BSA - What about THIS!

NousDefionsDoc · 11-15-2004, 17:50

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...nse_boy_scouts

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Bases Warned on Boy Scouts

1 hour, 7 minutes ago

U.S. National - AP

By MIKE ROBINSON, Associated Press Writer

CHICAGO - The Pentagon (news - web sites) has agreed to warn military bases worldwide that they should not directly sponsor Boy Scout troops, partially resolving claims that the government has improperly supported a group that requires members to believe in God.

The settlement, announced Monday, came in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, which says American military units have sponsored hundreds of Boy Scout troops.

"If our Constitution's promise of religious liberty is to be a reality, the government should not be administering religious oaths or discriminating based on religious beliefs," said ACLU attorney Adam Schwartz.

The Pentagon said it has long had a rule against sponsorship of non-federal organizations and denied the rule had been violated. But it agreed to send a message to posts worldwide warning them not to sponsor Boy Scout troops or other such groups.

The rule does not prevent service members from leading Scout troops unofficially on their own time, and Scouts will still be able to hold meetings on areas of military bases where civilian organizations are allowed to hold events.

The settlement does not resolve other ACLU claims involving government spending that benefits the Boy Scouts, such as money used to prepare a Virginia military base for the Boy Scout Jamboree and grants used by state and local governments to benefit the Boy Scouts, Schwartz said.

Attorney Marcia Berman, who represented the Defense Department, declined to comment on the settlement Monday. But Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said the message that will be sent to bases represents "a clarification of an existing rule that DOD personnel cannot be involved in an official capacity."

The original ACLU lawsuit named as defendants the City of Chicago, the Department of Defense (news - web sites) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The City of Chicago settled, agreeing not to engage in official sponsorship of scouting activities.

rubberneck · 11-15-2004, 18:11

This burns my arse. The First Amendment grants freedom of religion not freedom from religion. The founders of this country were, by in large, very religious men. The influence of religion can clearly be seen in our laws and customs. What the ACLU is doing to religion IMHO is quite Un-American. The removal of the cross from the LA County (or city) seal is just another example of how the ACLU is enforcing their particular anti-religious jihad. As if the Christian missions that were fromed in California had nothing to do with the traditions and history of the state.

I certianly hope the President can get enough common sense judges on the Supreme Court that they can put an end to this needless BS.

Achilles · 11-15-2004, 18:21

IMHO seperation of church and state is critical. And as much as I fookin hate the ACLU they have a point. You know they are putting warnings on science textbooks about evolution just being a theory in some state (put in the context that it "may not" be true)s? I thought we were in the 21st century.

It won't affect anything.... Troops will still sponsor the boy scouts, just on their own time. Best solution would be to modernize Boy Scouts and allow for freedom of religion.

rubberneck · 11-15-2004, 18:45

I don't have a problem with the seperation between church and state but this BS with the Boy Scouts is out of control. How is interacting with a group like the Boy Socuts violating anyones first amendment rights. Its not like they are telling Muslin troops that they have support them.

Why are the boy scouts bad yet Congress has a Chaplin and each session is opened with a prayer? Why are elected and appointed officials sworn in while holding a bible? I would be the first person to say something if the government tired to prevent anyone from practicing their religion but why do we have to act as if religion doesn't exsist in society? Why can't the government acknowledge religion or religious groups and the good work they do without the ACLU having a heart attack?

And while I am on the subject being an atheist is not a religion. I get a little sick of atheists and agnostics claiming that their 1st amendment rights are trampled when the pledge is recited in schools. Why can you claim religious persecution if you don't believe in god or formal religion? Of all the very real issues the ACLU can chose to do something about they seem to pick the ones that have very little if any impact on our rights.

11-15-2004, 18:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

IMHO seperation of church and state is critical. And as much as I fookin hate the ACLU they have a point. You know they are putting warnings on science textbooks about evolution just being a theory in some state (put in the context that it "may not" be true)s? I thought we were in the 21st century.

I realize this may come as a shock to you, but it is "the theory of evolution".

**Kyobanim** · 11-15-2004, 19:09

@ Rubberneck - The majority of founding fathers were Deists. They believed in a natural god, that took no real part in the lives or fates of humans. The deists version of 'god', is not the same as the christian god.

According to Websters dictionary: "One who believes in the existence of a God or supreme being but denies revealed religion, basing his belief on the light of nature and reason."

This is why they wanted Fredom of religion inthe constitution.

NousDefionsDoc · 11-15-2004, 19:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

Best solution would be to modernize Boy Scouts and allow for freedom of religion.

Scout Oath
. . To do my duty to God . . .
Your family and religious leaders teach you about God and the ways you can serve. You do your duty to God by following the wisdom of those teachings every day and by respecting and defending the rights of others to practice their own beliefs.

. . and morally straight.
To be a person of strong character, your relationships with others should be honest and open. You should respect and defend the rights of all people. Be clean in your speech and actions, and remain faithful in your religious beliefs. The values you practice as a Scout will help you shape a life of virtue and self-reliance.

Note
DUTY TO GOD AND COUNTRY: Your FAMILY and religious leaders teach you to know and serve God. By following these teachings, you do your duty to God.

From the Boy Scout Law
A Scout is Reverent.
A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.

The intolerance is overwhelming

Achilles · 11-15-2004, 19:51

Its a theory with overwhelming evidence. Gravity is also a theory, you know. Theories are laws created upon observation of natural behavior. Some creationists still deny the existence of DINOSAURS. Those bones must have been planted. I'm a Christian, however I believe that much of the Old Testament was purely an allegory teaching a lesson in morality. Taking it all literally is a mistake. Yes, I believe that God created life on this planet. However, thats not something that should be taught in a Science classroom. That is best taught in Bible study or a Theology class.

Our government needs to stay out of any and all religious matters. Part of upholding the ideals of the constitution does have to do with the Bill of Rights. More than just our founding fathers, but many of the greatest scientific minds of our time were Deists as well. They respected our religion, so why not respect theirs and religions of others? By giving government funded preference to a group that only lets Christian boys join, we send a negative message to those of other religions.

I was in the boy scouts when I was a kid. Good experience. I have nothing against them, but they should probably open up on religious matters. Boy Scouts is a fantastic experience for a kid, so why should they act prejudiced to some children based on religion? IMO, thats wrong.

Sorry if my comments seemed condescending or matter-of-fact. They were not meant to be. This is just my opinion, and make no mistake: I respect all of yours.

edit for NDD:

I forgot the Scout oaths. Good points there. Most religions do believe in God one way or anotherr. I don't think those oaths bar children of other religions (except atheists, and even then those children could learn to find God even when their parents may not believe in Him).

NousDefionsDoc · 11-15-2004, 19:52

If they were teaching them how to fill out welfare and unemployment forms or get over on a piss test instead of how to tie knots and start a fire and be nice to people, nobody at the ACLU would be saying anything.

rubberneck · 11-15-2004, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyobanim

@ Rubberneck - The majority of founding fathers were Deists. They believed in a natural god, that took no real part in the lives or fates of humans. The deists version of 'god', is not the same as the christian god.

You are correct, however being religous and believing in an organized religion are not mutually exclusive ideas. While some of the founding fathers were clearly hostile towards organized religion it is quite clear that the laws that this country were founded on drew their inspiration from the judeo-chrisitan ethic.

Achilles · 11-15-2004, 20:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

If they were teaching them how to fill out welfare and unemployment forms or get over on a piss test instead of how to tie knots and start a fire and be nice to people, nobody at the ACLU would be saying anything.

LOL, true. I hate the ACLU so much. They've been completely worthless since major prejudice issues have disappeared. Just because I agree with them on a single issue (more like agreeing with the Bill of Rights) doesn't make me like them, at all. On the flipside, affirmative action is very much unconstitutional and I'd like to see that GONE. Why a judge hasn't declared AA unconstitutional yet is beyond me. AL?

rubberneck · 11-15-2004, 20:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

Boy Scouts is a fantastic experience for a kid, so why should they act prejudiced to some children based on religion? IMO, thats wrong.

I never understood this type of logic. Why should the Boy Scouts change their charter to suit the whims of others. It isn't by happenstance that members of the Boy Scouts are required to believe in God. If others want to start a group like the boy scouts that don't require kids to believe in God then go right ahead. This is a part of the bigotry that is faced by people of faith in this country (I am not saying you are a bigot by any means). A bigotry that says your institutions and histories are less important than their non-secular ideas. It leads gays to sue the Boy Scouts for the right to be included. Don't get me wrong I am not a uber right wing religious freak. I an a semi-practicing catholic that feels that the left has gone way too far in trying to seperate church and state. Part of our history as a country is at risk of being wiped out for fear that it might offend someone why else would you force LA to remove the cross from their seal.

Achilles · 11-15-2004, 20:14

rubberneck:

I am in TOTAL agreement that the left has gone too far. They continue to push the envelope when it is not needed or wanted. The vast majority of people in this country are Christians, as every registered user viewing this post most likely is. As am I. I agree with you that the Boy Scouts should not be forced to change their charter. I only suggested a friendly ammendment to be fair. As much as it is not "fair" to have gays in Boy Scouts, that ammendment will probably never happen for obvious (and good) reasons. And I wouldn't want it to. I only suggested Joe Bob Muhammed with Muslim parents be allowed take part in scouting activities and be treated just like the rest of the kids instead of having to deal with prejudice just because his parents happen to have raised him with X religion.

You probably know what I'm getting at.

**Kyobanim** · 11-15-2004, 20:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubberneck

While some of the founding fathers were clearly hostile towards organized religion it is quite clear that the laws that this country were founded on drew their inspiration from the judeo-chrisitan ethic.

I don't think it's clear at all. And besides, that was over 200 years ago. I think Tom said it best:

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times." -Thomas Jefferson

This is an interesting conversation but, as with other religion based topics I've gotten involved in, probably won't end nicely. I'll just back out now.

Achilles · 11-15-2004, 20:52

Fitting quote, Kyo. I'm going to step out of this conversation. I know this is a sensitive issue for some, and I'd rather not step on any toes over an issue of opinion.