<p>
</p>
<p>Their discrimination is legal because they are a private organization, independent of the nature of their group. The BSA is most certainly religious as it requires faith in some religion, which is consistent with the definition of what I meant by religious organization earlier.</p>
<p>So, perhaps for final clarification, using the legal definition (not mine), the BSA is not a religious organization. It is, however, indisputably religious, as it is…institutionally religious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And let us not forget the SCOTUS ruling.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The only requirement is a belief in God which does not require faith in some religion.</p>
<p>Post #200 has some good points. Having good credentials plus being involved as stated is a plus. However, just being an Eagle Scout does not require extraordinary talents. Average boys can accomplish the work required- those I know are proof of that. One chooses where to put forth the work. For some it will be a sport, music or another activity. Some will choose Boy Scouting. Not better nor worse than other activities for that purpose. Being an Eagle Scout is no more of a “hook” than many other activites where as much time and effort are put in. The message- only have your son pursue Scouting if it fits. For many the morals (discrimination against something a person has no control over- gender orientation- being one of the morals lacking) of the organization are reprehensible- the religion and/or homosexuality issues. For some they can be ignored on the local level. There are many much more academic ways to shine for ECs that also show leadership et al.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It requires “religion.”</p>
<p>And wis75, I think that the point of the Boy Scouts is to develop extraordinary talents and good leadership, not require them.</p>
<p>My point was that being an Eagle Scout does not trump many other ways of gaining those skills. My small pool could indicate being an Eagle Scout is tantamount to not getting a college degree. I don’t consider the skills “extraordinary”, perhaps they are for the average nonstellar boy.</p>
<p>
I don’t understand this comment. It seems not getting a college degree would generally be considered something negative.</p>
<p>Is this because in your pool most people you know with Eagle never finished college? I’m not sure that indicates anything.</p>
<p>Obviously, Eagle Scout is not an academic distinction. I don’t know if there is any relation between success in Scouts and success in academics, in career, or in any other aspect of life. But I would probably say the same thing about being on the debate team or the footbal team.</p>
<p>On the engineering board I frequent there are a large number of Eagles. And this list shows there are a lot of famous Eagles -
<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eagle_Scouts_(Boy_Scouts_of_America)[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eagle_Scouts_(Boy_Scouts_of_America)</a>)</p>
<p>But neither of those things really proves anything either. Especially since Fred Phelps is on the list. And at least one serial killer. :(</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In your opinion OK.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Given that my “opinion” is in this case fact, it is perfectly okay.</p>
<p>^ No your opinion is your opinion. Not fact. Religion is not required to believe in God. And the only BSA requirement is a belief in God.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Religion is required for a belief in God by definition of religion. There’s also no specificity in the word “God,” a pagan could be a Scout.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? What definition are you using?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That one. The whole time.</p>
<p>Also, I cannot edit my post, but the first definition is actually more narrow than the second one – I would combine the two to the effect of, “belief in a divine power.” The first definition excludes most of Christianity and is unnecessarily restrictive; the belief component of the second is more accurate.</p>
<p>Interesting…under that definition, devil worshipers could sponsor a troop.</p>
<p>I do not know whether the BSA has had to deal with that – I am actually curious.</p>
<p>BSA has Jewish, Hindu, Muslim and Bahai troops. Being Christian, or even being monotheistic, doesn’t seem to a requirement.</p>
<p>That’s true, which is why “God” and anything divine must be loosely interpreted regarding BSA policy, otherwise their regulations are inconsistent.</p>
<p>If they believe in God, then why don’t they like gay people?</p>
<p>Again, your interpretation. Ask someone in Irving if the BSA is a religious organization.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not really an interpretation. It’s a direct consequence of definitions and ideas that I laid out. Any problem must lie with those, not the conclusion, because the conclusion is immediately determined from the premises.</p>
<p>By my definition of religion, and by my definition of religious organization, the BSA is unquestionably an organization that is religious (if that phrasing is less confusing than “religious organization”).</p>
<p>All I am saying is that the BSA is institutionally religious, i.e. it is an organization…that is religious (as mentioned above). That’s what I mean by religious organization.</p>
<p>No one can legitimately argue that it is not institutionally religious given the definition of religion that I posted.</p>