Posted on 02/15/2002 6:50:19 AM PST by DoSomethingAboutIt
Libertarians in Santa Barbara, California have scored a victory for freedom of association by helping to nullify a resolution that censured the local Boy Scouts chapter.
On November 14, county supervisors approved a statute forbidding the government from discriminating against private organizations -- even if that group has "incorrect membership requirements," said Santa Barbara LP Secretary Robert Bakhaus.
"Even the U.S. Supreme Court had said the Boy Scouts have the right to associate, and make their own internal rules as they choose," he said. "If LPers could not lead in such a case as local government censuring the Boy Scouts, who would?"
The new statute invalidated a resolution adopted in March by a 3-2 vote, which censured the Boy Scouts for refusing to allow gay men to serve as scoutmasters.
County commissioners said the Boy Scout's policy violated the country's anti-discrimination law. The censure would have allowed county officials to prevent Scouts from using local camp grounds, leasing property from the city, or passing out leaflets on school grounds.
However, the Boy Scouts of America said the gay lifestyle violated the organization's oath, which requires members to be "morally straight." It won a U.S Supreme court decision in June 2000, which affirmed its right to decide who could be a Boy Scout.
Bakhaus said Libertarians support the right of the Boy Scouts to set their own membership requirements without government interference -- even if some Libertarians personally oppose those requirements.
"Even bigots have rights," he said. "Private organizations [should have] the right to make their own membership and leadership rules."
After the commission passed its resolution in March, "libertarian sympathizer" Michael Warnken and local LP members collected 20,000 signatures to put an initiative on the ballot to overturn it.
Libertarians helped drum up publicity for the campaign by sending letters to the editors of local papers, appearing at meetings and rallies, and speaking out on local television shows, said Bakhaus.
A number of conservative Republicans also joined the effort, which shows that small organizations "can't afford to be shy about having allies," he said.
"[Our LP affiliate is] too small to abolish taxation or achieve other radical reforms outright. We must first develop our clout by helping enforce the current good laws limiting government, while rallying better liberals and conservatives to uphold the best American traditions of freedom," he said.
However, the coalition ran into opposition from the county attorney's office, which filed a suit to stop the petitioning.
The attorney claimed the initiative language was "vague," and that only a statute or regulation -- not a resolution -- was subject to invalidation by initiative.
In response, activists changed the language of the measure meet state initiative requirements, and hired their own attorney to defend them from legal attacks, said Bakhaus.
With the initiative back on track and a large public turn-out at the commission's November meeting, county commissioners decided to nullify the anti-Boy Scout resolution, said Bakhaus.
"[It] was approved as law without a vote of the people, thanks in part to a large public showing -- but mostly by the fears of an electoral backlash if it went to a vote," he said.
Most importantly, Libertarians learned valuable lessons from the experience, said Bakhaus.
"The [Santa Barbara LP] learned that a countywide petition drive is not outside the bounds of doability," he said. "We also learned that a 1% investment ratio can be leveraged into victory, if that investment consists of extensive knowledge and experience about the intricacies of real politics."
The left doesn't like the Scouts. The left doesn't like Flynt.
Neither sees the point: When the will of the majority is used to violate the rights of others in pursuit of morality, you empower your opponent to limit your own rights.
The left sees discrimination as immoral. The right sees pornography as immoral. Both hand the government a big stick. Soon enough, government is staring at you. And he's holding the stick you gave him.
Principled defense of free association rights is not a wrong reason.
Correction: The right doesn't like Flynt.
Sorry for the typo.
Democrats think that they can force their personal beliefs on everyone (just like forcing the boyscouts to accept gay leaders). Libertarians think that they can deprive everyone of any kind of standards, whatsoever (creating chaos). True conservatives see that through communities, and groups (like the boy scouts) we can share morals and standards and function as our founders intended.
Whats 'bigoted' about it?
And the Libertarians call the Boy Scouts bigots. Boundless hypocrisy.
They won't answer the question. I already tried. I don't think they have an answer. Expect to be ignored, or be called names, just don't expect a logical reply.
I don't think NOW is too fond of him either.
Glad you feel that way about our boyscouts. Is this a common Libertarian opinion you hold?
YOU are over the line, and acting like a slimeball. Retract.
If not 'needing another reason' is the criteria for being 'the right reason', then by your definition, we too have 'the right reason'. Principled defense of free association rights needs no additional reasons to be legitimate. It stands on its own.
To bad the libertarians do not support moral values.
Prohibition of initiation of force or fraud is a moral value. It is always immoral to initiate force or fraud. This is an absolute moral value.
Say what you like about us, but it cannot be said that we hold no moral values. Our entire philosophy is based upon one.
1. False. Tenants and employees may discriminate as much as they like "in housing and employment."
2. Do you support the enactment of these laws?
You are over the line.
What an "interesting" philosophy.
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.