SUPREME COURT RULING
Dave Hultberg (dave.hultberg@PAONLINE.COM)
Thu, 9 Dec 1993 00:16:52 -0500
Rick Busdiecker <rfb@CMU.EDU> writes:
R> I definitely agree. I note in reading the material relating to this
R> decision that the ruling includes racial discrimination in the same
R> category with the other forms of discrimination that BSA could
R> practice if it chose to do so, even though they are illegal other
R> situations. It also seems to recognize the policy in question for
R> what it is, religious discrimination.
Where did you read anything about racial discrimination in relation to the
Elliot Welsh case? I have been reading the stories in the newspapers,
watched it on the local and national news and also watched reports on CNN.
All that I have heard only relates to the BSA's right to retain its policy
on agnostics and atheists. Your comments on racial discrimination are just
a strawman that you brought up. IMHO comparing BSA's religious policy to
racial discrimination is not a valid analogy.
R> I think that the history of BSA's policies concerning racial
R> discrimination gives some reason to think that the organization will
R> continue to advance past prejudice to realize that the current
R> practices are just as unnecessarily hurtful and the justifications
R> just as ridiculous.
If enough people agree with your point of view, the BSA might revise its
in the future. As a private organization that too is its right. I think
it is wrong to attempt to force private organizations to admit anyone who
wishes to join. Should the VFW or American Legion be forced to admit draft
dodgers if they now decide for some warped reason that they want to join?
Yours in Scouting,
firstname.lastname@example.org ASM Troop 196, Keystone Area Council
And a good old Bobwhite too NE-VI-34
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City