Martinez and the Magicians Horse

[Beavah 205]

This thread is provided so that anyone wanting to do da Merlyn thing can continue without hijacking the parent thread.

 

Merlyn wrote, once again, that public school chartering of a BSA unit is a civil rights violation in his opinion. I don't think he read all da Martinez amicus briefs, but he also opined that da case was fundamentally different. I don't think the case was completely on point, but I reckon based on the briefs that it was close enough to strongly guide the lower courts.

 

Have at it.

 

B

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Beavah, I pointed out just a few of the differences; you, as usual, have offered nothing in terms of rebuttal. It looks like you don't even know how to have an argument.

[Beavah 205]

Merlyn, I have no interest in having an argument with you. It's a bit like debating chores with a child, eh? Leads to much emotion and not much accomplished. Yeh need to take some classes and build up some experience, not expect others to explain complex disciplines in a few lines for yeh.

 

I opened up this thread on a public forum so that others who are interested in da topic can discuss it. That's what forums are for, eh? Group discussion, not private argument. Alternately it might give yeh a spot where yeh can vent or make ad hominem attacks in peace without disturbing other discussions.

 

B

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Beavah writes:

Merlyn, I have no interest in having an argument with you. It's a bit like debating chores with a child, eh?

 

Ah, the usual mindless insults, instead of any real intellectual content.

 

Beavah, I guess you're just too upset that I pointed out all your recent errors. You said marriage was not a right (and for which you gave no cites), and I showed you up by posting links to actual supreme court decisions stating that marriage IS a right under US law.

 

You make completely unspecific claims that the Martinez decision could have made it legal for public schools to charter BSA units if the decision had gone the other way, and I specifically pointed out just a few of the problems with that comparison. You had no comeback to that except to weakly reiterate your unchanged opinion.

 

Yes, you certainly ARE uninterested in having an argument with me; you offer NO basis for your erroneous opinions, and toss off childish insults when challenged. Yes, it's very much like debating with a child. A child with a childish fake accent.

[evmori 11]

How is a public school chartering a BSA unit a violation of anyone's civil rights? There is no requirement to join the BSA.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

How is a whites-only swim team a violation of anyone's rights Ed? Nobody is required to join the whites-only swim team.

 

Just how many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many times will you need to be told until you learn?

[evmori 11]

Big difference Merlyn and not even the same thing. If a public school charters a BSA unit, you don't have to join. You are not required to join. You won't be thought less of if you don't join. Your civil rights have not been harmed.(This message has been edited by evmori)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Ed, you said there's a big difference, but you haven't said what that difference IS.

 

Nobody has to join a whites-only swim team, right?

 

A whites-only swim team could be a part of a private organization that only allows whites to join, and allows public schools to sponsor swim clubs, right?

 

So now you have whites-only swim teams run by public schools, right?

[sherminator505 10]

I don't know how to swim...

 

I have never known how to swim....

 

I have never seen a reason to swim...

 

... SO LET ME BE ON YOUR SWIM TEAM RIGHT NOW!!!(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

[evmori 11]

In reality, there is no difference since no one is forced to join either.

 

Well sherm, ya gotta be able to swim to join a swim team~!

[sherminator505 10]

What, Ed? Are you saying that my previous rant didn't make any sense?

 

But seriously, Merlyn. If the BSA were to suddenly say that athiests were now allowed, but the Scout Oath and Law would not be changed, would you join? Why or why not?(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

OK Ed, you think public schools can, legally, own & operate whites-only swim teams, and doing so doesn't violate anyone's civil rights.

 

I disagree.

[sherminator505 10]

Sorry, Merlyn. We cross-posted. Same question...

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Sherminator writes:

But seriously, Merlyn. If the BSA were to suddenly say that athiests were now allowed, would you join? Why or why not?

 

Probably not, simply due to lack of interest. The most likely scenario would have been back when my son was younger, if he had had an interest in joining.

[sherminator505 10]

Um... OK. Over 3300 posts in these forums got us to the point that you have... a lack of interest in Scouting. That wasn't quite what I expected.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)