K of C dropping charters

[qwazse]

....and many of the ISIS killings are war related, not terror.

War is an awkward name for it for Muslims who consider Dae'sh to be neither Islamic nor State. They would rather us think in terms like "extended gang violence." Not entirely sure I'm buying it

[Eagle94-A1]

In regards to lawsuits against COs for choosing their own leaders since July, I have no idea.  I do know that there have been several prior to that, and not just based upon sexuality. There was a lawsuit against one CO by a parent because the CO wanted their members in leadership roles in the pack. The parent was not a member of the congregation, nor a member of the denomination and did sue.

 

While it can be hard to be in that situation, I'm in it to a degree at the moment, I do understand where the COs are coming from. I also know the importance of having a good CO to UNITS relationship. In my current situation, I'm in the background supporting my Scouts to the best of my ability.

[Peregrinator]

Or we can admit that compating ISIL, which has such modern weapons as guns, tanks and missiles is just a wee bit silly.   If the Inquisitor's had acces to guns, tanls and other weapons of mocern wrefere, they would have used them.

No they wouldn't have. The Inquisition was a court not a branch of the military.

[Stosh]

@@Peregrinator

 

You are correct on the Inquisition.  Once Christianity became political (Middle Ages) it took on the kind of extremism that we see in the islamic countries of today.  I learned way back in school that the problem of: Does the Pope hold the stirrup for the King or does the King hold the stirrup for the Pope?  Are the government leaders or the religious leaders running the show.  A lot of Christians died trying to work that out, now it's the Muslim's turn to play that game.  The only difference is rockets, guns and aircraft collatterally kill a lot more people quicker than swords and pyres.  No one out there has a monopoly on stupid.

 

Oh, and by the way, this is why our forefathers put the freedom of religion/freedom from a state religion in the Constitution... to avoid this kind of abuse of power.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Stosh

[JustThinking]

It takes a while for lawsuits to be submitted. Troops/Crews recruited in the fall for new applications this spring, so any potential discrimination will not have happened yet. Then you need time for the lawsuits to be investigated and filed. Probably won't be a year or so until we see any of these.

 

 

Forgive me for pointing out this post http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/27483-a-catholic-church-says-no/. 

[Stosh]

@@JustThinking

 

One always have to take into consideration discrimination is a two-way street with multiple agendas and variable levels of intolerance.  Once one gets a good handle on all those dynamics then the world makes more sense than common sense.

[JustThinking]

@@JustThinking

 

One always have to take into consideration discrimination is a two-way street with multiple agendas and variable levels of intolerance.  Once one gets a good handle on all those dynamics then the world makes more sense than common sense.

No disagreement.  There is what is said, there is what is done.  Of the two, what is done is generally closer to the truth. 

[Krampus]

Forgive me for pointing out this post http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/27483-a-catholic-church-says-no/.

That was a guy already turned down before just waiting for the decision to "re-apply" despite already knowing what the answer would be. Activist tilting the same wind mill.

[NJCubScouter]

Forgive me for pointing out this post http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/27483-a-catholic-church-says-no/. 

 

I don't believe the person who that thread is about has filed a lawsuit - or at least he hadn't as of the time of that thread.  If he does, and the church wins (as it should and probably would), that would demonstrate that (at least in that court's jurisdiction) the local option is legally viable.  That wouldn't be such a bad thing.  (Let's remember, this person applied to be a leader in a troop chartered to a Catholic Church, and was turned down.   That's how the local option is supposed to work.)

[Krampus]

That is how the local option should work, but I doubt that is how most people read the BSA change. Many I speak with think it means you have to accept anyone who applies now.

[NJCubScouter]

That is how the local option should work, but I doubt that is how most people read the BSA change. Many I speak with think it means you have to accept anyone who applies now.

 

"Most people" can think whatever they want.  If someone challenges the local option in court, the decision is not going to be made by "most people."  It is going to be made by a judge (or judges) who will have in front of him/her/them the relevant policies of the BSA and whatever CO is being sued.  Not news articles that get things half-right and are half-understood by the public, but the actual documents.  He/she/them will also have in front of them the First Amendment and the case law that has been decided under it.

 

Given all of that, I think the judge(s) would have to conclude that if the CO is a religious organization that teaches that homosexuality is a sin, that organization is able, under the Free Exercise of Religion Clause, to decline to appoint an openly gay adult to a leadership position in the BSA units for which it holds a charter.

 

This post is not intended as legal advice, etc. etc.

Edited December 14, 2015 by NJCubScouter

[Krampus]

"Most people" can think whatever they want.  If someone challenges the local option in court, the decision is not going to be made by "most people."  It is going to be made by a judge (or judges) who will have in front of him/her/them the relevant policies of the BSA and whatever CO is being sued.  Not news articles that get things half-right and are half-understood by the public, but the actual documents.  He/she/them will also have in front of them the First Amendment and the case law that has been decided under it.

 

Given all of that, I think the judge(s) would have to conclude that if the CO is a religious organization that teaches that homosexuality is a sin, that organization is able, under the Free Exercise of Religion Clause, to decline to appoint an openly gay adult to a leadership position in the BSA units for which it holds a charter.

 

This post is not intended as legal advice, etc. etc.

The judge had all that BEFORE the last two policy changes, and yet?

 

What makes you think this will be any different?

[NJCubScouter]

The judge had all that BEFORE the last two policy changes, and yet?

 

What makes you think this will be any different?

 

What case are you talking about?

 

The last case I am aware of on the "BSA/gay issue" was the Dale case.  Mr. Dale lost.  The BSA won.  (By a 5-4 vote, admittedly.)   Now, if there was a lawsuit over local option, I think the religious organization involved (for example, the Catholic Church) would have a much STRONGER case than the BSA had in the Dale case.*  And the BSA won.  I doubt that our hypothetical new case would even get to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

*I have always felt that the BSA fibbed a little to the Supreme Court when it said that the BSA teaches that homosexuality is inconsistent with the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Law.  I know I was never taught that.  And despite the misconceptions that a lot of people have about the Dale case, that finding was really the crux of the decision, because once you have an organization teaching its adherents something about its values, it's a short jump to saying that the organization's right of "expressive association", under the First Amendment, allows it to exclude persons whose presence would be contrary to those values.  On the other hand, the Catholic Church (for example) would have a much simpler (and undeniable) argument about its values, beliefs and teachings, not to mention a much more solid legal basis, the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

[hendrickms24]

All,

 

I'm a Knight and this is the first time I have heard about this.

My council does not charter a BSA Troop so maybe that is why. 

The one thing I keyed in to the Letter from Supreme Knight Anderson

is that all Councils need to integrate Squire Circles (Youth version of KofC Councils)

into Parish Youth.  Squires is/was a big Youth Activity for the Knights and now they are phasing it out.

Does this have to do with the BSA membership change NO!   This is about making the parish the focal point of the Family.   

 

YOS,

MSM

[JoeBob]

  Now, if there was a lawsuit over local option, I think the religious organization involved (for example, the Catholic Church) would have a much STRONGER case than the BSA had in the Dale case.

I hate to say this, but...

 

Is the judge going to look at Catholic policy or Catholic practice?  I know several gay priests, and we just starting recovering from the pedophile scandal.