From: palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 03:10:08 GMT

In <1992Aug22.163239.29797@m.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

>In <1992Aug21.110428.10268@m.cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu
>(Carl M. Kadie) writes:

>>I am disgusted to read that the United Way of Suburban Chicago will
>>now support racially and religiously discriminatory programs.
>>According to Eric Zorn's column on August 16, the suburban United
>>Way's new "antidiscrimination" policy says that groups "organized by,
>>on behalf of, or to serve persons of a particular race, religion, sex,
>>national origin" are now eligible for funding.

>palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:

>>Claiming that Jews are equivalent to atheists is morally reprehensible. Along
>>with Islam, Judaism and Christianity both come out of the Abrahamic tradition.
>>At least you could use a religion that is not tied to the Old Testament as
>>your example.

>I did not claim any equivalence between groups. What I said was that
>the new United Way of Suburban Chicago "antidiscrimination" policy has
>been changed to allow support of programs that discriminate against
>blacks and Jews. What I said was true. Their phrasing posted above.

Point taken. I misread your argument as applying to BSA, not United Way
policies. 

>>You evidently believe that no non-profit religious organization (or any
>>organization with religious ties) deserves any support from private busi-
>>ness (or, evidently, anyone else). Presumably, support for AA is out the
>>window. Catholic charities is quite obviously discrminatory. I imagine that
>>I could find dozens of organizations whose ties render them incompatible
>>with your standards. 

>You are wrong about Catholic charities (and most other charities).
>Their UW-supported charity programs are not limited to Catholics; they
>are open to all in need without regard to religious belief, race, etc.

I do not claim that most charities are based on religion. However, I accept
the caveat that your argument applies to charitable organizations which
have some form of religious belief as a membership requirement.

>You make it sound as though the United Way gives money to the general
>fund of churches. It doesn't; it only gives (BSA excepted) to specific
>charity program that benefit people without discrimination. Moreover,
>churches don't expect or ask for general fund money from the UW.

I did not mean to make this assertion. However, it must be noted that BSA
does charitable work which benefits communities. Many organizations have
restricted membership. The questiion is whether or not this should make
them ineligible for assistance.

>Under the old United Way charter, if the BSA started a soup kitchen
>program, that program would be eligible for United Way funds (assuming
>it did not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sexual
>orientation, etc). Under the new charter of the UW of Suburban
>Chicago, not only is the general BSA program (which does discriminate
>against atheist and gay scouts) eligible, but so is general KKK
>program which discriminates against Jews and African Americans.

So the change was poorly written.

>There are only three possibilities:
>  1) the old charter: the BSA general program is not eligible
>  2) the new charter of the UWSC: the KKK general program is eligible
>  3) some newer charter which includes the BSA and excludes the KKK

>My question is, is an acceptable newer charter really possible?

Yes, if you believe that some sort of religious requirement is possible for
a charitable organization.

Paul Lane
Newsgroups: rec.scouting