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

Skip to comments.

San Francisco Bar Association Prohibits Judges from Participating in Boy Scouts
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | July 26, 2002 | Bob Egelko

Posted on 07/26/2002 2:36:26 PM PDT by Selmo

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:40:39 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

San Francisco's judges have become the first in the state to cut ties with the Boy Scouts because of the organization's refusal to admit gays and lesbians. A lawyer who sought the change said Thursday she hoped to take it statewide.


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


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: legal; scouts
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last
To: Jhoffa_
This is a sham decision intended to slap the face of the BSA because they refuse to let little kids be fondled in the woods by a queer scoutmaster. It's also an implicit insult to the intelligence of the reader.

Exactly.

21 posted on 07/26/2002 3:09:17 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Selmo
please al-queda, nuke san francisco for the good of the planet.
22 posted on 07/26/2002 3:12:32 PM PDT by Joe Boucher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Selmo
Git a rope!

When I was in Jr. High, bullies called me a fag when I wore my scout uniform. Now as an adult leader I am a racist, biggoted, homophobe when I put on my uniform.
23 posted on 07/26/2002 3:14:23 PM PDT by AdA$tra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
For a bunch of people who would never, ever dream of pedophelia, they sure make allot of noise about not being allowed to take young boys on camping trips don't they?
24 posted on 07/26/2002 3:16:02 PM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Looking for Diogenes
Since a number of religions deem practicing homosexuals sinners and therefor without repentance and a resolve to sin no more unfit for heaven and good standing in the religous group this is a religous test for public office. As such it is specifically banned in the US Constitution.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

25 posted on 07/26/2002 3:18:38 PM PDT by harpseal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
Everyday, the people in the SFO area come up with another ruling, edict, OR statement more irrational and moronic than the previous. It is just scary.

It almost is beginning to remind me of that old movie - 'Escape from New York.' The whole area was ruled by the homeless, perverts, crooked politicians, (aka Willie Brown) and criminals - just like what San Francisco has become. What a shame.

MISS SAN FRANCISCO

26 posted on 07/26/2002 3:22:15 PM PDT by stlrocket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Selmo
Absurdity, grown out of madness compounding madness.

See The Boy Scouts Of America & A Leftwing Agenda.

Needless to say, the San Francisco Bar does not set the standard for all lawyers!

William Flax

27 posted on 07/26/2002 3:22:46 PM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Selmo
Isn't this discrimination against heterosexuals?
28 posted on 07/26/2002 3:26:06 PM PDT by Hillarys Gate Cult
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult
Isn't this discrimination against heterosexuals?

Doesn't count - we hate them.

29 posted on 07/26/2002 3:27:11 PM PDT by Swanks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Selmo
Is there a way to make sure Michael Savage knows about this story?
30 posted on 07/26/2002 3:28:50 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
From the article: "This is a fundamental part of being a judicial officer . . . avoiding even the appearance of partiality at all times so that every litigant who appears in front of you is treated fairly and equally,"

Yeah...heh....sure.

31 posted on 07/26/2002 3:32:15 PM PDT by Jason_b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
he lives there, i'm sure he knows... i'm always afraid he's gonna die of a heart attack from one of these stories.
32 posted on 07/26/2002 3:33:00 PM PDT by goodieD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
And Rush!
33 posted on 07/26/2002 3:33:11 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Selmo
San Francisco's judges have become the first in the state to cut ties with the Boy Scouts because of the organization's refusal to admit gays and lesbians.

No big deal.
San Francisco's judges were likely ineligible under Boy Scout guidelines anyway.

34 posted on 07/26/2002 3:33:13 PM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
No big deal.
San Francisco's judges were likely ineligible under Boy Scout guidelines anyway.

hehehe. How true.

35 posted on 07/26/2002 3:42:33 PM PDT by Jagdgewehr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
For a bunch of people who would never, ever dream of pedophelia, they sure make allot of noise about not being allowed to take young boys on camping trips don't they?

Why the hell do they want to be around my sons? My son's scout troop is run by dads (real ones).

36 posted on 07/26/2002 3:43:54 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
San Francisco's judges were likely ineligible under Boy Scout guidelines anyway.

Homosexuals, atheists, girls, or a combination thereof?

37 posted on 07/26/2002 3:44:46 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: LouD
San Francisco Superior Court judges and commissioners adopted a policy July 11 saying they would not take part in any organization that "discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation by excluding members on the grounds that their sexual orientation renders them 'unclean,' 'immoral' or 'unfit.' "

This would rule out judges being orthodox Jews, Muslims, Hindus or various Christian denominations, all of whom have ritual objections to certain sexual orientations, practices and conditions. San Francisco has indeed made a clean sweep here - only libertine atheists need apply to the judiciary.

38 posted on 07/26/2002 3:45:17 PM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Selmo
Since the Boy Scouts do NOT claim that one's sexual orientation makes one "unclean" and "unfit", it seems that the Judges can continue in Scouting to the extent they wish.
39 posted on 07/26/2002 3:46:19 PM PDT by frodolives
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpseal
Since a number of religions deem practicing homosexuals sinners and therefor without repentance and a resolve to sin no more unfit for heaven and good standing in the religous group this is a religous test for public office. As such it is specifically banned in the US Constitution.

The California Supreme Court Code of Judicial Ethics, which all of this is based on, indicates that it does not include religious groups among the applicable organizations.

C. Membership in Organizations

A judge shall not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, national origin, or sexual orientation.

This Canon does not apply to membership in a religious organization or an official military organization of the United States. So long as membership does not violate Canon 4A, this Canon does not bar membership in a nonprofit youth organization.*

* "Nonprofit youth organization" is any nonprofit corporation or association, not organized for the private gain of any person, whose purposes are irrevocably dedicated to benefiting and serving the interests of minors and which maintains its nonprofit status in accordance with applicable state and federal tax laws.
Court Rules


40 posted on 07/26/2002 3:47:05 PM PDT by Looking for Diogenes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 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