An Oregon appeals court has ruled against a school district that allowed the Boy Scouts to recruit on school grounds during school hours because the Scouts discriminate on the basis of religion. The report noted:
The court said while all students have been required to listen to an introductory presentation, "only the students who meet a religious test may accept the invitation to join."That amounts to substantial evidence, the court said, that the district "subjects persons to differentiated treatment in a school activity on the ground of religion."
Now I'm sure we'll hear lots of screaming from the social conservatives on this one, but only because they're trying to have it both ways. The Boy Scouts rightly argued that as a private organization they have the right to choose their own membership and discriminate against both atheists and homosexuals. I strongly support their right to do so. But the other side of that coin is that private organizations that discriminate still fall under state and federal anti-discrimination legislation that says that the government cannot support such organizations (the specific limitations on that support vary from state to state).
So while they do have the right to discriminate, the fact that they do so may make them ineligible for government support that they would otherwise like to have. For example, the Pentagon has now agreed not to allow military bases to sponsor Scout troops. As a private organization, the Scouts still have the same access to those parts of military bases that are open to other private organizations have, but they cannot get actual sponsorship, which means official endorsement and funding. The bottom line is that they can't have it both ways. If they are a private organization, then they have no more demand on government endorsement or support than any other private organization.
- Log in to post comments
I am constantly amazed by the fact that this simple point is overlooked by all of the raging morons screaming about how the poor scouts are being mistreated. They can't have it both ways - what's so hard to grasp about that?
Do you want to discriminate based on religion, or keep your government backing? Choose one, and quit whining.
I've been told that the Scouts do receive public funding. Someone directed me to the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, on pages 462-463 it reads:
SEC. 410. GRANTS FOR YOUTH ORGANIZATIONS. (a) IN GENERAL. The Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, shall make grants to the Girl Scouts of the United States of America, the Boy Scouts of America, the National 4 H Council, and the National FFA Organization to establish pilot projects to expand the programs carried out by the organizations in rural areas and small towns (including, with respect to the National 4 H Council, activities provided for in Public Law 107 19 (115 Stat. 153)).
(b) FUNDING. Of the funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation, the Secretary shall make available $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, which shall remain available until expended.
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007. .
Am I reading this correctly?
Joe-
You appear to be reading it correctly. I don't know exactly what Federal law says about giving aid to organizations that discriminate on the basis of religion or sexuality, but there may be a problem there. The ACLU brought suit against the Pentagon for base sponsorships of Scout troops, and the Pentagon ultimately settled it and pulled such sponsorships. So there was no ruling in the case that I know of. There may well be grounds for a suit in this situation. Perhaps some of our legal expert readers can chime in here.
The discrimination problem in Scouting might benefit at the moment from what then-presidential advisor Daniel Patrick Moynihan called "a period of benign neglect." I wish people would quit punishing kids for actions they kids don't have anything to do with. . . .
I wonder what the policies are of the Oregon troop that was actually doing the recruiting in Oregon? I know that the only place that it might be inferred the Scouts inquire into religion is on the application form -- and it makes no such inquiry. I know of no Scout group that makes such an inquiry, with the possible exception of LDS Scouting (but I was registered with an LDS unit, and they never asked).
I also can't figure out how an organization that has a federal charter can be said not to get anything from the federal government (see 36 USC Sec. 30901). Perhaps Ed Brayton can explain it to me, but I was mysitified why Dale's side didn't argue that in the Dale case. Scouting is charged with a specific task under federal law -- and advancement of religion is not the task. (BTW, my recollection is that there are five places in the U.S. Code where there is special treatment given to Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts and other organizations.)
In any case, though the national folks at the moment don't like it, there are probably dozens of Scout units who will not inquire on religion, and thousands who who won't push it.
Scouting teaches fine values. Scouting is a great experience for kids. Scouting is a great national heritage. Punishing all Scouts for a narrow view that is contrary to what the Scout Handbook teaches probably isn't a good way to bring the organization around to its traditional, not-religiously-discriminatory values.
Mr. Darrell's comments are very much to the point. I was a Boy Scout more years ago than I like to remember. It was my way out of first Brooklyn and then the burbs into the wilds of the Catskills and the Adirondaks. Eventually worked summer jobs in the camps, became adult leader of Cubs and Scouts when I had children. No troop I was ever in, as a Scout or as a leader, asked a kid "are you gay?" or "Do you believe in god?" The Scouts I knew were the originators and ardent practicers of "don't ask, don't tell." Clearly, this might not apply to some troops organized by churches, but again, most church organized troops I came in contact with accepted kids not from the organizing faith. Most recently, my eldest son was in a troop organized by and run out of a Lutheran church. Throughout, he identified himself as a pagan, and claimed he worshiped Athena. Nobody bothered him. He became an Eagle Scout and moved on to spend two fantastic summers on the backcountry staff at Philmont [though by that time he had converted to Catholicism]. I was about as non-religious as you could get without wearing a tattoo saying "athiest" all the while I was a leader. Nobody ever bothered me about it either. And I was not the only non-religious leader by a long shot.
One of the things folks in the organization at the volunteer level learned real quick was that "national" had its little quirks and sent down occasional directives about all sorts of things. Some made sense and were taken seriously. Others did not and were routinely ignored. The organization is not nearly as monolithic in either belief or practice as some of its wingnut adherants like to pretend.
Sadly, much of the damage the Scouts suffer in terms of reputation of late is self-inflicted by zealot parents and the occasional zealot leader. My favorite example of some years ago, which made the national news, was some Cub Pack out in I think California that expelled two six year olds from Tiger Cubs for being atheists. No six year old, of course, has a religion. Kids that young have, or profess to have, the faith of their parents [or lack thereof in this case]. Wingnut parents made a big issue out of it, and the kids were sent packing. Telling a six year old he can't fly kites and visit the zoo and go on picnics with a Cub Pack because he's an atheist is the height of insanity. Happily, such incidents are extremely rare. Besides, where else would a good Christian want the children of atheists but in a Scout troop where [by their lights] the kids would be exposed to religious values? The expulsions made no sense on any grounds other than perverse small-minded zelotry.
None of which alters the fact that the Scouts established in court that they are a private voluntary membership organization [and so can discriminate if they wish on religious grounds against atheists and gays], and so they are, necessarily, not entitled to be treated as a "public" organization with special privileges as such --- good illustration, I think, of that old saying about "be careful what you ask for. You may get it."