1985 Boy Scout commercial with a (now) non-supporter

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

 

Here:

 

Lately:

http://lezgetreal.com/2012/06/george-takei-to-join-glaad-in-pride-march-condeming-boy-scouts/

[SeattlePioneer]

Ho hum.

 

Really not a significant issue. A lot of white liberals have lots of reasons why they hate Scouting, so they aren't going to join in any case.

 

No one other than white liberals really cares very much about the issue. They will join or not join based on whether they are invited to join a program and their assessment of the value of their program to their children and family.

 

Even a number of white liberals will join Scouting if they see it as being valuable for their children and family.

 

Those who don't want to join for political reasons are no great loss, and Scouting is probably better off without them, frankly.

 

The only critical issue was whether liberals were going to be able to enlist government to compel BSA to change their policies. The Supreme Court said no to that.

 

I see this kind of publicity as being of zero importance.

(This message has been edited by seattlepioneer)

[moosetracker]

WOW.. Takei will be joined by his husband Brad So he is gay!!.. And was a Scoutmaster!.. And between his being a SM and his standing in the community, BSA thought enough of him to make him a spokesperson for scouting... In other words, he is living, breathing proof that you can be gay and a great role model for our youth in boy scouts!.. In other words a black eye to BSA because it is proof they are wrong..

 

Well I guess that takes him off the list in the other post as to who should be the Cheif Scout.. Some of us would still be fine with it, but I don't think BSA can go from -50 to 100 in a very short time span.

 

Sort of like this week the opposition against Gay marriage had an embarrassment when one of it's major spokespersons, David Blankenhorn (president of the New York-based Institute for American Values) publically decided to switch sides in support of gay marriage..

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/22/david-blankenhorn-prop-8-supporter-gay-marriage-_n_1620217.html

 

Let me say that again as it sounds pretty good.. President of the Institute for American Values.... President of American Values

 

SP.. I think Takei will be surprised to be defined as white. It's also suprising to see so many people jumping from being conservative to being liberal.. Not so good in an election year, huh?

 

 

(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

[SSScout]

The BSA will change (pick an issue) when it should, not because it has to. Or maybe it has to because it should. Or maybe it already has but doesn't realize it. Or the official policy hasn't caught up with the local reality . Or

 

Oh never mind.

[BSA24]

> A lot of white liberals have lots of

> reasons why they hate Scouting, so

> they aren't going to join in any case.

 

White liberal here. Became a liberal because of scouting. Learned about conservation, the trees, the birds, the wildlife, labor unions, and other cool topics. Been a liberal ever since. Was raised in a conservative/moderate family.

 

Been involved in scouting since a long, long time ago.

[NJCubScouter]

For whatever it's worth, when George Takei was a spokesman for the BSA, he was not "open" about his orientation. But it is interesting that the BSA's policy means that someone who was obviously believed by the BSA to be such a good role model for its values that they used him as a national spokesman, presumably became "not" a good role model for its values after he publicly disclosed his orientation. He was still the same person, the only thing that changed was that the public knew one more piece of information about his personal life. And according to Wikipedia, his orientation was an "open secret" among Star Trek fans since the 1970s, so apparently the folks at BSA National are not Star Trek fans. (Although I am a Star Trek fan and I didn't know it until after he "announced" it.)

 

I agree with Moosetracker, Mr. Takei -- a pretty prominent Japanese-American, who as a child spent most of WWII in an internment camp courtesy of the U.S. Government -- would probably be pretty surprised to learn that he is "white." As for "liberal", as others have asked before in this forum, why do some people feel the need to label other people so much? And to make inaccurate generalizations about what they supposedly believe? Most people would probably describe me as a "liberal", and I am white, but I do not "hate Scouting." I think Scouting is great, but I would like to see it improve, and one way I would like to see it improve would be by letting local units decide who their leaders are going to be, even if they are openly gay.

 

As for whether this type of publicity has any "importance", time will tell. I think attitudes about this are changing, even within the BSA. When that will actually result in a change in the policy is anybody's guess. My guess is that it won't happen soon, but it will happen eventually.

[Horizon]

George Takei isn't white, he is Japanese. He also has a good understanding of discrimination and its effects. He was sent to an internment camp as a boy during World War II. This is part of why he is one of the backers of the musical Allegiance:

 

http://www.allegiancemusical.com/post/creators

 

His quote profile on Facebook states this:

 

"Growing up in California, it was illegal for Asians to marry whites. How times have changed. I married a white DUDE."

 

I also would not call him a "non-supporter" of the BSA either. He asks that the discrimination against Gays and Lesbians end, and he says that as a former Scout and Scouter.

 

 

[moosetracker]

I was always told that BSA main group was white middle-class.. And it is always trying to attract other demographics.

 

That is part of the problem with a "Don't ask, Don't tell" rule.. It is not like the the athiest where you are required to believe in a God of some sort, and are breaking the scout oath to be in scouts and not disclose it.. There is nothing in the Scout law that pertains to them proclaiming to be "totally hetersexual".. And many homosexuals do believe themselves morally straight, as they don't see homosexuality as compromising there morals at all..

 

So they follow the "Don't ask, Don't tell" rule.. Become role models in BSA (most maybe locally, few nationally).. And when they finish with BSA they are open about being homosexual, and BSA is made to look really foolish, for stating this person that for years was "one of them", and held in high regards.. Was really also "One of them".. "Oh my, they could be both!!!".. Well shucks! Who would have thunk???

[perdidochas]

Moose,

 

"And many homosexuals do believe themselves morally straight, as they don't see homosexuality as compromising there morals at all.. "

 

Most drug dealers and pedophiles feel that they are morally straight.....

[moosetracker]

Ok.. I will change that.. and many in todays society (and continually increasing) see that homosexuals as outstanding citizens, role models and family members.. Therefore they see nothing wrong with their morals..

[BSA24]

> It is not like the the athiest where you are

> required to believe in a God of some sort,

> and are breaking the scout oath to be in scouts

> and not disclose it..

 

By that logic, every overweight man, woman, and boy who ever makes the scout sign and takes the oath is breaking the scout oath and not disclosing it every time they say "physically strong" while carrying an extra 100 pounds around their waists. I'm sorry, but if you can't run 2 miles in less than 20 minutes and do 40 pushups, you are not physically strong, imo. You can't even pass the military's basic test of physical fitness for a 40 year old to retain your commission as an officer, and that is not a challenging test.

 

By that logic, you are also breaking the scout oath every time you say you will keep yourself morally straight and yet you break the speed limit, laugh at your boss's jokes, or tell your wife her dress doesn't make her look fat.

 

Here's the thing. Life is not black and white. People are not good or bad.

 

The oath says "On my honor, I will do my best..." Technically an atheist is doing the best he can to do his duty to God and his country if he is trying to follow the scout law. He's doing the best that he can.

 

That's what the oath says. It does not say, "On my honor, I will 100% do the following things perfectly."

 

Good thing, too, or every fat scoutmaster out there would need to be booted out.

 

There is nothing in the oath and law that says you have to believe in God. The only place that is written is in BSA membership policies, the scout handbook, and the statement of religious principles.

 

There is this awesome Christian principle I learned growing up called grace. And the other principle is mercy. Grace = God granting you that which you do not deserve. Mercy is when God does not give you what you do deserve. I was raised that a Christian tries to emulate God best he can by bestowing Grace and Mercy in mass quantities.

 

I don't see why Atheists, who will never outnumber the rest of us, cannot join us at our meetings, learn to camp and play outside in boats and with bows and arrows, and enjoy the fellowship of the camp fire.

 

 

[SeattlePioneer]

The problem is that you will NEVER make some atheists happy until you exclude religion completely from the Scout program.

 

If you tolerate atheists, that will be fine with some. Others will object to being prayed over or exposed to religious programs or content --- you are back to the same old issue of unhappy atheists complaining about the Scout program.

 

The same is true of homosexuals.

 

Religion is an integral part of the Scouting program. In my view it's a mistake to start trying to compromise that value. So don't start.

 

If atheists are unhappy with Scouting --- don't join. Don't like it? Tough.

[moosetracker]

BSA24 -- The statement is simply reflecting on those who wish to keep atheists out, pointing to the fact that when they register they sign that they believe in a God, and have do my duty to God.. Therefore when someone is in the BSA for a while then admit, on the forum or such they are an atheist.. You have people on the forum, getting all bent out of shape with their lying every time they take the oath, and blah.. blah.. blah.. Through some of the reaction I have envisioned some people turning red in the face and close to heart failure over it.

 

I personally don't mind atheists who are tolerant and respectful of others having the belief in God, and finding ways to co-exist eventually being allowed in.. Those who are enrolled secretly are definitely co-existing.. So, just allow them and others to do it without the secrecy.. Even accept their silence for phrases using God.. But, if I am willing to accept them not saying God, they would need to be equally accepting of my wish to say God.. I do agree with SP, God should not be removed from the oath or pledge to placate one group while disrespecting another group. (one that has been in the group since its inception.)

 

Now there is also a piece in the registration that states "The applicant must possess the moral, educational, and emotional qualities that the Boy Scouts of America deems necessary to afford positive leadership to youth"..

 

But, BSA has verbally stated a "Don't ask, Don't tell" and the policy is because they want the sexual discussions at home (and somehow if an adult knows your gay, that means your discussing being a homosexual with the kids). But anyway.. All their flowery words, to try to say, we are not prejudice, we just don't want to know if they are amongst us.. States as that as long as they follow the "Don't ask, Don't tell", then they are Okay with BSA, thereby they pass BSA somewhat immature ideas on what they deems moral. (At least in the PR sense of the word.)

[SSScout]

We really do need a "Faith and Chaplaincy" forum. Look how this discussion has veered off the original topic. Good time to spin off, but no new forum to spin to, so might as well stay here.

 

Sexuality is not a topic that need concern Scouting, save where the actions of someone affects the young Scout, then that is a YP issue.

As has been said, the Scout Promise/Oath and Law make no mention of one's sexual behavior, only behavior in general. And the way one behaves toward one's friends, loved ones AND enemies is the indication of one's character, NOT merely one's sexual orientation, be that organically predetermined, or socially ingrained.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

SeattlePioneer writes:

The problem is that you will NEVER make some atheists happy until you exclude religion completely from the Scout program.

 

Even if true, how does that justify excluding all atheists?

 

Hey, some black steal; certainly that's justification to exclude all blacks, right?