And speaking of censorship... Corporations Punish Boy Scouts

  • Thread starter Thread starter condan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

condan

Guest
**Corporations Punish Boy Scouts For Policy On Atheists/Homosexuals

***February 17, 2005 – *Many large corporations are prohibiting donations to the Boy Scouts of America over its policy of excluding homosexuals and atheists from the group.

Textron, Inc., Knight-Ridder, Levi Strauss, Inc., Wells Fargo and IBM are just a few organizations that refuse to support the Boy Scouts.

One writer to the Record-Bee in Lake County, California, even speculated that the IRS might one day revoke the Boy Scouts’ tax exempt status if it continues to ban atheists and homosexuals.

The Boy Scouts has been under attack for years for its policy of protecting boys from homosexuals and for its policy of only allowing boys who believe in God to become members.

To keep updated on the legal attacks against the Boy Scouts by homosexuals and atheists, access the Boy Scouts Legal Issues web site.

Read a commentary defending the Scouts: “The Anti-Scouting Witchhunt.”

traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2137
 
In the court cases against the Boy Scouts, they had to choose whether they wanted to be considered as a private organization or a public accomodation. Under the law, private organizations can discriminate in their membership, while public accomodations cannot (according to the state law in several states).

The Boy Scouts chose to be considered a private organization, and thereby retained their ability to discriminate against athiests and homosexuals. So why should they keep their tax-exempt status? Are all those exclusive country clubs tax-exempt?

The Boy Scouts made their choice in court. Now they need to own it.
 
I think that the Scouts should kiss the stupid tax-exmption goodbye and continue as a private organization. If they don’t, they would face mass exodus of kids whose parents will say, enough is enough.
40.png
Catholic2003:
In the court cases against the Boy Scouts, they had to choose whether they wanted to be considered as a private organization or a public accomodation. Under the law, private organizations can discriminate in their membership, while public accomodations cannot (according to the state law in several states).

The Boy Scouts chose to be considered a private organization, and thereby retained their ability to discriminate against athiests and homosexuals. So why should they keep their tax-exempt status? Are all those exclusive country clubs tax-exempt?

The Boy Scouts made their choice in court. Now they need to own it.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
In the court cases against the Boy Scouts, they had to choose whether they wanted to be considered as a private organization or a public accomodation. Under the law, private organizations can discriminate in their membership, while public accomodations cannot (according to the state law in several states).

The Boy Scouts chose to be considered a private organization, and thereby retained their ability to discriminate against athiests and homosexuals. So why should they keep their tax-exempt status? Are all those exclusive country clubs tax-exempt?

The Boy Scouts made their choice in court. Now they need to own it.
Click to expand...
The Boy Scouts is not exactly the same thing as a private country club, now is it? The Boy Scouts have provided a valuable service to boys worldwide since the turn of the last century. Just as an example, one of the qualifications that the U.S. Military Academy looks for in potential students is achievement of the Eagle rank. It signifies a well-rounded, balanced young man who embodies leadership, service and commitment to his God and country. Not bad things, right? So why would corporations want to punish the Boy Scouts simply because they take a courageous and very unpopular stand for child safety? A bit hipocritical, don’t you think, in light of the way the Catholic church has been pilloried for NOT taking this approach.

Further, there are many private organizations that benefit from the tax-exempt status. Catholic Charities comes quickly to mind.

The bottom line is that it is the future men of our country who suffer. Not much of a strategy, if you ask me.
 
It is an attempt to destroy/eliminate the Boy Scouts…or to force them to accept sin.
 
40.png
condan:
The Boy Scouts is not exactly the same thing as a private country club, now is it? The Boy Scouts have provided a valuable service to boys worldwide since the turn of the last century.
Click to expand...
But that valuable service is only provided to boys who meet the Boy Scout’s membership criteria. Private country clubs also provide valuable services to their members, e.g., nice golf courses. In both cases, non-members don’t seem to get much out of the equation, maybe a scrap of kindness thrown their way every now and then to appease the masses.

They seem pretty similar to me.

Are you suggesting that Catholic Charities only helps Catholics?
 
40.png
condan:
So why would corporations want to punish the Boy Scouts simply because they take a courageous and very unpopular stand for child safety? A bit hipocritical, don’t you think, in light of the way the Catholic church has been pilloried for NOT taking this approach.
Click to expand...
How exactly does prohibiting athiests from joining the Boy Scouts promote child safety?
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
In the court cases against the Boy Scouts, they had to choose whether they wanted to be considered as a private organization or a public accomodation. Under the law, private organizations can discriminate in their membership, while public accomodations cannot (according to the state law in several states).

The Boy Scouts chose to be considered a private organization, and thereby retained their ability to discriminate against athiests and homosexuals. So why should they keep their tax-exempt status? Are all those exclusive country clubs tax-exempt?

The Boy Scouts made their choice in court. Now they need to own it.
Click to expand...
Catholic you need to get acquainted with the IRS rules on exempt organizations. There is no requirement that they be non-discriminatory. There are some very specific rules and as long as the Boy Scouts do not run afoul of such regulations, their tax status is not in jeopardy even if they don’t want homosexuals sleeping in tents with their kids.

Now if you want to think about an organization that doesn’t deserve its tax exempt status as a CHURCH look at the Unitarians. They do not comply with most of the rules regarding churches.

Lisa N
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
In the court cases against the Boy Scouts, they had to choose whether they wanted to be considered as a private organization or a public accomodation. Under the law, private organizations can discriminate in their membership, while public accomodations cannot (according to the state law in several states).

The Boy Scouts chose to be considered a private organization, and thereby retained their ability to discriminate against athiests and homosexuals. So why should they keep their tax-exempt status? Are all those exclusive country clubs tax-exempt?

The Boy Scouts made their choice in court. Now they need to own it.
Click to expand...
The laws on ‘public accomodations’ have been tried to be used against the Boy Scouts for years by the homosexual lobby (aka ACLU). Guess what? It hasn’t worked. Why? Because that was not the intent of the law.
 
40.png
gilliam:
Guess what? It hasn’t worked. Why? Because that was not the intent of the law.
Click to expand...
It didn’t work because the Boy Scouts said that they were a private organization, not a public accomodation. All I’m saying is that now the Boy Scouts need to stop expecting the benefits that go along with being a public accomodation.

The Boy Scouts are a good organization. For that matter, so is my local country club. I just don’t see why my tax dollars should go to supporting private organizations whose main purpose is to provide benefits to those people they have decided to accept as members.
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
. I just don’t see why my tax dollars should go to supporting private organizations whose main purpose is to provide benefits to those people they have decided to accept as members.
Click to expand...
see:
goodturnforamerica.org/

Also, individuals are the largest single funding source for local Boy Scout councils, and government grants are a very small source of income for the Boy Scouts.
 
http://www.scouting.org/media/anniv...w.scouting.org/media/anniversary/art/top2.jpg "The only problem with the Boy Scouts
is there aren’t enough of them."—Will Rogers

http://www.scouting.org/media/anniversary/art/hpboyce.jpg

How Scouting Came to America Since 1910, the Scouting movement has been dedicated to service.

Guided by the ideals of the Scout Oath and Law, Scouts have come to the aid of their neighbors and communities in ways both large and small. Whether it’s planting victory gardens, promoting literacy or donor awareness, or coming to the aid of disasters victims, the Boy Scouts of America built a tradition of service that helped shape the nation.

On this 95th anniversary of the founding of the Boy Scouts of America, we salute the history of Scouting, and 95 years of Good Turns for America.

Features
goodturnforamerica.org scouting.org bsamuseum.org The Boy Scouts of Americahttp://www.scouting.org/media/anniversary/art/smlogo.gifscouting.org
 
In another thread somebody called for a boycott of Walmart, because their treatment of gays doesn’t fit his believes, and many here approved of it.

Now when some companies don’t want to support the boy scouts because their treatment of gays doesn’t fit those company’s believes, what exactly is the difference?

Why is one completely ok and to be supported, when the other is an act of “censorship”?

Isn’t there the same right for everybody?

Or just for those who are against gays?

Werner
 
I think the Boyscouts are fooling themselves if they think not accepting homosexuals will keep pedophiles out. My son is a Boyscout, and I was a Girl Scout. I love scouting.

I personally know two men who were molested during camping trips of the Boy Scouts when they were children. One of these men was molested over a long period of time by his leader. Neither of the molesters were out–of-the-closet homosexuals. They were both married men!!

Right now my son is only a Cub Scout so his camping trips include the whole family. I am honestly concerned about the future when he goes alone. That is why teaching him protective behaviors is important. I don’t feel any safer with the anti-homosexual rule.

In fact, I think my child would be safer with a declared homosexual who would probably watch himself or not necessarily be a pedophile. It is the sickos who scare me.
 
40.png
bapcathluth:
I think the Boyscouts are fooling themselves if they think not accepting homosexuals will keep pedophiles out. My son is a Boyscout, and I was a Girl Scout. I love scouting.

I personally know two men who were molested during camping trips of the Boy Scouts when they were children. One of these men was molested over a long period of time by his leader. Neither of the molesters were out–of-the-closet homosexuals. They were both married men!!

Right now my son is only a Cub Scout so his camping trips include the whole family. I am honestly concerned about the future when he goes alone. That is why teaching him protective behaviors is important. I don’t feel any safer with the anti-homosexual rule.

In fact, I think my child would be safer with a declared homosexual who would probably watch himself or not necessarily be a pedophile. It is the sickos who scare me.
Click to expand...
If your son is a Cub Scout, then you know the proactive steps that the BSA has taken in response to the agregious crime of child molestation by some of its leaders. For example, “two-deep” leadership is required. An adult may not sleep in a tent with the boys unless there is another non-related adult present. All leaders are required to go through specific training vis a vis child protection. Background checks are performed.

When was the last time you heard of a child molestation in the Boy Scouts?

75% of homosexuals report having sex with a minor. Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts are minors. Since homosexuals compromise only 2.8% of the population but commit nearly 40% of child sexual molestion including pedophelia and ephebophelia, you are truly unwise to prefer sending your son on an overnight camp-out at the Boy Scout (not Cub) level with a homosexual rather than my husband who has been a Cubmaster and Den Leader for 5 years. I honestly would never risk my children’s safety just to be politically correct.
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
But that valuable service is only provided to boys who meet the Boy Scout’s membership criteria. Private country clubs also provide valuable services to their members, e.g., nice golf courses. In both cases, non-members don’t seem to get much out of the equation, maybe a scrap of kindness thrown their way every now and then to appease the masses.

They seem pretty similar to me.

Are you suggesting that Catholic Charities only helps Catholics?
Click to expand...
It’s unfortunate that you see it that way because it is quite different. The BSA motto is that a Scout be reverent. That is pretty broad. Since athiests don’t meet that criteria, they are better suited in a different organization like the 4H club. As for homosexuals, it is a matter of safety, since 75% of all homosexuals report having sex with a minor.
 
40.png
Werner:
In another thread somebody called for a boycott of Walmart, because their treatment of gays doesn’t fit his believes, and many here approved of it.

Now when some companies don’t want to support the boy scouts because their treatment of gays doesn’t fit those company’s believes, what exactly is the difference?

Why is one completely ok and to be supported, when the other is an act of “censorship”?

Isn’t there the same right for everybody?

Or just for those who are against gays?

Werner
Click to expand...
I do not remeber the WalMart thread, but if the case is that one group is supporting homosexuality as normal and one is rejecting such things, then one would seem to be upholding the moral law and one rejecting the moral law.
 
40.png
fix:
I do not remeber the WalMart thread, but if the case is that one group is supporting homosexuality as normal and one is rejecting such things, then one would seem to be upholding the moral law and one rejecting the moral law.
Click to expand...
So stifling the ability of a person or group to air an idea or opinion is considered to be censorship only when that idea or opinion “upholds the moral law”?

That’s not the definition of censorship we used in my high school civics class.

But it does fit in very well with the theme around here that only “moral” people and groups have civil rights.
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
So stifling the ability of a person or group to air an idea or opinion is considered to be censorship only when that idea or opinion “upholds the moral law”?

That’s not the definition of censorship we used in my high school civics class.

But it does fit in very well with the theme around here that only “moral” people and groups have civil rights.
Click to expand...
The Boy Scout Oath:
On my honor, I will do my best to serve God and my Country, to obey the Scott law, to help other peope at all times, to keep myself physcially strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.
Click to expand...
How can a homosexual Scout leader help young boys keep themselves morally straight? How can an atheist help young boys serve God? These two particular groups are at odds with the very principles that the Scouts are founded on. If they want a gay unbeliever club, why don’ they go start their own?
 
40.png
Catholic2003:
So stifling the ability of a person or group to air an idea or opinion is considered to be censorship only when that idea or opinion “upholds the moral law”?

That’s not the definition of censorship we used in my high school civics class.

But it does fit in very well with the theme around here that only “moral” people and groups have civil rights.
Click to expand...
Censorship? I thought the poster was referring to a boycott?

How can a group of people protesting a corporation be censoring something when they have no power to censor?

No one has declared civil rights should be eliminated for anyone. Some are saying that authentic rights come from the creator. What right is there to promote evil?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top