drmbear Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Why is any of this about their sins? According to everything I've ever seen, we all sin. In my mind it is more about a kid having a chance to be a part of this great organization, and his parents or loved ones having a chance to be there with him. I can think of all sorts of scenarios where it is just "better" for both the kid and the family to be a part of Scouting rather than not being part of Scouting. Overall, our society becomes a better place. I grew up in a family that wasn't very religious. In Scouting I found the ideas of a "World Brotherhood of Scouting" and the overall non-denominational nature of the Scout's Own services as the foundation that lead me to being accepting and respectful of others regardless of their faith. I attend church regularly with my family and feel I am part of a religious community, though I chose a church that matches up with the vision of Scouting that I had as a kid. What I know is that there are lots of different belief systems and folks should be able to choose their own way. Problems occur when people start trying to find ways to divide instead of bringing together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 drmbear, "Why is any of this about their sins?" Answer: Because the basis for this idiotic policy is in a particular interpretation of a particular sectarian belief system which BSA applies to the "morally straight" and "a scout is clean" parts of the oath and law. The prohibition of gays is based on certain sectarian beliefs. And violations of those are therefore interpreted as 'sin' by some scouters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavah Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 In my mind it is more about a kid having a chance to be a part of this great organization, and his parents or loved ones having a chance to be there with him. Yah, hmmm... Yeh know, drmbear, there is nuthin' at all stopping a lad from being part of the organization, right? And yeh know, there is nuthin' at all stopping a lad's parents or loved ones from being there with him (save at things like BORs or high adventure trips where they're not physically qualified, etc.). Da only BSA policy is that openly gay folks can't be registered leaders. Now yeh described a wonderful "men's club" that you're a part of that is a "safe place for men". So yeh seem perfectly comfortable discriminating against women when yeh are providing somethin' that you as a man feel is valuable. No daughters, no lads who want to bring one of their two female parents. It's a men's group. Now, I reckon some feminist could go off on your men's club about da long history of violence against women, about perpetuating patriarchal society, about excluding women from positions, about da history of all-male clubs becomin' the focus for civil power structures and relationships that kept women from equal participation in society, on and on. Your mens' club is really of a kind with a sorta ugly historical culture. But in da end, it's just a men's group, eh? Guys gettin' together for mutual support. Can't figure why this is any different. Folks from da vast majority of worldwide religions want a "safe place for kids" where the leadership reflects their values. We are providin' an environment that they as believers of one sort or another feel is valuable. Yep, it involves discrimination same as your club, but da discrimination is much less overt than the discrimination your club practices, eh? It only applies to leadership in da group, not participation, and it more or less discriminates on overt behavior rather than somethin' like gender. And in da end, same as your club, it's just a youth program. People with a few shared values gettin' together for mutual support. Beavah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortridge Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 I guess some sins are just worse than others. Does Irving have a sliding scale? Polluting your body with alcohol and tobacco is a 3, commiting adultery might be a 7, but sleeping with someone of the same gender is a 10, and that's the worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drmbear Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Responsible gay parents of a Cub Scout age boy is against the rules, but a heterosexual child molester can easily register as an adult leader in Scouting so long as he or she has not yet been caught. And those things like smoking, alcohol, drugs, etc., have an immediate, known, negative impact on the kids. Selection of leaders based on sexual orientation when the goal is to "protect" our children seems to miss the point completely, because I can just about guarantee that you would find no greater percentage of child molesters in that population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavah Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Responsible gay parents of a Cub Scout age boy is against the rules Nah, it isn't. BSA would be happy to have a lad with responsible gay parents. The parent(s) just couldn't register as cubmaster/den leader, etc. They could still participate, still attend events. Individual CO's might decide differently, of course. Yeh can't guarantee anything about da figures on child abuse, because nobody really knows 'em, and until very recently this was a very small population. But that's neither here nor there. If you can have a men's group that excludes women, because yeh feel there are some issues where men need mutual support from like-minded fellows they can talk to and trust, why is it so awful that parents from a very broad spectrum of faiths have an organization with leaders they feel they can talk to and trust with their kids? There's no difference. I suppose people could view your mens' group as being misogynist or da BSA as being homophobic or whatever. Lots of folks spend a lot of time judgin' others or imputing wicked intent where there isn't any. They probably should just get a life. Beavah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosetracker Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Beavah brings up a very good point.. In order to "protect" children from "whatever" it is that LDS & Catholics fear about homosexuals.. The thing is to utilize these "scary" people in everything... So they can be "unregistered" parents acting as ASMs, going on every outing and event as parents, filling in as Den Leaders when no one will register for the position.. etc.. The thing is they are just too "threatening" to give them the respect they deserve by allowing them to wear a uniform and hold a title for the position they are working.. And they are just too "scary" to allow them to go through a security check to assure they are not pedophiles and rapists and other low life criminal types.. We just should allow them to do the job of the heterosexuals without recognition.. An unattentive CO would not even need to give approval of this action because it is all handing a parent authority of our children under the table (so to speak).. So with not Adult App.. the CO/COR need not approve. But this is not a practice that would put our children in jeopardy, is not discrimination, nor hypocritical in any way.. (This message has been edited by moosetracker) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drmbear Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Beavah, Yes, I'm part of a men's group, and I have no problems with the idea that it is for men only. In reality, a whole other can of worms is that I think women, no matter how capable, knowledgeable, etc., have no place in camping and outings with Boy Scouts either, but BSA has already gone there. Women gather, men gather, and we all gather together, and the dynamics and scope of what can happen in each of those situations is different, and all good, and all important. Around the "men's work" idea I've spent a lot of time wanting to better understand that whole boy's to men transition time, and from that even knowing plenty of fully capable women Scout leaders, I think it is better for the boys if there were only men leaders, at least on the program side, during that Boy Scout phase of the program. Cub Scouts, a different kind of thing, in some ways I even think a Cub Scout pack could have both girls and boys. Venturing, also a different sort of thing, and a different age in the transition. I wonder whether there is an "ideal" way to organize this thing so that it provides the best opportunities for boys and girls to grow into the most capable people possible. I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGreyEagle Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 You know, some of this old song is dated, and then again, a lot of it is not... CHORUS: The beat goes on, the beat goes on Drums keep pounding a rhythm to the brain La de da de de, la de da de da Charleston was once the rage, uh huh History has turned the page, uh huh The mini skirts the current thing, uh huh Teenybopper is our newborn king, uh huh Chorus The grocery store's the super mart, uh huh Little girls still break their hearts, uh huh And men still keep on marching off to war Electrically they keep a baseball score Chorus Grandmas sit in chairs and reminisce Boys keep chasing girls to get a kiss The cars keep going faster all the time Bums still cry "hey buddy, have you got a dime" Chorus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavah Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Bums still cry "hey buddy, have you got a dime" Yah, right. That and another $3.50 will get yeh a cup of coffee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGreyEagle Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 So, I could have gone with If I should call you up, invest a dime And you say you belong to me and ease my mind Imagine how the world could be, so very fine So happy together Today it would be text you up and pay nothing since my parents have an unlimited text, data and voice plan but that doesnt trip off the tongue as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeattlePioneer Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Heh, heh! FINALLY --- this thread dropped off the "Active Topics page.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS-87 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 You're an awful person SP... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrush Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Moose, you just reminded me of my favorite literature quote, courtesy of RHH: "Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other sins are invented nonsense." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavah Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Nah, jrush. Sin involves hurting yourself. Either directly, or indirectly by how yeh treat others. Either by commission, by doin' something wrong, or by omission, by failing to do something right when yeh could have. While sin does affect others and da world at large, its primary effect is the harm it does to our own best selves. And that's why it's a kindness to point out or correct the sins of others, at a time when they are willing to listen or truly need the admonishment. It's what any wise parent, or friend, or scoutmaster does for someone they care about. Beavah 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