Merlyn_LeRoy

Nope, no hatred of atheists from boy scouts here, nosiree...

Of course I can, Bob, but as I said, you can't even see it, just as you can't even see BSA units chartered to government agencies, even though I've pointed them out to you.

The BSA does vilify atheists; Bob White just can't see this, just as he can't see BSA units chartered by government agencies.

Hey, Fathead Old Guy, I already told you I didn't write that, so quit whining to me about it, I have no sympathy for your personal problems. If you'd like to write to the people who write it, go right ahead. And Ed, if a fact is anything believed to be true or real by anyone, you end up with contradictory facts, which isn't very useful.

Ed, your reply is just more evidence that you don't know what a "fact" is.

Like I said, Ed, gods aren't facts, so "one nation under god" isn't a fact. But you just can't understand things.

Ed, gods aren't facts. But you don't understand what a fact is, so you can't understand that. But you try to paper over your ignorance by saying I'm "dodging" the issue somehow.

Ed, like I said, you don't even know what a "fact" is. And Fathead Old Guy, first, I didn't write that part, I was quoting an amicus brief written by some Christians and Jews; and second, learn what ellipses are, and what they mean when you use them in a quotation.

As usual Ed, it's pointless to try and educate you. For one thing, you seemed to have missed where I told you I was quoting an amicus brief filed by a group of Christians and Jews, so it isn't even something I wrote, it's something a group of Christians and Jews wrote. And you don't even know what a "fact" is, but that's no surprise.

Ah yes, Ed, another "victory" (really more of a delay, since the court didn't address the actual issue) for religiously meaningless god invocations. As one of the briefs filed by a group of Christians and Jews in support of Newdow to removed 'under god' from the pledge put it: I pledge allegiance to . . . one Nation, under God. This statement is inherently and unavoidably a personal affirmation of religious faith. Either it is intended seriously, or it is not. If it is intended seriously, then every day, government asks millions of school children to affirm and reaffirm their religious faith. This request is made to children who believe in a single God Whom the nation is under, and equally to children who believe in no god, many gods, or god as a concept so abstract and remote that it is meaningless or inaccurate to speak of being under God. If the religious portion of the Pledge is not intended as a serious affirmation of faith, then every day, government asks millions of school children to take the name of the Lord in vain. Children are asked to recite what sounds like a serious religious affirmation, but it is not intended to have any real religious meaning. This is just as bad from a perspective of religious liberty, and it is worse from a perspective of religious faith. (This message has been edited by Merlyn_LeRoy)

robk writes: Merlyn says regarding my assertion that HUDs nondiscrimination requirements violate BSA's religous freedom: They don't. They require everyone to follow their nondiscrimination requirements. But HUD's nondiscrimination requirements violate BSA's beliefs! HUD isn't infringing on the BSA's beliefs any more than HUD is infringing on the rights of whites-only country clubs by requiring racial nondiscrimination. If you don't meet their nondiscrimination requirements, too bad for you. You might want to review the Wyman lawsuit, where the BSA was legally excluded from the Connecticut State Employee Charitable Campaign for not meeting their nondiscrimination requirements: http://www.bsa-discrimination.org/html/untitled196.html And if you think HUD is outside the authority of the consitution, file a lawsuit. I assume you're a federal taxpayer, which ought to give you standing.

No Ed, I was an "outside agitator" (it's about an hour's drive from where I live); however, as a Minnesota taxpayer some of my money supported the school, and as someone who has read the online MN statutes on public school discrimination I knew that a Venture Crew was unlawful for a public school to charter. And as an atheist Minnesotan, I certainly don't like state-sponsored discrimination against atheists. The principal and school superintendent knew that their Venture Crew couldn't exclude students who were atheists or gay, yet the Viking council apparently mislead them into thinking atheist and gay students COULD join their Venture Crew. When I called the Viking council and asked them directly if atheists could join this Venture Crew, I got the runaround ("how would WE know someone is an atheist?" instead of a "yes" or "no"), so I called BSA national. After getting referred to many different people at BSA national, the legal department finally gave me a real answer: "no". That answer, of course, prevents public schools from chartering Venture Crews. Instead of risking a lawsuit, the school decided to change the program to one that didn't illegally discriminate against their own students. The Viking council wouldn't provide an honest answer, and the BSA legal department didn't care that public schools were discriminating against atheists and gays.

robk writes: BUT, if they [HUD] are going to fund groups, then they should not discriminate against the BSA based on its religous/moral beliefs. They don't. They require everyone to follow their nondiscrimination requirements. And HUD seems to fall within "promote the general welfare"

Roosevelt (Congress, actually, since the power of declaring war belongs to Congress, not the president, though Congress hasn't really used that power since WWII) declared war on Japan ONLY. Germany and Italy and Japan had signed the Tripartite Pact, which said that any country that declares war on any member will have war declared against it by all the Axis countries, so Germany and Italy declared war on the US. THEN the US declared war on Germany and Italy: Pearl Harbor & Japanese declaration of war on US: Dec 7, 1941 US declares war on Japan: Dec 8 Germany & Italy declare war on US: Dec 11 US declares war on Germany & Italy: Dec 11, in response

Of course, using those metaphorical definitions of religion, "bowling" is also a religion. I'll stick with English.

If you want to make up new meanings for words, go ahead; I'll stick with regular English.

Atheism isn't a religion, just as theism isn't a religion; they can be tenets or creeds of religions but are not religions in and of themselves. Good work condemning the Democrats for not excluding atheists; what cads! We all know atheists are second-class citizens, just like the Declaration of Religious Principles says.

You may have noticed that I haven't been arguing for atheists to be admitted to scouting, but to have school charters & government funding removed.

Merlyn says that the government cannot fund organizations which require a belief in X. No, I haven't.

That's the trouble with conservative radio listeners, they just make up stuff and pretend it's true. Air America is still going, you can listen to it right now at http://www.airamericaradio.com Here's an article from today's Chicago Tribune: http://tinyurl.com/yq3ba ... But in New York, where Air America still broadcasts over WLIB-1190 AM, the network beat Limbaugh's station, Disney-owned WABC, among both 25-to-54-year-olds and 18-to-34-year-olds during the 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. period. In the 25-to-54 demographic, WLIB garnered a 3.4 share to WABC's 3.1; among 18-to-34-year-olds, WLIB won sevenfold with a 2.9 share to WABC's 0.4. ...

To refuse to fund the BSA based on this is to discriminate against them because of their religous and moral beliefs. So do you think the government should be required to fund other discriminatory groups that apply, like the KKK? And isn't Selma, by requiring integrated bus service, discriminating against someone who wants segregated bus service? Makes as much sense as the complaint that the government is discriminating against the BSA for not funding programs that discriminate.

If the BSA is denied HUD funding for not following the nondiscrimination requirements, they are being denied for not following the nondiscrimination requirements, not for being a religious organization. ALL applicants have to follow the HUD requirements, whether they are religious organizations or not. If you don't meet the requirements, you aren't eligible. Sound familiar?(This message has been edited by Merlyn_LeRoy)

You're free to file a lawsuit on those grounds if you like, but you're comparing apples and oranges. The BSA excludes people on religious grounds, and HUD grants explicitly forbid religious discrimination. NEA funded exhibitions don't exclude people based on their religious views.

I'll let you have yours if you don't force me to subsidize it; that means no HUD grants, no $1/year leases, no free government buildings (e.g. Cradle of Liberty council in Philadelphia), etc. And I'll still point out how dishonest the Boy Scouts are for signing nondiscrimination agreements that they have no intentions of honoring.

Trail Pounder, I was an atheist at age 11. The BSA kicked out the Randall twins in California when they were 12 for not believing in god. For some reason, you think EVERY 11-year-old believes in gods? It's impossible for any 11-year-old to NOT believe in gods? That's absurd. And I'm not surprised that you advocate govenment funding of discrimination against atheists, given your attitude. Fortunately, the courts are much better at treating atheists as equal citizens than you.