Scout Decision Going To Supreme Court
Posted on July 11, 2006
Via WND
A decision by the California Supreme Court that ended a half century of free use of the Berkeley, Calif., marina by the Boy Scouts of America is being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Pacific Legal Foundation announced today.
Although Berkeley allows nonprofit groups free use of the city’s marina, it prohibits the Berkeley Sea Scouts from participating in this program, because the Sea Scouts are affiliated with the Boy Scouts of America, which official excludes avowed homosexuals and atheists from being adult leaders of the boys enrolled in the century-old youth organization.
Although Berkeley has never identified a single exclusionary act by the Sea Scouts, it is barring the group from its marina program for nonprofits solely because of their ties with the Boy Scouts.
In March, the California Supreme Court upheld Berkeley’s policy of denying the Sea Scouts access to the berthing program for nonprofits. The Pacific Legal Foundation is representing the skipper of the Berkeley Sea Scout program.
“Berkeley is penalizing the Sea Scouts for exercising their First Amendment right of association in ways that city officials don’t like,” said PLF attorney Harold Johnson, co-counsel in the case. “May government punish you, or fine you, or subject you to second class treatment if you don’t pass a politically correct litmus test? That’s the question raised by this case. It’s a question that deserves to be heard by the United States Supreme Court.”
Indeed it will be interesting to hear what the current Supreme Court think on this one.
Trackback URL
Comments
2 Responses to “Scout Decision Going To Supreme Court”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
This comment is aimed more at Gribbit’s post, but for obvious reasons I have to put it here. Since it’s more or less on the same topic, I hope you don’t mind that I place it under this post.
There are many contemporary things to which one could compare Orwell’s 1984: The NSA’s phone record spying, the NSA’s financial record spying, pretty much anything the NSA has done in the last couple of years. But honestly, Berkeley not allowing a potentially discriminatory group access to a public marina? That is Orwellian?
If the Boy Scouts insist upon barring homosexuals, atheists, or anyone else for that matter, then the government should cut all ties with them. I haven’t read up on the Berkeley case all that much, but I think the question lies in whether or not the Sea Scouts are affiliated closely enough with the Boy Scouts. I really, really hope you can see the difference between supporting tolerance and supporting intolerance, but from what you wrote, I don’t know that you can.
Jay, I’m about to thank you for the second time today, believe it or not. Thanks for showing some restraint with your post on the subject. This really is an interesting constitutional question, and I can actually understand both sides of the argument. It’ll be an interesting one to follow.
I don’t mind you posting a response on this post. I expected it. I also expected this type of response after reading Gribbit’s post. I see where the leftys are coming from in their comparisons of the NSA to Orwellian thought. I also see where Gribbit is coming from. Trying to force your beliefs on someone else in order for them to have the same benefits as others is Orwellian. I don’t care how intolerant the beliefs are, America is supposed to be about freedom.