0
   

Voting Values or Keeping us Safe from Boy Scouts

 
 
Foxfyre
 
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 10:26 am
Ever wonder why the middle of the country is so red after election day? Well, in my opinion, the following is one of the big reasons. At some point, where do we stop the insanity and start being reasonable about some of this stuff? Ignore the values of middle America at your peril I think.

Quote:
Then one day his kid's Wolf Pack gets denied a permit to hold a party in a public park.

And thus do blue folks see red.


Keeping us safe from Boy Scouts
We certainly don't want the military mixing with good kids
06:43 PM CST on Friday, November 19, 2004
By JAMES LILEKS

Move over, OBL -- our new national threat comes from the BSA. They're a strange, religiously oriented group that's stated purposes ought to make your blood run as cold as chilled mercury. We've had remarkable success in recent years keeping them from undermining American power, thanks to the U.S. military. But now it's official, and what was once a shadowy war is out in the open.

The Pentagon has informed all bases not to sponsor the Boy Scouts of America.

Not that they ever have, mind you. Says the Associated Press: "The Pentagon said it has long had a rule against sponsorship of non-federal organizations and denied the rule had been violated. But it agreed to send a message to posts worldwide warning them not to sponsor Boy Scout troops or other such groups."

So we're still in danger. It's possible that in some distant base in a flat, empty state, some rogue officer might horribly commingle Boy Scouts and his official duties -- say, showing up in uniform to teach the Webelos the Pledge of Allegiance.

Why is this bad? Simple: The Scouts make you swear an oath that mentions the Big Guy. Here's the marrow-curdling vow in its entirety, brazenly posted on a Web site they use to communicate with other cells. Ready?

"On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight."

Whew. Strong stuff. The God part is bad enough, but the "morally straight" line is the big cherry on the cake. But remember, please: The Scouts are a private organization; they have the right to believe what they wish, even if you disagree.

And we're talking about the Boy Scouts, for heaven's sake, not some Junior Klan League noted for torchlight parades through Jewish neighborhoods. Who has the time to worry whether the Scouts are meeting in the local library? Isn't there some real, actual evil handy you could sue?

Since the last election, we've been told that right-wing theoreticians concoct divisive social issues in secret underground labs and release them into the body politic every election cycle, clouding the minds of red-state sheep. But the Boy Scouts haven't been suing anyone for the right to hold compulsory God and country rallies in schools across the land. The

American Civil Liberties Union is forcing the issue.

The people barging into the courts are the ones obsessed that Boy Scouts might be using public school rooms after hours to learn knot tying. And Scouts drive on public roads to get there, too. They even breathe air whose quality is mandated by federal regulations that take public money to enforce. Theocratic parasites, that's what they are. What's next? A 900-foot statue of Jesus on the Mall in Washington?

This may be the face of the hard, foamy left, but it's not the view of your average Democrat. Throwing the Scouts into an electrified pen that keeps them from contaminating government is not high on the list of your average Democratic concerns.

Ask one. Why are you a Democrat? "Because I believe in good jobs, health care for all, more diplomacy and strong public schools."
And you oppose the Boy Scouts, right? "What? No. My kid's a scout."
But the ACLU has practically declared them a hate group. Got the Pentagon to promise no official connections. And you'll still vote Democratic? "Count on it, friend."

Then one day his kid's Wolf Pack gets denied a permit to hold a party in a public park.

And thus do blue folks see red.

James Lileks writes for the Minneapolis Star Tribune. His e-mail address is [email protected].
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/112004dnedilileks.5013.html
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,797 • Replies: 51
No top replies

 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 11:03 am
Foxfyre,

Do you understand the issue that the ACLU is raising about the Boy Scouts?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 11:04 am
Yes, I think so ebrown. What is your take on it?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 11:14 am
Lileks is a Democrat and exceptionally bright Smile

(He voted for Bush).
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:20 pm
Re: Voting Values or Keeping us Safe from Boy Scouts
Foxfyre wrote:
Ever wonder why the middle of the country is so red after election day?


I don't wonder at all, especially as I read these forums and see evidence of it every day. A good many Bush voters were appallingly misinformed and voted based on fear and prejuduce rather than facts. Of course, we get the gubmint we deserve. BTW how long will we (I live in a blue county) Blues have to subsidize you red slackers? I don't have the stat to back me up but I would guess that the heavy blue areas of the country produce at least 60-70% of the GDP.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:26 pm
The issue is whether a organization that is "public", or "sponsored" or "supported" by the government is allowed to have institutional policy that promotes one religion over another or breaks anti-discrimination laws.

As the article notes. The Boy Scouts is an organization that requires a loyalty oath to "God" and excludes homosexuals.

The Pentagon is a government organization.

This combination clearly raises First Amendment issues.

Nowhere has the ACLU come even close to calling the Scouts a hate group.

If you want to debate the issues, it is fine.

But this article is another example of one who completely avoids the issue to make a small-minded attack using meaningless labels.

If you want to debate this issue, I am all for it. But it would be nice to see a reasoned position based on the issues rather than blind partisan attacks.

(JustWonders <<sigh>>, the political party of the author has absolutely nothing to do with anything. There isn't much in this article to demostrate his intelligence.)
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:29 pm
Harper, I've been meaning to ask. Are you still planning on running? How's the campaign going? Is your sig line going to be your signature campaign slogan?
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:33 pm
Running for what?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:35 pm
Mr. Brown - sorry if I offended you by pointing out Mr. Lileks party affiliation. But, he is bright. Bright enough to know that this current brouhaha over the Boy Scouts isn't going to play well in either the red OR the blue states.

By the way, I'm pretty sure that officials of the Boy Scouts are on record as saying that it's okay with them if potential scouts substitute any word they want to, in place of "God" in the oath.

For instance, they could swear an allegiance to "Allah", or "nature", or whatever.

No, I don't have a link. If it's important, I suppose I could look it up.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:38 pm
Harper - I thought you once said you were thinking of running for public office? Just wondered how that was going.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:38 pm
JustWonders,

Do you understand the issue?

Our forefathers were wise enough to establish a Bill of Rights that was designed to protect minority groups against majority politics.

Don't you think that is a good thing?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:39 pm
Since I became aware of this (= Pentagon sponsoring Boy Scouts), I've noticed that Boy Scouts in the USA are very different to e.g. those followers of Baden-Powell in Europe: in Germany, for instance, the Boy Scouts are reputated for giving excellent advice for conscientious objectors.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:44 pm
Mr. Brown - I don't think the case of the Boy Scouts is infringing in any way on anyone's "rights".

But...it's the ACLU. That just about says it all as far as I'm concerned.
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:52 pm
JW, you asked how the campaign was going, I haven't filed yet, I am thinking of running for President in 2008 instead. Of course, I am a comic. So don't take evrything I say verbatim.
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:52 pm
JustWonders wrote:
Mr. Brown - I don't think the case of the Boy Scouts is infringing in any way on anyone's "rights".

But...it's the ACLU. That just about says it all as far as I'm concerned.


Wow!
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 12:56 pm
Ah - I see you found it Smile
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 01:02 pm
I didn't remember saying that here. I have sickos who stalk me on the internet, I was thinking that may be the case but I guess not.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 01:11 pm
JustWonders,

I don't think your hatred of the ACLU is based on reason.

Assuming that you agree that the Bill of Rights (which is there to protect minority interests against majority rule) is a good thing, the ACLU has pretty much held to their role of defending it.

The ACLU has often defended religious groups, including the right of Christian groups to proselytize at work and rent schools for services after school hours.

I have not always agreed with them.

But as someone who at times has opinions that are not shared by the majority, I sure appreciate the role they play.
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 02:04 pm
ebrown, don't expect any reasoned discussion from JW. His posts usually consist of snide remarks and non sequiturs.
0 Replies
 
Idaho
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Nov, 2004 02:20 pm
Quote:
Assuming that you agree that the Bill of Rights (which is there to protect minority interests against majority rule) is a good thing, the ACLU has pretty much held to their role of defending it.



The ACLU has, in general, tried to turn "Freedom Of Religion" into "Freedom FROM Religion" thereby assaulting the Bill or Rights rather than defending it. Certainly, many things they have done have been in defense of the Bill of Rights, but they are mostly strangely silent when the freedom on religious people is under fire.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Voting Values or Keeping us Safe from Boy Scouts
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/27/2024 at 12:00:54