The American heartland

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

skeptic, the BSA has stated in court that it's a religious organization, and courts have been ruling that it's a religious organization.

 

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

"Not only does the BSA-DPC concede that it is a religious organization,"...

"the Court finds that the BSA-DPC is a religious organization"... both bottom of page 15

 

BSA-DPC = Desert Pacific Council

 

Skeptic, stop lying.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

In the Feb/Mar BSA Today, public schools were listed as the #1 chartering org. with 427,842 members in 11,853 units from the 1997 end-of-year statistics. LDS had more units (30,297) but only 402,828 members and was listed third, after United Methodist.

[evmori 11]

Still waiting on that link Merlyn!

 

Well, since the LDS is a church and so are the Methodists and Presbyterians & Catholics, etc, sound like they would have more units chartered & members as a total!

 

Still waiting on that link Merlyn.

(This message has been edited by evmori)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

What link Ed?

[evmori 11]

I edited that previous post while you were posting your question, Merlyn. Sorry.

 

The BSA listed public schools as their single largest sponsoring group in 1998; "churches" wasn't a single group, they were listed as Catholic, LDS, etc. So blame the BSA for the way they categorized sponsors.

 

The one that backs up this claim. If you don't have a link, I'll take the file & do the heavy lifting.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Well, since the LDS is a church and so are the Methodists and Presbyterians & Catholics, etc, sound like they would have more units chartered & members as a total!

 

Yes Ed, in the same way that adding 5 and 6 and 7 will be larger than 10. But 10 is still larger than 5, 6, or 7, so stating that 10 is the largest is true.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

What file, Ed?

[skeptic 992]

It occurs to me that maybe we should replace the "scales" with a "spinning wheel", or perhaps a "spider-web with a gowned judge in the middle".

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

It occurs to me that if the BSA says it's a religious organization, and the courts say the BSA is a religious organization, that you might have to deal with that, instead of trying to imply that the courts have it all wrong.

[evmori 11]

You seem to be missing the point, Merlyn. The units charted by the LDS & Methodists & Presbyterian & Catholic & Lutheran & Episcopalian & Assembly Of God are all chartered by churches. Add them all up! I'd bet the number is bigger than those chartered by public schools in units & members making your statement bunk!

 

The link or file I am referring to, Merlyn, is the one you quoted here

 

The BSA listed public schools as their single largest sponsoring group in 1998; "churches" wasn't a single group, they were listed as Catholic, LDS, etc. So blame the BSA for the way they categorized sponsors.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Ed, I KNOW that if you add up all the church charters, you get more than public schools, even back in 1998. Note the "single largest", and that the BSA itself ranked public schools as #1. That's how the BSA presented their own chartering organization figures. Complain to the BSA if you like.

[evmori 11]

Does anyone else hear that old Billy Preston song "Will It Go Round in Circles"?

 

Did ya ever think that was because they BSA was showing which specific organizations chartered units? Duh! So public schools were NOT the #1 charter partner of the BSA! It was and still is churches! Gotta get it correct!

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Ed, complain to the BSA. They are the ones who ranked public schools as the #1 chartering organization. If you want to combine chartering organizations, I'll pick "organizations run by homo sapiens" and my numbers will be even BIGGER than churches.

 

So the homos are really #1.

[evmori 11]

Yeah Merlyn you are good a lumping stuff together! Your list of public schools comes to mind!

[Eamonn 61]

Have to admit to not reading all that has been posted.

In part because I kinda think it's going to be much of the same old same old!

Anyway!

In the mail today I received the quarterly edition of the PEBTF Benefit news (Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund) The headline read:

PEBTF Introduces Domestic Partner Benefits.

Under the "Common Requirements" it goes on to say: Two adults at last 18 years of age, and engaged in an exclusive committed relationship"

It makes no mention of what sexes the adults have to be or not be.

It does list a Fortune 500 companies who allow benefits to cover domestic partners.

While of course this is (at least to my way of thinking) a far fling from Gay Marriage.

I do think it is in response to current cultural trends.

I don't understand sex between two people of the same sex! -Maybe because I'm not gay or maybe because I was born when I was born? Or maybe because of 1001 other reasons?

I do however see that two people of the same sex can have deep and loving feeling for each other and I see no reason why they shouldn't set up house together and be offered the same benefits as traditional married partners.

I now return you to the $5.00 ongoing argument. (Yes you did, No I didn't, Yes you did, No I .....)

Eamonn.