Greetings from your friendly, neighborhood, TERRORIST!

"Tom S." writes:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "C J Campbell"
said:
....
ACLU's attack on the Boy Scouts is legendary. Apparently ACLU does not
believe in freedom of association, either, if it involves groups that it
does not like.

ACLU attempted to prevent the Boy Scouts from discriminating against
people. Hardly an attack.

Except the Boy Scouts is a private organization.

That wasn't decided UNTIL the courts ruled when the ACLU brought the
lawsuit; you can hardly fault the ACLU for arguing its side of a case
(much of which was based on the fact that many government agencies
sponsor BSA units. Note that I'm not talking about schools allowing BSA
units to meet; there were, and still are, lots of public schools and
other government agencies that own & operate BSA units. The ACLU
is suing to remove this government sponsorship).

---
Merlyn LeRoy

In article , Brian
Westley wrote:

ACLU attempted to prevent the Boy Scouts from discriminating against
people. Hardly an attack.

Except the Boy Scouts is a private organization.

That wasn't decided UNTIL the courts ruled when the ACLU brought the
lawsuit;

It was already known that the BSA is a private organization.

Perhaps it wasn't legally determined until the case, but the BSA
being a private organization falls into the duh category.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

"Brian Westley" wrote in message
. ..
"Tom S." writes:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "C J Campbell"
said:
...
ACLU's attack on the Boy Scouts is legendary. Apparently ACLU does not
believe in freedom of association, either, if it involves groups that
it
does not like.

ACLU attempted to prevent the Boy Scouts from discriminating against
people. Hardly an attack.

Except the Boy Scouts is a private organization.

That wasn't decided UNTIL the courts ruled when the ACLU brought the
lawsuit; you can hardly fault the ACLU for arguing its side of a case
(much of which was based on the fact that many government agencies
sponsor BSA units. Note that I'm not talking about schools allowing BSA
units to meet; there were, and still are, lots of public schools and
other government agencies that own & operate BSA units.

How does an organization "own" a BSA unit?

The ACLU
is suing to remove this government sponsorship).

---
Merlyn LeRoy

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
...

How does an organization "own" a BSA unit?


It is a term commonly used among Scouters. Every unit is chartered by some
other organization, such as church, civic club, school, or even a business.
Chartered organizations are given some guidelines and rules they must
follow, but otherwise the unit 'belongs' to the chartered organizations.
Within these guidelines, the chartering organization has wide latitude in
how the unit is run. So, the unit is literally 'owned' by the chartering
organization, like a McDonalds franchise is 'owned' by the franchisee.

Each chartered organization has a charter representative on the local
district, if the local council is divided into districts. This district
committee may also have several 'at large' members. The district committee
organizes larger events and sets policies for the district. Each district
committee member gets one vote. Councils are similarly organized, and they
have representatives on the National Committee.

Since the vast majority of BSA units are owned by churches, these churches
basically run BSA and set all policies. These churches have threatened to
pull out of BSA if courts force policies inimical to the churches' beliefs
on the organization, which would basically end the Boy Scouts as we know it.
BSA would lose almost all of its funding and something like 80% of its
members.

It is widely believed by the churches that BSA shields them from
anti-discrimination attacks on themselves. They think that if BSA goes, they
are next -- that they will not even be able to determine their own
doctrines. I have heard various church leaders say that BSA is a lightning
rod that distracts attacks on their religious beliefs from themselves.

ACLU, not to protect freedom of speech (notice they never take
the case of conservatives/free market types at colleges that have speech
codes) but to maintain their propaganda outlets.


The ACLU frequently takes the side of conservative and other groups. Free
speech is free speech, as long as it's respectful of others' constitutional
rights.

As for the Boy Scouts, if they had the work ethic of the Girl Scouts, they
wouldn't be in this fix. They take money from civic charities so they must
abide by nondiscrimination rules. If they earned their own funds like the
girls they wouldn't have to.

By the way, note too that the Communist Party USA endorses Kerry
http://www.cpusa.org

No, the party makes clear that it does not endorse candidates.

And Fox news has no respect for you, and less for journalistic ethics than CBS
does.

http://web.morons.org/article.jsp?sectionid=1&id=5607

And Fox news has no respect for you, and less for journalistic ethics
than CBS does.

Does anyone with any sensibility watch Fox "news" - other than for amusement
of course?

Does anyone with any sensibility watch Fox "news" - other than for
amusement of course?

When given the choice between Dan Rather and Fox?

Dang, that's pretty much a toss-up...

I'll stick to NPR, thanks.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article MHT8d.190485$MQ5.15096@attbi_s52,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Does anyone with any sensibility watch Fox "news" - other than for
amusement of course?

When given the choice between Dan Rather and Fox?

Dang, that's pretty much a toss-up...

I'll stick to NPR, thanks.



Or a choice between ANY CBS "news" program and Fox Nesew?

"John Harlow" wrote

Does anyone with any sensibility watch Fox "news" - other than for amusement
of course?

Dunno whether my fairly infrequent posts to this NG have resulted in
folks labeling me "sensible", or otherwise. But my $0.02 says Fox
News is the only game in town for anyone looking for balanced coverage
from TV news.

I just watched "OutFoxed", a "documentary" video produced by
MoveOn.org whose subtitle is "Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism".
Their examples of right-wing bias at FNC were so pathetic as to render
me a bigger Fox News advocate than ever. Here are a few examples:

o They showed numerous clips of FNC's Sean Hannity saying "X days left
before Bush/Cheney are reelected". First off, Hannity is one half of a
Conservative/Liberal talk show patterned after CNN's "Crossfire". He's
SUPPOSED to be conservative. The liberal half of the show, Allan
Colmes, often declares "X days left before John Kerry becomes our new
president". Of course the video didn't show any of that.

o Much is made of Bill O'Reilly declaring he's only told guests to
"shut up" a couple of times, then showing maybe 10 clips of him
telling certain people to do just that. Problem is, most of the clips
OutFoxed came up were things like "why don't you just shut up about
your sexuality?". I.e. he wasn't actually telling them to shut up, but
suggesting as a general principle that they'd be better off keeping
quiet about certain private matters.

o The claim was made that FNC only has "weak" liberal guests. O'Reilly
regularly has Clinton's Secretary of Labor, Robert Reich, on as a
guest. I can't stand that S.O.B., but one thing he's not is stupid.
They also berated Allan Colmes for not being handsome enough, and
Susan Estridge (ran Michael Dukakis' presidential campaign) for being
too conservative!

Though I'm no Republican, I'll have to admit to taking a bit of
perverse joy at watching "the left" react in apoplectic fits to the
success of right-wing talk radio and the way-overdue emergence of a
broadcast news source that ISN'T left of center. It's nothing short of
hilarious given the current fiasco at CBS, and the longstanding
obvious left-wing bias at the other networks.

Anybody listen to Air America radio? That's the new left-wing talk
network bankrolled by billionaire George Soros. They've got Al Franken
and a bunch of other nobodies who just sit there and scream
(literally) about what a bunch of "liars" the Bush administration are.
A complete waste of time.

Bottom line: I think FNC is well worth watching, if for no other
reason than to momentarily remove one's head from the left-wing
cesspool that is the rest of broadcast news.

Jim Rosinski
Still undecided about who he'd rather see lose the Presidential
election.

Jim,

ut my $0.02 says Fox
News is the only game in town for anyone looking for balanced coverage
from TV news.


Bruhaha! OMG! You guys are hilarious.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)