OldGreyEagle Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 This is old ground, but only if you have been over it before Youth are not Gay, Straight, Bi, etc (I said etc because I listed the sexual orientations I am know of, there may be more) They are youth, I do not want anyone, either Gay, Straight, or Bi telling tales of their sexual adventures. We just have scouts and all should be regarded as such Adult leader criteria should be left up to the CO, they are the franchise owners, they decide who delivers the program. I would also be sure the CO is at least as responsible as the BSA for any lawasuits involving the behavior of a leader. They hold the power, they should also hold responsibility. Of course, perhaps they already do and I dont know it, it happens Reverence? We teach that all beliefs are respected. Thats it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortridge Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 onevoice wrote: "do you seriously believe that is what was meant by reverent when the scout law was written?" And yet we're not digging trenches or carrying around heavy canvas tents today, which was the Scouting program as written during the time you cite. As a society, we've changed our minds about many items, even things sexual. BP condemned masturbation, for example - he believed it caused headaches, heart problems and insanity. The public viewpoint toward that practice has clearly changed in the century since. This entire line of reasoning becomes even more ridiculous when you consider that BP didn't even put Reverent in the Scout Law. That was an entirely American invention. Blame James West and the YMCA - it was a marketing tool, not a fundamental principle of the movement. What BP *did* write about religion is crystal-clear: Religion is a very simple thing: 1st. To believe in God. 2nd. To do good to other people. - SFB, p230 I submit that telling an entire group of people that they are not fit to be Scouts or to serve Scouting simply because they love the wrong kind of person is not "doing good."(This message has been edited by shortridge) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoutfish Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 reverent/ˈrev(ə)rənt/ Adjective: Feeling or showing deep and solemn respect: "a reverent silence". Funny, it doesn't say that it's limited to any one certain sexual persuasion. Doesn't say that it's limited to, directed only to or at any one particular god of any particular religion. It does not say that it is a religious thought or feeling. Truth be told, I PERSONALLY know athiest people who abide by the ten commandmenst and follow a more morally straight path than many self procliamed "saved and heaven bound Christians". These people may not believe ina god at all or just not by your definition, but they do the right thing, teat people with the respect due the person and not just what they personally think. Thing is, as a "Christain" , you are bound by God and bible to not judge others. You are also bound to love one another, And to do unto others as you would do unto yourself. So far, all you have done is call them defective, bash their ability to be reverent because it does not fit YOUR PERSONAL definition... and You blame them for problems with in the relationships of what you consider "normal" families. So onevoice...what part of REVERENT are you practicing and living? Because....."....you're entitled to your opinion, but do you seriously believe that is what was meant by reverent when the scout law was written?" Well, do you? 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