Petitions delivered by Eagle Scout over Anti-Gay Policy

[Trevorum]

Seattle, glad you won't stand in the way of inevitable progess. And I, for one, am OK with that. You (and others) focus on making our organization stronger, while I (and others) focus on making it more just. Not mutually exclusive.

[Beavah]

I'm always amused by da notion that progress is "inevitable" in the direction that individuals happen to agree with.

 

The lessons of history are different. Acceptance of homosexuality has been a historical marker for da social and economic decline of cultures, which are generally replaced by ones that return to more "traditional" values. I'd suggest that there are sociological reasons why yeh can't find much by way of long-term religion or culture in da world that embraces homosexuality.

 

B

 

 

 

[BSA24]

Beavah,

 

Cite these historical declines please? Because that's just a oft-repeated myth. There are no declines associated with the introduction of acceptance of homosexuality. It was accepted in Ancient Rome before Rome took power, during all of its reign of terror, and after. It was accepted in Ancient Greece - before it rose to power and after.

 

It is not considered "wrong" by Buddhism, Shinto, Taoism, or Confucianism. China and Japan seem to have done fine for thousands of years while "accepting" it.

[Trevorum]

Thank you BSA24 for pointing that out; I was going to respond with the example of classical Greece, which had a flourishing culture and religious life for 500+ years while accepting homosexuality as a part of society, and whose eventual decline had nothing to do with sexuality.

 

I'm always amused by da folks who either do not know history or who choose to ignore it in order to support their notions.

[SeattlePioneer]

There is nothing inevitable about following the fads and fashions of the white middle class.

 

Indeed, the fads and fashions of the white middle class reliably produce political and social opposition by others who disagree with those fashions.

 

White liberal opposition to provate firearms ownership has resulted in such rights being expanded by law and written into the constitution by the Supreme Court.

 

White liberal support of abortion has resulted in widespread opposition to abortion on demand, state laws restricting abortion and rolling back constitutional protection of abortion by the Supreme Court itself.

 

The Equal Rights Amendment for women was never ratified by enough states to be adopted.

 

Nixon's "Silent Majority," an "Reagan Democrats" took control of the Federal government from White Liberals and may do so again in November.

 

There is nothing "inevitable" about the rule of white liberals, nor is giving homosexuals additional social and cultural power necessarily a matter of "justice," in my opinion.

[BSA24]

Given the way young people today believe that homosexuality is not a big deal and is an inborn trait, the change is inevitable. This is just like the racism of the past. 80 year olds are firm in their resistance. 20 year olds are laughing at them and are asking for things to change.

 

It is a generational prejudice. It will die with us.

 

And we are in charge of a youth movement. How can we be this out of touch with the vast, vast majority of our nation's youth and still reach them on topics that matter?

 

[Horizon]

SeattlePioneer - you really should take a look at the Pew Research I linked to. This is a lot more than just "white liberals" supporting gay marriage rights.

[Beavah]

It is not considered wrong by Buddhism

 

"Buddhist sexual proscriptions ban homosexual activity and heterosexual sex through orifices other than the vagina, including masturbation or other sexual activity with the hand... From a Buddhist point of view, lesbian and gay sex is generally considered sexual misconduct" - Dalai Lama

 

It is not considered wrong by Taoists

 

Yah, which ones are yeh asking? It is considered out of balance for some, and others consider all sex a distraction. Taoism generally doesn't have a language of "right vs. wrong", so the question generally doesn't have any meaning in that context.

 

It is not considered wrong by Shinto

 

"Nanshoku relationships inside monasteries were typically pederastic, that is, an age-structured relationship where the younger partner is not considered adult. The older partner, or nenja ("lover" or "admirer"), would be a monk, priest or abbot, while the younger partner was assumed to be an acolyte (chigo, 稚児), who would be a prepubescent or adolescent boy;[4] the relationship would be dissolved once the boy reached adulthood (or left the monastery). Both parties were encouraged to treat the relationship seriously and conduct the affair honorably, and the nenja might be required to write a formal vow of fidelity.[5] Outside of the monasteries, monks were considered to have a particular predilection for male prostitutes, which was the subject of much ribald humor.[6]

 

Yah, if Shinto monks endorse what we would consider rape of boy scout aged boys, then I don't reckon it's a religion worth pointing to as an example, eh?

 

And so on. Yeh have to be careful as a westerner tryin' to interpret eastern philosophical traditions, eh? Myself included, as they are well outside my cultural tradition and I don't have da language skills. But I'd suggest yeh be more thoughtful about it, BSA24.

 

Now, Trevorum is correct in sayin' that Ancient Greece, like Shinto monastic practice, had a culture of older men bringing up young teens in the way of sex. That pattern does exist across some cultures, eh? The Jerry Sandusky approach to adolescent children was a common enough practice in many civilizations. It's interestin' and perhaps telling to have those who advocate for homosexual inclusion also give credit to those cultures who embraced this particular form of homosexuality. I, quite prejudicially I'll admit, was leavin' 'em out.

 

I'm left wonderin' if that is what folks really want to advocate?

 

Beavah

 

[BSA24]

The Dalai Lama only represents a sect of Tibetan Buddhism - not all Buddhism. He is not the pope of Buddhists everywhere. Buddhism is also practiced across India, China, and Japan and has no such proscriptions. In fact, it is in the very nature of Buddhism to not proscribe any behaviors at all.

 

During my many travels to Asia, I have never seen any evidence that they despise or discriminate against homosexuals in any way.

 

Your example of Shinto is countered by modern accusations against Priests in the Catholic Church. There's a great example to cite of Christian decency, right? Those Catholic Priests abusing boys by the bus load and the church denying it all the way to court and refusing to release records on it? The pope refusing to condemn it or apologize for it?

 

See? Anyone can do that to anyone's religious beliefs, Beavah. You haven't made a point. You've just conflated the issue by pulling random facts out of long-dead history.

 

Be careful as a Westerner trying to interpret other country's belief systems, Beavah. You'll just end up cutting and pasting random things in a desperate attempt to not change your mind.

 

This issue will eventually resolve when our generation is dead and the next one takes over. Either that, or the Boy Scouts will become a Mormon's only club and find itself unable to operate the camps that it has.

 

Let's get back to your original point: No nation or people in history have ever "declined" due to homosexuality becoming accepted or even in any sort of correlation with the acceptance.

(This message has been edited by BSA24)

[moosetracker]

Hmmm... I never felt in the minority being a white middle class person in the scouting movement.

 

Nor have I felt in the minority when I voice my opinion on this subject on this forum or in other scouting circles.. Usually we are equally divided..

 

I agree as the young grow to be the adults things will change.. Some youth may become more conservative in their view on economic wealth, religion etc as they age.. But, I have never heard of anyone who is not prejudice learning to become prejudice as they age, even if they have become more conservative.. At least not without good reason, like becoming a school teacher or cop in the ghetto and being disrespected or victimized in various ways.. Personally I don't think there is much danger of too many of our youth becoming victims of thug like homosexuals to force a large change in viewpoint.

 

These youth if they stay religious or become religious will continue to liberate their churches from archaic fears. Tell them that their good friends or relatives are not worthy of equal rights because God tells us to mistreat them, and they will debate your fear spreading verbage with logic and reason.. The same logic and reason they debated the topic with their parents or grandparents, and possibly converted some of them to be more lenient.

 

I guess Beavah's point is that the Greeks & Romans did eventually fail, and even if it was not because of homosexuality, it was due to some way God smiting them due to their views on homosexuality.. Japan and China I guess are slated to fail some day also due to Gods wrath.. Probably the whole economic crisis that alot of countries are facing is due to God's wrath on homosexuality.. Could not possibly be due to Greed.. If our cultures fail it will be due to homosexuality..

[Beavah]

The Dalai Lama only represents a sect of Tibetan Buddhism

 

Of course. But then yeh were making a claim about all Buddhism, eh? So the Dalai Lama, who in this case is talkin' about general Buddhist tradition rather than his own personal views, refutes your claim. I'll leave yeh to evaluate your second claim about all of Buddhism on your own.

 

During my many travels to Asia, I have never seen any evidence that they despise or discriminate against homosexuals in any way.

 

Traveled extensively have yeh? In western-facing cities I suppose, rather than in da countryside. Most would disagree with your assessment. Consider, for example, http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2010-02-21-gays-China-closeted_N.htm

 

Da Catholic Church never considered pederasty as normative or accepted. Yep, it had sinful priests, but despite its efforts to cover up their sins or try to rehabilitate them, it never claimed that such behavior wasn't gravely sinful. That's the important difference with Shinto which yeh missed. The behavior there, as yeh correctly point out, was accepted within da culture/religion. Of course, these days it wouldn't be, because Japan has largely been corrupted by Western Imperialist Christian mores.

 

Homosexuality is only one aspect of a range of moral behaviors which have to do with societal values and child rearing. I'm not claiming causation, but I'll stick with correlation. And as moosetracker suggests, da views of folks in their 20s don't correlate all that well with their views later in life. People do learn judgment and discernment as they get older, eh? No young person is naturally prejudiced, but they pick it up pretty well from others over time. The same often happens with other aspects of judgment that are more positive.

 

But in da long run, I reckon we'll just be replaced by fundamentalist Islam, because they are reproducing faster.

 

B

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[moosetracker]

Beavah - No young person is naturally prejudiced, but they pick it up pretty well from others over time.

 

I disagree with that statement.. Prejudice is learned from your elders very early in life before you reach your teen years and start thinking for yourself. If it is not rooted before your teen years, then it takes personal being victimized by a group to form prejudices later in life.

 

I do agree though that when the money the government is chewing up and spitting out, when taxes become their problems not their parents, then they could be more conservative in politics, or when it is their kid rather then themselves they may have a more conservative view on raising them with a set of guidelines (then again not always, parents do seem to get more & more lax with guidelines and more just want to be friends & buddies..) They may also become more religious for the sake of raising children..

 

But, if in their teen years on through to adult, they did not pick up their parents prejudices, and know and like and respect the black kid from high school, the jewish kid from college, the homosexual co-worker.. etc. etc. etc..

 

Well prejudice is built on fears of the unknown.. Once they know and like, admire and respect individuals of certain classes, they can not go back to grouping them all up and labeling them as the scum of the earth based on verbage meant to have them fear that group of people, and see them not as individuals but as a group that have no value.

 

The only way the fear can later be implanted is if the enough members of the group victimize the person, as to get them to fear there are more in the group that are bad then good, and it is not worth the effort to weed out the good from the bad.

[Beavah]

Yah, moosetracker, that's a nice theory, but I don't think there's evidence to back it up. More's the pity.

 

I'm not talkin' about prejudice, though. I'm talkin' about judgment and discernment. Those continue to develop into and throughout adulthood.

 

I'd suggest that it's a prejudice to believe that developing judgment will not lead one to reject liberal social values. I think very frequently, as young folks develop more experience with the world they do come to a more balanced and sensible view of social norms and values than liberal orthodoxy.

 

For one thing, they learn not to conflate gay-bashing and the like with a principled moral stand on the propriety of homosexual behavior or society's endorsement of it. The former is reprehensible, the latter a matter of moral viewpoint. One can oppose gay bashing while still characterizing homosexual behavior as morally unsound, or while still choosing not to subsidize the behavior through legal marriage arrangements. That's the sort of developing judgment that allows young people to make more mature and sophisticated choices as they grow older.

 

Beavah

 

[moosetracker]

Maybe, but as stated, I did say judgement will evolve. as people age.. Prejudice will not.. The fear that homosexuals, or gay marriage or whatever.. Is an unfounded fear of an unknown.. You have to beat the fear into people when they still believe in the boogie man.. That way they are just to fearful to socialize with people of that group and figure out the fear is unfounded..

 

Unfortunately even putting fear in them at a young age doesn't always work.. They could get a peer group that will have friends who have friends who are gay.. All it takes is to personally get to know some people from a group to figure out that the story of the boogie man your parents were spoon feeding you was not true.

[SeattlePioneer]

Sigh. Moosetracker again suggests that the issue is one of "fear."

 

Of course that's not true. It's one of values, culture and political freedom and liberty.

 

As is so common, my liberal friends think the fashionable values they promote are the only ones a reasonable person could hold. Of course that's not true.

 

Homosexual interest groups have wanted endless favors from government to impose their own biases on society, and the Democratic Party, Clinton and Obama should be embarrassed about being led around by the nose so often.

 

This is an issue about personal freedom and liberty. Homosexuals should be free to convince other people to hire them, and to accept their values and practices. But using government power to impose those views on others is obnoxious.

 

It's also reasonable to expect government to protect homosexuals from assault and other crimes.

 

Homosexuals are free to lobby government to be added to the short list of human relationships recognized by legal marriage, but there is no "right" to marriage: it's a legal privilege dispensed to only a few of the enormous variety of human relationships.