BSA Should Ban Smokers

[BSA24]

Can we please ban smokers? I find the smell of cigarette smoke to be dirty and unclean behavior. It is immoral to smoke because you damage your own body, damage your voice, and commit a sort of slow suicide which is clearly banned by Judeo-Christian tradition. They litter cigarette butts everywhere they go. They leave nasty ashes everywhere. They cough up gross noises all the time.

 

It sets a bad example for the youth. People who smoke are not physically strong, mentally awake, or morally straight, and they are not doing their best to do their duty to God, their Country, or themselves.

 

It is not thrifty to buy cigarettes. It is not clean to smoke them. It is not reverent to hurt yourself.

 

Smoking is a choice. You are not born a smoker. It is aberrant behavior. It is an addiction and a filthy habit.

 

Our youth deserve better examples than nasty smokers.

 

Let's have a don't ask don't tell, but if anyone smells like smoke, or if a parent complains, let's throw them out.

 

(This message has been edited by BSA24)

[SeattlePioneer]

Personally I favor current BSA policies which prohibit smoking at Scout meeting and activities.

 

 

BSA24, would you favor a local option that permits units to burn offenders at the stake? (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

[Stosh]

Same for drinkers and those who use drugs including prescription drugs that are abused.

 

Hmmm, divorcees don't set a very good example for the boys....

 

Traffic offenders risk the safety of our boys every time they get behind the wheel with boys in their car/truck.

 

I could probably put together a list long enough to keep just about any adult from ever being considered for BSA membership.....

 

Stosh

[BSA24]

Banning smoking itself at scout meetings is not good enough. These people can be detected because cigarette smoke gets in their clothes and hair. Their teeth turn yellow, and their faces age prematurely. They are always offering lighters when we are trying to start a fire, and their cars our youth ride in smell bad.

 

There's no way to hide the fact that someone is an immoral smoker and a bad example for our youth.

 

If we are going to ban adults who are a bad example or who are sinners, we have to get rid of the smokers.

 

I am not in favor of publicly burning them over cigarettes, as the crowd throwing stones would likely become addicted and might start burning other kinds of people in order to keep the hits coming.

 

Burning them over regular wood is fine. But do not inhale.(This message has been edited by BSA24)

[Brewmeister]

I think we just ought to let every manner of perversion into scouting because it's all morally equivalent anyway. Maybe we can get NAMBLA to charter a unit. Standards are so 20th century.

[BSA24]

I think BSA already bans people who think like you, so you are automatically out.

 

Next!

[BS-87]

It's wholly within the rights of a Chartering Organization to say that they don't want a person who is leading their kids to be in possession of tobacco, smell like tobacco, or use nicotine products while performing any duty of their position. If that expectation is set, a CO is perfectly able to remove that person from their position for that reason for the same reasons you've listed.

 

Also, while I'm a fan of exercises in reason such as this, I don't think you're presenting this issue very maturely.

 

Personal health is a subject that is appropriate to talk about around scouts. Not smoking is a good example to set, and so not smoking is a good thing to encourage boys to do. Because this is an appropriate topic to talk about with Scouts, it's not absolutely necessary to shield the boys from the behavior (though any CO, Committee, etc in their right mind probably already do so)

 

Sexuality is never an appropriate topic for discussion in Scouting. Because it is not an appropriate topic, adults who exemplify that topic and thereby naturally make it a topic of discussion just by being present should not be exposed to Scouts. The key to this is "exemplify", being openly aberrant in words or by action by either expressing your sexuality or being accompanied by a non-traditional partner is not acceptable. Not expressing your sexuality does not bring the subject to attention and discussion, and so then there would be no issue with such a person serving in a leadership role in Scouting.

 

It doesn't matter whether you agree with the policy or not. I agree that maybe in the future Sexuality might be an appropriate topic for Venturers, but I do not feel sexuality is an appropriate subject for 11-12 yr olds.

 

 

[fred8033]

BSA24 - Your just being hateful now.

 

All smokers know smoking is bad for them. Most want to quit. I've only met a few who advocate smoking and it's always advocating smoking pot. Same with those overweight. They know the extra weight is bad for them and it affects their whole life. Essentially, no one advocates smoking or weighing too much. No one would suggest we teach being overweight and/or smoking as a healthy positive moral attribute. It's not good for them and they would prefer to be otherwise.

 

But, BSA has already moved in your proposed direction. Weight limits at high adventures. Needing doctor slips at scout shopts to purchase uniforms over a certain size. Designated smoking spots at camp located far away from the scouts. So perhaps your proposal isn't so far fetched.

[dg98adams]

"Needing doctor slips at scout shops to purchase uniforms over a certain size"

 

Which Scout shop, what size and what would the doctor write on the slip?

 

 

[fred8033]

Scout shop want a special clearance to sell a 4XL to a scout leader. Not for me. They said anyone purchasing that need to get authorization to purchase them.

[pchadbo]

"These people can be detected because cigarette smoke gets in their clothes and hair. Their teeth turn yellow, and their faces age prematurely. They are always offering lighters when we are trying to start a fire, and their cars our youth ride in smell bad."

 

"There's no way to hide the fact that someone is an immoral smoker and a bad example for our youth"

 

'If we are going to ban adults who are a bad example or who are sinners, we have to get rid of the smokers"

 

OK so you are against smoking, I get that. You have called smokers, immoral, irresponsible, smelly, ugly and sinners. Boy, would that I had a Troop or Pack where the biggest issue I had to worry about was if there were smokers among my adult leaders. I would hope that this is an exercise in rattling cages to make a point rather than a serious attempt. If we as you say are going to ban all sinners, we are in serious trouble for adult leaders, as in the history of man there has only been one person who lived without sin and he has been dead for almost 2000 years.

 

What part of these statements are Friendly, Courteous, Helpful, Cheerful or Kind?

 

Remember when you point your finger at others, three more point back at you. why not organize a stop smoking clinic, a clean up patrol to cleaup after those who do not practice LNT, or even just a kind word to remind the smokers about the policies in place.

 

Lets not judge the smokers unless we are going to start judging everyone's bad habits.

 

My $.02

 

[BSA24]

> No one would suggest we teach being overweight and/or smoking as a healthy positive moral attribute. It's not good for them and they would prefer to be otherwise.

 

Yes, they would. They put on a uniform and put themselves up in front of all of us as a "leader".

 

That in itself is their advocacy. That is why we don't allow gays and atheist leaders, correct? To have them as leaders would send the wrong message, because the very act of being a leader is acceptance, approval, and being put forward as an example?

 

The guy up there who was trolled worse than I intended said it best: When you point your finger, three point back at you.

 

That's what's wrong with the gay/atheist ban.

(This message has been edited by BSA24)

[FScouter]

"Lets not judge the smokers unless we are going to start judging everyone's bad habits."

 

Ah ha. The 'ol "judgment" card - pulled on he who would state an opinion about another person. Sounds like another judgment in itself, leastways that's how I judge it.

[NJCubScouter]

This sounds like quite "a modest proposal" to me.

[pchadbo]

BSA24

 

Please do not feel I was "trolled" (see my post in your other thread). I too enjoy a good semantic argument and happen to agree with the spirit behind your post. If we are going to "die on the hill" for this issue, why not others.

As a CC I do not care what my adult leaders do behind closed doors, nor do I care with whom they do it. I do care that they show up for the boys, are good people, and help the pack go. That goes for all lifestyle choices.

 

Happy trolling!

pchadbo