Editorial Support for BSA

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

mmhardy writes:

If your interested in getting the facts right how about the ACLU stating that the military gives the BSA $2 million per year to support the Jamboree.

 

It doesn't say that. It says:

"The ACLU of Illinois has raised concern, for example, about the Pentagons handpicking the BSA and no other organization for the expenditure of an average of $2 million each year to support the national Boy Scout Jamboree."

[WAKWIB]

Doesn't the military provide chaplains for almost every major religion? They conduct services on military bases. In my mind this seems to be a bigger step towards the establishment of religion than providing a meeting room for a Scout troop. The Scout troop may not be that "religious" anyway. I have yet to go to a Monday night Scout meeting where the gospel was preached, or communion taken,etc. Yet I would suppose this would happen at various base chapels.

 

 

 

[evmori]

It's called selective prosecution! The ACLU won't go after the military about the chaplain's but they will go after the BSA in anyway they can!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

As I've pointed out before, military chaplains have to serve all military personnel; the Boy Scouts exclude some people solely due to their religious views.

 

Ed, "selective prosecution" is when the GOVERNMENT decides to apply the law against one group and not another. The ACLU is not the government, and if you think a lawsuit should be brought against military chaplains, you are free to do so, and the courts will rule on it.

[evmori]

No difference Merlyn! The chaplains are paid by taxpayer money and therefore according to your views the government is endorsing religion!

 

The ACLU selects what they want to attack & they do. That's what I meant by selective prosecution. I should have worded it selective persecution!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[WAKWIB]

I'm curious as to how a chaplain could serve an avowed atheist.

My understanding is that a chaplain for the most part serves those who share his/her faith or are interested in learning about it.

I'm thinking here, Merlyn, that when you refer to Scouts excluding someone, you have the avowed atheist in mind.

And honestly, I don't see how Scouting "actively" seeks to exclude the atheist anyway. In the cases that have come up, it seems that the atheist is the one who wants to exclude God from the equation, and are asking the Scouts to change the formula of their oath to accomodate them. How is that a Constitutional issue anyway?

I had a kid in our troop come up to me a couple of years ago who told me he was an atheist. Did we throw him out? No. In other words, he kept an open mind about it, and I (who happen to be a fairly devout Christian) didn't beat him over the head with religion. He is still a very active and productive member of the troop. He told me recently that he now believes there is a God. I guess the point I'm making is that he was man enough to tolerate our position about God, and not whine and complain about it.

[WAKWIB]

I'm curious as to how a chaplain could serve an avowed atheist.

My understanding is that a chaplain for the most part serves those who share his/her faith or are interested in learning about it.

I'm thinking here, Merlyn, that when you refer to Scouts excluding someone, you have the avowed atheist in mind.

And honestly, I don't see how Scouting "actively" seeks to exclude the atheist anyway. In the cases that have come up, it seems that the atheist is the one who wants to exclude God from the equation, and are asking the Scouts to change the formula of their oath to accomodate them. How is that a Constitutional issue anyway?

I had a kid in our troop come up to me a couple of years ago who told me he was an atheist. Did we throw him out? No. In other words, he kept an open mind about it, and I (who happen to be a fairly devout Christian) didn't beat him over the head with religion. He is still a very active and productive member of the troop. He told me recently that he now believes there is a God. I guess the point I'm making is that he was man enough to tolerate our position about God, and not whine and complain about it.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Chaplains are morale officers, and are assigned duties like grief counselling and suicide prevention. Also, some people, like Buddhists, can also be atheists.

 

And BSA national is the one with the policy of throwing out atheists; it doesn't matter if the atheist is vocal about it or not. We have religious freedom in the US, and that means the government can't discriminate against you simply because your religious views are unpopular. The constitutional issue is government sponsorship of a religious discriminatory organization.

[evmori]

Merlyn,

Think you better look up atheist in the dictionary again! A Buddhist can't be an atheist! They believe in a higher being!

 

Military chaplains are there primarily for their denomination. They can refuse to be a chaplain for another denomination

 

Interesting that a proclaimed atheist isn't even sure what he is!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Ed, I've seen Buddhists say they are atheists, and I've seen chaplains say it's their duty to serve all military personnel, not just their denomination.

[NJCubScouter]

Ed, while the beliefs of Buddhists are complicated and not entirely clear to me, everything I have read supports the idea that a belief in a "higher power" is not part of Buddhism, though some Buddhists may believe in one.

 

See: http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/b/bu/buddhism_1.html

 

I have seen you (Ed) say in the past that Buddhists believe in "Buddha" as God. That is clearly incorrect, as the linked article explains. A "Buddha" may be any "enlightened" person, and the person we think of as "the" Buddha was many things, mainly a teacher, but clearly was not any sort of deity and never claimed to be one.

 

See: http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/g/ga/gautama_buddha.html

[Bolo]

It's a disgrace that the ACLU and any other organization that wants to sue the government can use taxpayer money to pay their attorneys, according to federal statute:

 

42 USC 1988

(b) Attorneys fees

In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of Public Law 92318 [20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.], the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 [42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.], the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 [42 U.S.C. 2000cc et seq.], title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.], or section 13981 of this title, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorneys fee as part of the costs, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officers judicial capacity such officer shall not be held liable for any costs, including attorneys fees, unless such action was clearly in excess of such officers jurisdiction.

 

There's another group out there currently bashing the scouts: "Love makes A Family" headed by Bonnie Tinker from Portland, Oregon. This group is trying to ban the Scouts from public schools based on, according to Ms. Tinker, "BSA policy that discriminates."

Anyone know about this group? According to their website, they appear to be a gay/lesbian group who says the scouts will not allow any boys into a unit with a gay/lesbian parent. Unbelievable and IMO, disgusting.

 

I'm in agreement with one of the above posters...all the battling will only make the BSA stronger.

 

 

[evmori]

Atheist - One who disbelieves or denies the existence of a God, or supreme intelligent Being.

 

Seems to me a Buddhist doesn't fit this definition nor would any religion that worships another being.

 

Merlyn,

I've seen black people say they are white, too! Just because they do doesn't make it true!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[NJCubScouter]

Seems to me a Buddhist doesn't fit this definition nor would any religion that worships another being.

 

Then tell me, Ed, who (or what) is the "being" that Buddhists "worship"? Because I have read several articles about the nature of Buddhism, including the ones I posted the links to earlier, and I have never once seen any mention of a "being" they "worship." Unless you consider the "being" to be "truth" or "mankind as a whole," but not a deity or some other supernatural being(s) like most other religions have. So if you know who (or what) is, I'd like to know so I can learn something.

 

Now, as for whether Buddhists are "atheists" or Buddhism is "atheistic" in nature, that may be a different story. Note that I never said they are, or it was. One of the articles I have read said that some consider Buddhism to be "agnostic" rather than "atheistic" in nature, because Buddhism does not deny the existence of a deity, and it is possible to believe in a deity and still be a Buddhist. (It probably would be a deity that is fairly "limited" in its nature.) The point is that Buddhism itself does not involve belief in a deity.

 

I do have to admit that at this point I have lost whatever connection this discussion of Buddhism may have with the rest of the thread. I just saw something I thought was incorrect and figured I'd mention it, and then as usual Ed, you didn't accept the facts I presented, so now I'm mired in yet another seemingly endless, mostly-pointless discussion with you. But Ed, for reasons I cannot figure out, I somewhat enjoy these seemingly endless, mostly-pointless discussions I have with you.

[packsaddle]

Just to add to the confusion: As I remember, in his Oscar award acceptance speech for his role in "The Killing Fields", Dr. Haing S. Ngor thanked the "great god Buddah". I could hear the gasps echoing throughout the Bible belt.