What is Morally Straight?

[Rooster7]

Before you jump on me...I will remain faithful to my vow to remain silent on the issue.

 

However, I would like to offer this in defense of Dedicated Dad's statement that apparently has offended at least one person. Exaggeration is a debating technique. When used properly, it can demonstrate the error of one's logic when carried to an extreme. Obviously no one on this site advocates incest. His example proves that two consenting adults, even if no one else is being harmed, can be immoral.

 

[P_Swigs]

Nowhere in any of my postings did I even have a twinkle of a thought that any of the putrid examples made by DD were acceptable anywhere.

 

I am tired of arguing, so I am going to do as Rooster is doing - opt for silence in this forum and spend my time on our Troop's program and high adventure treks. Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas!

[OldGreyEagle]

Dad I want to take you through a progression and you let me know where you disagree, as if I could stop you...

 

In our country's past we had a time when Americans were able to own other human beings and trade them like sticks of furniture. It was legal. Some of our foremost early statesman owned slaves. Ministers preached from the pulpit that white dominance was supported by the bible, it was not considered a perversion then, yet today our country views slavery as the highest perversion of human/civil rights.

 

Times change

 

It was not until the 1920's that women were allowed to vote. Every one just knew that women's brains were just constructed in a way that made life choice decisions impossible for them to deal with. My grandfather sent his son, my uncle, to college but not my mother because, .... well because she was a woman. Today to take away a persons right to vote based on sex would be considered a perversion.

 

Times change

 

During the Second World War some American Citizens had their property seized and were herded into interment camps based purely on ethnic background. This was done with the best intentions. Since the Sept 11th attacks the President and the government reiterates constantly that Muslims, especially American Muslims are not the enemy.

 

Times change

 

As you pointed out, perversion, usually sexual, is a deviation from the norm. But who gets to establish the norm? The majority?

 

There was a time when women were seen as perverted if they had a hint of a libido, today it is acknowledged that desire in both husband and wife is an asset to their relationship.

 

Times change

 

I have seen postings that say its simple to tell homosexuality is a perversion because its against nature. As I view nature I only see one creature that disrupts nature as much as man. We change the course of rivers, we build machines to help us fly, navigate water ways, bring the light of day into the night and visit the moon. We destroy the terrain of other species and at times cause them to be wiped off the face of the earth.

Because no other creature has this ability then can humans in total be considered a perversion? I hope not because I intend to keep using the goods and products of mans genius. God gives us the ability t change our environment and I would think it wrong not to use our talents. During the Industrial Revolution environmental concerns were minimal at best. Today companies tout their concern for the environment.(though tree huggers are way out there)

 

Times change

 

What I object most to is the use of the word perversion to label an activity that we dont comprehend.

 

We in the BSA have chosen to not allow homosexual leaders and as a private organization we have the right to set membership requirements, we know this because the Supreme Court says so. In a country where personal freedom is sacred I dont see any other choice.

 

Homosexuals are free to their pursuit of happiness and the BSA is free to pursue its path without the company of homosexual leaders.

 

I do think this may be accomplished without using terms like perversion, amoral, ect. We made this decision and as Eiseley lets us know, it has challenged us in many areas of the country. But then again, charactor is forged in difficult times, not easy times.

 

We took a stand and must weather the storm

 

Will times ever change so homosexual leaders are not barred from boy scouts? I dont have that answer, but I do know that sometimes what seems right at the time, when viewed by history is completely wrong.

 

I would like to be the side that takes the high moral road, stands up for our decisions and their consequences and does not name call or label.(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[evmori]

OGE,

Excellent post! I couldn't agree more. In my opinion, the morality of this country was going in the dumper until September 11th. That tragic event seems to have helped people realize what was happening. The moral high ground is the only way to go. Yes, times change but that doesn't mean the changes are good. Scouting has stood strong through these changes and I pray will continue to stand strong in the future.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

[andrews]

You still haven't dealt with why homosexuality is not immoral, but other sexual relationships "between consenting adults" are.

 

Defining deviancy down leads to making more and more acceptable.

 

To argue "things change" is a shaky basis for anything. Things change for the better AND for the worse.

 

>

 

What is there to "understand" about homosexuality? It is a pretty clear issue, and choice.

 

The "we can't judge" idea is a falacy, because we judge all the time. You even judge my stance as wrong. What is really being said is that no one can disagree with whatever is currently politically correct.

 

Brad

[sctmom]

::::: standing and applauding OGE's excellent and intelligent post :::::

 

[Dedicated Dad]

OGE

With all due and great respect to you I thank you for your heart felt well thought out post. In this great country of ours, we are all responsible as citizens to lead and sustain a civilized society that is in the best interests of man, woman and child. The selfishness of Liberaltarianism, cloaked in liberty, leads us down a path of repugnance and baseness that is contrary to the intent of our founding fathers. As to your mixed metaphors, they all speak to the difference between innate condition and behavior. our country views slavery as the highest perversion of human/civil rights. take away a persons right to vote based on sex American Citizens had their property seized and were herded into interment camps based purely on ethnic background. women were seen as perverted All of your points affirm the wrongs committed by our country, however they are not equal or fair comparisons to behavioral choices because race, creed, color and gender are not a chosen behavior where as homosexuality is. I know you think differently, but is that because to choose not to investigate the science or that you see no evil, speak no evil or hear no evil, sorry no dig intended? If you believe any of the highly reported Hammer, LeVay or twins studies that erroneously endorsed homosexuality as innate condition but then underreported for their bias and the ability to be re-created under similar conditions, you are just another sheeple in the hand of propaganda. Youre welcome to get out your scientific studies and Ill get out mine, so we can debate the legitimacy of being born that way or being a chosen behavior. As you pointed out, perversion, usually sexual, is a deviation from the norm. That is the usual tactic of the uninformed, but I have never said that or implied it. Deviating from the norm is part of what made this country great, but deviating from what is intrinsically right or wrong will overtly be seen for its truth and sobriety. But who gets to establish the norm? The majority? No, the essential virtues of right and wrong establish the healthy well being of our society. I have seen postings that say its simple to tell homosexuality is a perversion because its against nature. Not from me. But for the record, part of the definition of perversion is, see previous post, homosexuality. As I view nature I only see one creature that disrupts nature as much as man. We change the course of rivers. Because no other creature has this ability then can humans in total be considered a perversion? Of course not, we as the highest order of beings seek to strengthen our environment for the betterment of society. To analogize it with perversion is specious and arbitrary. Its in our nature to choose our destinies, free will and all that. What I object most to is the use of the word perversion to label an activity that we dont comprehend. Speak for yourself, the act is repugnant to that which is good, right and true, should you choose to investigate the validity of its definition, as it pertains to homosexuality, you may see the truth. In a country where personal freedom is sacred I dont see any other choice. Homosexuals are free to their pursuit of happiness As well they are, but they dont deserve any special rights for their behavior as that would make them more equal than all of us. We as Scouters need to have the capacity to distinguish between right and wrong behavior and it is our obligation to separate ourselves from others irresponsible conduct. I do think this may be accomplished without using terms like perversion, amoral, ect. And it is here, in your last comment, I believe we find the crust of your concern. You label my clinical use of the word perversion, as name-calling, and weve wasted a lot of ink to get to this point. Shall we soft peddle certain wrong behaviors with words like gay and transgendered or is it best to accurately define said behaviors so they can be seen for what they are? It is the act by which they define themselves, I believe its our duty to bring to light filth and degradation so that it can seen for the depravity that it is. I will have you know that in a similar debate with a homosexual former Eagle Scout, he readily admits that his behavior is perversion by definition, and though his testimony is anecdotal it serves as a bellwether to measure others. You chose not to answer whether or not perversion is good, right and true and I believe the reason you didnt is because you cant, in good conscience, call the act of debauchery anything more than what it is. I would like to be the side that takes the high moral road, stands up for our decisions and their consequences and does not name call or label. And Nero fiddled while Rome burned.

 

 

[Dedicated Dad]

ArbitrarilyEnumeratedMachoFowl

 

I extend to you, one free token for comment without any retribution to your self imposed exile.

 

 

[Rooster7]

Amen.

[evmori]

>>The "we can't judge" idea is a falacy, because we judge all the time. You even judge my stance as wrong. What is really being said is that no one can disagree with whatever is currently politically correct.

[eisely]

OGE,

 

A thoughtful post. Dedicated dad does make a point however in that the dispute over homosexuality is a dispute over behavior and its place in a youth movement.

 

Dedicated Dad,

 

I understand where you are coming from, and obviously there are very strongly held views. One of the difficulties other participants have with your posts is the vehemence of some of your language. One of the reasons I avoid the use of some the terminology that you use is that it becomes a dialogue of the deaf. Just as promoters of gay rights seek to label scouts as homophobic and shut down all debate by name calling, your choice of words often has the same effect. I know that this is not what you intend but that is the effect.

 

I agree that some specific homosexual acts are perverted, but in using that language I shut down the minds and ears of the people I am trying to convince.

[evmori]

>> I agree that some specific homosexual acts are perverted, but in using that language I shut down the minds and ears of the people I am trying to convince.

[Mike Long]

You all get an F on your homework.

[Dedicated Dad]

Is everyone worn out over this one, I know I am? I dont know any other subject in America today that provokes the kind of passion that this does.

 

Eisely, I take to heart you input, your opinions are always fair and balanced. Youre correct to characterize my diction as vehement; my words are carefully chosen and meant to shakeout the cobwebs of apathy. I would take issue with your comparison to a pretend word like homophobia, I believe we could have rather lengthy discussion about whether words are factual and undistorted and constitute name-calling or whether words, like gay, are deceptions of the truth. Regardless, Im pretty sure we can agree that if I were to choose my words differently, you and others are still going to continue to use words, like gay, that soft-peddle the baseness hidden within their meanings. Those offended by my clinical use of certain words are not fence sitters and I believe no amount of agreeable dialog will sway their opinion to the truth, it is however, the real fence sitters that I hope to influence with a certain kind of truth in advertising approach.

 

Nevertheless, after its all said and done, after the frank debate that OGE prescribed in the preface, Id like think that we can at least agree to disagree and still work together to further this great institution we all know and love. In that spirit, I hope we can put this matter aside and to all I humbly and sincerely ask your forgiveness for my position on this subject.

 

 

 

[dan]

Homosexuals are free to their pursuit of happiness and the BSA is free to pursue its path without the company of homosexual leaders.

 

I do not believe the above statement fits with the BSA policy. What I read on the BSA site, it that the BSA will not go looking for gay leaders, they will only remove a leader or scout from the BSA if they come out of the closet!

Now imagine this a 17 year old scout is 2 months away from receiving his eagle and in a moment of distress he confines in you that he is gay, You only have one option you must remove him from the troop!

 

The policy is Don't ask Don't tell, I disliked this policy when I heard it the first time (from Our president) and I hate it when I heard it the 2nd time (BSA)