The Beatles? Appropriate for Scouting?

[Fat Old Guy]

" the very fact that you are asking whether or not the Beatles are appropriate for scouting is prying into their personal lives."

 

No prying is necessary. They made their private lives very public about 30 years ago.

 

 

 

[evmori]

Since when is TFB an obsenity?

 

Since I think we agree that rockers are not good role models, I find it amusing that I have a Woodbadge song book that contains "Stairway to Heaven", "Hotel California" and other like tunes!

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[acco40]

The Beatles were a collection of four individuals. Stating that "the Beatles" were atheists is like saying The New York Times is a Democrat. It is ludicrous. Like almost all individuals, they experienced growth and maturity as time went on. Look at how John raised Sean as opposed to Julian. George Harrison (certainly was NOT an atheist) stated that he sought success but never fame. The boys became wildly successful and popular in their early twenties. Three were raised by single parents. They all had their foibles but I can honestly say (like Levis and Disney) they greatly added to the beauty and enjoyment of my life.

 

Heck, I firmly believe Lord Baden Powell was gay. So what? That doesn't diminish the positive effect that Scouting has had world wide and will continue to have for many years to come.

 

Come on people. Get a real life. Remove those chips from your shoulders. Living in Michigan (which just became the 10th state in the US to declare that it would not discriminate against individuals wrt sexual orientation) has exposed me to the "buy American" campaigns. Speilberg movies can be good or bad. Same with Disney, Levis, Ford, Toyota, and on and on. Why such hatred and venom? Look at the stupid arguments everyone has had about the "my" argument. Does BW make a valid point about overbearing SMs and the possibility that language influences and sometimes exposes behavior? Yes. Did he maybe do it in somewhat accusatorial (is that a word?) manner? Maybe. Come on people, let it go! This world is not filled with saints. Don't go looking for them.

[NJCubScouter]

Absolutely right, Acco.

 

I had let the line about the Beatles being atheists go without comment, but it is ridiculous when applied to George in particular. For awhile after the Beatles broke up, half his songs were about God in one way or another, so much so that I remember discussing it with one of my college roommates how it would be nice if he made a song about something else. (Maybe not always "God" as conceived of by some in this forum, but God nevertheless. And the song "My Sweet Lord" shows that he wasn't really choosing among "Gods," hallelujah, hare krishnah, it was all the same to him. And he did do some religious songs with no Hindu imagery or Indian music at all, I have to admit not being sure of the name of the song I am thinking of, it may be "Give Me Love." The whole song is really a prayer set to a pop melody.)

 

And by the way, it seems to me that the same person who criticized the Beatles for "casual sex" posted something in the thread about Strom Thurmond to the effect that what Strom did was ok because he, the poster (ok, it was FOG) had had "fun" (I think that was the term) with a number of "girls" who he would not have brought home to mother. Or something like that. It didn't really have anything to do with the subject of the thread and was a lot more than I wanted to know about FOG's personal life, but I did not expect the same person to come back 2 or 3 weeks later criticizing anyone about "casual sex." Maybe I should have expected it. At least get your stories straight.

[Fat Old Guy]

" It didn't really have anything to do with the subject of the thread and was a lot more than I wanted to know about FOG's personal life, but I did not expect the same person to come back 2 or 3 weeks later criticizing anyone about "casual sex.""

 

So far, no one has thrown millions of dollars my way to help support my degenerate lifestyle.

[evmori]

The Beatles are four talented individuals who gottogether at the right time. They had a lot of influence on my generation. Everyone wanted a "Beatle haircut". As far as them being good role models, well they weren't. The remaining ones have mellowed with age it seems. But they are still not role models.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

Not Everyone.

[Fat Old Guy]

Stapler Dude, you seem to think that it is foolish to not help Speilberg make billions because I disagree with his politics.

 

Let's look at a home town example. You want to do some home improvements and ask around. Many people like the work done by Bob Goodtool so you call him up and ask him to come out to your house. When he arrives, he's driving a truck with a Nazi swastika on the side and he has "The only good Jew is a dead Jew" tatooed on his bald head. However, he really knows his stuff and quotes a fantastic price. Would you hire him?

[Eamonn]

Looking at the replies that are posted in the other thread about appropriate leaders it would seem if they were all still alive all four might be allowed to become members of the BSA.

In some councils I am not sure if even being alive is even a requirement.

 

Eamonn

Who never had the dumb haircut more into the Sergeant Pepper style.

[Adrianvs]

"And by the way, it seems to me that the same person who criticized the Beatles for "casual sex" posted something in the thread about Strom Thurmond to the effect that what Strom did was ok because he, the poster (ok, it was FOG) had had "fun" (I think that was the term) with a number of "girls" who he would not have brought home to mother."

 

 

I'm sorry, but FOG wasn't stating that Strom's "fun" with the black mistress was OK. He was simply stating that a racist (or anyone else) needn't respect the object of his sexual gratification. He was indicating that lots of people engage in such actions with people that they wouldn't associate with publicly or introduce to one's family as a potential spouse. He never stated that such behavior is acceptable and I don't think that he believes that it is at all. Some people do, however. Don't you have words for it like "free love" or "safe sex" or something to the like?

 

Remember what we learned about hypocrisy? It usually takes the form of pretend virtue? Pretend prudence perhaps?

[NJCubScouter]

Adrian, I mentioned which thread FOG's post was in only for purposes of identification, so that people could go back and look at it if they wished. I did not mean to get into that discussion again. And, regardless of why he said what he said, FOG's comment was relevant to his self-contradictory comment here.

 

As for what "we learned" about hypocrisy in that thread, I'll tell you that what I learned was that you use a narrow definition of "hypocrisy" that I disagree with. In the dozens of articles I have seen since that situation came to light, the vast majority have used the word "hypocrisy," so it would seem that "common usage" is on my side. Now, if you'd like to debate the prescriptive vs. descriptive theory of dictionary writing, you can do that... but probably not in this forum, and definitely not with me.

[evmori]

"Not Everyone"

 

Figures.

 

 

[Fat Old Guy]

" And, regardless of why he said what he said, FOG's comment was relevant to his self-contradictory comment here."

 

As I said before, no one ever threw millions of dollars at me to support the degenerate lifestyle of my youth. Popular public figures are, by default, role models for the youth that spend their parents money on albums, concert tickets and the like. They wanted to be "cool" like Paul and John so they wore strange clothing and smoked dope. Today, kids want to be like Tommy Lee or Snoop Dog and try to emulate them.

 

 

[Adrianvs]

"...to the effect that what Strom did was ok because he, the poster (ok, it was FOG) had had "fun" (I think that was the term) with a number of "girls" who he would not have brought home to mother."

 

False characterization. I merely corrected.

 

 

The implicit charge of pretend virtue still stands. Would you prefer "whitewashed tomb?" What about "self-aggrandizing pretend moralist?" It seems that you are fond of common parlence; I believe that "poser" is the proper term.

 

YiS,

 

 

P.S. How many dozen articles on Strom's (what is the phrase...) personal life have you read? Hmm..

[Bob White]

This entire thread is a yank at our collective chain by FOG and Ed.

 

It is based on a fabricated premise that a poster, or posters, had used The Beatles as role models. No one had. They had simply refered to their music. I can say that I am amazed at Michael jordans athletic accomplishments without accepting the examples he has set in his personal life in any way, and without implying that he would be a good scout leader.

 

He was a great athlete, just as the Beatles were great musicians. Nothing more was implied by anyone other than FOG and ED.

 

Yes FOG condradicts himself between threads, we have all seen it but do not think he is the only one who does.

 

Ed in this very thread said that the Beatles were poor role models, then he said that in his generation "everyone" wanted to look like them. "Everyone" Ed? Including you? You wanted to follow poor role maodels. I know lots of people in our generation that had no interest in looking like them. I have no idea how you have insight into what "everyone" wants.

 

When I first pointed out that "everyone did not"

you sarcastically answered "figures". But Ed, if you feel that the Beatles were such bad role models why would you not be thrilled to know that not everyone followed them?

 

 

Finally lets look at a list of bands and musicians...

 

"Van Morrison, Jefferson Airplane (not Starship), BB King, U2, The Who, The Beatles, Jethro Tull, Santana, Eric Clapton, ELP, Buddy Miles, Harry Nilsson, Bonnie & Delaney, Lynard Skynard, Pink Floyd, Jars of Clay, Aaron Bailey, david bailey, Miles Davis, Aerosmith and a lot more."

 

See any dope users, sex addicts, adulterers and overall poor role models in there?

 

How about it ED? Do you recognize the list.

 

IT'S YOUR POST ED!

from June 20th of 2003

These are folks YOU identified as some of your favorites.

You even said "Love rock n roll"

 

Now that's duplicitous.

 

This thread's only purpose is to insult and incite everyone. That is the role that FOG and Ed have chosen for themselves. Do not kid yourselves for one minute that this thread was for any positive service to scouting, or scouts, or scouters. They act only as chum tossers in the sea of scouting.

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)