Merlyn_LeRoy Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Here's their poll that closed on Friday: http://tinyurl.com/bflzsxe ... As a reminder, this Non-Discrimination statement is the same one that Pack families anonymously voted on and overwhelming approved back in August 2012. Our chartering organization, the Colesville Lions Club, also approved this statement in September and strongly supported us in posting this statement. In addition, the statement was discussed in detail with District Leaders and NCAC from August through October 2012. As was stated above, it was only recently that NCAC contacted us saying they would no longer allow this statement to be posted. ... There's also a notice on their front page: http://www.pack442.us (fixed URL)(This message has been edited by Merlyn_LeRoy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosetracker Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Well, it sounds like they chose to remove the statement rather then discontinuing the program. But, I like their new web page replacement, to send complaints to the responsible party, and by the way, we will still continue with our program the way we always have.. We just can't post that in a statement on our website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nldscout Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 I am glad they did the right thing for the boys and removed the statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeanRx Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 yeah good for them... they stood up for what they think is the right thing to do... then point folks in the right direction to complain if they don't like the change. While I do NOT agree with national's current membership policy, you have to be willing to live by the brand that you buy into. Its not like I can go and buy a McDonald's fanchise and then be surprised when MCD international tells me I can't be selling Whoppers on my local menu... An 'A' for effort, but a better approach is to try to change the organization internally. Glad they didn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Dean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeptic Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 "Maryland pack forced to withdraw popular non-discrimnation policy now votes on leaving the BSA" Merlyn; please try posting accurate title. They obviously did not vote to leave BSA. Your title suggests that they did. I realize you would prefer they had; but they did not, so you are not being accurate. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted January 28, 2013 Author Share Posted January 28, 2013 Merlyn; please try posting accurate title. They obviously did not vote to leave BSA. Of course they did; that's what the vote was about. Your title suggests that they did. I can't help your invalid assumptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basementdweller Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 So I wonder if they will be forced to quit using Pack, den and the BSA program..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RememberSchiff Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 I wonder if Council pressured Pack 442 only after the Presidential Inauguration in which 750 Council scouts participated? Pack 442's inclusion membership statement had been prominently displayed on their website for some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nldscout Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Obviously the vote was to withdraw the statement and stay with the program, because thats what they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel947 Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 What stops them from simply continuing their inclusion policy without a statement on the website? Does National send people to make sure the units are following the discrimination policy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basementdweller Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Sentienal you know the answer. BSA's exclusion policy is ignored till some Scouter has an ax to grind. Then it is pulled out and sunk handle deep into the victims back. Interestingly enough it is usually the bible thumpers doing the damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosetracker Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Why are you surprised it's the bible thumpers, Basement?.. They're the ones who need the "We are better then you" supiority comparisons in order to claim they are they "chosen ones".. It may be homosexuals or it may be thinking their religious members are the only one blessed to access heaven, while all other people (whether of no religion, or of a different faith then theirs) are doomed to rot in hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel947 Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Best thing to ask a bible thumper Moosetracker: Have you ever sinned? Its fun to watch em dodge the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZMike Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 "Best thing to ask a bible thumper Moosetracker: Have you ever sinned? Its fun to watch em dodge the question." What kind of weirdo sociopath Christians are you hanging out with who claim they have never sinned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted January 28, 2013 Share Posted January 28, 2013 Sentinel: don't know which "thumpers" you know. But the best ones I've met reply, "Yes, and greatly." Of course, that sort doesn't get the best TV time. Now, nationwide we have certain "clashes of orthodoxies" here. One that insists that scouts in scouting should only be exposed to adult leaders who comport themselves sexually in a particular way (set of ways) vs. the other that insists scouts should be exposed to adults who comport themselves sexually in the variety of manners that represent the communities in which they live. One that insists that scouts in scouting should have a religious life as that is intrinsic to sound character vs. the other that insists scouts should be taught that religious life is not intrinsic to sound character and (by way of including the irreligious) that faith is an incidental, not a necessity. Clearly, this pack's membership voted to draw a line in the sand (in favor of the more secular orthodoxies), and then after consultation decided to remove it. I can't imagine this was merely a philosophical exercise. There are probably individuals whom they want to secure for the pack while still securing their association with BSA. It's odd how folks want a middle road, when there are two perfectly serviceable roads to drive on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now