moosetracker

The problem is that it is local interpretation, and some have a very concrete interpretation.. They will have a problem with a Buddist faith, or wiccan or my son's belief that is more with Greek mythology.. There was a thread a little while back and one person did have a hard time with the concept and felt there had to be some sort of measure and pass/fail for a person's belief.. Some beliefs were too far out there, had no logic, or were too close to being the beliefs of a atheist..

I agree with Merlyn, for Christians the Bible has been interpreted and re-interpreted by men through the years, the moral code has changed through the years and the bible has countless different interpretations for each denomination.. The moral code of the bible is not a constant.. Other holy books, or folk lore are completely different and they too can be interpreted differently by many people. If you are religious but don't like the moral code of your religion, well just find a different religion that is more in line with your beliefs. I also disagree that atheists choose not to follow a moral code.. Some ... sure, same as some in the religious community are not so pious.. But, they can have a moral code as good as anyone who is religious.. Cyclops - this may be a different fight, but it was probably brought on by the policy change in homosexuals.. With some people, they have won a victory so are moving on for the next battle, some see that as co-ed, others as allowing in atheists.. Personally between the two I think we will get co-ed before atheists.. BSA just doubled down on this being a religious organization and beefed up it's advancement requirements in both cub scouts & boy scouts to make sure that religious is more of a main theme.. Some of it troubles me as it allows people who are religious fanatics to discount some peoples religious beliefs if it does not pass their smell test.. I see a lot of arguments coming up over people not understanding what non-sectarian really means.

Well although morality, Is a standard, set by the group of people or community (religiously they are set by the groups interpretation of their holy book, or holy word, or folk lore). The only way you as a person are able to follow the morals you are given by this community, are by learning them and having your conscience guide you on the right path to take.. If the holy word on morality were just magically there and everyone had it, there would be no need for churches, no difference in interpretation of what is morally correct and atheists would magically have the same moral code that you have, therefore no reason to deny them acceptance into BSA.. Very nice you missed the very recent argument over the inclusion of homosexuals.. We spent years where the argument came up in I&P at least every 6 months or so, and we would reargue the same argument all over again.. With the inclusion of homosexuals, the argument changed a little as those who felt persecuted felt vindicated and vica-versa.. You are a new member, but some new members lurk before they jump in.. If you missed the whole thing, do not worry, I am sure it will be brought up again in 6 months. Do we argue about other things? Sure.. This atheist argument is one argument that comes up several times.. CoEd scouting.. Old school vs New school Scouting ( and various things in that sometimes get taken out and argued on their own merits.), Uniform Policing on and on.. We do love to bicker..

I disagree, because they can take a moral code of an organization (like scouting) or the moral code that was taught to them by their parents (how many of us have had mom or dad chirping in our ear if we even contemplated something that went against how we were raised?).. Religion has also many different denominations and a lot are due to one denomination splitting off into two due to disagreement on what is important or what the true meaning of something in some holy book is all about.. People choose a religion that is closest to their moral beliefs.. If they at some point disagree they can change their religion, become a stay at home religious person (like me) who considers themselves with a religion (and thus perfectly acceptable to be a BSA member) but I do not believe in a structured religion, and do not take the bible as the word of God, but more historical interpreting by men of the time, which has been rewritten and altered over time by other men who wanted to influence their people or their culture.. According to BSA, I can have my belief and my morals are not In question because I do have a form of religious belief.. Why is my religious belief really any better for moral conviction then an atheist? It is really still my inner voice telling me what is right and what is wrong.. Sometimes my inner voice is my parents, sometimes BSA, sometimes the Jesus or God that I believe in, sometimes some little grade school teacher.. My Jesus or God may not be at all like what you picture Jesus or God (if you even are of a Christian religion, if you aren't then we have two different higher powers altogether different). Yet, an atheist can not have similar morals because they are missing some form of inner voice they equate to being that of Jesus or God (or whatever), when those figures are very individual to each and everyone of us (or at least very different based on some religious community you hang around with.) Stosh - I do agree respect is also important.. But, it is different for different people.. The big difference In this last showdown was people who felt respect was keeping things as they were period, and those who felt the current way was disrespectful, in that they were not being allowed to treat people with the curtsey they deserved, and they were not allowed to practice their religious beliefs in BSA but forced to follow someone else's.

Yeah I agree with Rick-in-CA, we are not very good at the understanding of reverent... My point exactly... With the words of Merlyn I would say an understanding and practice of the word reverent is needed from both sides.

I believe an atheist can be as moral as a religious person.. And compared to some religious people certain atheists may even be 100% more moral.. Religion does not guarantee morality.. Some people may need a higher being who will smile on them or crush them, or a guarantee for a spot in heaven if they play nice on earth in order to behave well while on earth. Others, just need empathy for their fellow man or the animals or the planet, a wish and desire to leave the world a better place for the next generation some of whom may be their offspring.. Scouting itself and following the laws of scouting can have a profound effect on the moral upbringing of an atheist child, especially if the parents also believe in and follow the laws. Same as it has with every child who is religious.. The only way that the two worlds could co-habitat in scouting though would have to be by making one of the laws very, very important for many years... REVERENT ... If we can not be reverent, we would rip each other apart and the scouting community with it.

I did not say they paid attention to volunteers of BSA.. I said they paid attention to the public opinion in their area.. Who will donate? (or not and why), Who will start a new charter (or not and why), Who has boys of age to recruit.. (If not interested, why).. If they are getting enough then the "No's" don't figure as much, if they are not the "No's" become reason to want change.. Here in the East, the "No's" defiantly helped convince councils it was time to get behind and back change..

Councils in my experience pretty much echo the opinions of the community around them.. There major push is for donations and membership.. If they have problems with either due to a policy, they will side with a policy change, if they have support of the community due to a policy they will support the policy.. Wishy Washy... yes.. But it is what it is..

Personally I think the statement is well worded and finally reflects what scouting has always stated it was but was not following, that they are now nonsectarian in its attitude toward religious training. And perhaps if your not a religion and can not deny people due to religious beliefs (ie. you have conducted yourself with respect for everyone around you, but since I know your a homosexual you can not be an BSA Adult leader).. But, if someone wants to be an adult leader (or is an adult leader) and they are "a leader bragging in front of the scouts and others about some kind of affair; or telling suggestive stories; or being drunk or high." Then yes, you have a right not to accept their application, or revoke it.. Same as you always did for all these things, even though none of these items fell into the category or refusing homosexuals, not because of some negative behavior that they promote to the scout youth, but just because they are homosexuals..

I heard those comments a lot in these forums.. Many did not want us to stay and push for change, but to leave and suggested we start our own group.. I do not think the answer then was to try to push us out, I don't think the answer now is for us to try to push you out.. But, I do think the answer is within everyone personally as to what is the best way for them to either figure out how to continue on and be true to your own convictions, or not.. No one can tell you what is right for you personally. All I can say is many of us who pushed for this change found reasons to stay with BSA and push for the right to be able to follow our own religious convictions eventually.. You might have heard that they would not change Adult leadership in the near future, but it was always worded in a way that told you that eventually the change would come, and that the majority of leadership at National knew this was the right direction that eventually had to happen.. They were just planning and hoping not to get as cornered as they did into making this change this soon after the change on the homosexual youth.. They wanted the conservative groups to get adjusted to the first change before taking the next step.. There was a pool as to when the change would come in our neck of the woods.. This change came earlier then I thought, my bet was for 5 years after they voted to accept gay youth.. Others I knew thought it would be only a year, but I knew that would have been too early.. Still others guessed it would be later then my 5 year prediction, but not much later.. I think the latest was about 7 years last I heard.

I have been reading this interaction about civil law and cannon law for a page or two.. I guess, I am totally confused about the debate, it must be more then the fact that courts can put a dispute with the Catholic Church on trial, and consider the Catholic church in the wrong and liable whether monetarily or with prison time.. Many of the child molestations by catholic priests and the cover up, where all done in civil court and Catholic church ended up paying a ton of dough for their actions, and several priest wound up with jail time.. Catholic Church has done ALOT to change their process to make sure they now comply with the legalities that is required for youth protection.. This shows that Catholic churches are definitely not of the view they are above the law (they might have thought so, but not anymore)... Also courts have presided on things like the school employee who was fired for using in vitro insemination.. The court found the catholic church in the wrong.. Many court cases upheld the churches stance, but others did not.. Clearly you guys are arguing on a different plane, that I am not comprehending.. Could you explain?

Still say no comparison between Divorced, unwed cohabitation and homosexuals.. Divorced/unwed can just live their lives and so if Catholic they may not get communion, if not Catholic they don't even get that to tell them someone thinks it's a sin.. Most divorced/unwed even if religious will not consider their lifestyle sinful.. So, no, the reason they were accepted as scout leaders is not because they are sorry for their sins and have repented.. Currently homosexuals can not "just live their lives", and just be denied communion. I am not saying the Catholic church can not have these double standards, or any religion can not have them.. But, just thankfully with local option we all do not have to follow someone else's belief.. Also since I do not have to follow some others religious groups belief system, I have no problem with them exercising it in the local option.. All I am saying is again.. "No" the difference between homosexuals and divorced/unwed cohabitators is that the latter groups understand and are so repentant of the some sin that someone else religious group (perhaps their own) has labeled them with.

As for the Catholic church they have the right to refuse to accept him as a leader in their troop, just as they have the right to not accept anyone for any reason.. I half believe the comment "When WLKY asked the Archdiocese of Louisville, if homosexuals will be allowed as scout leaders, a spokesperson said "it depends.".. I could see more conservative Catholic Churches simply not accepting any homosexuals as an adult leader.. It is really unclear what the Catholic position will be, but I expect it will be fine with some guidelines on how their Catholic Churches can conduct themselves.. It may be not accepting any in volunteer positions, it might be allowing homosexuals into committee positions but not direct contact, I would be surprised if they allowed churches the freedom of their own decision. All would be fine decisions for them, that is the local option.. This guy looks like he would not be welcomed if the argument had been on something else other then homosexuality, because this guy now has the opportunity to go to another unit (if his personality was one another unit would welcome, "cheerful service" rather then "chip on the shoulder"..) Yet he would prefer to fight the same old battle.. Some have predicted that public opinion will side with him and see the Catholic church as wrong.. My prediction is that you will find only a few beating that drum, while the majority of people will not see this as a major problem worth their time to get involved with.. The article itself only has 4 comments, not hundreds, which already shows a waning interest in who thinks you need to try to pressure churches to accept what is against their religious beliefs.. Now as for people comparing this to divorce and trying to say that divorced people are welcome because they are repentant, or those who live out of wedlock are welcome because they are repentant, but gays should not be because they are not repentant... PHOOOEYYY!!! Couple divorcing is the buzz for the week, when they introduce you to their new love interest, it may or may not create a buzz for a week, when they remarry probably no buzz at all.. Same with people who live together, maybe some buzz if they break up, and either move to new love interest or get back together.. But no more then a week.. Thing is, todays society accepts this, and even with some gossip very few, very few units would ask their scout leaders to step down because of it.. The divorced people / unmarried couple just go about living their life and few would see their lives sinful.. Many would probably be insulted if you started preaching to them about their sinful ways.

Very true SpEdScouter, that is the reason there are girls who want to be in boy scouts not girl scouts, because girl scouts does not offer them what they want. That is also the reason co-ed boy scouts will probably have little effect on the membership numbers of girl scouts, because a lot of those in girl scouts are in a group they prefer.

Oh yes, a pie emotions would work just fine.. I was just thinking of what other forums I belong to have in their bag of tricks, so it was cake, beer and martini glasses, also some shamrocks and stars and rainbows (but those might be a little too girlie for BSA, and right now some would protest the use of the rainbow emotion when trying to send a peace offering..)