And in these confirmations, who controlled the Senate at the time?
You can be sure Kerry won't even nominate anyone you'd like to see on the bench.
Show 'em my motto!
Posted on 03/08/2004 11:26:44 PM PST by JohnHuang2
LAW OF THE LAND
Supreme Court rejects Boy Scouts' appeal
State can exclude group due to policy against homosexual leaders
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
The U.S. Supreme Court today allowed Connecticut to exclude the Boy Scouts of America from a state charitable program because of the Scouts' policy barring avowed homosexuals from leadership.
Critics said the high court's refusal to revisit the ruling by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals threatens not only the First Amendment right to expressive association but also the right to free exercise of religion.
The decision has "far reaching implications that could threaten the constitutional rights of religious-based organizations that seek to promote and preserve their organizational values, particularly with regard to the issue of homosexuality," said the Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case.
For more than 30 years, the Boy Scouts had participated in the Connecticut State Employee Campaign Committee, which allows private groups to receive charitable donations through voluntary payroll deductions from state employees.
State officials denied the Boy Scouts access to the program, claiming the organization violated state non-discrimination laws by excluding avowed homosexuals from positions of leadership.
The organization says "such employment would interfere with scouting's mission of transmitting values to youth."
"Permitting this decision [Second Circuit Court of Appeals] to stand would in effect allow governments to legally extort organizations and individuals to give up basic beliefs," said Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, prior to the ruling.
Thompson noted homosexual activist organizations such as the Lambda Legal Defense Fund are allowed to participate in the state charitable campaign.
Lambda Senior Staff Attorney Evan Wolfson has said, "As long as the Boy Scouts' leaders are insisting on an exclusionary membership policy, the rest of us, especially public schools, parents, and donors, are going to dissociate ourselves from discrimination against our kids."
The Law Center said this decision, coupled with the Supreme Court's ruling less than two weeks ago allowing the state of Washington to discriminate in its scholarship program against a Christian college student who majored in theology, is evidence of a "disturbing anti-Christian trend in the federal courts."
"It suggests that the Supreme Court has taken sides in the culture war facing our nation," Thompson said.
In 2000, the Supreme Court affirmed by a 5-4 vote the Scouts' policy of excluding homosexuals from leadership.
The decision, Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, held the youth organization had a constitutionally based right to discriminate on the basis of "sexual orientation." James Dale was an Eagle Scout whose adult membership in the Boy Scouts was revoked when the organization learned that he was an avowed homosexual and homosexual-rights activist.
The organization, founded in 1910, has more than 2.5 million youth members and 1 million adult members.
I guess that would explain his 11th Commandment.
You're working very hard at trying to be miserable.
Fair enough. Private is private and we don't need money with strings attached.
May I suggest that state employees who support the Boy Scout send whatever contribution they would have may to the drive directly to the Boy Scouts and tell the payroll department why they are opting out of the payroll deduction program.
Polybius, Assistant Scoutmaster
Please Freepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent Connecticut ping list.
And in these confirmations, who controlled the Senate at the time?
You can be sure Kerry won't even nominate anyone you'd like to see on the bench.
Show 'em my motto!
Show me in the Constitution where the President is allowed to force through judges. I must have missed that part.
And if the President could force through someone, we'd then have a dictator, not a President of a Republic.
Show 'em my motto!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.