Why not girls or atheists?

[Peregrinator]

Well, I'm confident that it's interpreted that way now.

 

Of course it is, which is one of the reasons why ordinary people have so little confidence in the federal justice system. If the Constitution plus the XIVth Amendment can be used to ban prayer in schools, for example, they can be used to do anything.

 

You omitted the part where people were killed over which version of the bible to use in public schools.

 

I'm not sure which incident you're referring to, but yes, there were riots in Philadelphia, for example -- I didn't "omit" them, I gave a brief summary.

[tgrimstead]

Merlyn,

 

I love your dedication! Never back down!

You remind me of a Firefighter buddy of mine named Ruby, die hard Atheist. We would get some beers and argue about everything. I tried to explain to him that a glass of wine, a shot of whiskey, and a beer all had the same alcohol content one time. We argued about that for months! Miss that guy. Very interested in your views on other subject matter. It's hard to find folks that can have a conversation of different opinion with out resorting to silliness.

 

You'll never change me, I'll never change you, and would never have it any other way.

Tim

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Well, I'm confident that it's interpreted that way now.

 

Of course it is, which is one of the reasons why ordinary people have so little confidence in the federal justice system. If the Constitution plus the XIVth Amendment can be used to ban prayer in schools, for example, they can be used to do anything.

 

Why are you arguing for an all-powerful government? You realize that prohibiting governmental prayer in schools is a restriction against the government, don't you?

 

You omitted the part where people were killed over which version of the bible to use in public schools.

 

I'm not sure which incident you're referring to, but yes, there were riots in Philadelphia, for example -- I didn't "omit" them, I gave a brief summary.

 

You even have your own definition of "omit"?

 

Anyway, did you want to go back to those times, when people were killed over which bible to use?

[Peregrinator]

Why are you arguing for an all-powerful government? You realize that prohibiting governmental prayer in schools is a restriction against the government, don't you?

 

You're the one arguing for government force to prevent atheists from being offended, not I. If the Constitution and the XIVth Amendment taken together mean that prayer can be forbidden in schools, then government power is truly unlimited. But that is what atheists must believe of necessity anyway, since they cannot believe that human rights come from something greater than the State.

 

You even have your own definition of "omit"?

 

If I were attempting to give more than a brief summary, one could say that I "omitted" something.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Why are you arguing for an all-powerful government? You realize that prohibiting governmental prayer in schools is a restriction against the government, don't you?

 

You're the one arguing for government force to prevent atheists from being offended, not I.

 

Not at all; people can pray in school, but school officials can't promote prayer. You can't seem to understand the different between private acts vs. a government employee acting as an agent of the state.

 

If the Constitution and the XIVth Amendment taken together mean that prayer can be forbidden in schools

 

It doesn't, and prayer has never been forbidden in schools. What's prohibited is government imposition of prayers.

 

 

Addendum: if the 14th didn't apply the first amendment to the states, each state could e.g. have an official state religion with required prayers in state schools, or e.g. ban ALL prayers in state schools. Holding state governments to the first amendment prevents either of these from happening.(This message has been edited by Merlyn_LeRoy)

[NJCubScouter]

I'm not sure why I am jumping in here, when I am not going to change anybody's mind, but Peregrinator says to Merlyn:

 

You're the one arguing for government force to prevent atheists from being offended, not I. If the Constitution and the XIVth Amendment taken together mean that prayer can be forbidden in schools, then government power is truly unlimited. But that is what atheists must believe of necessity anyway, since they cannot believe that human rights come from something greater than the State.

 

Peregrinator, I think the distinction you are making between "school" and "government" is a false distinction, at least for purposes of this topic. (Assuming we are talking about public schools, of course.) I realize it may seem odd to think of your friendly local elementary school, with friendly old Mr. Smith (or youngish Ms. Smith) as principal, as a government institution headed by a government official, but that is what they are. They are under the control of your local (or not-so-local) school board, which exists under the laws of your state, either directly or indirectly. So the school is part of the government. Under the Supreme Court cases, the government (including a school) cannot organize a prayer or other religious observance.

 

Personally, I am very happy that the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government (regardless of the level) from practicing religion. (I don't know if that last phrase is used in any of the cases, I just think it is a useful way of looking at it.) And, unlike Merlyn, I am not an atheist.

[Peregrinator]

You can't seem to understand the different between private acts vs. a government employee acting as an agent of the state.

 

I understand the difference just as I understand the distinction between "promoting" and "imposing". For example, the U.S. government "promotes" population control, while the Chinese government "imposes" it.

 

Under the Supreme Court cases, the government (including a school) cannot organize a prayer or other religious observance.

 

And that is one of many reasons why the Supreme Court is not taken seriously and its decisions viewed with suspicion and even derision.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

I understand the difference just as I understand the distinction between "promoting" and "imposing". For example, the U.S. government "promotes" population control, while the Chinese government "imposes" it.

 

You've given no indication in this thread. Public school employees are agents of the state while they are acting in their official capacity.

 

Under the Supreme Court cases, the government (including a school) cannot organize a prayer or other religious observance.

 

And that is one of many reasons why the Supreme Court is not taken seriously and its decisions viewed with suspicion and even derision.

 

By you. maybe. Public schools promoting religion is a rights violation (not to mention a disaster).

[tyke]

As a gay, atheist scout leader that has 3 girls in his troop it does feel a bit random reading some of the comments here. Scouting in the UK has had an open to all policy for years where no one is left out and I believe scouting has benefited for it. I bet if any of the scouts came to over to our troop they'd not see much difference, we still go camping, play with axes, knives, fire, play rough games etc. As an outsider looking in the BSA seems to come across as very serious, conservative and stuffy, if you look on the website the head scout is wearing a suit, in the UK anyone from scouting that appears in the media, including the chief scout, never wears uniform its generally a necker and hoody, and this is backed up by the media policy given to all leader to encourage a more relaxed atmosphere, as the stuffy image of tucked in ironed shirts puts kids off. It seems to be working as scouting UK is growing not declining.

[packsaddle]

That's quite a resurrection you just performed, tyke. I hope everyone remembers to play nice.

[mattman578]

I have 2 atheist scouts in my Bear Den. I am a Christian, as that is what others have labeled me as, and I will never deny the scout experience from a boy. Period!!!

Girls have GSUSA or AHG or Venturing or LFL. Though many countries include girls in their Scouting. ( I think our program is superior to GSUSA, but that's me.)

Gays? well...what is worse a CM who is a drunk, drug addict, porn addict, divorced, liar, thief, lazy, uses profanity, over weight...etc. All these are sins and all sins are equal and we all sin. Last I checked Jesus associated with sinners (and tax collectors) :)to the dismay of his followers, as they were the ones who needed him most. We are the ones who need him most.(If you believe in him.) By exclusion you condone bigotry.

 

Yours In Cheerful Service,

Tim

( who is addicted to Mt.Dew!!)

 

I am with Tim I will never deny any scout the scouting experience !!!! Also any Gay leaders are welcome to my pack just because you are gay does not automatically make you a child molester!!! I am an over weight smoking recovering alcoholic. Who is in scouting to make sure my son has a good program. He really enjoys it and gets a lot of benefits also. Any adult that wants to help will get the chance any boy who wants to scout will get the chance. I do not ask if you are gay straight cross dresser document or not document alien. Hell if you were from mars and wanted to join scouting my reaction would most likely be man your green here is how to tie a square knot.

 

As for the way this thread is going my thoughts are that the Constitution of the USA gives you the right of freedom or religion to practice or not. the separation of church and state gets taken way to far most of the time.

 

One of the things I have found is that education teaches tolerance.

[qwazse]

Not getting into philosophy as to whose culture is more enlightened. (Suffice it to say that I endure scouters who would never look outside US borders for organizational models and resent me when I point them out .) , but you raise an important point ...

 

... As an outsider looking in the BSA seems to come across as very serious' date=' conservative and stuffy, if you look on the website the head scout is wearing a suit, ...[/quote']

 

That's because it is "serious", "conservative", and "stuffy." Although not necessarily in the sense that you are thinking of. Parents in the US have often looked to leaders in business and government as role models for their children. They aren't looking for another "entertainment outlet" for the boys. They are looking for a lean, efficient organization that produces world leaders with a minimum of distraction. Some of them are actually looking to BSA as a weapon in their personal culture war. (You'll no doubt read from a few of them on this forum.) In any case, the laid-back, fun-loving, youth leader is what parents are looking for in their youth pastor(s), but not their scoutmaster, and certainly not their chief scout. (In fact, the poor man caught flack for a photo where he was at an awards ceremony wearing with non-regulation slacks!)

 

... the stuffy image of tucked in ironed shirts puts kids off.

Our market is more complex than yours. For example, I advise a Venturing crew. (You've clearly browsed official websites, so I'll spare you the details.) These youth (ages 14-20) have an option of the national uniform, or devising their own uniform. These neckers you speak of ... there is not a boy or girl in my crew who would ever put them on ... NOT EVER ... even the ones who are boy scouts and have a uniform shirt to match officially removed them as a required element of our troop's uniform.

 

Meanwhile, an adjacent crew adopts the national uniform with no qualms whatsoever. (Still, no necker.) They'll likely be the ones paying a visit to our chief scout executive one day.

 

... It seems to be working as scouting UK is growing not declining.

 

I'm really excited for UK scouting. I think their growth is inspiring. But it will take a little more than that to impress American parents. And as long as they're writing the checks, BSA is limited in its innovation.

[tyke]

Thanks for the interesting discussion. The fun loving youth leader being derived from a pastor is very different from the UK, as kids don't go to church (UK church going is around 10% of the population but this is in decline with it expected to be around 8% by 2025 as the older people die off and arn't replaced with 45% of people under 25 say they have no religion). So they are never going to meet there pastor, let alone do any fun things with them. Scouting UK is a strange place too regarding uniforms, as lots of the 'old guard' like the kids to wear full uniform at all times, nicely ironed. where as lots of the newer leaders and the uk commissioners prefer a more modern image, neckers and hoodies.

[Cambridgeskip]

Hi Tyke, based on title and subject matter I am going to assume you are the same Tyke as on escouts? Likewise I'm the same CambridgeSkip!

 

Anyway, I'd say to you stick around and look over some of the discussions, even if you have no comments to make. It's something I've done and I think I've learned quite a bit not just about American scouting but also American culture. In particular the sense of libertarianism that is much more prominent in the USA that it is in Western Europe.

 

I share many of your views on inclusivity within scouting. Although I do think you have underestimated the levels of religious beliefs with in the UK!

[tyke]

Yep, same tyke as on Escouts. if anything I've over estimated the level of religious belief in the uk, as there are lots of stats, but even the daily mail shows it in terminal decline ( http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2586596/Just-800-000-worshipers-attend-Church-England-service-average-Sunday.html)