok'd certain restrictions for public safety, like riots, demonstrations in public areas without permits, etc.) The city of Philadelphia is NOT telling boy scouts that they may not meet with other boy scouts. They ARE telling the non-profit org (not the scouts themselves) that, as an organization, they do not meet the legal criteria for incredibly cheap-o rent. Our rights and freedoms are indeed precious, but let's not stretch them out of all recognition just for convenience sake.

 

Is what Phillie is doing legal? Almost certainly, and this is a predictable upshot of the BSA's policy. Is what Phillie is doing "right" or "just?" Depends on your viewpoint, but you cannot seriously expect a city to just ignore a law on as high profile a case as this one, especially when there's a significant amount of revenue involved. Here's one irony for you - taxpayer watchdog groups (which tend to be Republican and generally socially conservative) would tear the city a new one if they found that the city was NOT charging market value rent and instead, illegally subsidizing BSA HQ with tax dollars.

 

 

[FScouter 24]

The city has not been ignoring a law. They wrote an ordinance in 1928 which set up the arrangment whereby Scouts would use the building in perpetuity in exchange for maintenance. The deal has worked fine for 79 years. Now the city has written a new ordinance essentially undoing the existing ordinance with the intention of ousting the Scouts.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

The lease has always said that either party can end the lease by giving one year`s notice.

[Gold Winger 9]

"So why can't people leave others alone? Why must an atheist attack a Christian and why must that Christian attack an atheist?"

 

It is usually the atheists attacking the Christians (they like to call us Xians). In fact, its been my experience that atheists spend far too much time trying to point out that we believers are silly.

 

I find it equally silly that most atheists that I know celebrate Christmas and Easter. Some will claim that those are both pagan holidays and not Christian but pagans aren't atheists either. If you're going to be an atheist, don't clebrate the holidays of Christians, Jews or pagans. That means St. Valentine's Day, St. Patrick's Day, Easter, Thanksgiving, Christmas and even New Year's Day.

[onehouraweekmy 10]

Again, the City may have correctly jumped through whatever legalities it needed to hit the BSA... the point is that yet again, an attack on the BSA has been launched because the BSA refuses to rescind its position that homosexuality is incompatible with the aims of the organization.

 

It's as simple as that, and no, I see no Republican or socially conservative groups attacking the BSA... only the ACLU and some hostile local governments with agendas to push and radical constituents to placate.

 

I'm just suprised that so many good Scouters on this forum seem to be so indifferent about defending the BSA's position or acknowledging that what's happening here is political and social hardball. Will the Philly council survive? Surely. But we can't forget that this is not about fiscal prudence on the city's part. It's about ramming an agenda down BSA's throat, and trying to compel them to change a fundamental principle of scouting.

 

As Scouters, we should defend BSA... or go start a comparable organization that OK's whatever it is y'all think BSA should be approving-- it's a free country and anyone who wants to can set up a BSA-like group minus the moral component. But until then, leave BSA alone and unchanged. It's just common courtesy.