These people are despicable wastes of skin.
Considering this is the Ninth Circuit, the Scouts will lose this one. They can find another venue, probably at no greater cost. In short, the Scouts will survive. With any luck, the ACLU will not.
The ACLU supports the rights of NAMBLA while fighting against the Boy Scouts of America. It's sickening and ironic, boys are the victims of NAMBLA.
Why can't people just leave the Boy Scouts alone?
Any "judge" or "lawyer" that thinks that this agreement "violates the First Amendment’s ban on state-sponsored religion" has definitely molested too many little boys and done way too many recreational drugs.
"Go ahead, ACLU, make my day." - Chief Justice John Roberts
(This Supreme Court justice has been impersonated for the purpose of ticking off any DUmmies who might be having someone else read this to them.)
Judge Napoleon Jones. Dickens would have enjoyed that.
I once was a Boy Scout (roughly when the last of the dinosaurs died out), and if I were to come across an ACLU member--unlikely in this rural community, those types just don't exist here--there would be an unpleasant exchange of words.
When the ACLU launches a civil rights case, by law it is compensated for its services by the federal government -- the American taxpayers.
Thus, the ACLU is not only in the process of systematically destroying our civil rights, we are paying them to do so. Remove the compensation provision from the civil rights act and you defund the ACLU.
Having paid compensation, the gays/lesbians/atheistic will assume control and responsibility for the ongoing upkeep of the facilities.
The Boy Scouts can take the fees refunded to them and create a private, non-taxpayer supported facility that will be out of the reach of the ACLU.
The BSA will probably lose this. Then they will take it to the Supreme Court, where I suspect they'll find a more sympathetic audience.
Now then, why wouldn't the wonderful lawyer, afiliated with the ACLU, who brought this lawsuit have his name mentioned in this article? If he/she were in my community rest assured that his/her life would be a living hell henceforth. What I am saying is that the ACLU didn't bring this issue up to the courts, the guy next door did. And he should be ostracized in the community for the pathetic creature that he is......
by Wendy Cloyd, assistant editor
Group to face the American Civil Liberties Union and the iconoclastic 9th circuit to defend the right to use public land.
The Boy Scouts of America (BSA) will come face to face Tuesday with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — the same court that recently ruled parents have no say in their child's education once they enter the school building — in order to preserve their right to use land on which they have spent millions of dollars over several decades to develop.
The Scouts have operated and maintained Camp Balboa in a public-private partnership with the city of San Diego since 1915. The San Diego Youth Aquatic Center on Fiesta Island was an unused land fill before the Scouts developed it. Both facilities are open to the public on a first-come, first-served basis.
Five years ago, two sets of parents — one atheist, one homosexual — enlisted the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to sue the city of San Diego. As usual, the ACLU claimed the lease agreement between the city and the Scouts violated the separation of church and state because membership requires adherence to religious principles.
According to an article in Citizen magazine, San Diego ACLU Director Nancy Sasaki wrote an editorial explaining the reason for the lawsuit. "The Boy Scouts are an anachronism in these times of diversity and inclusiveness," she said. "And the Scouts show no signs of joining the progress the rest of society has made."
The ACLU demanded the Scouts be kicked off land it's used since World War II, spent millions of dollars to build and improve — at no cost to the city — and that it shares with at least 120 other nonprofit groups, including The Girl Scouts; The Salvation Army; The Boys and Girls Club; The Jewish Community Center; The San Diego Lesbian, Gay and Transgender Community Center; a Korean church and several Protestant churches
Judge Napoleon Jones with the U.S. District Court heard the case in 2003. He ruled in favor of the ACLU, stating that the partnership between the Scouts and the city of San Diego was a violation of the First Amendment. He determined the Scouts to be a religious organization because members generally take an oath that references God. "On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country," the oath states, "and to obey the Scout law, to help other people at all times, to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight."
Jordan Lorence, attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund, said the Scouts are being treated differently because of the message they espouse. "That's classic viewpoint discrimination," he told Citizen magazine. "This is about punishing the Boy Scouts and anybody who associates with them." Robert Bork, spokesman for the BSA, said despite the ACLU challenge, the Scouts are still using the properties.
"We're still operating under those leases," he said. "We have a basic agreement that we will continue to do so until such time that it is ultimately resolved." Regardless of Tuesday's outcome, Bork is confident the case will end up before the Supreme Court. "From our point of view, this is basically a case about whether or not the Boy Scouts have the same constitutional First Amendment rights to use public property as any other organization does," he said. "And the answer to that question ultimately, we believe, will be 'Yes' — whether it's here or at the Supreme Court."
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
To learn more about the Boy Scouts of America's fight to use public land, read the Citizen magazine article, "Voted Off The Island."
Will they be wearing their usual black hoods and eye cut-outs?