packsaddle Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Merlyn, you read my mind as I was going through that other thread. If it isn't ignoring policy, it sure is local option! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted January 11, 2006 Author Share Posted January 11, 2006 Well, an atheist would have to out right lie to become a member without anyone asking any question. As far as "don't ask don't tell" for gays, there is no policy that states someone must be asked if they are gay or straight so nothing violated here, either! Splitting hairs is fun! Ed Mori Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 So Ed, do you think the Berkeley Sea Scouts are ignoring policy or not? The BSA's own lawyer is saying that atheists and gays were members. How do you have: 1) an organization which prohibits atheist and gay members 2) a unit of that organization which admits in court under oath that atheists and gays have been members ...and not conclude that 2) is ignoring policy? They even admitted in the earlier court proceedings that they ignored policy: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/revpub/A097187.PDF ... Appellants did agree to a modified version of a dont ask, dont tell program, in which appellants stated that they considered such matters as sexual orientation to be a private matter, which they would not ask anyone to divulge, and appellants agreed to obey any laws actually forbidding them from engaging in any illegal discrimination. Appellants also pointed out that some of their participants in the past had been persons who were atheists or who had presumably not been heterosexuals, and appellants had not discriminated against those persons. However, appellants did not and could not agree not to discriminate on these grounds in the future, because the Boy Scouts of America would not allow appellants to agree to such conditions without losing their Boy Scout charter, and appellants had to obey because they were securing their marine insurance at favorable rates through the Boy Scouts of America. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted January 11, 2006 Author Share Posted January 11, 2006 If they knowingly admit an atheist or homosexual - yes. If they find out a member is a homosexual or an atheist and don't revoke their membership - yes. Otherwise, no. Ed Mori Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 The previous court quote makes it clear that the Sea Scouts had at least some atheists as members that it knew about and "appellants had not discriminated against those persons", so they ignored policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaji Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 A scout is TRUSTWORTHY. If he says he will abide by the Scout Law, then he will abide by all points of it. A scout is LOYAL. While continuing to be a member of the BSA for better or for worse is certainly a display of loyalty, a conscious violation of the rules (particularly one in which nobody is physically harmed and no inalienable rights are violated) is a stab in the back, no matter how you slice it. A scout is HELPFUL. Peaceful forms of protest can be construed as helpful because they can highlight areas that need changing. Violating rules in the name of protest crosses the line into being destructive to the cohesiveness of the organization, and that is in all ways a disservice, especially when done under a banner of "unity". A scout is FRIENDLY. Just because they aren't allowed to be scouts doesn't mean they can't be your friend, or that you can't be theirs. A scout is COURTEOUS. A rule that never shifts. Honesty is part of courtesy as well as the aforementioned trustworthiness and loyalty. A scout is KIND. Corny as it may sound, lying about breaking the rules is unkind (as well as discourteous) to people like your DE and SE who have to answer for it if it comes to light that people under their jurisdiction have been violating the rules. Your being in violation makes them in violation, whether they are accomplices to it or not. A scout is OBEDIENT. The rules are there for a reason. You swore to obey and uphold the scout law. Therefore, the scout law binds you to obeying the BSA's policies. A scout is CHEERFUL. Even if you don't like doing your duty, you should still try to view it in the best light you can and be positive about it. If you can't hold to this, then you should either find a means of contributing that doesn't put you in this scenario, or you should be questioning whether you should/can contribute at all. A scout is THRIFTY. The obvious interpretation here is the monetary one. If you don't support the BSA, don't "waste" your money supporting something that doesn't represent what you believe. It's not like taxes, nobody's forcing you to be a member. A scout is BRAVE. If you feel that the policy is wrong, the brave (and as aforementioned, honorable) thing to do is to openly dispute it. If you can't properly execute BSA policy in the intervening time you are trying to get it changed, then you should resign and protest until it is changed. A scout is CLEAN. That includes his conscience. If he's not following a point of the scout law then he's automatically violating the first point, which should mean he's therefore in violation of this point as well (if he has a conscience in the first place). Notice the chain reaction? A scout is REVERENT. He's not required to believe in a particular god, but he is required to at least be open to the possibility that there is one, regardless. I've personally seen these same twelve points of the scout law in every edition of the Boy Scout and Scoutmaster handbooks clear back to 1928, and I'm pretty sure that they were there before then, as well. That means that the requirement was clear a full 50 years before the cited 1978, it was just that in that year the need was felt to clarify it. It's much like how when the pope speaks ex cathedra on issues facing the Catholic church. It's more often than not stating with as much clarity as possible what the church's stance is on something that had not been elaborated on to that extent in the past because the issue either A) was common sense up until then, or B) was never an issue because the necessary technologies/knowledge/etc. were not in place prior to that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Kaji writes: A scout is REVERENT. He's not required to believe in a particular god, but he is required to at least be open to the possibility that there is one, regardless. "Reverent" does not mean being open to the possibility that god(s) exist, and the BSA does not merely require that a scout be open to the possibility (but actually believe in a god), so your definition fails on both counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted January 12, 2006 Author Share Posted January 12, 2006 reverent - feeling or showing profound respect or veneration; "maintained a reverent silence" [ant: irreverent] 2: showing great reverence for god; "a godly man"; "leading a godly life" [syn: godly, worshipful] The BSA requires a member to believe in God. Once a member, the BSA requires a Scout to be reverent. Hope this clears things up. Ed Mori Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now