Atheism

[Gonzo1]

Merlyn,

What s the actual, REAL harm if a few grade school have a cub scout pack? Really, doing something

good for the community, trying to teach a few kids that something is good, keeping them (or

at least trying) out of trouble. Is that really so bad. I'm not really certain if any public entity actually charters anymore scout units. I think "Friends of XYZ School or Friends of Anytown Police Department" may, so what? I know, you say your civil rights are being violated. But they're not, remember the "free exercise thereof" part.

 

And if you want to mention precedent, The court has ruled (insert your citation here) that the BSA is a private organization and can admit anyone it chooses. And if I'm not mistaken, you should be reasonably "happy" with "precedent".

 

 

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Gonzo1, it's the same harm as if a public school ran a "no Jews" club. Now, if you'd like to argue that having "no Jews" clubs run by public schools don't harm Jewish kids and don't foment hatred against Jewish kids, go right ahead. You pretty much have to take that position to stay aligned with your stance regarding atheists.

 

As for "friends of XXX", that's what the BSA would have done if they were honest. As it is, there are still hundreds of units unlawfully chartered to government entities, in spite of the BSA's word that they wouldn't do that. The BSA's word is worthless.

[Gonzo1]

I continue to disagree with you.

 

We welcome Jewish kids. We welcome all people of all faiths. We just believe that believers are people we want in our organization.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Oh, I see you're another person who has no idea what an analogy is.

 

I'll use smaller words.

 

Gonzo1, compare these two situations. Forget about the BSA specifically, address these two imaginary situations:

 

1) a public school runs a club that excludes Jews

2) a public school runs a club that excludes atheists

 

Now, considering the two imaginary situations above, and remember that neither one is about the BSA specifically, in your opinion:

a) which (if any) of the above two situations is illegal?

b) which (if any) of the above two situations harms children?

[sherminator505]

It seems that a lot of misplaced energy is being expended here. We know what Merlyn thinks, and obviously his nose is out of joint. We also know what Ed thinks, and obviously he has a lot of time on his hands to continue this spitting contest into the tenth page.

 

To answer yann's questions as directly as I can (in no particular order):

 

It would be impossible for an athiest to recognize his duty to a diety that he does not believe in.

 

To my knowledge the BSA has never told a child that he must believe in God.

 

Those of us who believe in God do so out of faith.

 

Having faith has absolutely no impact on a person's ability to think for himself.

 

And now a question for yann (not that I'm expecting a response): When you say "it is proven that athiests are more intelligent than theists," what statistics or evidence are you using to come to that conclusion?(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

[Gonzo1]

Merlyn,

I have a couple of college degrees (similar to you) and I know what an analogy is.

 

I don't care for your attempt to pigeon hole me into you jews vs atheist example. I don't really see it as a school "running" the scout groups that happen to meet there. I see it as the school providing a place for them to meet. I've never seen a "scout hut" at a school. When I was in cub scouts, our pack meetings were in the gym. There was no real evidence that scouts met there except during the monthly pack meeting.

 

If a private group want to exclude another group, so be it.

 

No girls (except for venturing), no gays and no atheists.

 

I see this whole thing as you continuing to have your nose out of joint and you don't like it. You really seem to want to get in for your self or for other atheists to get in, but atheists aren't allow. An atheist can't do his duty to God if he doesn't believe in God.

 

We've been over the whole scout oath/law aspect of it, just give up. BSA isn't going to change for you. Go join Spiral Scouts!

 

I see you point that it isn't about the group, but rather where the group meets. AFAIK, public entities are not supposed to charter scouts anymore, but "Friends of _____" can.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Gonzo1 writes:

I have a couple of college degrees (similar to you) and I know what an analogy is.

 

No. You really don't. If you knew what an analogy is, you would not have responded to my hypothetical "no Jews" club by saying you welcome people of all faiths. You're responding to an imaginary situation as if I was referring to your specific, real situation. If you knew what an analogy is, you wouldn't do that. You would, instead, consider the BSA's exclusion of atheists and compare it to my hypothetical group that excludes Jews. That's the analogy.

 

I don't care for your attempt to pigeon hole me into you jews vs atheist example.

 

I'd say that's because you'd have to defend a public school excluding Jews on the same basis as a public school excluding atheists.

 

I don't really see it as a school "running" the scout groups that happen to meet there.

 

And AGAIN, you aren't keeping straight the difference between a school-run club and a student-run club.

 

If a public school is the chartering partner, the school is running the club. This requires the school to illegally practice religious discrimination. Public schools can't do that, period.

 

It is not a case of a group simply "meeting" in a school.

[Beavah]

If a public school is the chartering partner, the school is running the club. This requires the school to illegally practice religious discrimination.

 

Yah, so generally speakin', public entities aren't allowed to lobby either.

 

So if a school district charters a National Honor Society chapter from a lobbying organization (NASSP), is that illegal too?

 

Troops and Crews at least are youth-run, eh? So if a group of students in a public school gets together, they can form a student-run club as a scouting unit. Now, if a school district just allows 'em to do it without supervision or insurance, then the people in that school district are liable for anything that goes wrong, eh? But if the district contracts with da BSA, then they get qualified volunteer leadership and insurance. Again, serves a public purpose by providin' resources that protect the district and its students while not infringing on what those students are constitutionally allowed to do. And what's more, odds are that zero district funds are expended, since da normal practice is for troops to pay their own way.

 

Given da trend in SCOTUS rulings on this stuff, yeh really have a weak case in making a constitutional argument if the school district is doin' things right.

 

Just MHO. It'll never actually be litigated because there's no point in takin' the time and expense when yeh can just juggle paperwork to get the same effect. Shift da charter to the PTO and everything stays the same.

 

B

 

[evmori]

We also know what Ed thinks, and obviously he has a lot of time on his hands to continue this spitting contest into the tenth page.

 

What is the point of this comment?

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Yes Beavah, the BSA has already done that re: schools, they just haven't been honest enough to do likewise with law enforcement agencies, correctional institutions, municipal park & recreation depts. etc.

[BklynEagle]

Actually, Beavah, using what Merlyn might term as "reasoning", I'd say that you could argue that a public school chartering a National Honor Society chapter is illegal because the NHS discriminates on a basis of intellectual capability, regardless of NHS' parent corporation's lobbying background. At that point, you could even argue that NYC is illegally running "Specialty Schools", which discriminate on basis of intelligence (Brooklyn Tech, where you hade better be good at math) and/or talent (Fiorello H. LaGuardia High School of Music & Art and Performing Arts, the modern incarnation of the school in "Fame"). I wonder how publically-funded Schools for the Deaf would fair in Merlyn's world, as they "discriminate" against people who can hear....

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

You'd have a point if discrimination on the basis of intellectual ability was illegal. But it isn't, and you can't just equivocate as if all discrimination is equally lawful or unlawful (since public schools discriminate, legally, in all kinds of ways).

[evmori]

And let us not forget SCOTUS ruled the BSA is a private organization and can set it's own membership rules. So the BSA doesn't discriminate illegally.

[sherminator505]

Ed, you let him bait you, and the result has been several pages of back-and-forth gainsaying that has done little to fortify either of your positions. Using the term "spitting contest" may have been a bit rough, but I can't think of a better way to describe the latter portions of this exchange.

[evmori]

This boy doesn't get baited sherm.