Oregon high court rules for Scouts, against atheist mother
By Tim Fought

The Associated Press

PORTLAND — The Oregon Supreme Court today rejected the discrimination claim of an atheist whose son was required to attend a Boy Scout recruiting session in a Portland public school.

The Scout oath requires members "to do my duty to God and my country" but simply providing information to pupils in public schools isn't discrimination under Oregon Law, the court said.

Reversing a lower court, the justices denied the claim of Nancy Powell, whose son, Remington, was in elementary school when the dispute began in 1996.

The justices said the recruiting process on school grounds treats all students the same.

"It is in the later enrollment in the organization that the Boy Scouts differentiate among those who do not profess a belief in the deity and those who do," the court said. "That enrollment, however, is not done by the school district, nor is it done in any public elementary school activity."

Dissenting, Justice Rives Kistler said the Scouts' offer "appeared to be open to all the elementary school children without limitation," but that wasn't the case.

"That offer, both in fact and in operation, divided the elementary school children into two groups: those whose religious views agreed with the Scouts' views and those whose views did not," he wrote.


Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company

I think it's a great decision for Americans. Any comments?

This news story should REALLLY give more info.

First it states that the atheist's son was REQUIRED to attend, which would be just plain wrong. And stupid.
Why would you require a kid to attend a recruiting drive which he obviously will not be accepted for? Especially one where he would be rejected on RELIGIOUS basis.

The second statement belies the first one, claiming that they were "simply providing information to pupils in public schools". If the information was "simply provided" in a mandatory event, that would be wrong.

"the recruiting process on school grounds treats all students the same"???
Give me a freakin' break. If the recruiting process is going to reject this kid because of his religion, then it is obviously NOT treating all students the same.

The scouts discriminate upon religious basis. As such, they shouldn't be allowed to recruit in "mandatory" school events.
In some ways, it's just mean-spirited for a kid to hear about this "great" organization that he can't join just because of his religion. Discriminating on the basis of religion has no room for existence in our schools.

The lower court was correct, and hopefully this will get appealed to a higher court.
The solution seems simple. If the Boy Scouts are going to have any such events, they should NEVER be mandatory.

Looking through some of the history of this case, it's darkly hilarious how people want to "uphold" a "good" thing like the "Boy Scouts" by lying...


April 10, 1997 Nancy Powell attends a School Board meeting. She provides each School Board member a notebook, documenting Boy Scout policy barring atheists, the events that have occurred at Harvey Scott and a copy of the Portland District rules barring activities at school that bar admission based on religion (PPSD Rule 3.30.020(9)). She asks for the opportunity to speak before the Board.

March 8-9, 1999 Lew Frederick, School District spokesperson, Joseph Williams, Principal at Harvey Scott, and Marc Abrams, School Board member testify under oath in pre-trial depositions.

Despite three years of documentation by Nancy Powell that the Boy Scouts bars membership to atheist students (confirmed by Scout Executive Larry Otto who testified months before on the Boy Scout policy banning atheists) none of the school district witnesses admits to any current knowledge about the bar on atheists in the Boy Scouts.

Lew Frederick, spokesperson for the School District who was charged with representing School District policy on the Boy Scouts before community organizations, including at the Atheist Community Center almost a year before, testified that he is "not really aware of the Boy Scout policy regarding membership of atheists to Boy Scouts."

Joseph Williams, Harvey Scott Principal to whom Nancy Powell first complained in October 1996, testified that to this day he did not "know whether the Boy Scouts allows atheists to become members."
ACLU Boy Scout Case


If a person is righteous and upholding morality, then they should be doing that in the simplest action of TELLING THE TRUTH.
The fact that these school board members BLATANTLY LIED says a lot about their support of the Boy Scouts.

I find it interesting that the Boy Scouts want to leave out anyone who doesn't believe in God, but the Girl Scouts do not. I was a Girl Scout as a kid, and a Scout leader when my daughter was a Scout. At no point were we asked about our religious beliefs. I see on the Girl Scout website that there is an asterisk by "God" in the Promise, and at the bottom of the page is this: "* The word "God" can be interpreted in a number of ways, depending on one's spiritual beliefs. When reciting the Girl Scout Promise, it is okay to replace the word "God" with whatever word your spiritual beliefs dictate."

The first characteristic under Boy Scout Law is:
Trustworthy: A Scout tells the truth. He keeps his promises. Honesty is part of his code of conduct. People can depend on him.

Is the same code of conduct applicable to the Boy Scout leaders, or are they somehow excluded?

Why would Leaders be excluded?

REVERENT A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.

[quote=onthefence;50717]Why would Leaders be excluded?
QUOTE]

So, shouldn't Leaders be honest in their dealings with others, including telling who can and who cannot join the Scouts during the recruiting session?

I don't understand why the school made the recruiting session mandatory. Does anyone know?

Where were the leaders dishonest? The issue here is the school made it mandatory that all attend. Did they make all boys attend or all students? They don't let girls in Cub Scouts either. Just like they don't let boys in the Girl Scouts.

Tell me do they let men be Girl Scout leaders??

There is a heckuva a lot of information that is NOT being told in this article, about this case.

It sounds to me like Ms Powell is claiming her son was forced to attend a mandatory Cub Scout meeting, but the court realized it wasn't mandatory.

If "information is made available" to all students, that is NOT recruitment nor is it illegal.


Something smells fishy with this whole thing.

It would certainlly help with recruiting if the school made it madatory, we have a hard enough time getting the school to give out a handout for us. Not surprisingly it is much easier to get our recruiting drive put in all the local church bulletins the two weeks prior. Go figure.

The boys that are Cub Scouts do a much better job getting other boys to join than any other means....

In case it's not obvious, I am a Cub Scout Leader.