Pregnant Leader

[matuawarrior]

Rooster7

 

The AG Church, that I'm a member of, and the Foundation are two different institutions. We, somehow, I'm not sure how it happened, affilliated the foundation with the Local AG Church here. Most of the members of the units are also members of the AG Church. The Scouts and Venturers are active members with the Church's Youth Group.

 

Another Example of how the Church influences with our program is our monthly outing. We used to camp throughout the weekend. Now we do Friday-Saturday overnights. Rarely do we camp on a Sunday. If we do a Long weekend campout, We plan for a Church Service during Sunday morning at camp complete with song sheets, guitars, and a short message on the Word that relates to Scoutings Ideals. I didn't decide on the change it was our SPL and Crew President. I believe it was two years ago when this happened. I remember the Pastor talking to me about the Sabbath, Fellowshipping with the Church Family, and setting the example. I mentioned that I would bring it up to my core leaders at the next Leadership Corps Seminar (PLC). At that meeting, the SPL and Crew President were talking to their respective councils the exact same thing the Pastor had spoken to me the night before: the Sabbath, fellowshipping with the Church Family, and setting the example. The Jr. Leaders voted for no more activities on Sundays. God is now First and has been since. I just sat there dumbfounded. It was a Classic Strategy of Divide and Conquer. The Youth Pastor had talked to the SPL and Crew President the night before just has I was talking to the Head Pastor. They actually did a better job in presenting their case before the two councils.

 

AS per the question on morality on Guam, I would say it's not getting any better. That is why Scouting is so important here. The last 20 years morality has been declining. When I was in high school during the mid 80's, teen pregnancy was hushed. You would see maybe one or two pregnant girls in school. NOW, no pun intended, but it seems that it is a requirement to have a baby or be pregnant to graduate. There are still some families that are following the old traditional ways. That's great but they are slowly becoming extinct. Scouting and the Churches (Any Denomination) need to unite to bring back God's Values to this island. Until then Big Business Marketing, Hollywood, liberal media will have their way influencing society. The Good News -- The Protestant Churches are growing. Maybe it may not be to late after all.

 

Matua

 

[acco40]

For religions that profess to have strict Sabbath policies, I wonder how they determine when the Sabbath occurs. Most Christians consider the Sabbath as Sunday, Hebrews, Saturday. Can anyone elighten me as why? Is it not more important to set aside time (a day for some) to reflect on God, faith and spiritual endeavors and less improtant on the particular time when it is done. Myself, I prefer Wednesdays.

 

Mark, do I read your post to say that morality is a majority decision or more of a when in Rome, do as the Romans? I'm not trying to make light of what you wrote, just trying to understand.

 

I think it is good for our youth to have role models. I also believe that exposing the youth to the trials and tribulations of single parenthood (regardless if by death, divorce, out of wedlock birth, adoption, or whatever) teaches by example. Most professional organizations use recovering members to teach the evils of XXX (recovering alcoholics, former cult members, gamblers, etc.). As long a the pregnant Venturer (?) is not advocating her previous actions to the youth, I think that the CO and the BSA could be excellent role models for the youth (teaching tolerance) by accepting her membership (taking into account all of her other qualities). The young lady can also be an excellent role model by showing the youth how she overcame adversity.

[evmori]

"I'm surprised that you can't see how the story of the Prodigal Son would apply to this situation. I have taught lessons, led bible studies and even preached on the subject a number of times over the years and think it is very appropriate for this situation. I would suggest that you meditate on the passage and it should become clearer to you.

 

I'm unclear on how the passage you cited applies. How would someone becoming pregnant outside of marriage considered those actions as being beneficial to themselves?"

 

kwc57,

Led a few Bible studies in my time, too. The passages I cited I feel go to the heart of the situation. While waiting until she graduated HS to get pregnant could be considered admirable but the decision to be an unwed mother is not. being pregnant is permissible but being pregnant while unmarried is not beneficial or constructive.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[packsaddle]

FYI, Guam is approximately 98% Roman Catholic with smatterings of various Protestant flavors here and there. However, the historical roots extending to times before the Spanish conquest are a society that is matriarchal (the Spanish, needless to say, could not comprehend this). It is common, according to my Guamanian friends, for all adults in a family (and close friends) to consider themselves 'parents' of a particular child. Extended family in the truest sense. My friends say that an unwed mother is likely to be viewed with less condemnation than on the mainland USA. This thread seems to be living up to that.

[NWScouter]

First information for acco40. The Sabbath for Jews is Saturday as it is the seventh day of week and is the day God rested during creation. As the first Christians were Jews they would go to the synagogue on Saturday and then because Jesus rose on Sunday that would hold their Christian worship on Sunday. At least that how it it was explained to me at Sunday School, confirmation and Bible College. There are Christian Groups that have Seventh Day in their names that believe that it must be Saturday.

More on point to the thread, I was amused when I went through Venturing Leaders training and learned under the rules as they are now, I would not have been allowed to be a leader when I got married back in the 7Os. If both my wife and I had been involved in Venturing one of us would have to leave. For I was twenty-one and she was one week shy of her nineteenth birthday . And no we didnt have to get married may now Eagle scout didnt come fore two years.

I do understand the rules as the disruption of the unit can happen with the dynamics of dating/mating game in coed groups. But the actual mechanics of enforcing them can seem foolish. At summer camp the staff laugh at the requirement that if a staff members turns eighteen during the camp season, the birthday boy/girl has to pack up his/her stuff and move from the under eighteen living space to the over eighteen spaces.

In her case I am in agreement with it being the Charter Partners call, but I think that the it also should be their call also in all cases, except for the safety of youth. For the BSA allows women in all leadership but does not make individual Charter Partners accept them. They let Charter Partners set their own age requirements for membership in the various levels. They can have no girls in Venturing if they wish or I imagine that they could have all girls.

 

 

[Hunt]

Now that we have more of the facts, it's easier to distinguish this case from that of an "avowed" homosexual. For this woman, her sin is in the past, and she has expressed remorse. For an avowed homosexual, especially one who continues in the behavior, this is not the case. In a case like this, you really have to leave it to local option, because somebody has to make a judgment about the person's character and the sincerity of their repentance. So even though I tend to think the gay leader issue should be local option too, I can see how this case is different, and easier.

[mk9750]

acco40,

 

Your question to me gets to the core of major philosophical arguement I have with myself all of the time.

 

I think it is very reasonable to say that morality is what society says it is. If this is not reasonable, than far too many societies in the past must be viewed as immoral. Would not older cultures who practiced animal sacrifices not be immoral by today's standards? But even if they would now be immoral, can we say they were immoral in a time that was so different than our own? I'd rather not phrase it as you have, that morality is decided by popular vote. But I think it is a function of the general situation of the society that is current at the time.

 

My dilema: Using this same philosophy, if our current society moves from a general belief that some of today's activities are immoral, to one of accepting those activities, must I then accept them as moral myself?

 

Let's examine the issue of this thread. I cannot fathom me believing that premarital sex is moral. I just don't see me ever accepting that. I think that our American society, despite obvious evidence to the contrary, also believes that premarital sex is immoral. But let's face it: I, and people like me, are fighting a losing battle. Movement on this issue goes from inpercepable to momentous. But at some point in our culture's future, my attitude will be out of style. It might even become unacceptable to think like I do. When that change happens, how do I reconcile my beliefs with society's standards?

 

This is true as far as homosexuality goes, too, in my opinion. American culture always used to say that homosexuality was wrong. I agree with that stance. Now, I think it is obvious that our culture is changing. I try to fight it. I know others do too. But sooner or later, we as a society will be saying that those of us who say homosexuality is immoral will be old fashioned.

 

My difficulty comes in applying my two positions. How can it be acceptable to view morality from the frame of reference of society's standards, but reject those things that I view as immoral, even though society might not? I'm just not smart enough to figure this one out on my own.

 

Mark

[SM406]

Society in general may collectively decide what it believes to be moral. But what is this morality based on? If it is based on a collection of popular beliefs, then it can change with the tides. It can change to fit the morals of which ever group is the most persistent and vocal (i.e. the homosexual community). However if morality is faith based, with direct ties to the Old and New Testaments then it will never change. Societys morality can change but that change could still be immoral in Gods view (homosexuality, infidelity and adultery are still immoral). I am viewed as old fashioned and intolerant in Societies opinion, but I am not here to please Society, I am here to please my God.

 

It does not matter to me how nice they are or how well they relate to the boys. A pregnant unmarried 18 year old girl is not any more a proper role model for 11 to 17 year old Boy Scouts as an avowed homosexual is. However, once the homosexual renounces his preferences and goes straight and once the girl marries and has the child, and they are repentant and seek forgiveness from God, then and only then would they be welcome in my Troop.

 

[mk9750]

SM406,

 

Your response is exactly what I would like things to be. So what I am about to say is not disagreement with you, but a further explaination of why I struggle with this isse.

 

You spoke about morality, if defined by religious principles, particurly the Old and New Testement, being able to withstand the test of time. And I agree. However, I think it is very presumtuous of we who are Judeo (sp?) Christians to represent that we have the only legitimate religion. I believe that the way to eternal salvation is by accepting Christ, and all that that includes. But I don't think my belief has a "corner on the market". Heck, we may find out when we meet our maker that our ideas were all wrong and we should have been worshipping frogs all along. Of course I don't believe that, but intellectually, I have to accept that I am a believer in God and Jesus, not a knower. I could be wrong.

 

So if I could be wrong, then the vast majority of society would also be wrong. And if society is wrong, other cultures, perhaps cultures that do not believe as we do, might be right. Maybe it isn't immoral to be naked. Maybe it isn't immoral to have multiple wives, as some cultures encourage.

 

And IF our morals are wrong, then someone else's were right all along. And we have condemned those morals just as they have codemned ours. So who's really right? You and I, and most of the people we each know, believe we are. But we don't KNOW that we are.

 

I intend to lead my life by what I believe to be true. But I acknowledge I could be wrong. If I am wrong, I hope whatever it is we find on the other side is benevolent. And if I hope for benevolence for me, I have to hope for the same for others who have chosen to believe something different (or by circumstance are ignorant). I hope that my morals are judged satisfactory by whatever being decides my fate after human life. And if I have that hope for myself, then I have to allow that other's morals may be acceptable to my God. And if acceptable to my God, can they be wrong, just because they are different than my own?

 

Man, even I think it's getting deep in here. Maybe I better quit while I'm not too far behind.

 

Mark

[SM406]

Thanks Mark. I too have struggled with the very same issues you are. Just whose beliefs are right or wrong? I too wanted to know the right answers and if I was right. And for years I professed to be a Christian, but a little part of me held out, just by chance I had it all wrong.

 

Since I have been in Scouting, I found Scouting to be an organization that was wholesome, fun and originally based on a set of morals, similar to those found in the Bible, worthy of teaching young lads. Recently society has started to change and a new set of morals are being developed by society that are clearly not Biblically based and are being shoved down everyones throat. Scouting so far has resisted this shift and this has caused me to do a little soul searching. I finally decided that Scouting is worth defending and rather than waffling about whose right or wrong, fully BELIEVE Scouting is right. I also BELIEVE the Bible is the word of God. Sure I do not really know, but I believe. I respect others beliefs even atheist and frog worshippers, I just no longer believe they possibly may be right.

 

SM406

 

[fboisseau]

For me morality is not based on scripture, but making the choices that cause the least harm to society and yourself. In the two examples stated in the thread (homosexuality and sex outside of marriage) I have to come down against them because I see evidence that they harm society. First both examples are based on the presumption that if it feels good do it. This presumption in our society causes all sorts of social problems, including the following: transmission of diseases, the break-up of marriages (studies have shown that two opposite sex parents are necessary for well-adjusted children/future adults), drug use, alcohol abuse, poverty, and un-wed pregnancies. My beliefs does allow for the break-up a marriage for such things as abuse, because does society no good to have its citizens living in fear of others and abuse in the home teaches it to the children in the home. A course following this view is never easy because the right/moral thing is never easy.

[mk9750]

SM406,

 

Your last phrase, "...I just no longer believe they may possibly be right." leads me to an obvious next question. What will happen to those who don't believe what we believe? (I am assuming we fave the same belief). What becomes of Ghandi? Or the souls who spent their entire lives never having gotten the chance to believe what we believe? Or can being wrong still get one to heaven?

 

Mark

 

 

[evmori]

Mark,

I'm not speaking for SM406. Just tossing in my 2 cents worth. I'll probably get change.

 

Those who don't believe will spend eternity in Hades. Those who you said never had the chance will be in the same place. God has given us all the chance to follow him.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[mk9750]

Ed,

 

Boy, I just don't know about that. I see God as benevolent, and I don't believe everyone has the oppurtunity to believe what we believe. With your stance, all Jews who lived before Jesus are also condemed to eternal hell. That just doesn't seem right.

 

Try for just a minute or two to see, for arguements sake alone, that you and I end up being wrong. Let's say Hinduism is the one true religion. Or that we idolize a false god by worshipping Jesus, when Judeisnm was the Way. Will you and I burn forever?

 

Through your posts I have come to know you as a good man. You have chosen what you believe, and you believe it fervently. As do I. I want to believe, and I certainly hope, that should we meet Him, and He is not what we thought, that our goodness will speak well for us. And if it would, then those who are also good should also not fear for meeting our God.

 

Mark (mk9750 - I add that because with a new Mark on the forum, sometimes I have been confused about to whom other members are directing questions and responses.)

[SR540Beaver]

Mark,

 

God is a loving God, but also a just God. The Bible says that He can not look upon sin. The Bible says that we have all fallen short. The Bible says that the wages of sin is death. The Bible says that God desire for all men to come to Him. It is man's rejection of God that dooms them to hell. God forces no one to heaven, it must be by their own free will choice. Being "good" has nothing to do with obtaining salvation. God sent his perfect Son to die as a sacrifice for us. It is thru accepting Christ as our Savior AND our Lord that we are held sinless before God and can enter His kingdom. While evangelism is annoying to some people, this is why Christians "bug" people about finding salvation. It is up to Christians to spread the Gospel to the world and see that ALL do have the opportunity to know God and enter His kingdom.

 

There are various interpretations of how people prior to Christ were saved. I don't have the time or the undivided time right now to attempt to explain it clearly. I'll leave that to someone else to bite into.