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


1 posted on 06/24/2010 12:25:09 PM PDT by mdittmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: mdittmar

I hope the city does have to eat that legal bill. Freedom of association still lives there in Philly...at least for now.


2 posted on 06/24/2010 12:27:03 PM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar
I guess the City of Brothers in Love will have to

SUCK IT UP!"

3 posted on 06/24/2010 12:29:28 PM PDT by Young Werther ("Quae cum ita sunt" Since these things are so!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar
The scouts can now ask the court to order the city to pay legal fees of about $860,000.

It's nice to know that the city is so awash in cash that we can afford to use our courts and solicitors wage nuisance law suits to make our sodomite City Solicitor and our useless mayor.

4 posted on 06/24/2010 12:32:00 PM PDT by End Times Sentinel (In Memory of my Dear Friend Henry Lee II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar
Jury says Philly can't evict Boy Scouts for anti-gay policy existing ... (fixed it)
5 posted on 06/24/2010 12:32:27 PM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar

Well, sometimes it seems evil doesn’t win. I was beginning to get discouraged.


6 posted on 06/24/2010 12:32:30 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local Communist or Socialist Party Chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar

They mention city-owned building a few times but fail to mention that the Scouts built the building at the city’s request and deeded it back to them with the right to rent it for $1 a year. Unfortunately they also gave the city the right to change the terms with one year’s notice and the city did just that.


7 posted on 06/24/2010 12:36:07 PM PDT by NonValueAdded ("The real death threat is their legislation" Rush Limbaugh, 3/25/10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar

This is great news too:)


8 posted on 06/24/2010 12:36:14 PM PDT by fatima (Free Hugs Today :))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar

Good. The queers can go stuff each other and leave the Scouts alone. I was a Boy Scout, First Class with a few merit badges. Some of the best days of my boyhood.


9 posted on 06/24/2010 12:37:50 PM PDT by thethirddegree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar

“While the good work of the Boy Scouts cannot be disputed, the city remains steadfast in its commitment to prevent its facilities from being used to disadvantage certain groups.”

Their logic is backwards. It is they who think they can legally disadvantage private groups of associated citizens; picking and choosing which citizens groups they will honor on equal terms and which ones they won’t.

There is no honest truth to any idea that the lease given the Boy Scouts is an act of promotion of, or support of the policies of the Boy Scouts.

In such matters, the government MUST be agnostic, neither actively promoting or actively suppressing the points of view of one group of citizens over another.

The city is free to offer the same terms to a youth organization that does not restrict its membership to homosexuals. It is not free to pick and choose between those that do and those that don’t.


10 posted on 06/24/2010 12:40:51 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar

“Mayor Nutter said...”


12 posted on 06/24/2010 12:54:44 PM PDT by beelzepug (This administration is a tagline-rich environment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar
Councilman Darrell L. Clarke, whose district includes the scouts' headquarters, was disappointed: "If in fact you have a policy that does not comply with the city's antidiscrimination policy, then you should not be allowed to be in a city-owned facility, period."

Unless, of course, the "antidiscrimination" policy is discriminatory!

13 posted on 06/24/2010 1:12:48 PM PDT by TheDon ("Citizen" of Kalifornia, USSA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar
"Under the ordinance that leased the property to the scouts, the city has the right to evict them without giving any reason at all, both sides have agreed. Asked if the city would take that step, Smith said, "The verdict was just issued today, and we'll be considering all of our options.""

This is worrisome.

14 posted on 06/24/2010 1:16:51 PM PDT by Think free or die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar; RonF; AppauledAtAppeasementConservat; Looking for Diogenes; Congressman Billybob; ...

Scout Victory Ping


17 posted on 06/24/2010 1:34:38 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar
The scouts can now ask the court to order the city to pay legal fees of about $860,000.

A good day for all. A very good day.

Mom of 2 Eagle Scouts.

21 posted on 06/25/2010 8:23:07 PM PDT by MarMema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar

If the city wants to save face at this point, perhaps it should agree to sell the building outright to the Scouts for $1.


22 posted on 06/26/2010 3:23:31 AM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar
My head is spinning?????
  1. Councilman Darrell L. Clarke, ... was disappointed:
    "If in fact you have a policy that does not comply with the city's antidiscrimination policy, then you should not be allowed to be in a city-owned facility, period."

  2. Under the ordinance that leased the property to the scouts, the city has the right to evict them without giving any reason at all, both sides have agreed.

Sooooooooo.
Per Philly pols the Boys Scouts can't 'discriminate' even though SCOTUS says they can.

BUT! Philly can 'discriminate' when leasing property (or anything) and they don't even have to give a reason why they ARE discriminating.

To quote Capt. John Joseph Yossarian:

"That's some Catch, that 'Catch-22."

24 posted on 06/26/2010 5:02:37 AM PDT by Condor51 (SAT CONG!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mdittmar

All Right!


25 posted on 06/26/2010 5:25:55 AM PDT by 2harddrive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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