Boy Scouts under attack … again!

Today, the ACLJ has again represented you and your interests by filing our major brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Here’s the crux of the situation:

With the help of the ACLU, Mr. Eugene Winkler and other taxpayers brought a lawsuit against the military for their support of the National Scout Jamboree, held every four years.

(It is important to note that the military has provided service and support for this national event since 1937.  Furthermore, Congress passed the Jamboree statute in 1972 to formally recognize the military’s role in the Jamboree.)

The plaintiffs argued that the Jamboree statute – and others – were laws ”respecting an establishment of religion” in violation of the First Amendment …

… since the Boy Scouts’ oath contains an affirmation to God.

The District Court agreed.

As this case makes its way to the appeals court, the ACLJ is ready to continue fighting for religious freedom in America! 

Bearing the signatures of 88 members of the House and Senate, our brief contends that – among other things – the Jamboree statute was written by Congress to help the military pursue its own recruiting and public relations interests through involvement with private organizations …

not to promote the Boy Scouts of America’s religious beliefs.

This is just another blatant attempt by the ACLU and others to destroy the Boy Scouts of America – because it is part of the scouts’ oath to affirm their belief in God.

The Boy Scouts Jamboree is a time-honored national tradition … we cannot allow it to be destroyed to advance the liberal cause of the ACLU and others!

The ACLJ will continue to fight this unconstitutional ruling and will keep you updated on our progress in the days to come.

American Center for Law and Justice
P.O. Box 90555, Washington, D.C. 20090-0555
Phone: (800) 296-4529

Error: Unable to create directory wp-content/uploads/2024/05. Is its parent directory writable by the server?

About waynem

As a Minnesota based photographer and artist I have been greatly influenced by the Upper Midwest. I focus my skills and energies on portraits, landscapes, cityscapes, architectural and fine art work. My best work comes from images first painted in my mind. I mull over a prospective image for weeks or months, seeing it from different angles and perspectives, then finally deciding what to capture. The result is images that deeply touch people's emotions and powerfully evoke memories and dreams. My images are used commercially by companies and organizations ranging from Financial Services firms, mom and pop Ice Cream shops and The Basilica of St Mary to communicate their shared vision and values. Book and magazine publishers have featured my images on their covers. My photographs also grace and enhance the decor of many fine homes.
This entry was posted in Activism, Current Affairs, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Boy Scouts under attack … again!

  1. Clarke Green says:

    Over the years the BSA has gained access, cooperation and goodwill from many governmental entities: schools, municipalities and the military. The cooperation has benefited both. Scouts and Scouters are energetic community minded volunteers that have tremendous potential for good.
    But in order to exclude those that the BSA considers unacceptable we assumed the mantle of religion. Instead of allowing members to settle these questions in their own minds and hearts we have told them what they must think.
    Religious entities have limited access to public resources because these resources are intended for all without qualification of their adherence to a religious tradition.
    If we cannot practice nondiscriminatory access then we should not receive nondiscriminatory access.

  2. Wayne M says:

    Non-discrimination is not the greatest good. Truth, rightness and doing what is honorable is a higher good.
    I hope that you in your life discriminate on a regular basis. You chose to not do things that are harmful or dangerous.
    While homosexuality has as religious component, you can certainly argue against homosexuality on a purely community health basis. The lifestyle and the sexual practices are unhealthy. This is a fact.
    So, excluding homosexual leaders is not a religious issue, it is a reasonable health and safety issue.
    You have raised “nondiscrimination” up to the point of being an inappropriate idol. I would recommend we put truth first.

  3. Clarke Green says:

    My intention was to express that since we discriminate based on religious principles, as we deny atheists membership, that there is little choice in the matter for judges who must obey the constitutional prohibition on establishment of religion, free speech and association. The government properly denies us special access and support because we discriminate on the basis of religion.
    I agree that individuals have the right and moral imperative to make decisions for themselves concerning truth. Groups of individuals have similar rights. So my argument is not about who can do what it is why we make the choices that we do.
    I think that a healthy way of looking at the world is finding common ground. What you call truth and I call truth will overlap, however slightly, and we will be in agreement. It is not important to me to influence anyone to share my conception of the world, It is exciting to discover shared concepts and work together for good.
    Discriminating based on a narrowly defined set of standards does us more harm than good. We ultimately decide what the scout oath and law mean in our own minds and hearts no matter what the organization dictates, part of scouting is discovering this.
    If the ban on gays was elementally based on health and safety we would have a similar ban all people with epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, HIV positive, diabetic, heart conditions, and any number of conditions that would occasionally render them physically unstable or remotely communicable on a campout. The ban on gays is a judgment that homosexuality is immoral.
    Your suggestion that I idolize anti-discrimination is kindly intended. Buddhists have a term for idolization; attachment. The more we attach ourselves to a particular point of view or way of thinking or object the more we suffer. I attempt to hold these things lightly and not let them cloud the central intention to end suffering.
    Thank you for your kind words, be well and happy
    Visit my BLOG

Comments are closed.