Dear Mr. Gwinn,
As a reader of Free Republic, I was interested to hear under what theory the City of San Diego gave a large sum of money to the ACLU in order to be excused from a pending case involving City property.
I also noticed that you left the other defendant, the Boy Scouts of America, to meet the burden of the illimitably-funded ACLU alone. How is this possible, given that City policies on public property use were involved?
Considering that the Boy Scouts of America are one of the few organizations left in the United States that haven't been politicized by inexhaustibly-funded NGO's and their armies of political locusts, what is San Diego's moral justification for leaving the Boy Scouts in the lurch?
Lastly, isn't it true that San Diego permits church- and temple-affiliated groups to conduct activities on City property? And isn't it true that the City, through various nondiscrimination ordinances, does not require these organizations to seat Dagon-worshippers, Satanists, practicing pedophiles, registered sex offenders, and other persons they might deem unacceptable participants in their activities, in their organizational leadership?
I'm just curious about how you are handling City property and why San Diego left the Boy Scouts case.