Defending the Scout Oath

[aquaticeagle]

Thank you Cardinal for taking the time to read what was originally written and taking the time to understand it. It really helps the conversation.

 

"To answer your original question: my opinion is that the BSA is never going to ban those who smoke or drink any alcohol.At least not those adults who do it outside of scouting."

 

I don't think they will either. Don't you think that is hypocritical?

[TheScout]

I did. It says harmful smoking and alcohol.

 

I've had some of each. Haven't been harmed.

[aquaticeagle]

"I did. It says harmful smoking and alcohol.

I've had some of each. Haven't been harmed."

 

You obviously either haven't read what I've written or you aren't understanding it. I am NOT debating whether or not smoking and drinking is right or wrong. I am at loss as to how to make this any clearer to you. Cardinal gets it. Why don't you?

[cardinal50]

Aquaticeagle said:

I don't think they will either. Don't you think that is hypocritical?

 

I respond: No. I'm trying to figure out if you are upset by hypocrisy in general, hypocrisy specifically on the part of BSA, or by BSA's ban of homosexual members. Would you be appeased if BSA opened membership to gays?

 

[TheScout]

I hear you. The BSA definition says "harmful."

[aquaticeagle]

Cardinal:

 

I would be happy if the BSA would open membership to people from all walks of life. A good citizen should not be defined by their sexuality or religion. I would be happy if the BSA would not pick and choose which parts of their policy they wish to observe. How can one justify the enforcing of one part of a policy but ignoring the others?

 

I am against the BSA banning homosexuals but the issue here is the hypocrisy of the BSA in enforcing its policies.

 

I'm going to bed now but I will continue this tomorrow.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

TheScout writes:

I've had some of each. Haven't been harmed.

 

Sorry, you can't claim that. You can only say you haven't noticed any adverse health effects. You could have cancer right now and not know it.

 

Of course, that just begs the question. Should the BSA kick out members who smoke and develop cancer?

[Horizon]

BSA chooses to define morally straight as excluding gays.

BSA chooses to define physically strong to mean that smoking and poor health in general are bad, but not bad enough to exclude you. However, they have changed the health form and are supposedly going to tighten the restrictions on adult volunteers for some activities such as Jambo staff.

BSA chooses to define mentally awake to mean that there is no alcohol at Scout functions.

 

I don't think it is hypocrisy as much as it is a different level of standards. We can not smoke or drink at Scout events - so they ARE keeping to some of their requirements. You could argue that the BSA has an uneven level of measurement, but not pure hypocrisy.

 

I say this as someone who believes that the BSA should let the Charter organization make the call on homosexuality. If the Charter group does not see a conflict with homosexuality and Morals - then they can choose to have a gay volunteer. That has been hashed over in other threads.

[skeptic]

I see this whole thread as someone "poking the pig"; therefore, other than this comment, I will ignore it as having no worth.

 

 

[evmori]

Again, I'm not arguing the rights and wrongs of alcohol or tobacco consumption. I'm arguing the rights and wrongs of hypocrisy on the BSA's part.

 

OK What are the right & wrongs of hypocrisy?

[OldGreyEagle]

Hey, what if we limit participation in this thread to only those who assert they are willing to change their opinion on this topic based on the other sides argument?

 

Anyone? Anyone?

 

OK, back to everyone participates,

 

"Lay on, Macduff,

And damn'd be him that first cries, 'Hold, enough!'"

 

[Hal_Crawford]

OGE:

To many in the theatre it is bad luck to quote, or even speak the name of the "Scottish play". Break a leg.

Hal

 

(Though I will admit that I have crossed that line at least once on this forum).

[OldGreyEagle]

Hey, although I did a magificient turn as Judge Omar Gaffney as a senior in High School (I got to smoke a cigar, it was fine until I accidentally inhaled on stage), I never have nor do I now proclaim myself as a Thespian, master or otherwise

[aquaticeagle]

"I don't think it is hypocrisy as much as it is a different level of standards. We can not smoke or drink at Scout events - so they ARE keeping to some of their requirements. You could argue that the BSA has an uneven level of measurement, but not pure hypocrisy."

 

Here is the problem. In the BSA definition of "physically strong" it is very specific in saying that alcohol, tobacco and illegal drugs should be avoided. Taking part in any of those is obviously NOT avoiding them and clearly would be a violation of the Scout Oath. "Morally straight" is NOT defined by the Scout Oath as having anything to do with sexual preference. That is something that is being inferred from their broad definition.

 

So why is it okay for the BSA to IGNORE a very specific detail that they have included in the Scout Oath definition regarding "physically strong" but enforce a part of "morally straight" that is NOT in the definition at all? The scouts are not allowed to pick and choose which parts of the Oath and Law they want to live by so why is the BSA organization?

[aquaticeagle]

"Hey, what if we limit participation in this thread to only those who assert they are willing to change their opinion on this topic based on the other sides argument?"

 

I'm certainly willing to agree to that. I guess you're suggesting this because of some of the persistence on this thread. For my part of that, it's not about being stubborn and not changing my opinion. It's about being persistent in wanting someone to pay attention to what the thread is about and stop changing the subject.

 

I'm willing to change my opinion if someone can explain to me why it's okay for the BSA to pick and choose which parts of the Oath they want to follow while the scouts are expected to subscribe to the entire Oath.