Schools & Scouting

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

SeattlePioneer writes:

And there are numerous situations where a child or adult who initiates a prayer in school will have his mouth stopped by teachers or administrators. I would say that there is a definite bias against religion or prayer in public schools even when that is freely initiated by students.

 

Sorry, that's not an indication that schools are a "religion-free zone", that's an indication that some school officials break the law. I can point to people being killed every day in the news, but I can't use that to argue that murder is legal.

 

In some places, schools have stonewalled the formation of atheist student groups, even if other non-academic groups are allowed. This shows a bias against atheists by some school administrators, but instead of claiming that schools are an "atheism-free zone", it's just another example of school officials violating the rights of students. The PROPER response is to sue the school and the adminstrators (though usually the threat of a lawsuit is enough).

[skeptic]

"(though usually the threat of a lawsuit is enough). "

 

Ah, here is the bludgeon so popular with the PC groups, especially with government. Also a favorite tactic by questionable lawyers seeking settlements against perceived deep pockets. Why? Because they know it is generally far less expensive to settle than stand up to them.

 

The need to change the way these suits are handled has been bandied about already. Seems we would be far better off with the litigant responsible for "all" costs, should they lose. And judges need to have the power, reason, and fortitude to throw many of them out to start with.

 

Again, JMHO.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

As usual, people actually having the gall to peacefully use the court systems to determine what is legal and defend civil rights becomes a "bludgeon" in skeptic's anti-civil-rights view. Some people are just too uppity and don't know their second-place status.

 

PS: By the way, skeptic, since my mention of lawsuits was SPECIFICALLY about atheists having equal rights to form non-academic school groups, is it your position that atheists do NOT have the same rights as everyone else to form non-academic school groups?(This message has been edited by Merlyn_LeRoy)

[skeptic]

Merlyn;

 

It continues to amaze me how you can twist anything to fit your point of view and crusade. You appear to miss my point completely. And, as I said, it is my opinion. Has nothing to do with "your" viewpoint; only that "threats" are used as tools to scare groups and government, who have limited funds for such things, into not defending the cases due to cost. Many of the "settled" suits would end up being won if they were to go to the end; but since the loser does not have to pay the defense, it is just too costly and time consuming. I have no hope that you will actually acknowledge my point. And this will be my only response to you regarding it, as even this is really pointless.

 

Good day.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

skeptic writes:

It continues to amaze me how you can twist anything to fit your point of view and crusade.

 

You started this crusade; I remarked how students who have their civil rights ignored should use the court system to make sure their rights aren't infringed, and you, as usual, turn that into a cartoon where the person having their rights infringed is somehow the big bully with a bludgeon, while the people responsible for violating their rights go uncriticized by you.

 

"threats" are used as tools to scare groups and government, who have limited funds for such things, into not defending the cases due to cost.

 

Right, the big, bad high school student can outspend the government.

 

Many of the "settled" suits would end up being won if they were to go to the end

 

Not the cases I've been describing, but that doesn't stop you from lumping them in together. You don't bother with such nitpicky things as whether the people threatening the lawsuit might even be RIGHT.

 

I have no hope that you will actually acknowledge my point

 

I always do; you always cop out like this, whining that I'm not "acknowledging your point".

 

YOU'RE the one failing to distinguish between two entirely different circumstances.

 

Tell me, what SHOULD a student do if their school VIOLATES THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS?

 

And this will be my only response to you regarding it, as even this is really pointless.

 

Good day.

 

Intellectual coward.

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

Secularists have triumphed by excising religion and prayer from government institutions such as schools. Well, fine.

 

But they aren't content with that. They often have an agenda of turning pretty much anything using or occupying the public square into a religion free zone ---- and that includes Scouting.

 

That needs to be resisted, in my view. Government has pervasive power and prestige in society. Secularists would like to establish a societal norm of pretty much everyplace except the home and church being a religion free zone.

 

 

Fortuantely the Congress and even the Supreme Court has placed roadblocks in that political and legal agenda.

 

After all, the "free exercise" of religion is part of the 1st amendment too.

[packsaddle]

So....how about those PTA's and PTO's deciding not to sponsor units, for whatever reason...?

[Lisabob]

SP I don't know where you are getting your info from, but the analysis is flawed.

 

Here's the deal:

 

Anyone can pray in public school. You can, I can, your neighbor can.

 

A person cannot coerce others into praying, and one should not disrupt the normal flow of lessons (breaking into noisy worship during math class seems like a good example). But the law does NOT prohibit prayer in public schools.

 

The law also doesn't prohibit student religious clubs or groups from forming (in fact, the Supreme Court has said such groups must be allowed, if other student groups are also allowed). If students want an after school bible study club (or koran study club, or bhagavad gita study club, or whatever religious text you wish to insert here), they can do so. If they want to pray together before school, or at lunchtime, they can do that, too.

 

Further, if schools allow some community groups to use school grounds after hours, they cannot exclude most other groups, including religious groups.

 

Finally, there's actually a provision in the Patriot Act that obligates schools to provide access to the BSA, in particular. There can be debates about what "access" means, but public schools cannot simply bar the BSA from school grounds.

 

So I do not understand why you are determined to believe that somehow, schools have been made into "religion free zones" in violation of the free exercise clause of the 1st amendment. Because they have not been. Anyone trying to tell you otherwise is pushing an ulterior agenda.

[Lisabob]

Back to PTAs and PTOs, maybe it would be good in the long term if more of them dropped their charters. I say this for a couple of reasons.

 

1. Pragmatically, they tend to be lousy charter partners. They have high turnover, often don't have a clue about the BSA, let alone the unit they sponsor, and often can't provide much (if anything) in the way of material support. In my experience, these factors combine to make for unpredictable charter orgs who typically don't want to be more involved than is absolutely necessary. Not exactly a good relationship base, there.

 

2. All parents should feel welcome at their PTA or PTO. It is harder to pull that off when the PTA or PTO sponsors discriminatory groups.

 

From the PTA or PTO's stance, sponsorship seems problematic. So, too, from the BSA unit's perspective.

 

3. I don't believe that the BSA should retain its discriminatory membership policies. More pressure from (former) COs might help the BSA come into the 21st century on this issue.

[ChaiAdventure]

LisaBob

 

The USAPATRIOT Act has a provision for BSA?? Seriously??

 

From what I read, the Act only mentions BSA in terms of the Bank Secrecy Act. There is no further mention of Scouting at all. I am not sure why it would address Scouting in the first place. Am I wrong?

[packsaddle]

This might be the Act that Lisa mentioned. It was included in the NCLB legislation.

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

 

Lisa's points re: PTA and PTO sponsorship make sense. In this area I don't know of a single unit sponsored by a PTA or PTO. Most, if not all, are sponsored by churches. It's been pretty much that way as long as I can remember.

Edit: Of course it helps to have a church for every, what, 10-20 people...unlike those heathenous yankees. (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Abel Magwitch]

In my council, in school scouting made up 41% of the total traditional membership. Yet you never see these scouts.

 

Furthermore, the school district has its own policies.

 

Co-curricular and Extracurricular Activities

Activities must be open to all students, regardless of race, color, national origin, citizenship status, religion, sex, economic status, age or disability.

 

School Ceremonies and Observation/Patriotic Exercises

The school should avoid any activity, display or exhibit that promotes or gives its approval to religious matters.

 

Schools must be neutral in matters of religion. The District must show no preference for one religion over another and must refrain from the promotion of any religion. No pupil shall be required to participate in programs or meditations based upon moral, philosophical or patriotic themes if they are contrary to the religious convictions of the pupil or the pupils parent(s)/legal guardian(s). Teachers should also respect the fact that some individuals beliefs do not include religious observances.

 

Yet the BSA has its own policies which are contrary to the above school policies, yet they are allowed to set up shop within the schools.

 

The Boy Scouts have a policy on the declaration of Religious Principal:

From Bylaws of Boy Scouts of America, art. IX, 1, cl. 1- [The Boy Scouts] policy is that the home and the organization with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life.

 

The Boy Scouts have a policy against homosexuality:

Boy Scouts of America believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the obligations in the Scout Oath and Scout Law to be morally straight and clean in thought, word, and deed. The conduct of youth members must be in compliance with the Scout Oath and Law, and membership in Boy Scouts of America is contingent upon the willingness to accept Scoutings values and beliefs.

 

The Boy Scouts do not allow girls to become members:

Teaching "Boys to Do Things for Themselves and Others" - According to Boy Scouts of Americas Charter The purpose of this corporation shall be to promote . . . the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in Scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues . . .

 

The Boy Scouts have age and grade requirements:

Cub Scouts - For boys in first grade through fifth grade (or seven through 10 years of age)

Boy Scouts - For boys who are 11 through 17 years of age, or have earned the Cub Scouting Arrow of Light award and are at least 10 years old, or have completed the fifth grade and are at least 10 years old

Venturing - For young men and women 14 (and have completed the eighth grade) through 20 years of age

 

These in school units are also open only to students going to that school. If Johnny is a member of the school and a member of the school Pack, and his next door neighbor friend Joey (who goes to another Catholic school) is not allowed to join Johnnys pack.

 

The PTA may be the sponsoring institution and the sponsoring institution is supposed to agree to provide a meeting place for the Scouts but unfortunately, the meeting place does not belong to the PTA nor is it owned by the PTA It belongs to the school district which is owned by the citizens and the school district has its own policies.

 

The main reason why I am against in school scouting is because my council generates some terrific membership numbers in the school. There are actually Packs with over 300 kids registered to them; Troops with over 150 kids registered. Im sorry, I have never actually seen a 300 kid Pack in my life.

 

Once strong troops, and packs were sponsored by churches in my city. But over the past 25 to 30 years, so many have simply died. Yet the public schools supposedly have over a third of the councils membership.

 

Baloney.

 

[evmori]

But BSA has some ideas about right and wrong that conflict in some ways with the currently fashionable ideas that government seeks to enforce on people and institutions.

 

Key word - fashionable - and also the key problem. Fashionable is like being politically correct. Stupid!

[BadenP]

The OP of this thread started this discussion with why certain PTA/PTO's in one area will no longer sponsor scout units due to legal liabilities to the CO if an accident or incident should be caused by that unit. It is NOT about religion in schools or who can rent a school building for a meeting or the religious stance of the BSA. Now the discussion has devolved into the old chicken and egg argument which is unprovable and unwinable and quite frankly has been hashed around in this forum too many times in the past. You know what happens if you keep poking a bull with a stick, eventually you are gonna get gored.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

[Beavah]

More pressure from (former) COs might help the BSA come into the 21st century on this issue.

 

Yah, that makes a lot of sense. Give up your membership and your vote and you will gain more influence? How's that workin' out? Sounds like da tactics of the Iraqi Sunni leadership at the beginning. Boycott the elections! Oh, wait, now we don't have any say?

 

I think, had they pushed it, the schools, PTOs, and other groups who would have preferred changing the policy could have made significant inroads into the BSA's governance. But by giving up their charters, they ceded control to those organizations who are less likely to pursue that agenda. We are now less likely than ever to reverse the policy.

 

I think it's important to acknowledge that there have been a lot of cases of hostility toward religion in public schools. I know of a case in a nearby school district that was pursued by one of da conservative legal foundations on behalf of a student where the district court's ruling compared the local school officials to Nazis their behavior toward religious students was so egregious. So the notion that there is an agenda to drive religion out of the public sphere and especially the schools has some real basis in fact.

 

At the same time, in other communities, it's important to acknowledge that there have been a lot of cases of hostility toward non-Protestant-Christian practice or expression in the public schools or the public square. And yeh can certainly point toward equally egregious behavior by elected and school officials on that side.

 

Which is why I'm such a proponent of public monies being used for personal public choice. It's da easiest, best way to end the squabbling and attempts to "win" through legal and policy manipulation. Schools support student groups that meet baseline guidance for good behavior, period. Charter and fund the boy scouts, the girl scouts, the American Heritage Girls, the Spiral Scouts, whoever. Fund 'em based on the number of kids choosing the activity. Let 'em participate in extracurricular recruitment day and assemblies. Let kids and families choose, rather than letting government choose. Maybe everyone will just join da robot club.

 

Whenever we let government choose, it puts kids and families into competition against each other to secure da government's choice for what they want. It leads to lobbyists and political donations and litigation when yeh don't win the lobbyist game. It locks people into philosophical advocacy and viewing competing philosophies as enemies. It's ugly and uncivil and hurts society.

 

A school can sponsor an LGBT club with public dollars, but a school can't sponsor a Christian prayer group. It's hard not to see that as government-sponsored discrimination against a particular viewpoint.

 

Just sponsor everything and the arguments and competition for resources mostly go away. Funny, eh? That's what all da other countries in the free world do.

 

Beavah