Merlyn_LeRoy

"Private citizens running a private business sued for standing on their faith" No, sued for illegal discrimination, which ended with the Wildflower Inn paying a settlement (i.e. they lost): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/23/wildflower-inn-vermont-gay-marriage-lawsuit_n_1826218.html According to the above story, the (former) employee falsely claimed that the inn would not allow a same-sex reception, contrary to what the owners of the Inn wanted. Renting out facilities to straight couples but not gay couples is a violation of Vermont's Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act. As for the property sale, they too can't refuse to sell to a party simply because the buyers are gay, again due to state law.

Currently, ALL BSA charter organizations must legally be able to exclude gays and atheists; that's why public schools had to stop chartering units. Any unit that could, hypothetically, be sued due to the local option could be sued TODAY on the same grounds. PS: OGE, do you know when people will be able to create new topics again?

Currently, ALL BSA charter organizations must legally be able to exclude gays and atheists; that's why public schools had to stop chartering units. Any unit that could, hypothetically, be sued due to the local option could be sued TODAY on the same grounds. PS: OGE, do you know when people will be able to create new topics again?

"Actually, I wrote "unwilling or unable" ... I don't know which one it is." It isn't EITHER one. "Maybe you're more interested in throwing around terms like "bigot" than actually showing how people are bigoted." How would showing such atheists actually exist prove anything? Bigots aren't concerned with facts, only stereotypes. What's the point?

"So you are claiming that it is bigoted to say that atheists, by definition, cannot be respectful of others' religious beliefs, but you are unwilling or unable to name a single atheist who actually is respectful of others' religious beliefs?" No. I'm saying I never said I would name such an atheist. But for some unknown reason, you are under the impression that I *can't* name such an atheist. But that's just you jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

"Yet you can't produce a single example of an atheist who is respectful of religious beliefs?" What? When did I say I would? Oh, never. And it might be kind of hard to produce a priest who manifestly isn't a child rapist, as people tend to keep that sort of thing a secret as much as they can.

"I suspect jrush would say that if an atheist were truly respectful of other's religious beliefs, he would cease to be an atheist." Yeah, and if Jews are incapable of being generous, a Jew who wasn't a cheapskate would (somehow) cease to be a Jew. "You may, of course, disagree with his definition of "atheist" but I don't think it's an unreasonable one" It's as reasonable as saying Catholic priests are child rapists "by definition". "and rather than pointing out how he is wrong, by showing how an atheist CAN respect the beliefs of others while remaining an atheist, you accuse him of bigotry (which at this point has become a bromide in this forum, at least when it comes from you)." And all the heaps of respect I get from you or jrush or half a dozen others. No, I'm the one always at fault, "by definition".

"Someone who is truly atheist cannot, by definition, respect the beliefs of others" Thus saying an entire class of people (atheists) cannot respect the beliefs of others.

No, but it is bigotry to say that an entire class of people are incapable of showing respect.

The current local option proposal only allows for gays, not atheists, so that still wouldn't allow for military units or public schools.

Beavah, today, there aren't supposed to BE any organizations that can't discriminate in all the ways the BSA discriminates for their particular unit, so the local option changes nothing. If organization X can't discriminate after the local option, it couldn't have discriminated before the local option either, and could face a lawsuit in either case.

"No youth scouting program has recovered to the level of memebership and funding they had before accepting gay role models." April 19, 2010 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/young-flock-to-join-scouts-for-adventure-1948207.html Elderly ladies stranded on the wrong side of the road can breathe a sigh of relief. The UK now has more Scouts than at any time in the past 40 years. Membership of the group has reached almost 500,000, show figures published today. More than 16,500 people have joined since January last year, the fifth consecutive annual rise. Contrary to the commonly held belief that Britain's youth is an increasingly sedentary bunch, the Scout Association said a major reason for the surge was down to record levels of interest from teenagers. Some 65,000 teenagers are now involved in Scouting, a rise of more than 26 per cent since 2001. ... This is after the UK SA made it clear that they don't discriminate against gays: http://www.scoutbase.org.uk/library/hqdocs/facts/pdfs/fs185081.pdf

Only if they also want to be exempt from California taxes as outlined in SB 323. Plenty of organizations exist now that aren't exempt from taxes, of course, so I don't know why so many people are responding as if such organizations couldn't exist at all if this law passes.

Those who claim otherwise are simply wrong, because you wrote "almost all". Did you have a point?

You mean the way you constantly ignore how gay and atheist youth are affected?

Just equal treatment. Tax-free status is a privilege, not a right.

This article only mentions sexual orientation: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Boy-Scouts-could-lose-tax-break-for-gay-ban-4292197.php The bill itself includes religion and religious affiliation, so it would still be in effect if the BSA allows gays but still excludes atheists: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0301-0350/sb_323_bill_20130219_introduced.html

I treat others the way they treat me, Brewmeister. I have standards, too.

"Merlyn, you're not paying attention." Yes, I am. You're clearly bigoted against atheists. "]Someone who is truly atheist cannot, by definition, respect the beliefs of others" Someone who is truly Jewish cannot, by definition, respect the beliefs of others. Someone who is truly Catholic cannot, by definition, respect the beliefs of others. Someone who is truly Muslim cannot, by definition, respect the beliefs of others. Bigot. You are a PERFECT example of how the BSA encourages bigotry against atheists. And people criticized ME for removing school-sponsored BSA units...

"There's a difference between "as inclusive as possible" and "totally inclusive"" Not in English; to actually be as inclusive as possible would be to exclude no one. "Merlyn, the problem with atheism is it's basic premise...that all religions are wrong because none are right" Why isn't that a problem with religion X, that says all other religions (and atheists) are wrong because none of them are religion X? "The BSA doesn't require me to worship a particular deity in a particular way; what it requires me to do is respect the beliefs of others." Atheists can certainly meet that requirement too. "If I truly subscribe to a philosophy that your deity and belief system is a sham, how can I respect it? I can't" How can a Christian respect a Wiccan if they believe Wicca is a religion of the devil? He can't. "Quite frankly, the BSA should treat baptists, catholics, jews, etc who disrespect the beliefs of others the same way as well, but that's a different topic." Oh, but you're just fine with treating atheists like that, because it's impossible for them, eh? Or is it Jews? Wait, that was last century. "So, as the BSA has a policy of respecting each other's beliefs, excluding atheists is being as inclusive as possible." Only for bigots who paint atheists as all the same and incapable of respect. Why should I give you any respect when you clearly don't respect me?

AZMike, your religion has convinced you that religion is the only source of morality, and that your religion is the only source of real morality; a classic con job. You need to take the blinders off.

"how can a "lack of belief" possess a system of morality?" It doesn't. People who lack a belief in a god can possess a system of morality, of course.

You don't limit yourself to beliefs, you also draw (incorrect) conclusions about the morals of atheists.

"From this, I learned that atheists are like the Weimar Republic of Life, Merlyn." I see -- denigrating millions of people based on the prejudice of one man. I've heard that one before.

Any secular CO bound by non-discrimination laws will have to admit atheists as members.