Looks like it's a done deal

[firstpusk]

"We went to the moon?

 

 

;-)"

 

Careful now. Are you sure Buzz Aldrin doesn't lurk on this board?

 

[SR540Beaver]

"We went to the moon?

 

Well, there are some who still maintain in the face of all the evidence that it was staged by Hollywood.

[CubsRgr8]

littlebillie and tjhammer,

 

I am NOT talking about a priest experiencing a crisis of faith. I am NOT talking about a widower who has an epiphany regarding his sexuality. I am NOT talking about the merits of evolution vs. intelligent design. I am NOT talking about BSA's policy on homosexuality.

 

I am talking about adults who are expected to influence youth, to instill in them very specific values. I am talking about adults who volunteer in a movement that, right up front on the application they sign, requires them to accept, embrace and promote Duty to God as one of those values.

 

I'm no paragon of virtue. I frequently fail to live up to the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Law, including Duty to God. But I never deny the worth of any one of those values, which I try my best to instill in the youth of the pack and troop I serve. These are the very same values you both agreed to promote when you signed up as adult leaders.

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by CubsRgr8)

[packsaddle]

KWC57, STAGED? You sayin' it wasn't?

 

ACCO40

If the BSA revoked the membership of every over weight SM, every smoker, etc. membership would decrease tremendously. Am I not trustworthy because I say the Scout Oath and am guilty of not getting enough sleep on camping trips?

I believe that smokers pose a greater proximate health threat to youth than atheists and that anyone with a drunk driving record should be bounced ASAP. But don't stop at overweight. From my observations even to place the bar higher, say, at 'obese' would eliminate 50% of leaders. We don't exactly cover ourselves with glory on personal fitness. But I get your point.

How does that Gilbert and Sullivan thing go, "If someday it should happen that some victims must be found,

I have this little list,

I have this little list.

Of society offenders who might well be underground,

and they'd none of 'em be missed,

they'd none of 'em be missed."

 

twin_wasp

I firmly believe that BSA has no business dictating theology to religious denominations, as they have done with the Unitarians over the requirements for their badge.

I agree with your statement but BSA didn't dictate to the UUs. The BSA 'excommunicated' them because they publicly disagreed with policy, a fate that has happened to others as well (look elsewhere among the threads). BSA has no allegiance to the First Amendment. (Yeah, yeah, I know, ScoutParent, 'go form my own organization...'.)

 

littlebillie

If there is no God, then we ARE animals, and if we are animals, we are cetainly social animals. among social animals certain behaviors promote survival of the species, and certain behaviors do not. As we are intelligent animals, we have codifed (well, overcodified, actually, but that's a different topic :-) our behaviors, and it DOES matter.

As my beer-swizzling, cigarette-smoking, obscenity-slinging, obese acquaintances like to say, "God made them in His image".

 

firstpusk

Intelligent design...Good answer, but it was invented long before...just took the creationists a while to learn to read.

 

NJCubScouter, I commend your patience, we know what science is around here as well. OK, some of us do anyway.

 

Firstpusk

Gee DeMann You're casting pearls, and this guy's already in orbit. Good suggestion, though, the community college.

 

tjhammer

Cubs --- that's not just LittleBillie's position, that's the official position of the BSA... for example, they don't ban homosexual Scouts and leaders if they are "closeted", and in the Lambert case, it seems the BSA was perfectly fine with him being an atheist, just as long as he lied to Scouting and said he wasn't.

Absolutely Right!!!

This is my beef with BSA. The BSA leadership is guilty of violating their own standards by acquiescing to silent lies! They are OK with having gays and atheists in scouting...as long as they keep quiet. Now there's an example to set for the boys! As a result the ensuing controversies embroil the organization in needless scrutiny and embarrassment over their hypocrisy rather than the real issues. Instead, we should not act ashamed of our policies. A perfect example to follow would be Albert Speer who alone (OK, maybe Hitler did too) truly believed in his cause and was unafraid to admit his actions. Not only that, he was proud and unashamed of it (until later). BSA should have followed this example and bounced Lambert WOFA. Then BSA should have loudly proclaimed our intolerance toward gays and atheists and persons who disagree with policy. Also that we have great diversity (Jews, hispanics, blacks, orientals, and Catholics) even though we could, if we wanted, exclude any of those kind as well.

But they won't and the reason is...in the words of Rush, it's all about money. It is the scouting equivalent of PTL club (Pass The Loot, that is) and it won't change as long as professionals ignore the standards for themselves...that they choose to impose on others. Someone needs to sweep the barn out in our organization but I see no brooms in sight.

 

[firstpusk]

packsaddle,

 

I agree with you on both points. I have to make the argument even if he won't listen. There may be others willing to educate themselves.

[littlebillie]

CubsRgr8

 

"But I never deny the worth of any one of those values..."

 

You say that, but you seem to really think that there are no atheists who can see the value of religion for others, and who would encourage others to keep their faith if the can.

 

If a person cannot themselves believe, but encourages the comfort and direction and belonging that faith can bring for others, wha problem do you have with that? We had a couple of boys from a two-dad family in our original Pack before the school kicked us out. Should those boys have not been allowed to join?

 

 

Ya know, these are only a couple of the many shades of gray that stand between the black and white that others seem to think defines the world.

 

The word is avowed. And the excerpts posted here seem only to address supporting faith, not necessarily having it.

[Bob White]

The assumption some posters are making in this thread is that the BSA is unconcerned with scouters who do not support scoutings values of fitness or citizenship only character, and that is not in fact true. A leader who does not support scouting values of patriotism or participating citizenship is just as likely to be removed from membership as a leader that does not support the character values. The same is true of fitness. A good example is a leader that promotes the use of tobacco or drugs is not doing their best to support fitness and can be, and have been, removed.

 

Those kinds of things are not as controversial or news worthy and do not interfere with a vocal political agenda and so there is not as much made of them by disgruntled members or outside political action groups. But they happen none the less.

 

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Weekender]

Scout Parent,

 

What irritates me about the public schools is that the government forces you to give them money and then saysIts perfectly OK to tell a child the reason he is here is because a couple piles of mud and muck got together and decided it would be nice to be a fish and a couple fish got together and decided they would rather be squirrel and so onbut dont you dare tell him that he was fearfully and wonderfully made by a God who loves him and values him and would move heaven and earth if He had to to show you His love (after all, who wants a child to think he has intrinsic value). Its perfectly OK to tell a young boy entering puberty that if he is confused he should try having sex with another boy to see if its what he wantsbut dont you dare tell him that he was designed physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually to be with a woman and only after becoming an adult. Its perfectly OK to tell a 13-year-old girl that having sex is fine as long as she uses a condom, but dont you dare tell her that she should abstain from sex until she is married. Its perfectly OK to tell a 15-year-girl that killing her unborn child is as valid an option as any other, but you dare tell her that she is carrying a living human being who also has value. In the public schools cheating is fine as long as you dont get caught, but if you dowell just have your mommy go in and threaten the principal until the teacher is forced to give you a passing grade anyway. No wonder the rest of the world sees us the way they do. We are teaching our kids to ignore any kind of moral compass and to do whatever feels good and not worry about the consequences. I'm not given the choice not to support this perversion but I certainly won't put my children in it.

 

 

NJ, LittleB, FirstP, et. al.,

Sorry folks, there are consequences for teaching our children that life has no value and whether you want to believe it or not that IS what they are being taught. We see the results in increased teen pregnancy, suicide, and drug and alcohol abuse. A child who reveres God, respects others, and knows they have valueThats the child our schools were first designed to producethats the young man the BSA strives forI dont understand why so many of you have a problem with that. I personally dont agree with the founding and guiding principles of the various mason organizationsso I dont join. If you, or Mr. Lambert, disagree with the founding and guiding principles of the BSA you have the same option.

 

[littlebillie]

Weekender - "A child who reveres God, respects others, and knows they have value". Hmmm - see, that's not what public schools are supposed to produce - that's what parents are supposed to produce. I think a kid needs to learn this properly and completely at home, first, and then in their church. then when the school system gets them, the kids are good to go! My kid KNOWS he has value, and I know he has VALUES - I'm sorry your background DEvalues the parents' roles in this. From my perspective, the public schools are NOT there to take my place in teaching ethics or self-respect or filial devotion or reverence for God, and most especially not the specifics and details of my religion. That should not be what a PUBLIC school teaches.

 

Once they start that, where do you suggest it end? Teach Christian precepts and stop? Teach Judaica to the Buddhists and let it go at that? Teach one religion, ya gotta teach them all, in public school.

 

Schools ARE trying to get their arms around diversity in a way that is all inclusive, and showing us that all people have value - unfortunately in the eyes of some, this includes gays. So - diversity gets trashed...

 

Let the public schools teach the reading, writing, basic science, auto shop and etc. If this isn't good enough for you, and you can't teach the necessary ethics, values and morals yourself, send your child to a private school, a religious school, whatever.

 

Whew, never thought of THIS way before, but this really is so much easier on folks who accept a symbolic rather than a literal genesis.

 

And hey, W'ender, just where do you get off insinuating that I promote the devaluation of life?!? Apparently you'd like to see the devaluation of truth and fact be taught in the schools. Fer cryin' out loud....

 

 

Oh, wait, I know :-)

 

If you don't like the current public schools, start your OWN public school system!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SR540Beaver]

weekender,

 

I am a devout Southern Baptist Christian with a degree in Religion. I am raising my son with the values I learned from my parents, who learned them from their parents. As a Southern Baptist educated in a Southern Baptist University, I not only know what I believe, I know why I believe it. Because of that, while I respect other people's denominations and beliefs, I don't agree with many of their teachings. They read the same Bible as me and get totally different interprtations. I leave my son's religious education to myself and our church. My son attends public school. It is not his school's job to teach him about God. In fact, I would be very upset if they did. What if one teacher is Jewish and another is Catholic? What if the principal is Muslim. Their teaching about God will reflect their brand of religion and it is not what I believe and not what I want my son learning. Many of my son's teachers and his principal are in fact Christians. That comes out in the way they conduct their daily life and the example they set. That is all the "religious" teaching I want my son's school to do. While I don't agree with an Atheist, what convinces you that someone who does not believe in God or someone who believes in evolution (not the same thing) has no respect for life or basic human values? The gangbanger kids who run around killing others are not doing it because they are not being taught Creationism in schools. It is because they come from homes where God is not taught. The problems in society are not the schools, it is the families. Teachers have influence over kids, but not a 10th as much as parents and family do. Ask any teacher about their good and bad students and which one has parents that are concerned with their kids behavior and education. They will tell you that the good students come from homes where the parents are involved and concerned with the kid's development, values and education....hands down.

[NJCubScouter]

BobWhite says:

 

A leader who does not support scouting values of patriotism or participating citizenship is just as likely to be removed from membership as a leader that does not support the character values. The same is true of fitness. A good example is a leader that promotes the use of tobacco or drugs is not doing their best to support fitness and can be, and have been, removed.

 

Those kinds of things are not as controversial or news worthy and do not interfere with a vocal political agenda and so there is not as much made of them by disgruntled members or outside political action groups.

 

So what you're saying is that only things that are controversial are controversial. Is that a surprise? Anyway, I have not seen anyone say, and I certainly have not said, that Scouters do not get removed for violating rules unrelated to "character." Of course they do, but it has nothing to do with the issues of avowed gay leaders (on which I disagree with the BSA) or avowed atheist leaders (on which I do not disagree with the BSA, with some qualifications I have mentioned in other posts.) Each ground (or proposed ground) for removing a leader has to be evaluated on its own merits.

 

As for "vocal political agenda," well, which vocal political agenda are you referring to? The agenda that calls for the automatic exclusion of gay leaders? Because no matter how much you (or the BSA) try to couch it in terms of "character" or "values," it is part of a political agenda. (Or if you prefer, a religious agenda, but in this situation politics and religion become interchangeable. And, regardless of terminology, the anti-gay agenda should not be codified in BSA policy even if it is a religious agenda -- especially if it is a relgious agenda. The same Declaration of Religious Principle that compels me to support (or at least accept) the removal of avowed atheists, declares that the BSA is nonsectarian, yet sectarian is exactly what it is when it requires members to follow a precept of one group of religions over another group of religions.)

 

By the way, of course I know that the anti-gay political agenda is not the agenda you are referring to. You are referring to the "agenda" that believes that a person is not automatically of bad character solely because they are an avowed homosexual. If that is a "political agenda," I plead guilty to being part of it.

 

As for "disgruntled members," is that what you call members of an organization or society who would like to see the authorities change their policy, and who exercise their powers of speech and the available media to petition for redress of grievances? All such people are to be dismissed as "disgruntled members"? So much for citizenship, I guess. I know the BSA is technically a "private organization," but in an organization that is based on the principle of citizenship in the community, nation and world, there is nothing wrong with a little internal citizenship either.

[firstpusk]

Weekender,

 

Unpack that gunnysack a little more often. I don't know that I have seen a longer list of misrepresentations and unfounded gripes. I have volunteered enough in the schools and known too many public school teachers to buy that truckload you are selling. Frankly, I am appalled at your willingness to cast aspersions applenty. It is not enough that question the integrity of everyone involved in public education. No, you have the temerity to ask fellow scouters to leave because they don't buy your theology. I thank God and BP, the movement is more ecumenical than you or ScoutParent are comfortable with.

[Rooster7]

yet sectarian is exactly what it is when it requires members to follow a precept of one group of religions over another group of religions.

 

Hmmm. Exactly, what precepts are you referencing? Truth be told, by the above standard or guide, BSA cannot in good conscience ask it members to subscribe to any precept. By some peoples interpretation of their faith, even murder can be viewed as acceptable - given the right circumstances. Is it truly wrong to steal if its your only means to feed your family? Is lying wrong if it prevents others from having hurt feelings? Almost every point of the Scout Law can be circumvented if BSA accepts all professed faiths without question. We NEED to share certain moral bonds (values). If we dont share those bonds, then BSA cant claim itself to be a character building, faith based (or if you prefer values based) organization. Otherwise, whats the yardstick or standard? How do we know that a boys character is being developed properly? What values are we to instill? BSAs values cannot be relative to each Scout or Scouters faith. Aberrant beliefs (religiously based or not) should not be dictators of BSA values and/or policies. If someones faith believes lying is acceptable, then BSA has the right to, and should, still teach its unacceptability. So, under these circumstances, I agree with Weekender. If someone doesn't like the value - trustworthy - and prefers to view lying as acceptable behavior, they are free to leave BSA. In summary, while I realize some folks may want to take this too far, some folks on this board dont want to go far enough.

 

[Weekender]

Wow, Y'all didn't just miss the boat on that one...you're in the wrong port. I did NOT say parents should abdicate their responsibilities related to raising their children. Just the opposite. Parents need to take that back from a corrupt and morally bankrupt school system.

 

The public school system was ORIGINALLY intended to reinforce values and character in children in conjunction with what they learned at home. And yes, I believe America was founded on Judeo-Christian values and so were the schools. The founding statements of universities such as Harvard and Stanford bear that out.

[SR540Beaver]

weekender - Wow, Y'all didn't just miss the boat on that one...you're in the wrong port. I did NOT say parents should abdicate their responsibilities related to raising their children. Just the opposite. Parents need to take that back from a corrupt and morally bankrupt school system.

 

We understood what you said. But look at what you said, "Parents need to take that back from a corrupt and morally bankrupt school system." I don't know about you Weekender, but I don't have to take that back from the school system. In the first place, they didn't take it and in the second place, I never gave it up.

 

I'm sorry you live in a town with such a dismal school system. Just because you were bitten by a black dog does not mean that all black dogs bite. We live in a town with a great school system. My son's pulic school has a school creed and each class has a class creed that are all value based. The classes work on a behavior chart system. If a kid does something wrong, it is marked up. After 3 marks, the kid goes to the principal. Parents are notified if it becomes a real problem. Enough infractions and you end up sitting in the principal's office all day doing your school work. The principla and teachers encourage parent participation in every aspect of school. Parents are always welcome....anytime. Each week, a behavior folder is sent home with the student for the parent to review and sign. They have a homework/assignment folder that is brought home each night for parents to review and sign. Each week, there is a before school volunteer devotional program the students can attend. All of this in a state that ranks about 47th in teacher pay out of 50 states. My son's school teaches values, character, self-discipline, respect, etc. In fact, my son brought home a "Kids of Character" certificate for self-discipline last week. Your depiction of the public school system is colored by either your perception or your experience just like mine. Here where I live, I couldn't ask for more, it is great. My son gets an education from public school where respect of others and character values are taught along with the three R's and his religious training is handled by his family and church. Perhaps you should move here to Oklahoma where you can get some use out of your tax dollars.