Merlyn_LeRoy

CA_scouter, I know where the term "troll" comes from, and that describes both you and EagleInKY better than me. Both you and he haven't addressed the subject of the thread (should the BSA promote creationism); I have. Both you and he have attempted childish "baiting" by referring to me as "Moilan" and "Moil" - common trolling tactics. So both of you have been trolling in this thread, not me. Now, ignoring the trolls and addressing the actual subject: Ed, you seem to think that the BSA shouldn't endorse evolution, because it conflicts with some people's religions. Would this go for any other fields of science? Trevorum, I don't think you can dismiss out-of-hand the idea that the BSA may endorse creationism in some way; even though, as you point out, creationism is related to some specific religious sects and not others, I pointed out that the same is true for the BSA's gay policies.

Ed, if the ACLU litigates to make money, why did the San Diego ACLU repeatedly warn the city not to renew the BSA's lease because of the legal issues involved by the city subsidizing a discriminatory organization? If the city hadn't renewed the lease, the ACLU wouldn't have anything to litigate, and there would be no award of legal fees. If the ACLU was trying to make money via litigation, they wouldn't first try to warn off potential litigation -- they would say nothing until the city's deal was done, and then file a lawsuit.

The BSA has no interest in promoting creationism and will never go where Mr. Johnson suggests. Never? I've seen scouters in this forum try to dismiss evolution as science; it's hardly a stretch to imagine that such views could be promoted by the BSA itself in the near future. And you don't have a very good definition of "troll", as real trolls don't debate the issues. You're closer to that definition than me.

Kahuna writes: I personally think it has to do with the elements of the left (read ACLU) and media who want to do away with any standards of decency whatever. It's the same reason the BSA is singled out for punishment for upholding decency. The BSA is singled out because it's a supposedly private, discriminatory organization that gets a lot of government support, even though the government itself can't practice such discrimination. You have a really strange worldview if you think the ACLU wants to "do away with any standards of decency whatever"; why would e.g. Bob Barr work with them? Why would they defend Oliver North and Rush Limbaugh? Why would they fight removal of religious symbols from a Florida cemetery? Why would they fight for a student's right to include a bible quote in the school yearbook? Your view of what motivates the ACLU simply doesn't make sense when compared to how they act in real life and how real people act. To take into account the ACLU actions I've listed above (plus thousands more), you'll have to make up even more bizarre motivations, such as claiming all THOSE are instances of some kind of "smokescreen" to hide their REAL intentions. And somehow explain how an organization that SAYS its purpose is to defend civil liberties, and presumably attracts members who are interested in defending civil liberties, somehow manages to have a completely different internal agenda.

Merlyn- I am against the ban on atheists as well, but equating all Christians with creationists is about as hateful and non-productive as any other form of stereotyping. Oh, I'm not equating all Christians with creationists, but the people in charge of BSA policy seem to be the sort who would likely be sympathetic to creationism. The same can be said for many of the most vocal BSA supporters, Like George W. Bush.

Since creationism is the religious belief of some specific sects and not others, and so has no intrinsic bearing on the "belief in God", it would follow that incorporating this particular belief into BSA program would violate the DRP You mean the way the BSA's defining gays as not "clean" and "morally straight" matches some religious beliefs and not others violates the DRP?

For those unfamiliar with Phillip Johnson, he's a fairly well-known lawyer/creationist apologist who has written books like Darwin On Trial; here he comments on Darrell Lambert's situation and thinks that the BSA should "protect" scouts from becoming atheists: http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=16-02-016-c ... If it is important to the Boy Scouts that their members be and remain believers in God, then they need to make some effort to protect the boys under their care from the predictable effects of the teaching of evolution, that universal acid, to use Daniel Dennetts classic phrase, which has dissolved the religious faith of so many. Perhaps there should be a merit badge for understanding the evolution controversy, including knowledge of the truth about the Haeckel embryo drawings, the Cambrian explosion, and the peppered moth story, as well as the philosophical assumptions that generate the theory. ... So, maybe an anti-science merit badge, or something.

...So if the DOD is going to spend all this money to train the troops on a regular basis anyway why not let them work with scouts or any other group who can also benefit, The statute that the judge struck down only authorized military support for the Boy Scouts; no other group benefited. And Rooster7, I know of a number of similar HUD grants that state they are for Scoutreach programs or other Scout programs; all HUD grants require the same nondiscrimination agreement that the Old Baldy council signed. This is one reason why I don't consider the BSA to be an honest organization.

Rooster7 writes: As to any help the BSA may receive from the government, it is the responsibility of the sponsoring agencies to determine whether or not their help is appropriate and legal. Again, the BSA is not acting unethically or illegally when they accept help from the government. It is not their job to determine whether or not such aid is legal its the governments duty. Rooster7, here's where a BSA council accepted government aid, and signed a nondiscrimination agreement as part of that deal: http://www.bsa-discrimination.org/Old_Blady_Complaint.pdf Now, that council agreed they would not discriminate on the basis of religion in the use of that money, yet they used it for their religiously discriminatory Scout program, which is why they're being sued.

sltscouter writes: My proposal would be to exempt the BSA because it is non-profit. Do the same for all other non-profit orgs. Non-profit orgs include e.g. the Catholic Youth Foundation, which only serves Catholics and ministers to Catholic youth. You can't use government funds to discriminate on the basis of religion, whether it's the BSA or the CYF, even if they are non-profit organizations.

She makes the common mistake of apparently assuming that the United Negro College Fund does not grant scholarships to white students: http://www.uncf.org/aboutus/faqs.asp ... Q: Does UNCF only support African American education? A: UNCF was founded to address the funding inequities regarding educational resources for African Americans. UNCF believes in higher education opportunities for all Americans, however. Though most funding supports African American students, UNCF member schools do not discriminate and UNCF administered scholarships are open to all ethnic groups. ... Other than that, I've been saying the same thing for years.

You could look up "berdache" or "two-spirit" to find out.

Prairie_scouter writes: As long as the military is willing to support all groups equally, there shouldn't be a problem. I don't know if they do that or if this is a special accomodation just for BSA The judge struck down a federal statute that provided for military funding of the jamboree; that's all the statute did, it didn't provide for general funding. The ACLU press release says: The Judges decision reasoned that the government aid was not offered to a broad range of groups; rather, it is specifically targeted toward the Boy Scouts, which . . . is a religious organization from which agnostics and atheists are excluded.

Bad pennies don't go, the saying is "A bad penny always turns up." They keep returning to haunt you. Now make like a tree and get outta here, McFly.

fgoodwin writes: The claim was made, but so far, without support Wrong, I provided support. You just didn't agree with it. That's not a trivial distinction.

But the BSA doesn't kick out kids who don't belong to a religion, they kick out kids who don't believe in at least one god, so the BSA's policies don't seem to agree with B-P's tradition. The BSA doesn't care if a kid is a Buddhist - if he doesn't believe in at least one god also, he's kicked out. And if B-P intended to keep out kids who didn't belong to a religion (which I don't think you can show), that would also differ from current BSA policy.

Didn't B-P write the "Outlander's promise" as an alternative promise for Scouts, removing the King/Queen and god references, as an alternative promise for Scouts who couldn't or wouldn't take the original promise? Scout Promise (UK version) On my honour, I promise that I will do my best, To do my duty to God and to the Queen (or King), To help other people, And to keep the Scout Law. The Outlander Promise On my honour, I promise that I will do my best, To render service to my country; To help other people, And to keep the Scout Law.

mmhardy writes: How is a little funding for the Jamboree different then funding being given to other faith based organizations for various public good causes? Which faith-based organizations refuse to serve segments of the population due to their religious views? http://www.hhs.gov/fbci/final.html Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Secretary 45 CFR Parts 74, 92, 96, and 87 RIN 0991-AB32 Participation in Department of Health and Human Services Programs by Religious Organizations; Providing for Equal Treatment of all Department of Health and Human Services Program Participants AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: On March 9, 2004, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to implement executive branch policy that, within the framework of constitutional church-state guidelines, religiously affiliated (or faith-based) organizations should be able to compete on an equal footing with other organizations for the Departments funding without impairing the religious character of such organizations. ... (5) Nondiscrimination in providing assistance. The rule provides that an organization that receives direct financial assistance from the Department, including Department funds administered by State and local governments or intermediate organizations under Department programs, may not, in providing program assistance supported by such funding, discriminate against a program beneficiary or prospective program beneficiary on the basis of religion or religious belief. ... So any faith-based organization getting funding for a project can't reject atheists from participation. The Jamboree is for members of the BSA, and atheists can't be members of the BSA. Big difference there.

Nlscouter writes: SR450Beaver, maybe our troll will get a question that he can't "answer" and, like the troll in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail", be sent over the cliff never to be heard from again. That's wasn't a troll, that was the old man from Scene 24.

Ed writes: Don't you mean the #1 charter partner among educational organizations? No Ed, I mean #1 by total membership. And by chartering a BSA unit a public school is not violating anything except your feelings. You're wrong Ed, but you don't understand first amendment issues anyway. So, how many units are NOW chartered by public schools? Do you have any current numbers? Not since the BSA said they would stop, no. At around the start of this year, counting just Packs and Troops but not Crews, etc, that number was still over 9,000. It's supposed to go down to zero now, of course.

Bob writes: While There may have been some units chartered directly by Schools SOME units!? SOME units!? 10,000 units is "some units"... that does not alter the the fact that schools are not and have not been the #1 Co in the BSA for quite some time. So what? I never said public schools were #1 NOW. I was disputing your still-unsupported claim that public schools "rarely" chartered units. When in the last 20 years have public schools been outside the top 10 charter partners, Bob? Here's your original comment again: Public schools rarely were the sponsors of scout units they only acted as the meeting place, the PTA's, PTO's and other parent groups were the sponsors. For what year(s) in the last 20 years is the above comment valid? As far as I can see, there are NO years from 1985-2005 that the above comment is correct. So Bob, please give me a year where your comment about public schools is correct. According the the History of scouting in the LDS church there were over 24,500 LDS units at the time you report that public schools and just over 10, 000. Yes Bob, and what was the total number of MEMBERS? Who sponsored more MEMBERS? You know the old joke of the guy who orders a pizza, and is asked if he wants it cut into 6 or 8 pieces - "oh, better make it six, I don't think I could eat eight". Public schools had more members in 1997, right?

Bob writes: So tell us when was the last year that public schools were the #1 chartering organization. The 1998 Feb/Mar BSA Today says that public schools were the #1 sponsor before Exploring was moved into Learning for Life, with 427,842 members and 11,853 units. PTA's were listed as the #10 sponsor. After the L4L move, public schools were still #3 in total Scouting members in 1998. So I would say 1997 and earlier they were #1 for many of the years, and certainly in the top 5 for many more (and #1 for Packs). So Bob, now you tell me when public schools "rarely" chartered units, and when public school representatives "must have" voted to have public schools break the law and exclude atheists.

Ed writes: Here comes Merlyn with the numbers! 8 year old numbers! Hey Ed, I was TALKING about back when public schools WERE the #1 charter partner, so OF COURSE i'm using old numbers. Duh... Since then, public schools have been dropping sponsorship due to the BSA's discrimination, and they are supposed to go down to zero if the BSA lives up to the word of its Director of Registration.

Bob White writes: Public schools rarely were the sponsors of scout units they only acted as the meeting place, the PTA's, PTO's and other parent groups were the sponsors. What's your source on that, Bob? The figures I've seen for chartering organizations have PTAs and PTOs separate, and they are smaller than the total for public schools. For example, here's 1998: Educational Organizations:.........Units..........Youth Correctional Institutions............270..........6,540 Handicapped Resources................763.........11,199 Parent-Teacher Groups..............4,002........186,821 Parent Teacher Associations........1,965.........98,870 Private Schools....................1,213.........33,107 Public Schools....................10,113........362,989 So what figures do you have?

Bob writes: The membership rules are determined by the relationships committee and the national executive board. These committees are made up almost entirely of volunteers that represent the chartered otrganizations that use scouting. So Bob, when public schools were the #1 charter partner of BSA units, did their representatives urge the BSA to exclude atheists, thus making it impossible for public schools to continue to be charter partners?