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

Skip to comments.

Scouts unbowed by Berkeley bullies
Orange County Times ^ | Feb. 28, 2003 | Harold Johnson

Posted on 02/28/2003 2:36:31 PM PST by laureldrive

Edited on 04/14/2004 10:05:53 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

We think of the frontiers of freedom as being patrolled by the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. But these days, the Boy Scouts of America and affiliated groups also stand guard. In courtrooms across the country, they're resisting a domestic strain of tyranny - the totalitarian impulse to police thought and enforce a government-sanctioned orthodoxy on social and cultural issues.The Scouts are loathed by many self-styled progressives for transmitting a code of commitment, stressing God and country, that was supposed to be marginalized by now. But they're not giving in to bureaucratic bullies who try to force them to shed "outmoded" beliefs on matters of sex and social values. Lovers of liberty - even those who might disagree with Scouting's principles - should toast their tenacity for the First Amendment and the right not to be PC.This controversy was supposed to have been settled by the U.S. Supreme Court three years ago. In Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, a five-justice majority said that as a private, belief-based organization, the Scouts are free to craft their own membership rules; in particular, government can't order them to admit homosexuals as leaders. It follows that they're also within their rights to require that members profess a belief in God.But an alarming number of local and state officials refused to listen. In 2001, for instance, District of Columbia officials ordered the local Scouts to readmit two gays as adult leaders and pay $100,000 in damages. This decree was overturned by an appeals court, which noted that D.C. should take another look at Dale.Most of the current government assaults on the Scouts take the form of indirect coercion. There's shunning, as in San Francisco, where local judges are now barred from participating in Scouting. There's stigmatizing, as Connecticut and Portland, Ore., have attempted by excluding the Scouts from the charities that public employees may support through payroll deduction.There's also selective denial of public benefits. Berkeley leads the way by singling out the Sea Scouts for a fee to use the city's marina. After being permitted free use for 50 years, the Sea Scouts in 1998 were suddenly hit with a charge of more than $500 per month. No other nonprofit is required to pay to berth at the marina. The fee is imposed explicitly because of the Sea Scouts' affiliation with the Boy Scouts.High school teacher Eugene Evans, skipper of the Berkeley Sea Scouts' ship, pays the fee out of his pocket, so he can no longer cover membership costs for teenagers from poorer neighborhoods. Some have had to drop out.Unfortunately, a California court of appeal upheld Berkeley's punitive policy in November. The Sea Scouts have now asked the state Supreme Court to take the case. They cite the constitutional rule against "viewpoint discrimination" in the public sector. In other words, if Berkeley decides to offer free berthing to nonprofits - which it has done - it can't pick and choose recipients based on their beliefs or the beliefs of those they're associated with.Several recent "graduates" of the Berkeley Sea Scouts are now Marines stationed in the Persian Gulf. One of these young leathernecks is a plaintiff in the lawsuit against Berkeley's anti-Scout policy. All are following in a long tradition of Sea Scouts stepping forward in the nation's hours of need. More than 100,000 Sea Scouts volunteered after Pearl Harbor. Admiral Chester Nimitz reportedly said that the Sea Scouts were crucial to the Navy's ability to regroup after that disaster. But if Berkeley officials feel any remorse at targeting such a worthy group, they haven't revealed it.Today, the Boy Scouts' and Sea Scouts' fight is for the survival of a free and robust private sector, a sphere where all may choose their beliefs and affiliations without preclearance, editing or censorship by the state, and without fear of official discrimination or reprisal. For defending this basic principle of a free society, the Scouts deserve a hearty salute.


(Excerpt) Read more at 2.ocregister.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; US: California
KEYWORDS: berkeley; boyscouts; bsa; bsalist; firstamendment; seascouts
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 241-243 next last
To: madg
According to Gallup, more than three-quarters of the American population feel that gays should not suffer employment discrimination.

Not sure what context this came up in, so maybe I'm off the mark here, but let me point out that Scoutmasters, etc., are not employees, they are unpaid volunteers and are thus not covered under anti-discrimination laws that cover employment.

101 posted on 03/02/2003 6:32:59 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: madg
Unlike being drunk in public, being a gay person in public is not a crime.

Being drunk in public isn't a crime. Nor is being an alcoholic. Exhibiting the kinds of behavior that alcoholics and drunks often do while under the influence (puke, stumble around and insult people, start fighs etc.) is, however. Tell you what. Being an alcoholic will get you tossed out of the BSA quicker than being gay.

102 posted on 03/02/2003 6:53:46 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

Comment #103 Removed by Moderator

Comment #104 Removed by Moderator

To: madg
You can draw a BIG FAT LINE here, madg. Your gay agenda stops with the kiddies. You worry about YOU. Leave the children alone.
105 posted on 03/03/2003 11:25:41 AM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

Comment #106 Removed by Moderator

To: madg
Hey...watch it!
107 posted on 03/03/2003 11:37:01 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: madg
It very much follows the premise, madg. Gays can't produce children and they should BUTT OUT (no pun intended) of issues dealing with children. The non sequitur is your implication that this has anything to do with gay rights. This is about parental rights. Gays acting as gays can't be parents. Worry yourself with jobs, housing, health....whatever...but CHILDREN are none of your business.

And how DARE any government discriminate against parents who want good, moral examples to lead their children in scouts.

108 posted on 03/03/2003 11:48:43 AM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: madg
That was a long list of malarky you posted filled with many illogical and deceptive statements. Most of which are irrelevent to the argument here and mere prohomo crap.

For example: Scouts never allowed All boys into it. Only those subscribing to its beliefs.

Municipal policies ARE government policies. Did it take you long to get this confused or were you born that way?

Any policy which is required for membership is a DISCRIMINATORY policy. But the point of this policy is to foster morality ergo no queers or atheists.

How many fees of $7 does $500 a month cover? Since you are a liberal I will have to tell you the answer. 71 and change. That was a particularly dumb comment meant to call the Scout leader a liar.

The discriminatory policy of the marina will eventually be overthrown by a court which actually understands law. This means a non-california court obviously.

Patriotism and the willingness to serve our country is only irrelevent to the depraved scum and its allies who have joined forces to try and destroy those not utterly Godless and anti-American. We see which side you are on. You would apparently prefer that should a Pearl Harbor happen again (and it did 9/11) your allies could use the Sea Scouts to agitate against America rather than fight FOR it.
109 posted on 03/03/2003 11:53:07 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit ( Its time to trap some RATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Comment #110 Removed by Moderator

Comment #111 Removed by Moderator

To: madg
Gay activists in Berkeley probably represent the Right Wing there. They may be the sanest people in that collection of nuts and fruits.
112 posted on 03/03/2003 12:00:37 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit ( Its time to trap some RATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: madg
I suppose that every church in Berkeley has to renounce God since it would be "discriminatory" to do otherwise? And synagogues have to allow Al Queda members access? The NAACP must allow KKK members? Cats mix with Dogs.
113 posted on 03/03/2003 12:15:03 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit ( Its time to trap some RATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

Comment #114 Removed by Moderator

To: madg
The New Jersey Supreme Court. ROTFLMAO.
115 posted on 03/03/2003 12:20:37 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit ( Its time to trap some RATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
And how DARE any government discriminate against parents who want good, moral examples to lead their children in scouts.

Do you honestly think that if James Dale had been living with a girl that he would have been drummed out of the Boy Scouts? All too often the definition of 'morality' depends on what suits the agenda of the person passing judgement.

116 posted on 03/03/2003 12:31:55 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: madg
It is still open to "All boys" who live up to its code of conduct. And believe in God. That has not changed. This is not about boys allowed to join but the right to keep the homos away from them. Does the Bizzaro City Council have the right to tell them that atheists can't be excluded as members?

It was you who tried to distinguish between municipal policies and government policies. Not me.

Municipalities are not allowed to discriminate based on religious belief as Bizarro does in this case.

You can argue with the guy who pays their dues not me. You just tried to make him out to be a liar and were called on it.

The marina has a discriminatory pricing policy based on religious conviction. It will be overturned.

These concepts are not unrelated though you may try and pretend they are. Those opposed to the BSA are the same dimbulbs opposed to the war against Saddam, hate the military, hate Bush,hate capitalism, hate America. Those for the BSA are the same as the patriots who want to kick Saddam out, fight our enemies (foreign and domestic), hate Clinton and love America. It really isn't hard to comprehend.

Those attacking the BSA booed them at the DemocRATic Convention probably some of the very same people. They would boo the flag and spit on the military just as happily.
117 posted on 03/03/2003 12:35:19 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit ( Its time to trap some RATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: madg
Can they discriminate against pornographers, felons, alcoholics, polygamists, prostitutes, profanity users, liars, cheaters, etc...... and still gain a berth? Of course they can. IT IS BEHAVIOR DISCRIMINATION and any and all good parents must do it all the time!!!!!

Civil societies have always discriminated between right and wrong, good and bad, sexual behavior too.

The idea that the city claims behavior discrimination is equal to race or ethnic discrimination is what's unconstitutional. LIFE is all about behavior discrimination. Especially life involving kids. It starts from the beginning: Brush your teeth; eat right; be polite; don't hit your sister; buckle your seatbelt; etc..... Denying SS a berth is NOT equal treatment. It is not about gay rights/discrimination. It is about parental rights and it's the city that is violating the constitution.

118 posted on 03/03/2003 12:42:19 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Do you honestly think that if James Dale had been living with a girl that he would have been drummed out of the Boy Scouts?

If he were an avowed fornicator, you bet! See, heterosexuals have the good taste to understand that immorality is not something to flaunt in front of children. Those who don't have no business being leaders to children anywhere.

119 posted on 03/03/2003 12:44:48 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

Comment #120 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 241-243 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