Atheism

[evmori]

Every time you bring up the No Jewish club line.

[Mr. Boyce]

The whole "atheist" thing confuses me:

 

Among kids, there is very often a stretch of serious question when you get to be a teenager. It's pretty clear a kid can believe he's agnostic or atheistic. I would never kick a boy out for that; I think that's a natural intellectual process taking place. . . and that more often than not, the person finds that mankind has a spiritual dimension, etc.

 

But WHY would atheist parents okay putting their kid in a youth organization widely known as having a religious interest if they were opposed to having their child be exposed to this?

 

I could see, for instance, an atheist parent saying, "okay, there are a lot of religious people out there, the BSA might be a good way for my Johnny to learn something about the religious." So for some atheist parents it COULD be a great kind of educational tool. I mean our culture is enormously shaped by religion. Little Johnny should probably know something about the major religions.

 

I just don't see how the BSA would want to toss out "Reverent." That counts for something to so many of us.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

No Ed, that's an analogy. This might help, but I doubt it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

You need to find an example of the second sort.

 

Mr. Boyce writes:

But WHY would atheist parents okay putting their kid in a youth organization widely known as having a religious interest if they were opposed to having their child be exposed to this?

 

First, many BSA units have no religious content at all, and many more have very little (and not all of them require any sort of participation).

Second, the BSA kicks out atheists whether their parents are OK with their kids being exposed or not.

 

I just don't see how the BSA would want to toss out "Reverent."

 

Not all definitions of "reverent" are incompatible with atheism.

[BadenP]

Not taking sides here but I do remember very well as an 11 year old Catholic kid there were troops where it was made very clear that Catholics and Jews were not welcome, some of them sponsored by schools. Those were the days of Catholics being called mackerel snappers and papal worshippers so I do understand what it is like to be excluded and what atheist kids must feel being excluded, after all they are only reflecting what their parents have taught them. For many years right into the 1980's there were priests and bishops who told their congregations not to enroll their boys in the BSA since it was a "biased and blasphemous organization."

[Scoutfish]

 

 

Beautiful words Mr.Boyce!

 

Myself, I have my beliefs. I cannot clearly state that i belong to any one organized religion as I feel pretty much all the ones I have experienced have put too much politics into salvation.

 

As a father, I want my son to truely believe his beliefs instead of just believeing because I did. That make sense/

 

And as a person,I want him to learn about all religions. Not so he can necessarily have a bigger list to choose from, but to learn about them. I mean truley learn.

 

For example, Pagans are "known" to be devil worshipers, yet they actually do not recognize or believe a devil exists.

 

Islamics are hated and loathed due to the Radicals, yet nobody seems to know that true Islam is a peaceful religion that detests hatred and violence.

 

 

Some Christians avow to never work on Sunday, because i6t is the Sabbath, yet are entirelu clueless to the fact that the Sabbath is actually on Saturday, but "back room" dealings by Constantine created Sunday as a day of worship. Some are aware, but "Well, we've done it this way soo long.... don't see no reason to stop."

 

 

Then still, people think BC and AD are the literal initials for before Christ and After Death. Whoops! Somebody is missing about 33 years somewhere in there!

 

 

In school, I grew up around soe of the most racist, sexist, bigotted people on the face of this earth. Makes me wonder how it didn't rub off on me sometimes.

 

The problem is..peopel think that LEARNING about other cultures and religions is akin to being taught to conform to that culture or religion.

 

I think all religions as well as all the different levels of ateism as well as Diestism ( that a word?) should be taught as part of civics, social studies and world history.

 

In todays global society, we have too!

 

[evmori]

Your constant comparison to public schools running "No Jews Clubs" or "Jews Only Clubs" is what I was referring to Merlyn. Do you actually have proof ANY public school was running such a club?

[Scoutfish]

Merl, at one point, you aked me - when I said I had no problem with schols chartering a BSA unit - if I would feel the same way about the school chartering an AA unit.

 

I said,not, I did NOT have any issue or problem with it. Then you said but AA woulld be youth led, not school.

 

But YOU did not ask me about a youth led group, you asked about a school chartered group..to which I still have no issue.

 

 

So by changing around (and assuming what you thought I might mean) you also made a "strawman attack". The part concerning the WoO and

Guy Fawkes is a direct insult by comparing me to a terrorist attck on others due to different beliefs in religion.

 

Funny thing about that: I'm not trying to stop your group, but you are trying to stop and prevent mine. I have stated that you should have your group, and you can even hold meetings right beside my group. You on the other hand, are trying to "blow up" my group! Much like Guy Fawkes!

 

So, who is the guy Fawkes amongst us indeed?

 

 

See, the thing is this: A school that charters a group because it fills a PUBLICLY WANTED void : I'm cool with that. But as soon as the school made students or the public sign up,regardless of interest.... I'm not cool with that. So if students want to sign up for AA, BSA, FCA, or even G&L ( I guess that's what it is) than have at it...as long as the membership is NOT forced or mandatory as these clubs are all based on individual beliefs.

 

Since I pay taxes and my child is an extension of me...

Since you pay taxes, and your child(ren) are an extension of you, I do not have a problem with my school chartering both an AA club and a BSA unit .

 

And you can specifically state intricate details, but in the real world, as you know too well,that even if a school did charter a BSA unit, it would have no more connection to the government than I do as the finacial backbone of the government.

 

Yes, I specifically mean that the direction and running of the program would not go any further than whatever volunteers at that particular school decided to step up. There wouldn't be any control, direction or asstance given from the county BoE or even the state. And as far as federal involvement of that units program? THat's just laugable. There would be no involvement.

 

So on paper work, it might be construed ( if you make the effort) that the government runs a BSA unit, but in all reality,it would be a few parents and volunteers at the schol who were interested, and only did it in the school name in order to get access to the the school building to have a place to hold those meetings. And since that building is paid for by those volunteers tax dollars as well as the students who would join up....I cannot see where you can stop them.

 

Likewise, I belive in the same rights for your AA club. If you personally as tax payer want to have AA meetings at the school house...have at it! If some teachers are part of AA and want to start a club at school...Why not? Your taxes as well as all memebsr pay for that building too. AS long as it's there..use it!

 

 

Buy just like BSA..don't make membership mandatory, and everything is ok!

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Ed writes:

Your constant comparison to public schools running "No Jews Clubs" or "Jews Only Clubs" is what I was referring to Merlyn. Do you actually have proof ANY public school was running such a club?

 

No Ed, because that's called a "hypothetical example," which I was using as part of an "analogy."

 

That isn't a straw man attack.

 

Scoutfish writes:

Merl, at one point, you aked me - when I said I had no problem with schols chartering a BSA unit - if I would feel the same way about the school chartering an AA unit.

 

I said,not, I did NOT have any issue or problem with it. Then you said but AA woulld be youth led, not school.

 

When did I say this?

 

But YOU did not ask me about a youth led group, you asked about a school chartered group..to which I still have no issue.

 

Well, I don't know what you're referring to. It's possible for a club to be chartered by a school but lead by students, for one thing, but you're talking about it like they're mutually exclusive.

 

So by changing around (and assuming what you thought I might mean) you also made a "strawman attack".

 

Only if I actually did that. So quote exactly what I wrote where I said this.

 

Funny thing about that: I'm not trying to stop your group, but you are trying to stop and prevent mine.

 

Only ones unlawfully run by government entities, which cannot discriminate against atheists.

 

See, the thing is this: A school that charters a group because it fills a PUBLICLY WANTED void : I'm cool with that.

 

If that group discriminates in ways which are illegal for a public school to discriminate, such as religion, I'm not cool with that.

 

And you can specifically state intricate details, but in the real world, as you know too well,that even if a school did charter a BSA unit, it would have no more connection to the government than I do as the finacial backbone of the government.

 

A non-zero amount, which is enough standing to sue.

[evmori]

Ed writes:

Your constant comparison to public schools running "No Jews Clubs" or "Jews Only Clubs" is what I was referring to Merlyn. Do you actually have proof ANY public school was running such a club?

 

No Ed, because that's called a "hypothetical example," which I was using as part of an "analogy."

 

Same thing Merlyn! "Jews Only" or "No Jews Clubs" don't exist in public schools.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

No it isn't the same thing, Ed.

[Mr. Boyce]

Oh, the problem here, as it is in other threads in this area, is that Merlyn is an absolutist.

 

The older I get, the less wise that approach seems. You can throw the baby out with the bathwater if you do things this way.

 

The BSA rightly deserves recognition for its public works. So much so that the public might well believe it is a good organization and worth "supporting" through use of school rooms and such.

 

I'm a taxpayer, and it would not bother me whit if the local Buddhists used the school down the road to make blankets for orphans.

[evmori]

You are correct Mr Boyce. With Merlyn there is no wiggle room when it comes to the BSA.

[scoutingagain]

If one reads and understands Merlyn's posts, you'll see he has no objection to BSA units having the same access to public school facilities, parks etc. as any other private group does.

 

SA

 

 

[Jeffrey H]

I registered to this forum just to ask you this: Why don't you let atheists be scouts?

 

Yann,

 

The BSA is a private organization and the collective membership believes that a belief in God is required for membership. The BSA is non-secterian and does not define how that belief should be expressed. The BSA is a product of our country's religious liberty and teaches members to be respectful of all religions or different faiths.

 

I think you know the rest of the answer since it seems you have read some BSA literature. If you have not read it, go to Scouting.org and find out.

 

 

[acco40]

In the greater St. Louis area a few years ago, the Ku Klux Klan signed up to do a stretch of highway clean-up (i.e Adopt-a-Highway). Members of civic organisations volunteer to pick up litter along a stretch of highway. In appreciation, the organisation's name is displayed on a sign marking its stretch of the roadside.

 

The state of Missouri tried to stop this citing maintenance issues (continually replacing the signs), fears of angry drivers, etc. The US Supreme Court declined an appeal by the state of Missouri seeking to reverse an 8th Circuit opinion which allows the Ku Klux Klan to adopt a highway. Under the controlling ruling of the 8th Circuit, "desire to exclude controversial organizations in order to prevent 'road rage' or public backlash on the highways against the Klans unpopular beliefs is simply not a legitimate governmental interest that would support the enactment of speech-abridging regulations."

 

Why would folks get mad at this? Well, I'm sure some feel that by allowing the KKK to do this charitable work (or free advertising?) the government was in someway legitimizing the KKK's belief system. In much the same way, if the KKK (or Buddhists & blankets) asked to meet at the school and help wash the windows for free, some would object.

 

The government has stated that they will not discriminate based on a few things - such as race, religion, etc. So, the simple answer is not to "support" organizations that do - such as the BSA.

 

It gets a little more complicated wrt faith based charities. Certain organizations like the Catholic Relief Services donates humanitarian aid but does not have a faith based litmus test on who it donates too. Yet, for some, giving government support to such charities smacks of discrimination (i.e. does it support other religious affiliated charitable agencies?). That is a tough question.

 

The BSA question is simple in my mind. The BSA does discriminate based on religion - it has stated such publically. That fact should not be in dispute by anyone - even Ed & Merlyn should join hands in agreement on that. However, the government has stated that it does not discriminate based on religion - ergo, the government should not charter BSA units.(This message has been edited by acco40)