scout denied eagle

[Basementdweller]

Ok Calico since your are questioning my assumptions.

 

Have you looked at the Pictures from the articles?????

 

Did you go to his social media page before it was taken down????

 

The picture in the first linked article. To the left is a grand piano and to the right a very fancy fire place. So how big does a living room need to be to house a grand piano????? How big is the house that the big living room is attached to????? Look at the stuff on the fire place mantel. in california I bet it is a million dollar home.

 

The median family income is $116,000 for moraga california.......Ya they are very well off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

Lust is a natural human emotion. Nevertheless, we expect people to control their lust. The same is true for other human appetites.

 

A person may have an orientation towards violence, theft or exotic sexual practices. However, it is reasonable for society to expect people to control such impulses.

 

Unfortunately, the sexual liberation movement now refuses to recognize that placing limits on sexual impulses is reasonable and to be expected. The basic theory of the sexual liberation movement seems to be "If it feels good, do it."

 

There really is no limit on how sexual impulses are to be respected. While even advocates of the sexual liberation movement will acknowledge certain limits on sexual expression, tomorrow they will use the same old arguments to undermine any existing social consensus and limit on sexual expression.

 

 

By contrast, advocates of natural law have looked to the intended uses of sexual genitalia, which has been as a means of reproduction, not entertainment. Uses of sexual genitalia for reproduction are approved, and uses not aimed at that purpose are not.

 

It really doesn't matter what someone lusts or passions may be directed at. Most human passions need to be controlled, not indulged. Controlling such things is an aspect of human reason and is a large part of what separates human beings from other animals.

[Eagle732]

I wonder if talking to every new agency in the country and starting a petition will help his appeal with National?

 

BD - Dad owns a property management firm.

(This message has been edited by Eagle732)

[Basementdweller]

Interesting Eagle..... So do you think a million bucks a year????

 

I know my parents don't have the resources to conduct a national campaign to get their boy an eagle.

 

Interesting that the troop has turned out a number of gay scouts prior to this young man....

 

So is this a rich white and bored in the burbs thing?????? My boys really seem to enjoy lookin at the ladies when we are out..

 

had a first year scout tell me he was gay.....he had no idea what it was other than it was the worst thing he could think of to shock me with.

 

Well he is not gay took a young lady to the Fall Fling at school..... It is tough when your SM is also your chaparone at the dance..... I didn't wear my uniform.....but I probably should have.

 

 

 

 

 

[Eagle732]

BD, the company touts itself as the largest property management firm in the San Francisco Bay area. 2,300 units, 75 employees.

 

(This message has been edited by Eagle732)

[Oak Tree]

how does BSA accept Buddhists and members of other religions who do not believe in a 'deity'?

 

I don't know. I do, in fact, find it very odd. I guess one could go with the theory that some Buddhists might also claim that they have a duty to God, and any Buddhist willing to sign up as a member of the BSA is signing a document that says that he or she does have a duty to God. That's the only way that I can see it being consistent.

 

At the same time, I think it's possible that the policy is just plain inconsistent. I think the BSA may just have a don't-ask-don't-tell policy with the Buddhists...we won't ask if you really think that you have a duty to God and you won't actively state that you do not have a duty to God.

 

I could also ask, how does the National Buddhist Committee on Scouting reconcile Buddhist beliefs with the BSA membership requirement?

[Basementdweller]

I bet the father and scout are reading this thread just laughing at us.

 

 

Look at those poor self righteous fools.......

 

why does this kid need eagle?????

 

He had got the world by the throat.....No problem with food on the table....college is a given.....probably a trust fund when mom and dad pass....... Kid probably has more in his checking and savings account than I do......

 

One of the articles said that the SM said something to the effect they could work around the gay issue. Well he was wrong for leading the young man on.

 

 

hmmm Eagle you know way too much about this fellow????????

[AZMike]

So when all the other pro-homosexual Eagle Scouts have sent their Eagle badges to him, will he then return those badges to BSA out of disgust with the repressive BSA policies, as so many former (?) Eagle Scouts claim to have done, or will he frame them over the grand piano in the living room and say he is now an "Eagle Scout"?

 

 

[AZMike]

sailingpj: BDPT00, Feel free to ask the guy on that commented on the article to cite his sources. I would rather not link my facebook profile to that article right now.

 

The wikipedia entry has some good sources cited that you may want to check out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Cause

 

The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers stated in 2006:

Currently, there is no scientific consensus about the specific factors that cause an individual to become heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexualincluding possible biological, psychological, or social effects of the parents' sexual orientation. However, the available evidence indicates that the vast majority of lesbian and gay adults were raised by heterosexual parents and the vast majority of children raised by lesbian and gay parents eventually grow up to be heterosexual.[2]

 

The Royal College of Psychiatrists stated in 2007:

Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person's fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment. Sexual orientation is therefore not a choice.[4]

 

The American Academy of Pediatrics stated in Pediatrics in 2004:

Sexual orientation probably is not determined by any one factor but by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences. In recent decades, biologically based theories have been favored by experts. Although there continues to be controversy and uncertainty as to the genesis of the variety of human sexual orientations, there is no scientific evidence that abnormal parenting, sexual abuse, or other adverse life events influence sexual orientation. Current knowledge suggests that sexual orientation is usually established during early childhood.[4][134][135]

 

-------

 

sailingpj, I would suggest that the reason the DSM, and the psychological/psychiatric community changed its definition of homosexuality as pathology is as much due to the political movements of the 1960s than any actual scientific breakthroughs. See the following article, a transcript of a story that originally appeared on NPR. It is generally supportive of the movement to "destigmatize" homosexuality, but notes that it was driven more by closeted gay psychologists, gay activists, and professional and social pressures than any scientific breakthroughs: "As the APA prepares for the publication of the DSM-V in 2013, I believe its worthwhile to keep this story in mind. Some of the proposed changes seem to have more to do with a desire to remove a stigmatizing label than real scientific evidence."

 

See the article here: http://www.mindofmodernity.com/not-sick-the-1973-removal-of-homosexuality-from-the-dsm

 

 

[Brewmeister]

Well said Seattle. It amazes me how much the pro gay people here won't comment on those issues.

[Eagle732]

"hmmm Eagle you know way too much about this fellow???????? "

 

Google is your friend

 

The boy will be a guest on the Ellen DeGeneres show so we'll all get to see him in person.

Also he is 18 years old now.

Sucks when a group has standards they uphold. SM tried to work around the gay thing until they went public. They want the attention more than the Eagle. We'll see if dad can't buy it for him.

 

Lisa, you said that I wouldn't post information on one of my boys here and said I was unethical. I promise you if I made the decision not to sign off on Eagle for one of my boys because he posted on the internet for the public to see, disgusting language and statements obviously counter to BSA's ideas and then made a public spectacle of my decision by talking with every news outlet in the country then I would certainly share the information as part of an explanation as to why I made the decision. Sorry you were offended, I was offended too.

 

I don't have a problem with the boy being gay. I do have a problem with boys placing in the public domain personal information that shows they are not living up to the Ideas of Scouting including ANY type of sexual content. That is why I posed the question "if I looked at your your Facebook page would I see you're living up to the ideas of scouting".

 

As a side note I am probably the only person here who has actually been subpoenaed and had to appear in court over internet use involving Scouting.

 

(This message has been edited by Eagle732)

[Cambridgeskip]

Seattle

 

Some questions for you.

 

1. Define "Natural law". I can find you US federal law, state law of the various US states, UK law, laws of various religions all written down because they are laws created by various groups of people to givern the way their communities live. So what is natural law? I am confused.

 

2. If use of genitals to procreate is approved and not involving them are not does that mean that the following are "disaproved" of

 

a. Sexual relations between a married heterosexual couple using contraception?

 

b. Sexual reltions between a married heterosexual couple where the woman is either experiencing the menopause or is post menopausal?

 

c. Sexual relations between married heterosexual couple where one or the other is knowingly infertile?

 

d. Sexual relations between a married heterosexual couple during pregnancy?

 

If not then why not?

 

3. Do you accept that an orientation towards theft or violence is harmful to others in the community? In what way are "exotic sexual practices" between consenting adults in their own home harmful to the community?

 

Frankly I could fill a thesis with questions for you but I'll leave it at that for now.

[Eamonn]

A couple of weeks back I posted how at times I find myself with a foot on both sides of the fence.

I find myself feeling sorry for the SM.

Just imagine being faced with a Lad that you know and care about and have known and cared about for a long time then the Lad openly admits that he no longer meets the membership requirements.

What would you do?

I'm glad that I'm not in his shoes.

We as an organization have made earning Eagle Scout rank a very big deal.

While maybe the path isn't as hard for Lads who come from well to do families? I really don't think that how well off a family is or isn't really comes into play.

In the area where I live, very few Scouts who make it as far as the ESBOR are ever denied the rank. In over 25 years living in this area I know of only four. The reasons why these were denied had nothing to do with being gay or not accepting that there is some kind of God or higher power.

I knew two of these Lads and when they found out that they weren't going to get their Eagle Scout rank they accepted the decision. I think maybe they knew that everything wasn't in place before they went for the BOR?

The expectation that a Lad who has been denied will accept the decision and go quietly used to be the norm. Maybe a parent might show up at the Council Service Center and might give the SE a hard time? Has happened. In fact I know of one Lad who was denied. His Dad went to the Service Center with the idea of giving the SE a punch on the nose! The SE for whatever reason? Maybe out of fear for his nose? Or maybe because he seen that the Lad had not been treated fairly? Asked me to look into what had happened. When I found out the reason why the Lad had been denied was just plain wrong. The Lad received the rank.

The Lad and his family in this case are not going to go quietly.

Seems to me that they think that what has happened isn't fair and they are willing to use any means available to let everyone know this. Maybe wealthy parents do have more means available than poor parents do?

I don't know what the BSA is going to do.

I tend to think that going on what's happened in the past that the BSA will do nothing.

Still I respect the fact that this Lad and his parents have every right to voice their opinion and if the media picks up on the story. It just goes to show that they are doing a good job of getting their word out.

The BSA has spent a great deal of money in court and elsewhere defending the stand that it has taken. I really don't see that this Lad and his not receiving Eagle Scout rank is going to change that.

Still, I keep thinking of the play The Winslow Boy and stranger things have happened.

This story does seem to have legs and people on both sides seem to have very strong feelings. It will in time die down, but right now it isn't going anywhere fast.

It is so easy to look at the big picture, the media coverage and forget that we have a young man who is hurting.

That for me is just sad.

Eamonn.

 

 

 

 

[packsaddle]

Oak Tree wrote, "I could also ask, how does the National Buddhist Committee on Scouting reconcile Buddhist beliefs with the BSA membership requirement?"

 

I can't speak for the Buddhists but my take on this is that they don't have to reconcile anything. The exclusionary policy is BSA's so if BSA accepts Buddhists then BSA has done the reconciliation. They evidently haven't made it clear to you how they did it. Nor to me.

My point is that on the basis of YOUR standard, Buddhists would be excluded. But BSA accepts them. Therefore YOUR standard is in conflict with BSA's. How do YOU reconcile that?

 

Eamonn, I agree. I suspect there is a lot more to this than we're reading, though.

 

Cambridgeskip, I'm looking forward to that answer to your question about 'natural law'. I just wish he'd keep his sexual obsessions more to himself - it begs the question: how does he know so much about this stuff? But really, I don't WANT to know the answer to THAT part.

[Lisabob]

Eagle732, I didn't say you wouldn't post it about your own scouts. I said I hoped you wouldn't. I do think it is unethical to do so and I do think it was unethical for you to have done so in this case.

 

And now, to quote the great Forrest Gump, "that's all I have to say about that."