Lesbians Look to Boot Boy Scouts From Own Facilities

[007]

Here it comes people... the never ending push by the homo community to SHUT YOU THE FUCK UP. It'll be OK for them to make everything heterosexual and normal GO AWAY, but they want to be able for them to parade their SICK, fucking PERVERTED shit all over God's green creation. Why do I dispise homos, other than the OBVIOUS? Read on...


Lesbians Look to Boot Boy Scouts From Own Facilities



Ruling threatens faith-based groups trying to help in their communities
Posted: May 06, 2009

11:11 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


U.S. Supreme Court

With work ramping up in Washington on a "hate crimes" bill that would create special rights for homosexuals, a case that addresses a related issue – claims by same-sex couples they have the right not to be "offended" by "straight' morality – has been presented to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case involves a series of projects by the Boy Scouts of America in San Diego. The private organization has provided millions of dollars in improvements to public facilities in exchange for their use but faces being banned because homosexuals and lesbians who never even were exposed to the work claimed their feelings were hurt.

The organization has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the decision from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and now two major public interest law firms have joined them in their request.

"Radical homosexuals are attempting to use every means possible to destroy the Scouts despite a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that recognized their First Amendment right to have a morally-based policy excluding homosexual involvement," said Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center, which worked with the the Alliance Defense Fund on the friend-of-the-court brief.

At issue in the case are leases from the city of San Diego allowing the San Diego Boy Scouts to build and operate campgrounds and an aquatic center on city property for their use and the public's.

"Lesbian and agnostic couples who had never visited the facilities sued the Scouts on a claim that they felt offended by the fact that the city leases the public property to a 'morally straight' organization such as the Boy Scouts," the public interest legal groups said. "There were no religious symbols at the facilities."

The Scout Oath calls for a member "to do [his] duty to God and [his] country … and to keep [himself] morally straight."

Lesbians look to boot Boy Scouts from own facilities

 

[RodISHI]

For many this is perfectly okay.

 

[Korimyr the Rat]

"Morally straight" has nothing to do with sexual preference, and these attacks on the Boy Scouts are a disgusting attempt to undermine the moral fabric of our society.

I support gay rights, more even than most Democrats, but I will choose the Scouts over these provocateurs every single time.

 

[007]

"Morally straight" has nothing to do with sexual preference, and these attacks on the Boy Scouts are a disgusting attempt to undermine the moral fabric of our society.

I support gay rights, more even than most Democrats, but I will choose the Scouts over these provocateurs every single time.

I've disagreed with you in the past, but on this issue, you are correct.

 

[Shogun]

The private organization has provided millions of dollars in improvements to public facilities in exchange for their use


At issue in the case are leases from the city of San Diego allowing the San Diego Boy Scouts to build and operate campgrounds and an aquatic center on city property for their use and the public's.




Whose own facilities? If you lease a car who OWNS the car? Regardless of how much you paid for the rims and stereo installed.

 

[007]

The private organization has provided millions of dollars in improvements to public facilities in exchange for their use

At issue in the case are leases from the city of San Diego allowing the San Diego Boy Scouts to build and operate campgrounds and an aquatic center on city property for their use and the public's.

Whose own facilities? If you lease a car who OWNS the car? Regardless of how much you paid for the rims and stereo installed.

That's not the issue, and you know it.

Tell us all why it's OK to offend a straight person, but these militant homos want to make it so you can't as much as utter a PEEP against them....

 

[RodISHI]

"Lesbian and agnostic couples who had never visited the facilities sued the Scouts on a claim that they felt offended by the fact that the city leases the public property to a 'morally straight' organization such as the Boy Scouts," the public interest legal groups said. "There were no religious symbols at the facilities."

They have never been to the facility. Their contention is they feel offended by the fact that the Boy Scouts represent "morally striaght" ideals.

It is perfectly fine that these same groups of people have gotten taxpayer properties and funds to teach and assist gays and lesbians? Hogwash!

Shogun I feel offended by what you seem to me to represent. Possibly I should sue you.

 

[Ravi]

The suit is being made because the lesbian and the atheist don't feel they should have to go through an organization that is hostile to them to use publicly owned property.

 

[justabubba]

The private organization has provided millions of dollars in improvements to public facilities in exchange for their use

At issue in the case are leases from the city of San Diego allowing the San Diego Boy Scouts to build and operate campgrounds and an aquatic center on city property for their use and the public's.

Whose own facilities? If you lease a car who OWNS the car? Regardless of how much you paid for the rims and stereo installed.

That's not the issue, and you know it.

Tell us all why it's OK to offend a straight person, but these militant homos want to make it so you can't as much as utter a PEEP against them....

that is EXACTLY the issue
and too bad you don't know it
it's so obvious Stevie Wonder could see it

its an organization which requires its members to be (a) heterosexual and (b) possess a belief in God
that organization can do whatever it chooses on ITS OWN PROPERTY
but the public cannot allow those who discriminate regarding the EEO bases to use the public's facilities for their own limited purposes. that allows those public facilities to no longer be usable by the members of the public who do not meet the organization's internal moral guidelines

i'm a former scout and scout leader. i quit the organization when it took its anti-gay stand. my son left when it insisted he had to profess a belief in God

on their own property, they have a right to uphold their own beliefs ... but not on the public's property

that IS the issue

 

[Shogun]

The private organization has provided millions of dollars in improvements to public facilities in exchange for their use

At issue in the case are leases from the city of San Diego allowing the San Diego Boy Scouts to build and operate campgrounds and an aquatic center on city property for their use and the public's.

Whose own facilities? If you lease a car who OWNS the car? Regardless of how much you paid for the rims and stereo installed.

That's not the issue, and you know it.

Tell us all why it's OK to offend a straight person, but these militant homos want to make it so you can't as much as utter a PEEP against them....

Actually, that IS the issue... according to your thread title (from WND, no less)

Lesbians Look to Boot Boy Scouts From Own Facilities


Now, when you say OWN FACILITIES and the article specifically states that there is a LEASE involved then what the hell are you even complaining about anyway? If I rent an apartment and turn it into a friggin brothel my landlord can kick me out. Yes? For all the outrage and knee jerk reaction after we've already decided this kind of conflict between tax-based gov land and the scout's take on homosexuality, WHY THE HELL ARE YOU NOT OUT BUYING THE BOY SCOUTS THEIR OWN LAND?

You iknow.. ACTUAL property that is ACTUALLY OWNED by the scouts instead of being rented from a gov that will continue to hold non-biased standards?

 

[Shogun]

"Lesbian and agnostic couples who had never visited the facilities sued the Scouts on a claim that they felt offended by the fact that the city leases the public property to a 'morally straight' organization such as the Boy Scouts," the public interest legal groups said. "There were no religious symbols at the facilities."

They have never been to the facility. Their contention is they feel offended by the fact that the Boy Scouts represent "morally striaght" ideals.

It is perfectly fine that these same groups of people have gotten taxpayer properties and funds to teach and assist gays and lesbians? Hogwash!

Shogun I feel offended by what you seem to me to represent. Possibly I should sue you.

If my internet connection was subsidized by the GOVERNMENT then go ahead and get your lawsuit on. But, because I am actually using a PRIVATE CONNECTION then I guess you are shit out of luck.


Like i said, why the hell are the scouts not BUYING THEIR OWN LAND instead of crying every time a gov applies the same standards that Catholic Charities used to bitch about?

 

[RodISHI]

The suit is being made because the lesbian and the atheist don't feel they should have to go through an organization that is hostile to them to use publicly owned property.

Apparently church members will need to start playing the same game. They can attend the sites that are publicly supported by tax dollars where these LGBT organizations are. When they are discriminated against or even feel like they are being discriminated against they can sue the piss out of them. That boat floats both ways.

 

[Shogun]

The suit is being made because the lesbian and the atheist don't feel they should have to go through an organization that is hostile to them to use publicly owned property.

Apparently church members will need to start playing the same game. They can attend the sites that are publicly supported by tax dollars where these LGBT organizations are. When they are discriminated against or even feel like they are being discriminated against they can sue the piss out of them. That boat floats both ways.

.....because gay groups require one to be gay as a flaming rainbow to participate in their organizations?

sure... whatever you say.

 

[Ravi]

The suit is being made because the lesbian and the atheist don't feel they should have to go through an organization that is hostile to them to use publicly owned property.

Apparently church members will need to start playing the same game. They can attend the sites that are publicly supported by tax dollars where these LGBT organizations are. When they are discriminated against or even feel like they are being discriminated against they can sue the piss out of them. That boat floats both ways.

So? Does your selective outrage only run one way?

 

[Ravi]

The suit is being made because the lesbian and the atheist don't feel they should have to go through an organization that is hostile to them to use publicly owned property.

Apparently church members will need to start playing the same game. They can attend the sites that are publicly supported by tax dollars where these LGBT organizations are. When they are discriminated against or even feel like they are being discriminated against they can sue the piss out of them. That boat floats both ways.

.....because gay groups require one to be gay as a flaming rainbow to participate in their organizations?

sure... whatever you say.

lol...must resist...can't...I actually am going to have to rep you.

 

[RodISHI]

The private organization has provided millions of dollars in improvements to public facilities in exchange for their use

At issue in the case are leases from the city of San Diego allowing the San Diego Boy Scouts to build and operate campgrounds and an aquatic center on city property for their use and the public's.

Whose own facilities? If you lease a car who OWNS the car? Regardless of how much you paid for the rims and stereo installed.

That's not the issue, and you know it.

Tell us all why it's OK to offend a straight person, but these militant homos want to make it so you can't as much as utter a PEEP against them....

Actually, that IS the issue... according to your thread title (from WND, no less)

Lesbians Look to Boot Boy Scouts From Own Facilities


Now, when you say OWN FACILITIES and the article specifically states that there is a LEASE involved then what the hell are you even complaining about anyway? If I rent an apartment and turn it into a friggin brothel my landlord can kick me out. Yes? For all the outrage and knee jerk reaction after we've already decided this kind of conflict between tax-based gov land and the scout's take on homosexuality, WHY THE HELL ARE YOU NOT OUT BUYING THE BOY SCOUTS THEIR OWN LAND?

You iknow.. ACTUAL property that is ACTUALLY OWNED by the scouts instead of being rented from a gov that will continue to hold non-biased standards?

The same reason the LGBT's are not buying their own fucking land with their own fucking money to build on.

Church members pay taxes. Like it or not the people in those churches have businesses, jobs and pay property taxes. They have the same entitlements to have support groups as any other organization out there.

As body of members they have every right to ask for equal treatment when it comes to public lands as any other non profit organization out there does.

 

[RodISHI]

The suit is being made because the lesbian and the atheist don't feel they should have to go through an organization that is hostile to them to use publicly owned property.

Apparently church members will need to start playing the same game. They can attend the sites that are publicly supported by tax dollars where these LGBT organizations are. When they are discriminated against or even feel like they are being discriminated against they can sue the piss out of them. That boat floats both ways.

So? Does your selective outrage only run one way?

All is fair game when you open pandora's box ravi.

 

[Ravi]

Apparently church members will need to start playing the same game. They can attend the sites that are publicly supported by tax dollars where these LGBT organizations are. When they are discriminated against or even feel like they are being discriminated against they can sue the piss out of them. That boat floats both ways.

So? Does your selective outrage only run one way?

All is fair game when you open pandora's box ravi.

So you do admit that your outrage is selective. IMO, any group that benefits from taxpayer's money has no right to discriminate. Apparently in your view, groups that you agree with have the right to discriminate.

I am not surprised.

 

[Shogun]

That's not the issue, and you know it.

Tell us all why it's OK to offend a straight person, but these militant homos want to make it so you can't as much as utter a PEEP against them....

Actually, that IS the issue... according to your thread title (from WND, no less)

Lesbians Look to Boot Boy Scouts From Own Facilities


Now, when you say OWN FACILITIES and the article specifically states that there is a LEASE involved then what the hell are you even complaining about anyway? If I rent an apartment and turn it into a friggin brothel my landlord can kick me out. Yes? For all the outrage and knee jerk reaction after we've already decided this kind of conflict between tax-based gov land and the scout's take on homosexuality, WHY THE HELL ARE YOU NOT OUT BUYING THE BOY SCOUTS THEIR OWN LAND?

You iknow.. ACTUAL property that is ACTUALLY OWNED by the scouts instead of being rented from a gov that will continue to hold non-biased standards?

The same reason the LGBT's are not buying their own fucking land with their own fucking money to build on.

Church members pay taxes. Like it or not the people in those churches have businesses, jobs and pay property taxes. They have the same entitlements to have support groups as any other organization out there.

As body of members they have every right to ask for equal treatment when it comes to public lands as any other non profit organization out there does.

AGAIN, are the gay organizations REQUIRING A SPECIFIC SEXUALITY TO PARTICIPATE? a SPECIFIC RELIGION? Just answer those two questions before you waste too much effort typing out some lame threat of retort based more out of scorn than facts. Until you can prove that gay organizations that use public property are discriminating, LIKE WE KNOW THE SCOUTS ARE, then you really have no platform to stand on.

 

[Shogun]

Apparently church members will need to start playing the same game. They can attend the sites that are publicly supported by tax dollars where these LGBT organizations are. When they are discriminated against or even feel like they are being discriminated against they can sue the piss out of them. That boat floats both ways.

So? Does your selective outrage only run one way?

All is fair game when you open pandora's box ravi.

By all means.. get your lawsuit on.. I look forward to hearing you scream that the sky is falling when your case is thrown out of court.