ACLU vs. Boy Scouts

fpla83 · Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 4:45 am Post subject: ACLU vs. Boy Scouts

www.military.com/NewsCont...04,00.html

This is the best article on the subject I could find.

Will the ACLU leave the boy scouts alone already? We don't live in PC world, that's the fact. It will never become a PC world, if it ever does then I applaud Aldous Huxley for his foresight as we will surely be living in a Brave New World. The Boy Scouts is a private organization, it is their choice as to which values they choose to uphold. The fact is the Scouts do a great amount of good for communities and I find it disgusting and offensive that the ACLU is determined to ruin the organization. There is nothing illegal or wrong with the current relationship between the military and the scouts. You may not agree with the beliefs of the Boy Scouts however it is inconsequential, this is about basic rights provided to Americans under the constitution. They scouts are violating none.

jjacobs43 · Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:00 pm Post subject: ACLU vs. Boy Scouts

I have two points to your argument.

1: Why should my tax dollars go to support an organization like that?

and

2: Would you be making the same arguments if they didn't allow black people into their organization?

fpla83 · Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 6:54 pm Post subject: Re: ACLU vs. Boy Scouts

Your tax dollars do not support the boy scouts. Yes, I would make the same argument if they exluded blacks. They already exclude gays and there has been a Supreme Court ruling in favor of such a discriminatory practices as it is a private organization.

jjacobs43 · Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 7:22 pm Post subject: Re: ACLU vs. Boy Scouts

Quote:
Your tax dollars do not support the boy scouts.

I know the government doesn't totally fund the boy scouts but I was just referring to the article.

Quote:
He said the Pentagon spends $2 million every year to prepare the Virginia base for the jamboree, held once every four years. He said the Defense Department also makes annual allocations of $100,000 to support Boy Scout units on military bases overseas and $100,000 to improve Boy Scout properties, such as summer camps.

I would prefer if none of my money went to support an organization that wouldn't allow an Atheist such as myself to belong to it.

Quote:
Yes, I would make the same argument if they exluded blacks. They already exclude gays and there has been a Supreme Court ruling in favor of such a discriminatory practices as it is a private organization.

Can private organizations exclude blacks too? I think this opens up a whole can of worms that was discussed briefly in some other thread. What rights does a business or private organization have to deny service to people? I think that this sets a bad precedent and is a slippery slope to right back where we started from when blacks had to sit in the back of the bus. And as far as I'm concerned, the same rules should apply to homosexuals and Atheists. I just can't agree with the Supreme court on that ruling. With my sincerest apologies to all of the kids involved, I just have to side the ACLU on this. I would hope that some more tolerant private organization could step up and replace the good that comes out of the boy scouts.

Tessa3 · Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2004 9:38 pm Post subject: Kudos to the ACLU

I am grateful to the ACLU for their continued fight to end discrimination, even when their actions are in disfavor of the majority that would discriminate. The function of the courts is not to protect the majority opinions but to protect the rights of the minorities.

Niall001 · Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:30 am Post subject: Re: Kudos to the ACLU

Minorities, Majorities, its all bullshit.

You won't have equality until you stop grouping people and start treating people as equal individuals.

Let us agree, there is no one single reality. Not upon this stage, not in this world, all is in the mind... imagination is the only truth. Because it cannot be contradicted except by other imaginations - Richard Matheson

There are no conclusive indications by which waking life can be distinguished from sleep - Rene Descartes

jjacobs43 · Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:03 pm Post subject: Re: Kudos to the ACLU

Quote:
Minorities, Majorities, its all bullshit.
You won't have equality until you stop grouping people and start treating people as equal individuals.

Well, I believe that is exactly what the ACLU is trying to accomplish!

Personally, I think it's bullshit that the ACLU is made out to be the bad guy all of the time. They have absolutely no intention other than trying to make sure that EVERYBODY has equal rights. The Boy Scouts are the ones labeling people here.

Eric Hagelin · Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 3:19 pm Post subject: reply

So I wonder if they ACLU will ever come to the rescue of those people who label others, when they ultimately become a minority.

There are distinctions between people... distinctions between gender, skin color, sexuality, political persuasion, religious adherence, distinctions between their relative wealth or poverty, etc.

Making these distinctions is not a crime or injustice. The crimes and injustices do not originate in the distinction, and the solution to these problems is not to do away with distinctions and labels. Like-minded people tend to hang out together. People who have common ground (whether it is skin color, sexual preference, hobbies, religious views) will get together and form groups. This forum is a perfect example.

But doesn't this forum itself discriminate (and remove from participation) religious people who "proselytize"?

Uh-oh, he's a "proselytizer". Ban him. Or don't you believe the proselytizer has that "right" - and that the "freethinker" should obviously be free enough, and mature enough, to make up his or her own mind? Shouldn't EVERYBODY have equal rights, jjacobs43? Or is this public domain internet forum somehow more above, or elite?

(I could be jumping to conclusions. I thought I read somewhere about a guy getting banned for "proselytizing" or at least threatened with banning.) The mods would know.

The world is full of double-standards. No doubt many of you would get banned from various Christian forums for calling into question their beliefs.

An ordered society has to respect all, including reasonable traditions which exclude others.

The ACLU frequently goes overboard.

"...I beg of You to take away my freedom to displease You..."

~ St. Therese of Lisieux ~

jjacobs43 · Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 5:48 pm Post subject: Re: ACLU

Quote:
So I wonder if they ACLU will ever come to the rescue of those people who label others, when they ultimately become a minority.

Liberties are liberties whether they are in the minority or the majority. The ACLU will be there to defend whoever. It's not a some kind of assault against Christianity or some left wing attack group as many appear to believe. They are just standing up for EVERYBODY's liberties.

Quote:

There are distinctions between people... distinctions between gender, skin color, sexuality, political persuasion, religious adherence, distinctions between their relative wealth or poverty, etc.

Making these distinctions is not a crime or injustice. The crimes and injustices do not originate in the distinction, and the solution to these problems is not to do away with distinctions and labels. Like-minded people tend to hang out together. People who have common ground (whether it is skin color, sexual preference, hobbies, religious views) will get together and form groups. This forum is a perfect example.

Making these distinctions IS a crime in some situations. You can't make the distinction between black and white when deciding who to serve at a restaurant. The fact that like-minded people tend to hang out together is irrelevant.

As for this particular beef with the Boy Scouts. They have opened themselves up to it by taking advantage of tax payers money. If they want to use tax payer money, then they need to abide by the separation of church and state. Otherwise, they should get their own private financing for their activities.

Quote:
But doesn't this forum itself discriminate (and remove from participation) religious people who "proselytize"?

Uh-oh, he's a "proselytizer". Ban him. Or don't you believe the proselytizer has that "right" - and that the "freethinker" should obviously be free enough, and mature enough, to make up his or her own mind? Shouldn't EVERYBODY have equal rights, %%WORD240%C? Or is this public domain internet forum somehow more above, or elite?

(I could be jumping to conclusions. I thought I read somewhere about a guy getting banned for "proselytizing" or at least threatened with banning.) The mods would know.

I haven't been reading this forum for too long but I don't get the impression that anybody would be banned as long as they conducted themselves in a civil manner.

Quote:

The world is full of double-standards. No doubt many of you would get banned from various Christian forums for calling into question their beliefs.

An ordered society has to respect all, including reasonable traditions which exclude others.

The ACLU frequently goes overboard.

Well, the key word of your argument there is "reasonable". What's reasonable? I'm sure the ACLU can go overboard but I'm guessing we have very different thresholds of what we consider 'overboard'. I'm not saying that there are never occassions when people will need to be excluded from certain things. But there needs to be a 'just' and 'practical' reason for doing so.

While I appreciate the boy scouts right to operate as a private organization, I think they represent something that is very wrong with our society. So they certainly aren't going to get any sympathy from me when the ACLU forces them to adhere to the separation of church and state.

Eric Hagelin · Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:52 pm Post subject: reply

jjacobs43 types: "While I appreciate the boy scouts right to operate as a private organization, I think they represent something that is very wrong with our society."

Really? They represent something that is "very wrong with our society"?? What is it that you find so offensive about the Boy Scouts?

www.scouting.org/nav/enter.jsp?s=mc&c=mv

The ACLU claims the Boy Scouts "practice intolerance" (in reference to homosexuals).

Well, good for the Boy Scouts. Since their inception, they've stood up for traditional morals and values. More power to 'em, I say.

Yeah, these 10-year-olds are going to destroy everyone's civil liberties and bring about a new, dark age of intolerance and hate. Give me a break, please. The ACLU is on a witch-hunt. They always act with the impetus of 'eradication of Christianity from culture'.

The laws which enable the ACLU need to be repealed at the Congressional level. I think the ACLU represents "something very wrong with our society" - not the Boy Scouts.

If you don't approve of the Boy Scouts, don't participate. But leave them alone. They're not doing anything detrimental, they're a beneficial outfit, for crying out loud.

The only boy's group the liberal-left supports is NAMBLA. Go figure.

www.e-z.net/wtv/__bw-fed_...ip_Feb.htm
www.qrd.org/qrd/orgs/NAMB ...transcript

If you read that last link, be advised that NAMBLA was meeting in a public library. They can meet there, but the Boy Scouts can't... thanks to the ACLU. I ask you: Is this not backward? Is this not an outrage? If you even have to hesitate to make an answer, you have no sense of decency whatsoever.

"No significant segment of our society and no institution within it can exist in a vacuum or in total or absolute isolation from all the other parts, much less from government. Nor does the Constitution require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any." (Chief Justice Warren Burger. Lemon v. Kurtzman.)

The ACLU has a loooooooong history of hostility toward Christianity.

Finally:

clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/l....pl?100853

"...I beg of You to take away my freedom to displease You..."

~ St. Therese of Lisieux ~

jjacobs43 · Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 7:22 pm Post subject: Re: ACLU

Quote:

Really? They represent something that is "very wrong with our society"?? What is it that you find so offensive about the Boy Scouts?

I find the fact that they discriminate offensive. That's my personal opinion. You have your things...I have my things.

Quote:

Yeah, these 10-year-olds are going to destroy everyone's civil liberties and bring about a new, dark age of intolerance and hate. Give me a break, please. The ACLU is on a witch-hunt. They always act with the impetus of 'eradication of Christianity from culture'.

They are trying to eradicate Christianity from the state. That is all. If the Boy Scouts stayed private, it wouldn't be an issue. They'd still be intolerant, but the ACLU wouldn't have any legal stance against them.

Quote:

If you don't approve of the Boy Scouts, don't participate. But leave them alone. They're not doing anything detrimental, they're a beneficial outfit, for crying out loud.

I won't participate. And if I had any kids I would strongly discourage them from participating. The exclusion of homosexuals and non Christians is not the type of values I'd want to teach my children.

Quote:

The only boy's group the liberal-left supports is NAMBLA. Go figure.

I've never heard of NAMBLA before and if you think that the liberal left supports child molestation then you need to expand your horizons a bit. Obviously, if that's what the organization is for, they shouldn't be allowed to meet anywhere. That has nothing to do with the separation of church and state.

Quote:

The ACLU has a loooooooong history of hostility toward Christianity.

Well, I'd argue that the reason for this is because Christianity has a loooooooong history of intolerance and is asking for it.

janterry · Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 8:10 am Post subject: Re: reply

Just wanted to add that I find it very difficult to hear that someone would try to link (and that's what I think is happening) child molestation with gay men.

The logic is not just a leap, it is, as I've written elsewhere, inappropriate. The VAST majority of child perps (including those that target young boys) are heterosexual.

They are not gay.

We have done several meta-analyses and this holds up across studies and across methodologies.

And just for the record, I have a daughter - but if I had a son I would not allow them to join an organization that openly discrimminates against another group.

Edited by: janterry at: 12/4/04 9:43 am

Niall001 · Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 11:03 am Post subject: Re: reply

Describing a pedophile as either heterosexual or homosexual is pretty misleading.

Something that confuses the issue is that what is sometimes called pedophile is a label applied to a sexually mature man who engages in sexual relations with a sexually mature but emotionally immature boy, often called ephebophila. The APA and the law define pedophilia differently. What is considered ephebophila by many psychologists is considered pedophilia by the media.

For instance, in the pedophile-priests scandal in the U.S. most examples of abuse were examples of ephebophila. To be a true pedophile you have to be attracted to youth rather than sex.

Let us agree, there is no one single reality. Not upon this stage, not in this world, all is in the mind... imagination is the only truth. Because it cannot be contradicted except by other imaginations - Richard Matheson

There are no conclusive indications by which waking life can be distinguished from sleep - Rene Descartes

janterry · Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 12:43 pm Post subject: Re: reply

I think the question is important, to researchers, because when they describe the sexual predictions of pedophiles they are also trying to understand treatment interventions.

Niall001 · Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 1:41 pm Post subject: Re: reply

According to the APA definition, pedophiles are only attracted to pre-pubescents. It is their primary sexual orientation. Which is to say that pedophiles aren't attracted to a sex, but to a developmental stage. In the same way that 'normal' people may have preferences for redheads, asians, africans, blondes or short people, pedophiles may prefer certain kinds of child, but it is the child they are attracted to, not the child's sex.

THe Diagnostic criteria for Pedophilia is

A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.
Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.

In approx. 66% of cases, where a child has been abused by a pedophile, the pedophile was the child's parent. Makes sense when you think about it. Access being a key issue. So clearly, the majority of pedophiles are going to be hetrosexual in their 'normal' sexual activities. The thing is, what is that person thinking about when they're having sex. There are many pedophiles who don't molest children, though they may look at pictures, they might imagine having sex with children, and picture children when having sex. There are many non-pedophiles who molest children, though clearly they have pedophillic tendencies.

The Enjo kosai culture in Japan is commonly accepted there. In societies where it is normal to marry girls of about 13, it is common for men to be attracted to women of that age. Pedophilia is just a label. It doesn't exist. Sexuality is a very vague thing. Some research findings indicate that 25% of men are sexually attracted to children to some degree. But those people don't go about molesting kids.

Sorry this is probably all over the place. The point I'm trying to make is that sexuality isn't just black and white even if our practices are.
Some studies suggest that homophobia is a sign of latent homosexual tendencies. Its just unconscious. Whether someone's non-pedophillic activities are homosexual or hetrosexual is not really an important issue. Unfortunately, Its a part of sexuality.

Let us agree, there is no one single reality. Not upon this stage, not in this world, all is in the mind... imagination is the only truth. Because it cannot be contradicted except by other imaginations - Richard Matheson

There are no conclusive indications by which waking life can be distinguished from sleep - Rene Descartes


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT