Berkeley can boot Scouts, court says

Sacramento Bee ^ | Nov. 26, 02 | Claire Cooper

[churchillbuff]

The city is allowed to rescind the free berth at the marina because of the group's ban on gays.

SAN FRANCISCO -- The Sea Scouts are no longer entitled to a free berth at Berkeley's marina, an appeals court ruled Monday in a decision that lets the city enforce its policy of nondiscrimination toward homosexuals against an affiliate of the adamantly anti-gay Boy Scouts.

[Stone Mountain]

The Boy Scouts seem to always win the cases, but the governments (paid for by our tax dollars!) keep relentlessly taking the scouts to court.,

Actually, the Boy Scouts took the City of Berkeley to court...

[robertpaulsen]

So much for tolerance.

[Stone Mountain]

being a private enterprize, the Sea Scouts are perfectly in their rights now to expect payment when they assist AIDS-riddled old hippies across the Berkeley streets.

They are certainly free to ask. Is there an actualy point here I'm missing?

[GSWarrior]

The Sea Scouts are no longer entitled to a free berth at Berkeley's marina...in a decision that lets the city enforce its policy of nondiscrimination toward homosexuals against an affiliate of the adamantly anti-gay Boy Scouts

What kind of BS is this sentence? The Boy Scouts are adamantly anti-gay? Last I heard, they do not engage in witch hunts, do not award merit badges for queer-bashing, do not even ask prospective Scouts if they are homosexual.

Anyway, this Scout-bashing has little to do with the rights of a microscopic percentage of Scouts or Scout leaders who may be gay. The homosexuals are on a selfish, scorched-earth mission to prove to everyone that they are like the rest of us. That's all this is about. But they are not like the rest of us.

[Stone Mountain]

The criterion that the City of Berkeley is apparently using was stated in the article:

In the ruling, the state 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco said there's a difference between ordering groups to admit gay members, which would be unconstitutional, and extending fee waivers or other subsidies only to organizations that serve all people equally.

Do you disagree with this? Seems reasonable to me... as long as they use consistent standards to determine which groups get the waivers. Unless some other private group that discriminates in it's membership is getting waivers, the city is being consistent.

[The Electrician]

That actually would seem to be the key. Scrutiny of all deals between the city and various organizations are in order now, to ensure equal treatment under the law. My guess is that certain "politically correct" groups are getting subsidies, yet they have policies that would not meet the test that the city is requiring of the Sea Scouts.

[Stone Mountain]

I used to work in Berkeley. There is a large contingent of anti-white, anti-American, anti-gay Black Muslims. It would be interesting to see if they are getting any preferential treatment.

I work in Berkeley now - in fact, just a few blocks from the Marina! And yeah, if any of the groups you mentioned are getting financial consideration from the city, then there's a real problem. That's not the case as far as I know now though...

[Stone Mountain]

My guess is that certain "politically correct" groups are getting subsidies, yet they have policies that would not meet the test that the city is requiring of the Sea Scouts.

I'm not so sure that they are, but if so, I'm sure we'll be hearing about them very soon! This could certainly prove to be interesting if you are correct...

[Stone Mountain]

You may have a point, if and only if (little math lingo there) Berkeley uses no city rental property for the free use of homosexual, bisexual, whatever groups to demonstrate, gather, hang out, etc. Pretty sure I've read here several times, that is the case.

There may be groups that promote liberal ideas that meet, but the test is whether or not those groups would be open to all. For instance, if a Women's rights group refused to allow men to join their group, that would be unacceptable. But they still might allow a Women's rights group to meet on city property - the test aparently isn't what the group is promoting; it's what their membership requirements are. By my interpretation of this, even a KKK group could meet on city property as long as they allowed anyone to join in.

[Coleus]

The Scouts are under attack.

http://paganwiccan.about.com/library/weekly/aa111402spiralscouts.htm

http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/epaper/editions/tuesday/opinion_d39ddd9cb0d9716100da.html

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/4544322.htm

http://www.pnnonline.org/article.php?sid=756&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

http://www.austin360.com/aas/news/ap/ap_story.html/National/AP.V4344.AP-Boy-Scouts.html

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/news/021107d.asp

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200210\CUL20021030a.html


http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200210\CUL20021031b.html

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134564883_boyscout29m.html


http://people.aol.com/people/news/now/0,10958,364602,00.html

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/5372312p-6360508c.html

[Reactionary]

Great idea.

[ladtx]

So, does this mean that Berkeley is going to discriminate against the Boy Scouts because the Boy Scouts discriminate against homosexuals?

[Frohickey]

One Sea Scout vessel -- the Farallon -- remained at the marina, paying the annual fee of about $500 that most private parties pay. But a group of Scouts and their parents joined the Farallon's skipper in suing for breach of contract and violation of their constitutional rights.

S.S.S. Farallon
California
Mount Diablo Silverado Council
Sea Scout Ship Farallon (44)
Sea Scout Ship Farallon Inc.
P.O. Box 184
El Cerrito, California 94530
Skipper:
Gene Evans
Telephone: 510-448-8444

---

SSS Farallon I'm not sure if this is the scout ship in question, but this is what I found on the web.

[Dan Day]

You miss the point. If absolutely no other private group is getting any kind of assistance from Berkley, then this is completely kosher. OTOH, if the scouts were singled out from other "private" groups, then this is an outrage.

Why? Berkeley -- or any other city or institution or group -- should be free to decide whom they extend freebies to or not, based on whatever criteria they see fit.

Just as the Scouts are free to deny membership to whom they choose, Berkeley is free to deny benefits to whom they choose.

If the Organization of Left-handed gay monkey humpers or any other "right-thinking" club gets any form of subsidy or assistance from tax dollars, then the scouts deserve the same.

No, it's Berkeley's money, they get to decide who "deserves" it or not, even if they do choose to base it on leftist politically correct criteria.

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

I don't get it -why the hostility? The BSA went out of their way to proclaim themselves a private group (which they were entirely within their rights to do so). Having done that, I don't see why they should expect the City of Berkeley to pay for their docking fees, any more than the city should pay docking fees for any other yacht club that docks in the Marina.

The city was not paying the Scouts' docking fees. They were waiving the fees in exchange for rocks. I think the city should return all the rocks they've taken.

And what do you mean by saying the BSA "went out of their way to proclaim themselves a private group"? They are a private group. Always have been a private group. I don't think they had to go out of their way to proclaim the obvious. Sounds like you have an agenda.

[Stone Mountain]

The city was not paying the Scouts' docking fees. They were waiving the fees in exchange for rocks.

The city was clearly subsidizing the Scouts unless you think you can get dock fees for rocks anywhere else...

And what do you mean by saying the BSA "went out of their way to proclaim themselves a private group"? They are a private group. Always have been a private group. I don't think they had to go out of their way to proclaim the obvious. Sounds like you have an agenda.

Didn't mean anything by the "out of their way"comment other than that when the athiest/gay lawsuits came up, that the Scouts at the point eschewed the idea that they are a public organization and declared themselves private. Many people prior to that time (including myself) thought that the scouts were a public organization - wrongly, but it wasn't something I had given a lot of thought to, even when I was a scout. The athiest/gay suits were predicated on the idea that the Boy Scouts were a public organization. All I meant by that was that they emphasized that they were private. If you think I have an agenda, please state what you think it is instead of making implications...

[Stone Mountain]

Thanks - your answer was better than mine...

[VRWC_minion]

I don't see why they should expect the City of Berkeley to pay for their docking fees, any more than the city should pay docking fees for any other yacht club that docks in the Marina

I agree, so long as they don't give discounts to other organizations.