Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Berkeley can boot Scouts, court says
Sacramento Bee ^ | Nov. 26, 02 | Claire Cooper

Posted on 11/26/2002 9:28:29 AM PST by churchillbuff

Edited on 04/12/2004 5:46:29 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

The city is allowed to rescind the free berth at the marina because of the group's ban on gays.

SAN FRANCISCO -- The Sea Scouts are no longer entitled to a free berth at Berkeley's marina, an appeals court ruled Monday in a decision that lets the city enforce its policy of nondiscrimination toward homosexuals against an affiliate of the adamantly anti-gay Boy Scouts.


(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; US: California
KEYWORDS: berkley; boyscouts; bsa; bsalist; homosexuality; scouts; seascouts
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

1 posted on 11/26/2002 9:28:29 AM PST by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *bsa_list
bump
2 posted on 11/26/2002 9:35:22 AM PST by The Obstinate Insomniac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
Has anyone called Congresstrix Pelosi's office for a comment on this issue. Its time to start calling the hag on every issue that will illuminate her leftist agenda. She can't afford to support the Boy Scouts in the People's Republic of Californication, but she will not win the heart's and mind's of the midwest by attacking the BSA.
3 posted on 11/26/2002 9:36:00 AM PST by WilliamWallace1999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
I remember not too many years ago when there was an effort to bankrupt the KKK by taking them to court and making them pay huge damages. The goal was simply to destroy their organization through economic terrorism facilitated by the judicial system.

I wonder if that is what's going on here. The Boy Scouts seem to always win the cases, but the governments (paid for by our tax dollars!) keep relentlessly taking the scouts to court. It's got to be a financial drain -- and maybe that's the ultimate goal. Lord knows the government's pockets are deeper than the Scouts.

4 posted on 11/26/2002 9:36:39 AM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: churchillbuff
I don't think that there is a problem with this as long as the city is treating all organizations with similar viewpoints the same. If the scouts are being singled out then that's wrong.
6 posted on 11/26/2002 9:38:36 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
Are they not being helped by the Pacific Legal Foundation?

We know one the the ships which was tossed out. The kids are better off near us rather than way too close to Berzerkley.

7 posted on 11/26/2002 9:39:13 AM PST by pbear8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
Sounds like the fagg@ts can do to the little boy scouts

just what they wanted to do in the first place.

8 posted on 11/26/2002 9:41:05 AM PST by Taiwan Bocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Taiwan Bocks
Sounds like the fagg@ts can do to the little boy scouts just what they wanted to do in the first place.

What does this mean?

I don't get it -why the hostility? The BSA went out of their way to proclaim themselves a private group (which they were entirely within their rights to do so). Having done that, I don't see why they should expect the City of Berkeley to pay for their docking fees, any more than the city should pay docking fees for any other yacht club that docks in the Marina.
9 posted on 11/26/2002 9:44:58 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
I was a Sea Explorer back in the day....a great program for boys and girls 13-18 yrs old!
Many of our group went on to join the military.

I joined the Marine Corps out of High School and am now helping to run another excellent youth program -- the Young Marines (for boys and girls 8-18yrs old).

Hope the Sea Scouts can fight this or find a better place to be.
10 posted on 11/26/2002 9:49:15 AM PST by MudPuppy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrJET
Too despicable to comment about.

Why is it that here in this Conservative forum, people are complaining about a private group not receiving government assistance?
11 posted on 11/26/2002 9:51:06 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Stone Mountain
I get it, 'docking fees!'

You're a riot!

12 posted on 11/26/2002 9:55:52 AM PST by Taiwan Bocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
Berkeley has a marina?!? What do they park there, whales?
13 posted on 11/26/2002 9:56:48 AM PST by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stone Mountain
I used to work in Berkeley. There is a large contingent of anti-white, anti-American, anti-gay Black Muslims. It would be interesting to see if they are getting any preferential treatment.
14 posted on 11/26/2002 9:57:40 AM PST by joltinjoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Stone Mountain
"Why is it that here in this Conservative forum, people are complaining about a private group not receiving government assistance?"


You miss the point. If absolutely no other private group is getting any kind of assistance from Berkley, then this is completely kosher. OTOH, if the scouts were singled out from other "private" groups, then this is an outrage. If the Organization of Left-handed gay monkey humpers or any other "right-thinking" club gets any form of subsidy or assistance from tax dollars, then the scouts deserve the same.
15 posted on 11/26/2002 10:03:22 AM PST by WilliamWallace1999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WilliamWallace1999
LOCAL NEWSLINES

Scouts Battle Berkeley Over Gay Policy
by Mark Worrall - 365Gay.com Newscenter
November 23, 2002


(Berkley) A branch of the Boy Scouts of America is in court trying to regain free city facilities in Berkeley California.

TalkBack

Have you got something you want to say about an article or item that you have seen on metroG? Perhaps you just want to get something off of your chest. We want to know about it, TalkBack now!



The Berkeley Sea Scouts paid nothing to dock its boats at the Berkeley Marina for more than 50 years. But, in 1998, when it failed to disown the Boy Scouts’ anti-gay policies the city began charging the scouts for using the facility.

The Sea Scouts leaders sued the city in 1999, alleging a violation of the group’s free speech rights. But the Alameda County Superior Court rejected the claim in June 2001 and turned down a similar, amended complaint five months later.

Friday, the Sea Scouts took their fight to the California Court of Appeal in San Francisco.

Harold Johnson, a lawyer with the conservative Pacific Legal Foundation arguing on behalf of the Sea Scouts, said the group submitted a letter to the city in 1998 stating that it would abide by Berkeley’s non-discrimination policy.

But, Deputy City Attorney Laura McKinney called the argument “extremely disingenuous.” She said the Sea Scouts’ April 8, 1998 letter stated that the group would not discriminate on the basis of factors like race and gender, but excluded sexual orientation – a category included in the Berkeley anti-discrimination ordinance.

The letter also stated that the Sea Scouts never inquire about members’ sexual orientation.

But McKinney said a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is in violation of the city ordinance.

16 posted on 11/26/2002 10:05:53 AM PST by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: WilliamWallace1999
You miss the point. If absolutely no other private group is getting any kind of assistance from Berkley, then this is completely kosher.

What other private groups are getting free dock fees? None that I've heard of. Have you heard differently?
17 posted on 11/26/2002 10:07:08 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
There was another tie: an informal deal, "rocks for docks," in which the Scouts allowed Berkeley to take rocks from one of their camps to create fill at the marina in exchange for the free berths.

If I owned a construction company I would donate the heavy equipment needed for the Scouts to take BACK their rocks!!!

18 posted on 11/26/2002 10:07:29 AM PST by laker_dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stone Mountain
I don't get it -why the hostility? The BSA went out of their way to proclaim themselves a private group (which they were entirely within their rights to do so). Having done that, I don't see why they should expect the City of Berkeley to pay for their docking fees, any more than the city should pay docking fees for any other yacht club that docks in the Marina.

Good point!...and, being a private enterprize, the Sea Scouts are perfectly in their rights now to expect payment when they assist AIDS-riddled old hippies across the Berkeley streets.

19 posted on 11/26/2002 10:08:09 AM PST by meandog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: laker_dad
Of course, then the Scouts would be in trouble with the DNR.
20 posted on 11/26/2002 10:09:07 AM PST by laker_dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
The Boy Scouts seem to always win the cases, but the governments (paid for by our tax dollars!) keep relentlessly taking the scouts to court.,

Actually, the Boy Scouts took the City of Berkeley to court...
21 posted on 11/26/2002 10:09:30 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
So much for tolerance.
22 posted on 11/26/2002 10:10:48 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog
being a private enterprize, the Sea Scouts are perfectly in their rights now to expect payment when they assist AIDS-riddled old hippies across the Berkeley streets.

They are certainly free to ask. Is there an actualy point here I'm missing?
23 posted on 11/26/2002 10:12:54 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
The Sea Scouts are no longer entitled to a free berth at Berkeley's marina...in a decision that lets the city enforce its policy of nondiscrimination toward homosexuals against an affiliate of the adamantly anti-gay Boy Scouts

What kind of BS is this sentence? The Boy Scouts are adamantly anti-gay? Last I heard, they do not engage in witch hunts, do not award merit badges for queer-bashing, do not even ask prospective Scouts if they are homosexual.

Anyway, this Scout-bashing has little to do with the rights of a microscopic percentage of Scouts or Scout leaders who may be gay. The homosexuals are on a selfish, scorched-earth mission to prove to everyone that they are like the rest of us. That's all this is about. But they are not like the rest of us.

24 posted on 11/26/2002 10:12:59 AM PST by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamWallace1999
The criterion that the City of Berkeley is apparently using was stated in the article:

In the ruling, the state 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco said there's a difference between ordering groups to admit gay members, which would be unconstitutional, and extending fee waivers or other subsidies only to organizations that serve all people equally.

Do you disagree with this? Seems reasonable to me... as long as they use consistent standards to determine which groups get the waivers. Unless some other private group that discriminates in it's membership is getting waivers, the city is being consistent.
25 posted on 11/26/2002 10:20:00 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Stone Mountain
That actually would seem to be the key. Scrutiny of all deals between the city and various organizations are in order now, to ensure equal treatment under the law. My guess is that certain "politically correct" groups are getting subsidies, yet they have policies that would not meet the test that the city is requiring of the Sea Scouts.
26 posted on 11/26/2002 10:26:27 AM PST by The Electrician
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: joltinjoe
I used to work in Berkeley. There is a large contingent of anti-white, anti-American, anti-gay Black Muslims. It would be interesting to see if they are getting any preferential treatment.

I work in Berkeley now - in fact, just a few blocks from the Marina! And yeah, if any of the groups you mentioned are getting financial consideration from the city, then there's a real problem. That's not the case as far as I know now though...
27 posted on 11/26/2002 10:28:57 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: The Electrician
My guess is that certain "politically correct" groups are getting subsidies, yet they have policies that would not meet the test that the city is requiring of the Sea Scouts.

I'm not so sure that they are, but if so, I'm sure we'll be hearing about them very soon! This could certainly prove to be interesting if you are correct...
28 posted on 11/26/2002 10:30:30 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: DrJET
You may have a point, if and only if (little math lingo there) Berkeley uses no city rental property for the free use of homosexual, bisexual, whatever groups to demonstrate, gather, hang out, etc. Pretty sure I've read here several times, that is the case.

There may be groups that promote liberal ideas that meet, but the test is whether or not those groups would be open to all. For instance, if a Women's rights group refused to allow men to join their group, that would be unacceptable. But they still might allow a Women's rights group to meet on city property - the test aparently isn't what the group is promoting; it's what their membership requirements are. By my interpretation of this, even a KKK group could meet on city property as long as they allowed anyone to join in.
30 posted on 11/26/2002 10:47:29 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
The Scouts are under attack.

http://paganwiccan.about.com/library/weekly/aa111402spiralscouts.htm

http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/epaper/editions/tuesday/opinion_d39ddd9cb0d9716100da.html

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/4544322.htm

http://www.pnnonline.org/article.php?sid=756&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

http://www.austin360.com/aas/news/ap/ap_story.html/National/AP.V4344.AP-Boy-Scouts.html

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/news/021107d.asp

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200210\CUL20021030a.html


http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200210\CUL20021031b.html

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134564883_boyscout29m.html


http://people.aol.com/people/news/now/0,10958,364602,00.html

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/5372312p-6360508c.html
31 posted on 11/26/2002 10:50:51 AM PST by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamWallace1999
Great idea.
32 posted on 11/26/2002 11:03:39 AM PST by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
So, does this mean that Berkeley is going to discriminate against the Boy Scouts because the Boy Scouts discriminate against homosexuals?
33 posted on 11/26/2002 11:08:56 AM PST by ladtx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
One Sea Scout vessel -- the Farallon -- remained at the marina, paying the annual fee of about $500 that most private parties pay. But a group of Scouts and their parents joined the Farallon's skipper in suing for breach of contract and violation of their constitutional rights.

S.S.S. Farallon
California
Mount Diablo Silverado Council
Sea Scout Ship Farallon (44)
Sea Scout Ship Farallon Inc.
P.O. Box 184
El Cerrito, California 94530
Skipper:
Gene Evans
Telephone: 510-448-8444


SSS Farallon I'm not sure if this is the scout ship in question, but this is what I found on the web.

34 posted on 11/26/2002 11:14:51 AM PST by Frohickey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamWallace1999
You miss the point. If absolutely no other private group is getting any kind of assistance from Berkley, then this is completely kosher. OTOH, if the scouts were singled out from other "private" groups, then this is an outrage.

Why? Berkeley -- or any other city or institution or group -- should be free to decide whom they extend freebies to or not, based on whatever criteria they see fit.

Just as the Scouts are free to deny membership to whom they choose, Berkeley is free to deny benefits to whom they choose.

If the Organization of Left-handed gay monkey humpers or any other "right-thinking" club gets any form of subsidy or assistance from tax dollars, then the scouts deserve the same.

No, it's Berkeley's money, they get to decide who "deserves" it or not, even if they do choose to base it on leftist politically correct criteria.

35 posted on 11/26/2002 11:17:31 AM PST by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Stone Mountain
I don't get it -why the hostility? The BSA went out of their way to proclaim themselves a private group (which they were entirely within their rights to do so). Having done that, I don't see why they should expect the City of Berkeley to pay for their docking fees, any more than the city should pay docking fees for any other yacht club that docks in the Marina.

The city was not paying the Scouts' docking fees. They were waiving the fees in exchange for rocks. I think the city should return all the rocks they've taken.

And what do you mean by saying the BSA "went out of their way to proclaim themselves a private group"? They are a private group. Always have been a private group. I don't think they had to go out of their way to proclaim the obvious. Sounds like you have an agenda.

36 posted on 11/26/2002 11:18:49 AM PST by PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
The city was not paying the Scouts' docking fees. They were waiving the fees in exchange for rocks.

The city was clearly subsidizing the Scouts unless you think you can get dock fees for rocks anywhere else...

And what do you mean by saying the BSA "went out of their way to proclaim themselves a private group"? They are a private group. Always have been a private group. I don't think they had to go out of their way to proclaim the obvious. Sounds like you have an agenda.

Didn't mean anything by the "out of their way"comment other than that when the athiest/gay lawsuits came up, that the Scouts at the point eschewed the idea that they are a public organization and declared themselves private. Many people prior to that time (including myself) thought that the scouts were a public organization - wrongly, but it wasn't something I had given a lot of thought to, even when I was a scout. The athiest/gay suits were predicated on the idea that the Boy Scouts were a public organization. All I meant by that was that they emphasized that they were private. If you think I have an agenda, please state what you think it is instead of making implications...
38 posted on 11/26/2002 11:48:51 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: madg
Thanks - your answer was better than mine...
39 posted on 11/26/2002 11:51:01 AM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Stone Mountain
I don't see why they should expect the City of Berkeley to pay for their docking fees, any more than the city should pay docking fees for any other yacht club that docks in the Marina

I agree, so long as they don't give discounts to other organizations.

40 posted on 11/26/2002 11:51:33 AM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
This is wonderful.... Boy Scouts will no longer be harrassed by yet even more Seamen.
41 posted on 11/26/2002 11:55:45 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
I remember many years ago when I discovered that a local YWCA was controlled by militant feminists who used the Y's facilities to promote abortion and other left-wing feminist causes. The women who ran the center were atheists, some were Jewish, and none had any sympathy whatsoever for Christianity. If/when the Boy Scouts drop their ban on homosexuals and their requirement for a belief in God, the organization will slowly but surely be transformed, just as that YWCA was many years ago. It will eventually be turned on its head to espouse values totally contrary to those of its founders. That is what is at stake in these controversies.
42 posted on 11/26/2002 12:02:07 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
Actually, Berkeley could get in serious trouble...if this is the reason they yanked the free dock, then ANY group they support with other "fee or rent" waivers would have to meet the same "non-discrimination" policy.

It is city money, but if they yank it from one because they are in violation of "A" and grant it to another also in violation of "A", they are in the wrong. Berkeley is not a private entity and what they do with their money IS subject to the rule of law.

43 posted on 11/26/2002 12:02:58 PM PST by IYAS9YAS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
If/when the Boy Scouts drop their ban on homosexuals and their requirement for a belief in God, the organization will slowly but surely be transformed, just as that YWCA was many years ago

This is very insightful.

44 posted on 11/26/2002 12:04:09 PM PST by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
Yeah, except for the fact that it is not "Berkeley's" money. This is money that is coerced from everyone, and so Berkeley should use it for everyone's benefit, or else close the "family planning" clinics, or anything else that someone might find offensive.
45 posted on 11/26/2002 12:49:44 PM PST by IMHO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
It would seem that "Sexual disorientation" rather than "Sexual orientation", as applied to the life styles of various and sundry perverted sexual appetite consumed groups, would come more closely to defining them.

Move away if you are not gay,
from that sick city by the bay,
who's motto seems to say,
"It's the gay way or the highway."

Soddom and Gommorah's sister city,
feels neither mercy or pitty,
for parents who dare shield their male kiddie,
from deviates whom lust has drove giddy.

Fresh victims for perverts is what it's about,
this assault by the far left upon Scouts,
they want our boys early, before they find out,
there's really a heaven, but only girls know the route.

Pitty poor Berkley and all who live there,
where politically correct is polluting the air,
and those who make babies, all move to else where,
let the lights be turned off, as eternity calls,
the last lonely surviving queer.


















46 posted on 11/26/2002 12:52:10 PM PST by F.J. Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: F.J. Mitchell
Well, you can't fight sin without being where sin is...
47 posted on 11/26/2002 1:54:55 PM PST by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
Sad but not surprising. It just amazes me that liberals think it's a good idea to pick on boy scouts.
48 posted on 11/26/2002 2:58:50 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
Seems like it is ok for the ANTI-SEA SCOUT GAYS to discriminate against ANTI-GAY SEA SCOUTS but not vice-versa. I thought the SCOTUS decided this kind of freedom of association case last year? PC gone amok! Insanity reigns!
49 posted on 11/26/2002 3:07:59 PM PST by PISANO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
Who do we make a check out to for private funding contributions?
50 posted on 11/26/2002 3:09:04 PM PST by WaveThatFlag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson