Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Refusal to Subsidize Scouting Is Upheld
LA Times ^ | 3/10/6 | Maura Dolan

Posted on 03/10/2006 8:34:42 AM PST by Crackingham

California may refuse to provide subsidies to the Boy Scouts of America and other nonprofit groups that fail to comply with government antidiscrimination policies, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday. The state high court's decision gives cities and government agencies the ability to impose antidiscrimination conditions on any group that receives a public benefit. The ruling was one of a handful across the country in which courts have permitted government agencies to exclude the Boy Scouts from programs because the Scouts bar gays and atheists.

In a ruling written by Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, the court upheld a decision by the city of Berkeley to end a decades-long tradition of providing free berthing at a city marina to the Sea Scouts, an affiliate of the Boy Scouts.

The Sea Scouts argued that it had never discriminated and complained that the city was violating its 1st Amendment rights to free speech and association.

But the court said the group's refusal to pledge to comply with the city's antidiscrimination policy justified Berkeley's action.

"A government entity may constitutionally require a recipient of funding or subsidy to provide written, unambiguous assurances of compliance" with an antidiscrimination policy, Werdegar wrote. The requirement does not violate free speech rights because "to condition a public benefit on assurances of nondiscrimination is not to compel advocacy of a viewpoint," the court said.

The case attracted widespread interest. Groups weighing in the litigation on behalf of the Sea Scouts included the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the National Catholic Committee on Scouting and the National Club Assn.

Supporting Berkeley were the League of California Cities and California Assn. of Counties, the Anti-Defamation League, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and three foundations of the American Civil Liberties Union.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: aclu; adl; boyscouts; california; girlscouts; scouting; seascouts
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 03/10/2006 8:34:46 AM PST by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
California Supreme Court Ignores Constitutional Rights of Berkeley Sea Scouts

IRVING, TX, March 9, -- Boy Scouts of America is dismayed by the decision of the California Supreme Court in the Berkeley Sea Scouts lawsuit against the City of Berkeley. The Court chose to ignore United States Supreme Court precedent and denied the Sea Scouts its First Amendment rights of free speech and association. Read more...

2 posted on 03/10/2006 8:39:48 AM PST by MassMinuteman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
This will not hold up when it gets to the Supreme Court.

The Boy Scouts were chartered by an act of Congress, if memory serves.

A Pox on Berkely and all who live there.

3 posted on 03/10/2006 8:39:52 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine (DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy Valentine
But, does this charter mandate that state/local gov't must provide services free of charge?

Anyone know the answer? I don't.

4 posted on 03/10/2006 8:44:45 AM PST by mancogasuki (Live Free Or Die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Initial thought: We don't need yer stinkin' subsidy.


5 posted on 03/10/2006 8:46:14 AM PST by newgeezer (a fundamentalist, regarding the Holy Bible AND the Constitution. Words mean things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Once again, California shows itself to be one of the most moronic, useless states in the union. And before anyone attacks me for saying that, I live in California and am a native to this vile state. What a sad place this has become where lies rule the day and immorality is celebrated. California has easily become the most vapid and pointless state in the union.

The Boy Scouts provide a positive role model and a place for young boys to feel like they belong. It has helped keep many young boys out of gangs and has equipped them with important life skills. So I guess it's more important to California that we protect the feelings of gays then that we protect young boys increasingly vulnerable to gangs and drugs. This is the problem with the gay rights movement. It's all about them, to hell with what's good for everyone else. Never has their been a more narcisstic bunch of complainers and prima donnas then this. "Accept me! I demand it of you!" Why don't people just learn to accept that sometimes in life there are just places where you're not welcome, and an organization involving the rearing of young boys with proper moral values has no place for sexually predatory homosexual leaders? Is it so hard to accept in life that there are just simply places where you're not welcome? Get over it.

Anyway, good job California. Weaken an important organization that instills values and hard work in young boys in a world so lacking in such messages for our youth. Meanwhile, use my tax dollars to subsidize graffati taggers and call it "art." Once again my state utterly embarrasses me. I've got to accelerate my 5 year plan to get out of this hell hole.


6 posted on 03/10/2006 8:49:28 AM PST by MikeA (Rigged polls are what the news media uses to measure impact of their falsified anti-Bush reporting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy Valentine

The case would have to go up on certiorari and I'd bet a month's pay that the Sup. Ct. will not accept the case.


7 posted on 03/10/2006 8:49:33 AM PST by middie (ath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Once again, in the name of fighting discrimination, government practices discrimination. They say, "Oh, this is different - we are discriminating against discriminators, so it's not really discrimination." But they are doing EXACTLY what the Scouts are doing. The Scouts are discriminating against gays because they think homosexuality is morally offensive; Berkeley is discriminating against the Scouts because they think the Scouts anti-gay rule is morally offensive. I really don't see any difference. Oh, there's one - the Scouts are a private, voluntary organization; the city of Berkeley is a public entity. So what we have is a public, supposedly neutral entity, attempting to force its beliefs onto a private, voluntary entity, and doing it in the name of non-discrimination. It is laughable.


8 posted on 03/10/2006 8:52:19 AM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

The Boy Scouts should take a page from Hillsdale College and accept no government subsidies. I think that an aggressive P.R. campaign would yield the difference from private donors with no strings attached.


9 posted on 03/10/2006 8:53:15 AM PST by Inwoodian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

subsidy from government is inapropriate in any form.


10 posted on 03/10/2006 8:53:15 AM PST by misterrob (Islam is a hate crime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: middie

The Scouts will be better off without government connections and their mandates.


11 posted on 03/10/2006 8:54:06 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (BTUs are my Beat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Californicate is angry that the BOY Scouts wont allow homo scout leaders to prey on young boys.I couldnt allow my son to join knowing he would be fresh meat for bottom feeders.


12 posted on 03/10/2006 8:54:44 AM PST by xarmydog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeA
The Boy Scouts provide a positive role model and a place for young boys to feel like they belong.

Not the little gay ones.

(Devil's advocate)

13 posted on 03/10/2006 8:59:28 AM PST by aligncare (Watergate killed journalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: aligncare

"Not the little gay ones."

Don't ask, don't tell! Anyway, most grow out of it at that age.


14 posted on 03/10/2006 9:00:32 AM PST by MikeA (Rigged polls are what the news media uses to measure impact of their falsified anti-Bush reporting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
Oh, there's one - the Scouts are a private, voluntary organization; the city of Berkeley is a public entity. So what we have is a public, supposedly neutral entity, attempting to force its beliefs onto a private, voluntary entity, and doing it in the name of non-discrimination.

Actually, the Scouts aren't being forced to do anything. The court is saying that if they want to have benefits provided to them by a neutral public entity, the Scouts have to be neutral themselves. This is the flip side to the U.S. Supreme Court decision agreeing with the Scouts that they are a private membership organization. It works to allow them to exclude homosexuals and atheists if they wish, but also means that they don't have the automatic right to free public services.
15 posted on 03/10/2006 9:03:02 AM PST by drjimmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: misterrob
Growing up in the city, I probably would not have been exposed to the Boy Scouts, if they had not had their meetings in my public school. So what's wrong with that?
16 posted on 03/10/2006 9:13:07 AM PST by aligncare (Watergate killed journalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MassMinuteman

California Supreme Court - hate group!!


17 posted on 03/10/2006 9:15:27 AM PST by airborne (Satan's greatest trick was convincing people he doesn't exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

There's really nothing new here. Federal and state money always comes with strings attached. One of the reasons that I support the Boy Scouts financially is so that they do not need federal or state money, or any other money, for that matter, that comes with strings attached.


18 posted on 03/10/2006 9:17:33 AM PST by NCjim (The more I use Windows, the more I love UNIX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drjimmy
but also means that they don't have the automatic right to free public services

Local government belongs to local community. Boy Scouts as an 'expression' of local community should be accommodated in public schools...got a problem with that, then start the local chapter of the Gay Scouts who will ALSO meet at the public school.

19 posted on 03/10/2006 9:21:05 AM PST by aligncare (Watergate killed journalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
"We don't need yer stinkin' subsidy"

Yep and I tell you who is really going to lose on this . The local governments who have been given free of charge things like swimming pools (city of San Diego, sea walls ( City of Berkeley) and countless other things. I think that the Scout should sue the cities for breach of contract and demand compensation for the fair market value of these things. You can't have it both ways. You join into an agreement with the Scouts and you change the rules you should pay.
20 posted on 03/10/2006 9:23:29 AM PST by reagandemo (The battle is near are you ready for the sacrifice?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson