align-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcamerachatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-crosscrosseditfacebookglobegoogleimagesinstagramlocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartwitteryahoo

Re: [atheists-36] 'Boy Scouts of America' Discrimination Against Gays, Transgender and Atheists

From: Daniel S.
Sent on: Saturday, April 13, 2013 1:12 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Death Pooky <[address removed]>
To: atheists-36 <[address removed]>
Sent: Fri, Apr 12,[masked]:10 am
Subject: Re: [atheists-36] 'Boy Scouts of America' Discrimination Against Gays, Transgender and Atheists

  Jack, thank you for forwarding another interesting article, I appreciate you keeping us up to date on topics!

    I don't know that the scouts will remain intact regardless of the decision they make on this issue: they have already lost funding from groups that disagree with the policy but they stand to lose a lot more from the religious organizations that support them if they change it.  I do support much of what scouting does, and what it has taught my boys (despite my feelings on their religious nature and their policy on gays). As a leader I've had the chance to observe a lot of boys learning to be great leaders themselves,  and I've been able to counter unethical messages stated (I've never heard the issue of homosexuality discussed at any meetings at any pack or troop).  Seriously, Every parent should be doing this for their children for any activity they are involved in, that's called parenting.

   I'm torn on whether I agree with California's stand to try and force Scouting's hand...I know that the scouting policy is detrimental but scouting is on it's way to come to that conclusion.   On the other hand, if California enacts this legislation, can it be used to remove the tax-exempt status of churches which teach homophobia and hatred of atheists?  I would not be against that. 
Due to bitter experience most of the Founding Fathers were very much for the separation of church and state.  They did not want one entity to dominate the other so, knowing that the power to tax is the power to destroy, they exempted churches from paying taxes while also forbidding government support of religion, although a few states held out for a while.  Churches are presently not allowed to officially support political candidates if they want to maintain tax exempt status, in part because this is a way they might dominate government by saying, in effect, "God doesn't want you to vote for candidate A."  Organizations which are not churches, on the other hand, received no special consideration in this matter from the men who wrote our Constitution.  Therefore, I would think, the state has greater latitude in requiring certain behavior of them in order to achieve tax exempt status.  That, of course, doesn't speak to the wisdom, one way or another, of lawfully requiring something an organization might soon do voluntarily if left alone.  --Dan S.

I would appreciate all of the group's thoughts on this.  I may be too close to be rational about it, but I see so much positive in group is perfect.

Death Pooky

On Apr 12, 2013, at 8:30 AM, Jack Maurice <[address removed]> wrote:

California bill would eliminate tax breaks to punish Boy Scouts for excluding gays
Published April 09, 2013
Associated Press
SAN FRANCISCO – California lawmakers are considering taking some tax exemptions away from youth groups that do not accept gay, transgender or atheist members — a move intended to pressure the Boy Scouts of America to lift its ban on gay Scouts and troop leaders.
Some cities have withdrawn free rent and other subsidies from the Boy Scouts over the years, but legislation introduced by state Sen. Ricardo Lara would make California the first state to target the Scouts for its anti-gay policy.
The Long Beach Democrat's bill, SB 323, is scheduled for its first committee hearing on Wednesday.
"Our state values the important role that youth groups play in the empowerment of our next generation; this is demonstrated by rewarding organizations with tax exemptions supported financially by all Californians," Lara said. "SB 323 seeks to end the unfortunate discriminatory and outdated practices by certain youth groups."
Deron Smith, a spokesman for the Boy Scouts of America, told The Associated Press the organization was preparing a response to the proposal.
The legislation would deny tax-exempt status to nonprofit youth groups that discriminate on the basis of gender identity, race, sexual orientation, nationality, religion or religious affiliation.
As a result, it would require those organizations to pay corporate taxes on donations, membership dues, camp fees and other sources of income, and to obtain sellers permits and pay sales taxes on food, beverages and homemade items sold at fundraisers.
Churches that sponsor Boy Scouts troops would not lose their underlying tax-exempt status, but an array of nonprofits, ranging from the Young Men's Christian Association and Pop Warner football to the American Youth Soccer Association and 4-H clubs would have their tax returns and membership policies scrutinized by the state Franchise Tax Board if the bill becomes law, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analysts Office.
Also known as the Youth Equality Act, the bill requires a two-thirds vote from both houses of the Legislature and the signature of Gov. Jerry Brown to become law.
Legal aid groups that represent religious conservatives have cautioned the Senate Governance and Finance Committee that the measure conflicts with a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the right of private groups such as the Boy Scouts to exclude gays and lesbians from serving as adult leaders.
"SB 323's primary purpose is to penalize BSA based on its constitutionally protected membership policy and the values that underlie it," lawyers for the Arizona-based Alliance Defending Freedom wrote in a letter to lawmakers last week. "This type of targeted punishment of a group based on how it exercises its associational and free speech rights violates the First Amendment."
The Legislative Analyst's Office, however, has assured the Legislature it has authority to decide which organizations qualify for tax breaks.
An analysis of the bill points to a 2006 ruling in which the California Supreme Court said the city of Berkeley, Calif., could end its half-century-old practice of giving a nautical-themed offshoot of the Boy Scouts free rent at the city marina because of its gay ban.

This message was sent by Jack Maurice ([address removed]) from Orlando Freethinkers & Humanists.
To learn more about Jack Maurice, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe from special announcements from your Organizer(s), click here

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]

Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Death Pooky ([address removed]) from Orlando Freethinkers & Humanists.
To learn more about Death Pooky, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy