Religion/Sexuality

[packsaddle]

Is this membership card thing a metaphor? Do we actually have to turn something in or can the unit merely recharter without a member who disagrees with some BSA policy?

I ask this because outside of being kicked out (I have no idea what that really means either), I'm not sure of what the process is. For instance, if I suddenly decide not to continue as a volunteer, all I really need to do is inform the CO and they will make sure my name isn't on the charter next time around. Right?

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

I'd like to defend the proper use of the word "troll."

 

A "troll" is not someone who merely disagrees with you; anyone who responds to your arguments is NOT a troll, by definition.

 

A "troll" is a hit-and-run poster who posts something deliberately inflammatory or outrageous, in order to produce a flamewar. People who respond are said to have "bitten" (which is where "troll" comes from - "trolling" is a fishing metaphor).

[GernBlansten]

How about a simple shunning. We haven't had a decent shunning in our unit for months. You know, everyone stands up at the campfire, we declare the offender is now shunned, then we all turn our backs to him with our arms crossed. The shun is removed when the offense is rectified, or the next full moon. Whichever comes first.

[packsaddle]

Hi Merlyn,

Yeah, I knew that. I still prefer the mental image of something that eats Billy goats Gruff. Kind of like....me.

 

Gern, Back when I was still a Presbyterian, we referred to it as being 'churched'. The offending member would essentially be banned from the congregation. The entire church congregation would turn their backs on him and he would be ushered out the door. For some reason, people seemed deathly afraid of having this happen to them.

I guess it was the next best thing to 'excommunication' for a protestant....the result of a kind of 'excommunication envy' perhaps.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[OldGreyEagle]

Pack, I am a little confused by your description of being "churched". If the entire Presbyterian congregation would turn their backs to the Churchee, who would usher the person out? Did you hire At-large Baptists to perfrom the Sargeant at Arms routine?

[packsaddle]

No those were jack-booted thugs that we hired from the Democratic Party (they were cheaper than Baptists).

Seriously, the ushers did the deed but this was more myth in the mind of a child than reality. In reality, I can't imagine what kind of mischief would have been required before that church ejected a paying member.

[evmori]

Is the BSA perfect? Are you happy with all their policies? If not, why don't you turn in your membership card?

 

No the BSA isn't perfect, Never said it was. No I am not happy with all of their policies. I'm not turning in my membership card, either.

 

I like the core values the BSA has stuck to. What I don't like is the constant attack on those core values! Yeah I know people will constantly attack them but I don't have to like it!

 

Don't over think it pack! Don't want you to lose sleep or pop a blood vessel.

 

Troll. Let's see. sherm revives a thread in 7/2009 that last has a post in 9/2008. Posts a little then goes away for days then posts a little more. Yup! Troll!

 

 

[GernBlansten]

Its a core value Ed? Where in the scout handbook is it referenced specifically?

[evmori]

Read the application, Gern.

[GernBlansten]

Sorry Ed, I must have skipped over the checkbox on sexual orientation. Did it say Gay? Straight? No-preference? Abstain?

[Hal_Crawford]

Ed:

Sherm has been posting pretty steadily for the last week on several different threads. He is an Eagle and according to his profile he has been a Scoutmaster, an ASM and a UC, all positions that you have held. It would seem that you might have a lot in common. I don't think that he is a troll anymore than I think that you are troll.

 

Many on this forum have expressed disdain for the concept of "political correctness". It would appear that there is a BSA version of political correctness at work on this forum: don't question the membership policies because if you do we will dismiss you as a troll and/or suggest that you quit the BSA.

 

Hal

[NickP412]

it seems that we have gotten off the topic at hand, who cares if gays are born that way or not the debate lies in weather or not we should allow them to be scouts. for all i care people could turn gay because they drank root beer from apple bees on a Thursday night, it wouldn't matter. i hope they never let gays in the BSA, i do have 1 question though. did the UK ever not let gays in? if so then i hope we dont follow suit and let them in later, but i dont know there old policy.

[Mr. Boyce]

I am a decided political moderate but it IS disturbing to see the tendency among liberals of simply running away from facts. Or pooh-poohing them. Study this issue further, and you'll be surprised at the amount of slant, cant and studied ignorance of facts by our media outlets: they always feel happier selling a "let whatever happen" view.

 

http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache%3AT9T7F-bbmGsJ%3Awww.traditionalvalues.org%2Fpdf_files%2Fstatistics_on_homosexual_lifestyle.pdf+dangers+of+homosexual+lifestyle&hl=en&gl=us&pli=1

[Horizon]

The American Psychological Association today made a statement about the ability to change orientation through therapy:

 

"Contrary to claims of sexual orientation change advocates and practitioners, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation," said Judith M. Glassgold, PsyD, chair of the task force. "Scientifically rigorous older studies in this area found that sexual orientation was unlikely to change due to efforts designed for this purpose. Contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates, recent research studies do not provide evidence of sexual orientation change as the research methods are inadequate to determine the effectiveness of these interventions." Glassgold added: "At most, certain studies suggested that some individuals learned how to ignore or not act on their homosexual attractions. Yet, these studies did not indicate for whom this was possible, how long it lasted or its long-term mental health effects. Also, this result was much less likely to be true for people who started out only attracted to people of the same sex."

 

http://www.apa.org/releases/therapeutic.html?imw=Y

 

Mr. Boyce: Your .pdf link is interesting, but while skimming it in only 1 or 2 places does it appear to compare the rates of risky or dangerous behaviors of homosexuals to those of heterosexuals. Without showing the rate among equivalent heterosexual populations (and controlling for appropriate factors such as income and education), you can not make a scientifically backed judgment call.

[Hal_Crawford]

Mr. Boyce:

You may be a moderate but your sources are decidedly conservative. Interesting to note that the Traditional Values Coalition lists their address as 139 C. Street SE. I think that puts it next door (if in not the same building) to The Fellowship's complex at 133 C St. This organization and address have been at the center of the Ensign, Sanford and Pickering sex scandals.

 

All the things you said about liberals and the media can also be said about conservatives at other parts of the media. Lets not forget that Fox News is also part of the media.

 

Given the source, I am skeptical about the TVC article. For instance, the article provides shocking statistics about domestic violence among gays but does not compare it to domestic violence among the heterosexuals.

 

Groups with political agendas, both left and right are capable of cherry picking or outright manufacturing statistics to prove their point.

 

Hal