Progressive Parents...

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Roster7 writes:

So please stow the 60s Civil Rights comparisons. It doesn't hold up.

 

I say it does.

 

First, "choice" is not the linchpin of nondiscrimination legislation; being married is certainly a choice, yet there are laws covering discrimination on the basis of marital status. You can't merely say one is a choice and one isn't, you need to point out why "choice" is pertinent to discrimination.

 

Second, all sexual orientation nondiscrimination legislation that I know about is about that: "sexual orientation", not sexual acts. A virgin can be gay or straight. You can try to claim that sexual orientation is a choice, but I'd disagree with that assertion. The BSA's discrimination is not over sexual acts, it's over orientation. If you say it is, tell me who James Dale had sex with to be thrown out of the BSA.

[Basementdweller]

It is easy to be progressive and liberal from the safety of the suburbs or rural areas. How many of you actually live in a ethically, culturally diverse neighborhood. From what I have seen scouting is a suburban white thing. Sure there is a slight ethinic mix, but for the most parts the District with in councils are broken up by social classes. in our council the rich whites have their districts, there is a couple of rural districts and a couple of inter city districts. Yep my district is referred to as the bad news bears district. Our boys come from predominately single parent working/welfare class family's. not an excuse just a statement of class separation.

 

Yep, sure easy to be liberal and progressive from the cheap seats. Explain to your 5 year old son why those grown men are holding hands, arm in arm, or kissing. Explain why the lesbians making out on the park bench. Yep I have been down that road. Explain Kwanzaa is and why they don't celebrate xmas. Explain why the neighbors pray in the backyard a couple times a day. Yep sure is easy from the burbs. Explain why the signs in the grocery store are not in english. Sure is easy....... Explain what that funny smell is from the neighbors kitchen. I will tell you it tastes a lot better than it smelled.

 

How many of you had to alter a camp menu because of religious beliefs? Have you had to deal with little Johnny's two "Dads" at a camp out?

 

I wouldn't change where I live or my situation for anything. It infuriates me people calling themselves liberal or progressive from the safety of their rich white suburb.

 

Continue to debate something you have no clue about. You need to live it to understand it.

[TheScout]

Reminds me of one of my famous quotes, from Ian Smith, Prime Minister of Rhodesia, a short lived south African country from 1965-1979.

 

It is easy, when you live ten thousand kilometres away, to prescribe solutions, knowing that if the whole thing blows up and goes sour, you do not have to live with the results. The finest guarantee that the rest of the world can have, that we are completely dedicated to producing the best solution for all of our people, whatever their race, colour, or creed, is that we, and our children after us, will have to go on living with the result.

[Basementdweller]

In rereading the thread, I saw someone mention the homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles. I am not agreeing or disagreeing but I will offer this to the group.

 

Over the course of the last year I have noted that in the newspaper and TV news that MOST if not ALL of Child molesters that have been accused recently have been Church leaders or youth pastors. I say accused because I honestly don't know the outcomes of the trials. To my knowledge none of them were known to be gay or lesbian before the incident. Less we forget the whole catholic church thing.

 

Being a church leader does not make a man or women safe or less capable of getting their freak on if the situation presents itself. IMHO they are more dangerous because they use god as a tool and a stick to keep from getting caught.

 

Not a judgment, Just taking you clowns out of your comfort zone. I have met a number of church leaders who I wouldn't trust my children with.

[acco40]

Ooooh, such anger. Let's see, in my "rich white suburb" my next door neighbors are from Iraq. Across the street, they are from Romania. My daughters best friend has a mother who is African-American and a Jamaican father. Our troop has Asians, Asian Indians, Blacks, whites and Arabs. I have not inquired about income so I can't make a judgment on "rich" although I wouldn't put myself in that category.

 

Come on basement dweller, get out more!

[BrentAllen]

He-he, from my rich, white, conservative neighborhood, we have two Hindus in our troop, so no beef or pork on the menu. We also have Catholics, Jews, Baptists, Methodists, Episcopalians and Presbyterians. All in a Troop of 12 boys - which is chartered by a Baptist Church. Oh, we also have single-parent families as well. Almost forgot, the chinese vegetable soup one our boys (who happens to be Chinese) cooked at summer camp didn't go over very well. "Suburban white thing?" I'll buy the suburban part.

[GernBlansten]

Well, to tell the family secret, my grandmother was Dutch.

 

 

 

[packsaddle]

I know this unit is not typical because it draws from a community that is strongly influenced by the university. But we have, let's see, four nationalities, and currently three 'races'. Only one of the boys belongs to the CO and the rest are scattered across the religious rainbow. We have modified the menus to conform to one religious restriction and two dietary restrictions. So far. If anything, diversity is increasing...largely because of the growing presence of international students and faculty around here. Some great eating establishments too!

 

I also like the 'Large Tent' metaphor (or whatever it was that Trevorum called it). I look forward to the day when inclusiveness overcomes religious bigotry and homophobia.

 

OGE, they're just labels. The only thing that really matters is the ideas and how willing you are to put them to the test.

[CalicoPenn]

I'd sure like to know where those suburbs full of liberal progressives are. I live in a "rich white" suburb of Chicago - a city of mostly blue collar workers, pink collar workers, service/retail industry workers and white collar middle managers. Most of the suburbs around me are full of the same kind of people. There are a few suburbs where the residents pretend to be rich, but are mostly over-extended middle class people a couple of paychecks short of serious financial problems. There are a very few "rich white" suburbs.

 

One common theme in these suburbs is that liberal progressives are a decided minority - most people living in these suburbs are conservative staticists - people who want things to stay just as they are, and who will vote for a democrat only if the democrat is further to the right of Ghengis Khan than the republican is.

 

So where do we have to go to find liberal progressives? The big city (which also happens to be one of the biggest cities in the country) - and liberal progressives in the city aren't just limited to the lakefront, or the north side - you'll find them in the blue collar and rough collar neighborhoods of the city too.

 

So you'll have to forgive me if I don't buy the argument that one needs to be white and rich and live in the suburbs to be a liberal progressive - I just don't see that in the worldview I experience on a daily basis.

 

Calico

[fgoodwin]

Gern writes:The antonym of the Big Tent would be the exclusive private club. One with membership restrictions to keep undesirable people from joining. In my humble opinion, that is exactly what the BSA is engaging in, to their detriment . . . Now wouldn't it be silly for an exclusive private country club with declining membership to be complaining about their declining membership?Without coming out and saying it, you seem to imply that BSA's declining membership numbers results from its membership policies.

 

If that is indeed what you are saying, would you please explain to me how Scout's Canada is losing membership at a greater rate than BSA, yet has a more inclusive membership policy?

[GernBlansten]

I have no idea why Canada scouting is declining. I am not very educated on their history, policies or challenges.

 

However, I do know that many parents won't enroll their children in our program because of our discriminatory membership requirements, not that they don't meet the standards, but that they won't be part of them. And since those exclusions have nothing to do with the program as delivered, I think its self destructive to maintain those restrictions, when the core of society regards them as archaic and unnecessary.

[croushorn]

Gern - how often have you heard this from parents? I just find it interesting that Ive been back in Scouting for about 10 years and only heard it once. That was from an ASM that was just talking with me about how he didnt agree with it, not that it would prevent his family from taking part. Im certainly not going to say youre wrong like others do on this forum, I guess Im surprised to hear that there are many parents that feel that strongly to keep their kids out. Core of society? Thats a broad brush, dont be so certain about that. But then again, maybe I just havent been approached about it or maybe we just dont think that way here in fly-over country.

[GernBlansten]

I've heard it directly several times when trying to recruit my son's friends parents into scouting. But chances are, you are not hearing it because someone who holds that view, simply won't sign up. A polite no thank you will be your only clue. Those parents who I am good friends with, I'll probe deeper and ask them if its because of BSA policies, and most of them will say yes, they are uncomfortable with them and don't want to be associated with an organization that is so diametrically opposed to their own value system.

[packsaddle]

Gern, while I agree with your thoughts and while I have observed similar things in this area, I also observe that another way to view this is through market interactions. Scouting's decline, regardless of where, is due to failure to compete in the marketplace for youth programs.

 

There are two ways to approach this problem: to change the nature of the product or to spend more resources on trying to 'sell' an uncompetitive product.

Both ways can be potentially successful, we just don't know which would be more effective.

The first way is essentially a redesign of the product or, perhaps, the way it's produced. In scouting this amounts to an attempt to make the product desirable to a broader market (inclusiveness). The second way retains the old design but resorts to more aggressive marketing. The question for the first way is whether or not opening to a broader market will, at the same time, cause a decline in the current 'niche' market.

The question for the second way is whether or not aggressive marketing will cause the 'niche' to buy more...or if sufficient evangelical effort will cause the broader market to 'see' things differently.

 

There is no way to sort out the explanation for questions like the one Fgoodwin asked. We will argue them at length and never come to agreed answers. But the one thing that is for certain is that the marketplace WILL make its decision regardless of what we do. So strap on your seat belt and enjoy the ride.

[Gold Winger]

"May I ask you list references or data to substantiate this statement if possible. I have never heard that individuals who are homosexual in their ADULT sexual orientation are more inclined to pedophilia that persons who are straight in their adult sexual orientation. In fact, I have heard that pedophiles are most commonly males who are straight in their adult sexual orientation."

 

One of the problems here is that the public in general doesn't know what pedophilia is and the media doesn't help any. Have sex with anyone under 18 and you're labeled a pedophile by the ignorant population.

 

Attraction to Cub Scouts or Brownies would be pedophilia.

 

Attraction to someone who is past puberty isn't.

 

I'm not a homosexual and I've never played one on TV but I've had homosexual acquaintances. I've never known any to look at Cub Scouts and say, "Hmmmmm . . . yummy" any more than I've looked at a Brownie and said "Oh baby!" Now do they look at the studly 16 year old football player with attraction? Sure, that's normal if normal can be applied here. The same is true for most heterosexual men, if you're being honest, a well built 16 year old young woman walks by in shorts and a tight t-shirt and you look, twice.

 

It wasn't that long ago that 16 year old women would marry 30 or 40 year old men and that was accepted as normal and good. Society has changed but the underlying biology hasn't.(This message has been edited by Gold Winger)