Judge rules for boy in Boy Scouts case

[Rooster7]

Merlyn,

 

First, I'd like to point out (in fact, concede) that you seem to have excellent knowledge of Constitutional law, a command of the English language, and good debating technique, certainly above my capacity. Still, I believe you are wrong. While I'm not the most equipped person to counter your arguments, I stand convinced that our forefather's did not write the Constitution to be interpreted as you and others (even some Supreme Court justices) have.

 

I appreciate your intellect, but I think in this particular forum, it may be your own worse enemy. Your responses have tempted me many times to respond in kind. However, I have not been compelled to do so because you have riled so many of my compatriots and they have promptly return "fire". It's fairly apparent, that even though you have some well-reasoned arguments, your vision for our country differs greatly from many of the posters on this board. Yes, we want religious freedom. Yes, we want a government that allows everyone to have their say. IMHO (and obviously many others) that does not mean that every public community, every governmental entity, must ensure that all traces of religious identity and influence are removed.

 

I have no doubt that you will counter my post with more well thought out arguments. To that, I can only say that I have heard many arguments made on both sides of the issue. I see no point in playing this game of "point and counter-point" It appears to be an endless circle. Your passions and beliefs do not agree with most BSA supporters (I think that is a fair statement). There are powerful arguments on both sides. If this were not true, no one would be arguing with you. It comes down to this, "What vision do you think George Washington and the like had for our country?" I am convinced that BSA (and the public schools that charter them) is standing on solid groundthe same ground our forefathers defended and established.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

 

...

"If you remove God from the requirements and Scout oath, are you going to remove the requirement for saying the Pledge of Allegience?"

 

It's already illegal to require children to say the pledge of allegiance; see West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, which was way back in 1943 (even before it had 'under god' in it).

 

...

"Merlyn -- serious question because I'm curious, how does the atheist handle the saying of the Pledge of Allegience?"

 

Different ways. I just omitted the 'under god' bit.

 

...

"One more question -- should Girl Scouts be allowed to recruit during school hours? They also have "god" in their promise and they do not allow boys to join (men can be co-leaders and hold other positions). I do not know if they let atheists join and say something other than the promise."

 

I don't think ANY group should be allowed to recruit during school hours, as that isn't what school is for. The GSUSA allows members to substitute different words for 'god' in their promise and allows atheists; this change was made in 1993.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

 

Oh, I think you were asking about the Scout requirement about the pledge, not schools. I think the requirement is to 'know' the pledge, not actually 'take' the pledge, since non-US citizens can belong to a Scout troop and it wouldn't make sense to require them to pledge allegiance to the US, as they aren't US citizens, and some countries might even consider their citizens taking such a pledge to the US to be illegal.

[sctmom]

Merlyn, thanks for your responses.

 

I think there are also some religious groups who don't like to pledge allegiance to the flag because they feel you should only pledge allegiance to their god.

 

Off topic here, but I read recently that the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist for a socialist newspaper here in the U.S. People were trying to figure out a way to get patriotism up and to get more people to fly the flag. So they figured if they taught the pledge to school children then it would get more attention.

I don't know how much of that is absolute truth.

 

 

[evmori]

Whya are we removing God from everything? What's the big deal? I personally feel attempt to remove God from our everyday lives is one of the reasons this country was going to he** in a hand basket. since 911, people have returned to their faith or have gone seeking one. This is a good thing.

 

If the boy doesn't want to say the oath the way it is then I say don't let him in!

 

Has anyone noticed that Congress starts every session with a prayer?

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster (who will be celebrating Scout Sunday this month)

Troop 1

[KoreaScouter]

sctmom;

 

I realize it may be seem to be a stretch of logic to equate faithlessness with neglect. But, don't take my word for it. If you're interested, check out the book "The Educated Child" by William J. Bennett (former Secretary of Education and the author of The Book of Virtues, The Children's Book of Virtues, The Children's Book of Heroes, and The Death of Outrage, among others).

 

Bennett argues that a solid foundation in morals, right/wrong, manners, civilized behavior, etc., are all prerequisites for success in school, and success in life. Parents are the first teachers, of course, and one of the essential elements of this moral foundation is faith-based.

 

Leave that essential part out of your child's life, and it's akin to withholding any other "brick in the foundation" that builds responsible adults. BTW, I don't teach my kids that anyone who doesn't believe exactly as we do is a bad person, or everyone must believe the same thing. I simply find, as Bennett argues, that raising my kids in a faith-based family makes everything easier, including how they relate to other people (for one thing, we don't sue everybody we don't agree with). I find that a firm grounding in faith allows one to weather adversity and challenges better, since nothing external can shake your foundation.

 

That's my opinion; I could be wrong...

 

On letting atheists in Scouts, it's certainly fraught with controversy among Scouters; we're a perfect example. But, trying to step outside my Catholic skin, I only ask what is the best thing for the movement: spend our time and resources fighting BS (and I don't mean "Boy Scout")lawsuits, or allow atheists membership and remove the grounds for the lawsuits in the first place? I disagree strongly with the moral vacuum and self-centeredness inherent in it, but a young boy doesn't get to pick his parents; he needs us more than some other kids do, regardless of other external variables.

 

This is a provocative and emotional issue, because it goes to the very foundation of what we INDIVIDUALLY believe, Scouting aside. But let's face it, we live, work, play, study, shop, etc., next to athiests and others who don't share our value systems. The fact that we're able to maintain these value systems in our own lives and our own families is a testament to their strength. Honestly, would the presence of a boy in our Scout troops who doesn't profess a belief in God (for now, anyway) destroy our troops, our faith, the Scouting movement? I'm not going to answer my own question; you can answer for yourselves.

 

I could be completely out in left field here, but I'm only trying to do a little look-in-the-mirror self-assessment here. I'm still the old-fashioned Catholic boy...

[Rooster7]

KoreaScouter,

 

"This is a provocative and emotional issue, because it goes to the very foundation of what we INDIVIDUALLY believe, Scouting aside. But let's face it, we live, work, play, study, shop, etc., next to athiests and others who don't share our value systems. The fact that we're able to maintain these value systems in our own lives and our own families is a testament to their strength."

 

While I believe your intentions are honorable, your proposal would open Pandora's box. One of the reasons we are able to teach and maintain these value systems is the existence of groups like BSA. I, like you, believe one's family is key to establishing those value systems. However, let's not make their job more difficult by removing all other influences. Furthermore, once you change the standards for membership, BSA will rapidly become a different organization. In this forum, we can debate folks like Merlyn. The day we change the membership standards, the debate is over. Atheists will win. They will change the program (as others have suggested). Prayers will drop to the wayside, the Oath will be changed, the Scout Law will be changedBSA will become just another morally sterile organization. In fact, given a little more time, Atheists and others will argue that morals are relative. After all, without the major faiths of world, who's to say what is right or wrong. In this country, right and wrong changes will each new generation of Supreme Court justices. Let's do ourselves a favor. Let's keep BSA just the way it is!

 

[sctmom]

"Bennett argues that a solid foundation in morals, right/wrong, manners, civilized behavior, etc., are all prerequisites for success in school, and success in life. Parents are the first teachers, of course, and one of the essential elements of this moral foundation is faith-based. "

 

Merlyn can correct me if I'm wrong here, but being Atheist does not mean without morals.

 

I was NOT raised in a church, we did go to church some. I was in my teens before I saw my father enter a church. He has some of the strongest values of anyone. We were taught right from wrong without God ever being part of the conversation. We were taught manners, values, morals, etc. I'm one of 3 children. All of us are pretty decent citizens, never been in trouble with the law, hold down good jobs, and so forth.

 

My sister has become a pagan in the last few years. My mother is convinced that means she has no morals. That is completely false.

 

I think we all agree we need to spend our time and energy reaching out to youth instead of fighting. We need to teach them how to make the right choices and be independent. That can be done without saying "God says".

 

Personally, I'm more comfortable with a group like BSA saying up front where it stands on issues than the ones that claim to be open and discriminate in underhanded ways. BSA is not out on a witch hunt to convert others or harm others like some discriminated groups. Yet, I'm sure some BSA members would like to do that, I have faith that it is very few. I have faith that humans are basically good.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

 

...

"Atheists and others will argue that morals are relative. After all, without the major faiths of world, who's to say what is right or wrong."

 

WITH the major faiths, the problem is actually worse; for example, is polygamy right or wrong? Some religions allow it, some prohibit it; some even require it under certain circumstances. How do you say what is right or wrong then? No matter what you decide, you'll be going against some religion, and the followers of that religion won't ever change their views, because doing so would be admitting their god is either wrong or doesn't exist.

[andrews]

Your father had the advantage of the residue of the strong religious values that were around since the founding of the country, and before. (Of course that doesn't mean they were perfect, just that they acknowledged forces beyond themselves as the ultimate authority.)

 

>> Merlyn can correct me if I'm wrong here, but being Atheist does not mean without morals.

 

It does mean you have no firm basis on what is, and isn't, moral. Without something outside your own frame of reference, anything can go if you decide it is ok.

 

Brad

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

 

...

">> Merlyn can correct me if I'm wrong here, but being Atheist does not mean without morals."

 

Right.

 

...

"It does mean you have no firm basis on what is, and isn't, moral. Without something outside your own frame of reference, anything can go if you decide it is ok."

 

While those who are religious, such as the Sept. 11 terrorists, have such a firm basis on what's right and what's wrong that they're willing to kill themselves and thousands of people if they think that's what god wants.

 

Religion only gives you the illusion of an outside frame of reference. Tell me, is polygamy moral? Some religions say it is, some say it isn't. Whose god is right, whose is wrong?

 

[OldGreyEagle]

(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[sctmom]

OGE is starting the TRUTH "discussion" again....lol.

 

Merlyn, welcome to my corner...lol.

I swear I've said the same thing you said about polygamy! I read that and did a double take -- hmmm...where have I heard that before?

 

If I am right, does that make everyone else wrong?

[OldGreyEagle]

Hey Mom, fooled you !!!

 

I went back and used the edit function to erase my truth statment. I dont think it would be beneficial to start that here.

 

Actually I enjoy reading Mr LeRoy's posts, he comes from a different angle than I usually beleive, but he is very straight and logical. Having your views challenged is a good thing.

[sctmom]

OGE, you have Special powers I don't have. I tried to edit but can't!