its baaackk.... BSA policy on homosexuals and leadership

[Eagledad]

>>DLChris71, can I ask you straight out if you accept those national Scouting Organisations which don't exclude gay people as being just as much Scouts as BSA?

[Mr. Boyce]

Let's see, let's try a vast social experiment without really knowing what the phenomenon is all about.

[DuncanHill]

Eagledad, no I was asking the poster whose name I put at the start of my post

 

I was asking him because of his strong words about his version of morality, and the organisations I meant were ones like the Scout Association, Scouts Ireland, Swedish Scouting, Finnish Scouting, Scouts Australia and many others which welcome LGBT members both as young people and as leaders.

[moosetracker]

Sorry Duncan.. Yes some of us Americans have yet to come out of the dark ages, especially when a religion keeps us there..

 

Morally Straight as defined by "USScouts.org" & "Scoutmaster.org"

To be a person of strong character, your relationships with others should be honest and open. You should respect and defend the rights of all people. Be clean in your speech and actions, and remain faithful in your religious beliefs. The values you practice as a Scout will help you shape a life of virtue and self-reliance.

 

and from "US Scouts.Org"

means to live your life with honesty, to be clean in your speech and actions, and to be a person of strong character.

 

But, No there is not anything about "condemn homosexuality"..

 

(so I guess if their religious beliefs say to condemn, they condemn.. (But, then it goes against the part that says "respect and defend the rights of ALL people..)

 

Scoutfish "I do not join a club to protest their rules and insist they change....especially when part of the clubs identity is based on the rules it has."

 

 

Incorrect.. Gay bashing is not our clubs identity.. Many many people join and go for years until they find out this policy.. As stated by some scout Exec when explaining why this woman membership was revoked.. Sexual orientation is considered something that should not be discussed within Scouts, but something that should be taught at home. While I agreed with the statement, I found it out of sync with the action.. The women was not preaching her sexual orientation.. But, everyone in her Den & Pack knew about the BSA policy and learned about sexual orientation due to the actions of the Council..

 

I agree with everyone who says BSA will follow the money.. And that no one will ever be able to track the donations lost due to their policies, and that no one will pay out big bucks to an organization to change their veiws, much better just to ignore the organization, and donate to more worthier causes..

 

nldscout - Where did you read that the Bechtel family donated the Summit with "strings attached"? Not argueing, as I don't know one way or the other, but just wondering where that information comes from.

[DLChris71]

LB- In theological terms there is usually no difference between one sin and another sin. Something is immoral or it isn't. Go or no go. No difference between a little white lie and a big fat lie.

 

Duncan- "Morally straight"...no I'm not referring to sexual preference. I believe the term means that one stays on a moral course set forth by their religious teachings. Now some COs like the Lutheran Church will ordain a homosexual pastor and host a Boy Scout troop...thus making it possible that an IH and COR could be homosexual, theoretically. That's their moral course. I'm not sure what BSA would do if that were to become public knowledge.

 

People that don't agree with the Lutheran position are free to choose other churches and other troops.

 

It does impress me though to what extent activist will go to gain acceptance and in turn attempt to trample the views of others.

 

As to other scouting organizations, I don't concern myself with actions of organizations I'm not affiliated with. Scouting organizations were created under a common theme. A scout from Indonesia would be the same to me as one from England. I would just suggest that the two keep the conversation on scouting, as that is their common interest. That is we should leave proselytizing to others.(This message has been edited by dlchris71)

[moosetracker]

DLChris - There are more then one single religion that does not view homosexuals as sinful people, and will ordain them Episcopal church, and Unitarian are two others I know of.. Others are currently debating it, since social norms are changing.

 

Actually I didn't know of the Luthern church though.. So you added to my list, thanks.

 

Did you know that LDS would not allow a black man to join the priesthood until 1978? They changed due to a revalation.. Perhaps, they may get a new revelation dealing with homosexuals sometime in the future (may not be very near for them though, seeing how long it took them to treat blacks as equals after the social norms had changed).

[packsaddle]

"It does impress me though to what extent activist will go to gain acceptance and in turn attempt to trample the views of others."

 

Yeah....I used to hear words like this frequently. Back in the 1960s. Those 'activists'...the gall of them thinking they should have equal rights under the law. Yes, even from the pulpit I witnessed the outrage that those 'activists' who did know quite well what their place in society was, didn't want to remain 'in their place'. The very idea that they should be treated as citizens with equal rights...it's almost as if it wasn't unnatural or something!

[SeattlePioneer]

It's VERY presumptuous to give lectures about oppression and discrimination to LDS church members.

 

Not only did they have a number of church leaders lynched, but the entire church membership was repeatedly chased out of various communities because of violence.

 

I've seen a lot of hand wringing because of Japanese internment during WWII, but those same people are unconcerned about the religious persecution of Mormons. Indeed, they are often advocates of discrimination, harassment and persecution these days.

[packsaddle]

Those poor Mormons....

"If any miserable scoundrels come here, cut their throats." Brigham Young

 

http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds_mass.htm

 

They must have had it coming.

[shortridge]

As in this broader topic, SP, there's a difference between individual members and an institution's leadership. One can criticize the organizational stance while still having compassion for people. Condemning the LDS church hierarchy for its racist past does not mean anyone is tearing down its members.

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

Thank you for so neatly illustrating how to excuse one group from it's actions and condemn another you don't happen to like.

 

The murderous religiously motivated violence that killed and drove Mormons into repeatedly being refugees in the United States is breathtaking.

 

 

[DuncanHill]

DLChris71 - "As to other scouting organizations, I don't concern myself with actions of organizations I'm not affiliated with." BSA is part of the WOSM (just like the other organizations I mentioned). BSA at the last World Conference blocked a motion calling (among other human rights issues) for equal rights for LGBT people.

 

I'm a Scout, I'm part of the worldwide family of Scouts, so to me anything done in Scouting's name is my business.

 

[Oak Tree]

I have to agree that large alumni donors are probably a big part of the resistance to changing the existing policy. And large alumni donors tend to be older people who have had time to establish their fortunes.

 

There are indeed some providers of funding who oppose the current policy. Steven Spielberg dropped his support. United Way funding has dropped (stopped in some councils). Some large companies have dropped their support. (Wells Fargo, Levi Strauss, IBM, Medtronic, ...)

 

And various COs, of course, have dropped their support for BSA - a local YMCA, some liberal religious organizations, some PTAs.

 

The hard thing to see is what kind of a hit is being taken on the input side. There is clearly some anti-BSA sentiment out there. That's a long-term membership issue.

 

Still, the US military has adjusted. I think BSA can too.

[DLChris71]

Activist aren't always right. They sometimes win and they sometimes lose.

 

From what I recall they can only win in the context of the shared majority that giving into their campaign is in sync with their moral code.

 

Vietnam War, Death Penalty, ERA, Abortion Rights, Civil Rights, Environmentalism, 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment. Some wins, some losses, some still in conflict. Which is which depends on your perspective.

 

Will BSA ever allow homosexuals and atheists in? Only to the extent that the shared moral code is in sync with that event. I'm doubtful.

 

We are at a time where it is not criminal to be a homosexual. We are at a time when homosexuals receive some additional legal protections. We are at a time when homosexuals can, with some trouble, enter into some sort of civil relationship with their partner. We are at a time when, quite rightly, no person should be assaulted or intimidated for any reason. I think that is about as in sync as your going to get with the common moral code. The rest remains with the individual private institutions.

 

The viability of an institution is in its code, which is what makes it. As I have said before if an institution is going to blow around with which ever the way the wind blows its not going to live. It will just be some other organization that wanted everybody to like us. Like I said universal acceptance is unlikely.

[moosetracker]

Take a look at ANY religion's history and you will find a lot of not so virtuous moments. LDS, is just as good as all the others.