Worth reading

[silver-shark]

I've got to go along with Rooster on this one. I find it mostly to be right on the mark of how I feel.

 

As we continue to look at things like the Constitution in an increasingly more liberal light, we are getting further and further from what the writers actually intended.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

bob white answering me:

"what has the BSA done for gays?"

For one thing the BSA has been honest with them.

 

I wouldn't say that; the BSA didn't have a public "no gays" policy when Dale was kicked out. James Dale actually didn't know that the BSA kicked out gays, and the BSA had nothing in the membership requirements about it at all.

[Bob White]

That is simply not true. Mark even proved that the BSA removed scouts at least 13 years prior to Dale for being homosexual and there was a document then of the BSA's stance. So Merlyn again you show an uncanny lack of knowledge about the BSA.

 

By the way since when is a private organization required to make its rules public? You are not a member of the BSA, Merlyn, why would you expect to be aware of their rules?

 

Bob White

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

bob white writes:

That is simply not true. Mark even proved that the BSA removed scouts at least 13 years prior to Dale for being homosexual and there was a document then of the BSA's stance.

 

An internal document doesn't tell the public what the joining requirements are. The BSA gave Dale no indication that gays couldn't join. How was Dale expected to KNOW this?

 

So Merlyn again you show an uncanny lack of knowledge about the BSA.

 

Not at all; an internal document banning gays does not tell James Dale that gays can't join.

 

Why didn't the BSA put this in their membership requirements, if it's a requirement?

 

By the way since when is a private organization required to make its rules public?

 

When did I say it was "required"? I only used it to show that the BSA hasn't been honest with gays. So again you show an uncanny lack of reading comprehension.

 

You are not a member of the BSA, Merlyn, why would you expect to be aware of their rules?

 

James Dale WAS a member, and HE was never informed before he was kicked out that gays couldn't be members. Why isn't it listed as a disqualification for membership on the membership form? Seriously, don't you think that an organization that excludes gays should put that on their membership forms?

[Bob White]

Thats ridiculous Merlyn. My parents were scouters in the sixties and they knew full well that publicly known homosexuals would not be allowed as members. It wasnt until the late 70s and 80s that homosexuals started coming out of the closet. Once they did go public is when all the hub bub started.

 

Dale knew what to expect. He did it to start the media ball rolling

)(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Zahnada]

"Dale knew what to expect. He did it to start the media ball rolling."

 

I don't know about this, Bob. There are many stories about the situation floating around but it was my impression that he loved scouting and hated to be kicked out. I heard that he was seen at a gay rights activity. It's not like he announced it to his troop and was trying to get removed from the organization. But as I said, there are many stories floating around. Anyone else care to back up one side or the other?

 

In any case, I feel it's important to note that not everyone who is gay or supports gays wants to create large media exposure to force the BSA to change from the outside. Also, not everyone who's included in the "them" do not want to destroy BSA. Many just love scouting and feel it's taken a wrong turn.

 

I get the impression from many posters that it's an "us vs them" kind of argument. It seems that everyone against the policy is often lumped into the vocal, anti-BSA, activists. Of course the flip-side is true about the people who support the policy. There are many generalizations on all sides. It's important to remember that the majority of people from the many different sides and perspectives want only one thing: the preservation and growth of a great organization and the boys who participate.

[Bob White]

It's important to remember that the majority of people from the many different sides and perspectives want only one thing: the preservation and growth of a great organization and the boys who participate.

 

Don't kid yourself. The Democratic National Committee in 2000 asked the local BSA council to provide an Eagle Scout honor Guard to present the nation's flag and lead the Pledge of Allegiance to open the Convention.

 

Then the thousands in attendance waited for these boys to enter and on national TV boo'd them until they left. Thousands of adults ambushed these boys and you think they want what is best for scouting. They want what is best for their personal political agendas. They want to gain public acceptance threough the aknowledgment of the BSA or they want to shut the BSA down. PERIOD.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

[deleted duplicate message](This message has been edited by Merlyn_LeRoy)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

bob white writes:

Thats ridiculous Merlyn. My parents were scouters in the sixties and they knew full well that publicly known homosexuals would not be allowed as members.

 

Rules that "everyone knows" that aren't written down doesn't sound honest to me.

 

Like I said, at the time Dale was kicked out, he didn't know gays were kicked out, and the BSA had no announced policy that gays were not allowed. You said that the BSA treated gays honestly; I don't consider this kind of treatment to be honest.

[Bob White]

Merlyn,

If I told you that the BSA wrote a letter to every person in the USA telling them the rules you would say "sure but they didn't use the good stationary".

 

You're a one trick pony and a tiresome one at that. What you don't know of the BSA you make up, and the little you do know you don't understand.

 

I wish you well in your personal battle against the values of the BSA and hope you find something that will actual give your life a positive legacy.

 

best of luck

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

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Bob white writes:

Merlyn,

If I told you that the BSA wrote a letter to every person in the USA telling them the rules you would say "sure but they didn'tuse the good stationary".

 

Now I see you're reduced to ad hominem fallacies, and baseless claims that I "don't know" the BSA. Let me know if you ever want to actually debate the issues, instead of whitewashing how "honest" the BSA has been in its treatment of gays.

[Bob White]

Merlyn,

I actually know and understand the BSA so nothing you can provide will change my support of it. I am confident that nothing I, or anyone on this board, provides you will alter your chosen course.

 

The Constitution of the United States says that I have a right to free association and cannot be forced to associate with those whose values, ideals, and behavior I find offensive.

 

Thank you for your offer but I will decline. I believe that if I wrestle in the mud with a pig we would both get dirty, the only difference being that the pig would enjoy it.

 

Good night,

Bob White

 

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

 

Ah, more insults. You're a real good representative of the BSA, you know that?

 

---

Merlyn LeRoy

[silver-shark]

Merlyn,

 

I have to agree that I can't find any specific explaination of the ban on avowed homosexuals in the typical boy materials. There is a very good reason for that. Look at the following essay written MANY years ago by the renowned author and Scouter, William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt, entitled, "The Game of Scouting

 

"In fact, the basic principle in Scouting is "Learning by Doing." There is nothing negative in it. There is no "Go up in the attic and see what Johnny is doing and tell him he mustnt!" There are no "Donts." Scouting does not say "Dont rob birds nests," but "Find out about birds." It does not say "Dont cut down trees," but instead "Help save the trees." That is talking boy languagestimulating, not prohibiting."

 

This style of presentation to the boys has been working for over 90 years. Pages 376 and 377 of "The Boy Scout Handbook", don't tell us that homosexuality is wrong. That would be a negative. What it does say is to have a healthy sexual relationship AFTER you become married. It goes on to talk about their "Responsibility to Young Women", and themselves. And, do ask questions of your parents, guardians, or religious leaders.

 

As in many instances, the BSA doesn't have a whole lot of negative policy written UNTIL they are forced to, except as they pertain to health and safety issues.

 

And, as I have stated in other threads, morally straight is morally straight. There is no room in the program for the discussion of any sexual behaviors, it's as simple as that.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

[NWScouter]

This article writer has some serious errors in understanding the constitution. Some of them are down right scary.

The one that bothers me the most is comment Use the courts or other non-democratic means to impose the minority will on the majority. The Courts in the United States have three purposes: 1) to provide a forum to determine guilt or innocence in a criminal case and fault in a civil case, 2) to interpret the laws as written and 3) to protect the civil rights of the minority from the abuses of the majority. To refer to the courts as non-democratic is a libel against our way of life. When the courts become a captive of the ruling group or the majority we could end up courts like those of Third Reich.

 

The writer as Latter Day Saint should remember the discrimination of the early LDS in the settled parts of US that forced them to Utah. He definition of marriage as one of a man and woman, is what drove that discrimination and kept Utah from becoming a state. For it was not until the LDS change their stance on polygamy did Utah become a state.

 

His argument that homosexual marriage opens the door to legalizing pedophilia is specious argument. Yes there are groups out there that wish to make it man boy love legal, there are also people that wish to make the age of consent lower or gone for both boys and girls. The present marriage laws do not mean that a man can marry a 10 year old girl in any state. In fact in the last twenty year protection against child abuse in both law and societal norms has become stronger. The reasons that that the scandals in Roman Catholic church are in the news now is because the law and public opinion supports their discourse as they didnt do years ago.

 

His understanding of the term natural law is different than what the writers of the Declaration and Constitution . Here is the definition :

1. law of morality: a law of morality believed to be derived from human beings inherent sense of right and wrong, rather than from revelation or the legislation produced by society

 

2. law of nature: a law that governs the behavior of natural phenomena

 

3. philosophy belief in universal justice system: the belief that general laws of nature can be applied as a system of justice for all societies, regardless of their individual culture or customs

 

Encarta World English Dictionary [North American Edition] & (P)2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

 

Many of the writers were not Christians but Deists, believing in a clockwork universe started by an force that started it and left running.

 

The ACLU, Second Amendment Foundation, The Sierra Club, American Center for Law and Justice and others are all groups that try to protect the rights of the individual against the tyranny of the majority. They are all needed and are important part of the American system of government and justice.