Rules and Values (again...)

[Beavah]

You cannot possibly believe that there is a comparison between having to miss a campout in order to attend your father's funeral, and choosing to ingore a safety rule and endangering the lives of other people's children by ingnoring a safety rule?

 

Nope.

 

But nobody was talkin' about endangerin' lives, BobWhite. Nice spin, though. Always easier to get people to vote for a big honkin' bailout if you spread a lot of fear around, eh? You'd fit in nicely with this white house team, I reckon .

 

We were talkin' about a man breakin' his word and bein' unTrustworthy to the "program," because of da "situational ethics" of his father passing away. You'd endorse situational ethics in this case, then, I take it? GoldWinger it seems would not, perhaps to his credit. He believes his word is his bond. But you think it would be OK for the man to cancel the trip, even though he was breaking his agreement?

 

As for da rest, I was clearly raisin' too many things at once, and confusin' things. Forget drivin' in the dark in winter, or doin' a mile swim or triathalon in open water for now. Yah, but I am curious if yeh come from a Christian tradition, and whether you feel you can "pick and choose" what parts of your faith to believe?

 

Beavah

 

[evmori]

This seems like a no-brainer to me. My family comes 1st. And since it would seem in this example, dads death was sudden & unexpected. Dads funeral takes precedence over anything & I would go as far as stating not being at dads funeral and going on the Scout outing would be unethical and a poor example to all!

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

Beavah wrote "Would yeh even let a sea scout take a quick dip off of a boat without a roped-off swim area and in more than 12 feet of water? Would you, in fact, sometimes, when it's da right thing to do, not follow a rule?"

 

First you suggest that violating the Safe Swim Defense rules is 'the right thing to do". Anthen you write in your next post..."

 

"But nobody was talkin' about endangerin' lives,"

 

Yes, YOUR were talkin about endangering lives, When you advocate the violation of safety rules such as Safe Swum defense you are in fact endangering the welfare of other people's children.

 

This is not fear mongering, this is seeing you promote irresponsible behaviour and pointing it out to you and others.

[evmori]

I knew you were a problem Beav you fear mongerer!

[SSScout]

**sigh**

 

I am reminded of a couple of things (being a student of the media world):

 

Steve Martin suggests that if one is brought up before the court on a charge of murder, all one need do is tell the judge "I forgot" and you'll be let off, because all judges are forgiving, good folks. Everybody forgets stuff, right?

 

Woody Allen did a movie, "Sleeper" where the government is doing it's best to protect the populace against all threats of injury. Big puffy clothing (no bumps), only absolutely healthy food, etc. To disobey the rules is to chance hurt or injury and therefore is against the rules. If it could hurt you, even if it is not againt the rules, it is against the rules.

 

It is against the rules to exceed the posted speed limit. The PSL is there to help drivers drive safely. In our area, the government has installed videographic equipment that will, if you are exceeding the PSL as you pass, record your cars image, calculate the cars speed and send you (the cars owner) a speeding ticket. No appeal.

 

If I CHOOSE to violate a clearly pronounced rule (hence training and signs and counselors and police), then I must be prepared to acccept the consequences of that violation.

Those consequences may be monetary, societal, physical, consciencial, or spiritual. And I may decide that in the balance of consequence versus action (or lack of), it may be worth it.

Now, ignorance of the rule may be a forgivable offense, but that should not be confused with conscious choice. Intent should always be considered.

Refusing to give up a bus seat, not turning in a religious fugitive to the erstwhile authorities, refusing military induction on CO grounds, blocking a road to bring attention to a bad developement plan; such things shouldn't be compared to wearing the Patrol patch on the wrong sleeve or closely following a Scout leader's car to the camp ground.

 

And if a SM promised to go camping on a given day only to find the death of his father impinging on those plans, I would hope the rest of the campers would find it in their hearts the means to forgive the SM his broken promise. A Scout is Loyal and Courteous and Kind.

 

YiS

 

 

[Beavah]

Yah, Bobwhite. I really was curious whether yeh felt it was OK to pick and choose what you would believe from your religious tradition, eh? But yeh keep dodging the question.

 

So let's play your game.

 

As I understand it, you're sayin' that every BSA camp which conducts mile swim in open water usin' safety boats (a very common camp practice) is endangering lives because they are not followin' da full SSD with roped-off areas, swimmin' in water over 12' deep and whatnot?

 

And any unit that, for example, gets excited about encouragin' boys to be fit by participatin' in a local triathalon, just like the most recent issue of Boys' Life recommends, complete with contact information for youth triathalons, is puttin' lives at risk because of course da triathalon is conducted as an open-water swim without roped swim areas and in water over 12 feet deep.

 

And any Sea Scout ship on a long cruise that anchors off in a bay and lets da Sea Scouts go snorkeling off the back of da boat along the reef is puttin' kids' lives at risk because they didn't take the time to (illegally in some cases in sensitive reef environments) marker and rope off areas and because the water may be greater than 12 feet deep? You know, like what almost every trip run by SeaBase does?

 

Dang, we're a dangerous organization.

 

Beavah

 

[David CO]

Our school has a healthy snack policy. Fruit roll-ups are fine. Chocolate chip cookies are not. Little Joey's teacher thinks it is UNBELIEVABLE that a parent might endanger their child with an unapproved snack, and, in the process, provide a bad example to... other peoples children! Oh, the humanity!

 

Some parents object on principle, "The school has no right to tell me what to feed my child."

 

Some parents object based on the situation, "I ran out of fruit roll-ups."

 

Some parents object on expense, "I can't afford fruit roll-ups."

 

The vast majority of the parents at our school are good, decent people who who want their children to grow up respectful of teachers and observant of school rules. But as the rules expand and intrude, many of us who used to be rule followers, have become rule breakers.

 

 

 

 

 

[evmori]

Chocolate chip cookies are not

 

Are these people commies? There is nothing wrong with chocolate chip cookies! Heck, I'd rather my kid at a chocolate chip cookies than a preservative laden fruit roll up!

[Bob White]

More smoke and mirrors Beavah. Do you EVER stay on a single topic and discuss a single situation. In addition you misrepresent the elements of the Safe Swim Defense Plan.

 

For instance a triatholon not held by a Scout unit and not done as a scouting activity but done (are you ready) outside the sphere of scouting, is not subject to the rules of the BSA. So your premise as usual is false.

 

And the snorkeling situation at Sea Base is a far cry from your original scenario of tying a rope arond a scout and having jump overboard on a unit activity.

 

You are a master of the flim flam, you alter course continually to try and negate the response to the original question you ask.

It would seem by the recent replies from others that your dodges are not being as easily ignored as before.

 

Which brings us back to your original post which you based on a false premise of opinions that no one on the forum had put forward as you said they had.

 

False premise can only lead to false conclusions. And your attempts to continually change the subject does nothing to advance your position nor is it in keeping with your own admonition to "try and keep on track".

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[evmori]

False premise can only lead to false conclusions.

 

Well duh! One should practice what one preaches!

[Beavah]

Naturally, BobWhite, we often see in others a reflection of our own foibles, eh? Like false premises and changin' da subject, I reckon. My original example said nuthin' about tyin' ropes around people and all that, eh?

 

But since yeh want to stay on topic without changin' the subject, we're all waitin' for your answers to the followin' questions:

 

1) Do you believe it's OK to pick and choose what parts of your religious tradition to believe? Your personal religious tradition, eh? No need to speculate on others. Is it OK for you to pick and choose?

 

2) Do you believe that it's OK for a troop, as a troop activity to participate in a community triathalon to encourage fitness and tie in with da Boys' Life feature?

 

3) Do you believe that all those summer camps that do mile swims in open water over 12 feet deep with safety boaters are wrong, unethical, puttin' kids lives at risk, being bad examples, etc.?

 

4) Do you believe that SeaBase or a Sea Scout Ship or older Boy Scout sailing expedition that anchors in a safe bay and allows their youth to snorkel a reef or swim off da transom in water that might be over 12 feet deep (or without ropin' off three areas b/c that might damage da reef) are all wrong, unethical, endangering other people's children, not teachin' character, engaged in situational ethics, etc.?

 

Live up to your own ethics, eh? Don't change the topic. Answer da questions directly. Is it in fact the obligation of a member of a community to follow the laws and rules of the community as a moral imperative in each of these four cases?

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[David CO]

Whoa, back up the boat! Is this true? Does Sea Base use a different set of safety rules?

 

Does BSA have one set of rules for activities they run, and a more restrictive set of rules for Chartered Organizations? I ask because I never saw anything like that in the chartering agreement.

[Bob White]

1. I find questioning a persons religious traditions a very intrusive and rude question.

 

Shall we stay on topic. Do I knowingly violate the rules of any organization I belong to or thosde of my community? No

 

Do I think choosing to violate these rules simply beacuse they are personally inconvenient show a lack of personal values and ethics? Yes I do.

 

Do I think you endorse and encourage such behavior? I think your own posts show that you do.

 

2. The triatholon was not a troop function, it was organized and managed by another organization and as such is not subject to the rules of the BSA. If done as a troop activity with the permission of the local council then I will presume that they were aware and agreeable to the conditions and safety elements of the event.

 

3.You should knw by know that the Guiode to Safe Scouting is a unit resources for operating activities safely at the unit level. It says so right at the top of the manual. BSA camps operate under the safety rules and safety inspections that are approved and supervised by the BSA from the regional and national offices.

 

4. See #3. By the way your original scenario was a Sea Scout unit activity involving a rope, a scout, and having him go for a swim overboard, a far cry from what you now represent you words as being.

 

Is it in fact the obligation of a member of a community to follow the laws and rules of the community as a moral imperative in each of these four cases?

 

 

It would be if what your were posting were actually the rules that govern these activities outside of the unit, but they are not.

 

False premise, false conclusion. This is getting to be quite the habit with you Beavah.

 

[packsaddle]

Mr. Euphemism here...

Are you guys going at it 'hammer and tongs' or would that be 'tooth and nail'? Or maybe there's a better one out there. OGE, Ed, someone, help me out.

 

Edited part: Dang, left out a whole word..I hate it when that(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

happens(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Bob White]

Perhaps packsaddle the phrase would be fighting "fact and fiction".