Thought Experiment: Atheists are openly allowed.

[Eagledad]

So what's that got to do with anything being legal?

 

My remark about slavery had to do with Eagledad's statement, which was explicitly about "standards of moral behavior":

 

"God is principled, reasoned, consistent, and never changing."

 

What are you talking about, God never professed slavery as a standard of moral behavior? He commanded slaves to “not rebel against their masterâ€Â, which is consistent with his commands for all people to not rebel against their leaders or governments. Stosh is exactly right, slavery is man’s creation, not God’s.

 

Barry

 

[duckfoot]

 

No, this is not about the children, its about the foundation of the BSA principles. The BSA vision is developing moral decision makers and God has been set as the reference the organization as a whole to be principled in the moral concept. If you don’t let God lead in morality, then who? You? The only other choice would be to change the vision to something without morality. At that point you have a camping program that is a lot of fun. But you don’t have a program of values as its goal.

 

Boys learn from role models and the role models are supposed to have some inkling of God. Now we can go back and forth of promises and what a scout must do to meet requirements, but I have never met an adult who wasn't willing to allow the boys a scouting experience to learn how they feel about spiritual aspect of the program.

 

Scouting is ALL about the children, never forget that. They are why we do what we do. They are why you defend the status quo and why others seek to change it.

 

Tell me how an atheist is less equipped to give moral and ethical guidance? How are they less able to give instruction in right and wrong. Do atheist renounce the Golden Rule when they take up their beliefs? The mission of the BSA is a multi legged stool that reverence is but one. Modify it and the stool does not fall.

 

But the sword cuts both ways. An atheist scoutmaster should lead a Sunday service for his scouts that want to. No where did I say anything about not allowing the spiritual aspect of the program.

 

I think you mistake allowing atheists in the program for keeping religion out of the program. That would be just as bad. There's room for both. It wouldn't diminish scouting in the least. It would strengthen it.

[Eagledad]

Scouting is ALL about the children' date=' never forget that. They are why we do what we do. They are why you defend the status quo and why others seek to change it.[/quote']

 

Scouting is an adult program for developing our youth into moral decision makers.

 

 

Tell me how an atheist is less equipped to give moral and ethical guidance? .

 

Sure, atheists don’t have an institutional reference of morality. At best they only have government laws that are neither consistent around the world nor are they never changing.

 

I think you mistake allowing atheists in the program for keeping religion out of the program.

 

Nope, I have stated many times over the years as I said a minute ago: “No, this is not about the children, its about the foundation of the BSA principles. The BSA vision is developing moral decision makers and God has been set as the reference the organization as a whole to be principled in the moral concept. If you don’t let God lead in morality, then who? You? The only other choice would be to change the vision to something without morality. At that point you have a camping program that is a lot of fun. But you don’t have a program of values as its goal".

 

Barry

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

What are you talking about, God never professed slavery as a standard of moral behavior? He commanded slaves to “not rebel against their masterâ€Â, which is consistent with his commands for all people to not rebel against their leaders or governments.

 

How isn't that supporting slavery?

 

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

 

See, it's OK to sell the children of slaves, as slaves, as long as they aren't israelites.

 

Like I said, I consider that immoral.

 

[qwazse]

... See' date=' it's OK to sell the children of slaves, as slaves, as long as they aren't israelites. ...[/quote']

 

When the alternative is letting them starve while letting the land go unharvested (causing more starvation) or, worse, be sold to a foreign nation and never learn about God except through distant rumor only later to have them rise up as your enemies who would rather leave your land in waste for their horses than let your children live as their slaves. ...

 

The Biblical God is one who works with the unsavory aspects of any generation. For anyone who doesn't like that, atheism is a reasonable alternative.

[Eagledad]

Slavery was more of a social status back then and to be a slave was not necessarily as bad thing because the choice was usually much worse. God did not profess slavery and was then telling the Israelites how to keep their offspring pure. That was very important because he wanted the Jews to be His people. Merlyns text is a bit out of context and needs to be read in the context of the chapter. God

[duckfoot]

 

Scouting is an adult program for developing our youth into moral decision makers.

 

You are wrong. Scouting is a Youth program. Take away the Youth and you have no Boy Scouts of America. Every meeting would be like a roundtable, nobody would stick around for long for that.

 

Sure, atheists don’t have an institutional reference of morality. At best they only have government laws that are neither consistent around the world nor are they never changing.

 

That's a spurious argument. Everyone starts out as an atheist. You learned to be a Christian. You decided that was better. Good for you. How did you learn that? Your parents. Which is where everyone first learns their morality and values, be they good or bad. Does it mean you can't learn others? No.

 

Nope, I have stated many times over the years as I said a minute ago: “No, this is not about the children, its about the foundation of the BSA principles. The BSA vision is developing moral decision makers and God has been set as the reference the organization as a whole to be principled in the moral concept. If you don’t let God lead in morality, then who? You? The only other choice would be to change the vision to something without morality. At that point you have a camping program that is a lot of fun. But you don’t have a program of values as its goal".

 

That's bull. God is not the root of all morality. People are. Atheists have values. Atheists have morals. Atheists are ethical. They are more than capable of teaching those concepts as you are. Right is right, wrong is wrong. God has nothing to do with that.

 

But I digress...I wonder why you bothered to post in this thread anyway? It was just a thought experiment to see if we could bridge that gap without taking away from what is there while adding. Pointless to be sure, but I am disappointed that this has devolved into the same tired arguments, this is why we can't have nice things.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

When the alternative is letting them starve while letting the land go unharvested (causing more starvation) or' date=' worse, be sold to a foreign nation and never learn about God except through distant rumor only later to have them rise up as your enemies who would rather leave your land in waste for their horses than let your children live as their slaves. ... [/quote']

 

Well, if you want to think slavery is moral, I can't stop you. I still think it's immoral.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Slavery was more of a social status back then and to be a slave was not necessarily as bad thing because the choice was usually much worse.

 

Just come right out and say slavery is moral. And it's OK to beat your slave as long as they don't die for a couple of days.

 

God did not profess slavery and was then telling the Israelites how to keep their offspring pure.

 

Nope, he told them they could take slaves from the countries around them, and sell the children of slaves as slaves.

 

See, this is why I think god-based morals are about the worst kind of morals -- people will rationalize anything away. Killing everyone in Jericho, including children and infants? Hey, it's moral as long as your god wants you to kill them.

 

[duckfoot]

Good news everyone! Someone mentioned Baden-Powell (as people are wont to do on these forums) and I was inspired to look up what our friends across the pond are up to in relation to this question. I have found that this is not just a thought experiment anymore. They are doing it...Right Now!!! I haven't heard of the total collapse of European Scouting so it must be working. Good for them.

[skeptic]

Duckfoot; This has been shared already in a number of various places. What you do not mention, is that they specifically DID NOT TAKE GOD OUT, they simply added an alternative for those that might have issue.

 

"The existing core Scout Promise remains in place and The Scout Association remains fully committed as a Movement that explores faith, beliefs and attitudes as a core element of its programme."

 

Further down, they again stress the core belief that reflection on spirituality is an important part of the program.

[TABLE]

[TR]

[TD=width: 85, bgcolor: #f8f6fa]The ScoutMethod[/TD]

[TD=width: 354, bgcolor: #fbf9fc]Scouting takes place when young people, in partnership with adults, work together based on the values of Scouting and:

• enjoy what they are doing and have fun;
  
• take part in activities indoors and outdoors;
  
• learn by doing;
  
• share in spiritual reflection;
  
• take responsibility and make choices;
  
• undertake new and challenging activities; and
  
• make and live by their Promise.
  

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

So, yes they are being flexible, even a bit more than they had been; but the core spiritual elements are still there and considered part of the program.

 

 

 

[duckfoot]

@skeptic

 

I apologize for not seeing this in other places, I did look but with the current state of the forum search... I would have thought someone else would have mentioned this first if it was widely known...it was not to me, so today I was one of the lucky 10,000 and thought to pass that on to others.

 

I quote my orginal post:

'How do we go about integrating them into the Oath and Law without taking away from what's there already?'

 

Nowhere did I ever say anything about taking out what already is. I just posited the idea that atheists are accepted and how should we go about integrating them. Bibles were brought out and thumped and said this can never happen because the very foundation of scouting that was envisioned by Baden-Powell belongs to our lord god! Which wasn't a very helpful response. And it's devolved into the thread it is now.

 

 

[Cambridgeskip]

Duckfoot/Skeptic; something to bear in mind though is the British culture.

 

First of all the British are far less "out there" (for want of a better phrase) about religion than those in the USA are. Religion is something that most quietly get on with. We are frankly a bit uncomfortable discussing it. Just a national culture thing really.

 

Why does that matter?

 

Because it has historically been reflected in scouting. Yes there has always been a religious/spiritual element to the programe but it has never been as important to the programme as it has been to BSA.

 

We are also a nation that doesn't like authority very much, in fact I think as a nation we invented "passive aggressive"! In short when we don't like a rule we don't bother shouting or protesting. We just ignore it. It's that simple. What this meant was that there have always been an awful lot atheists in scouting, despite the official ban on adults in "leadership positions" (Basically any role with the word "leader" or "commissioner" in it, there was no such ban for things like chairman, treasurer, skills instructor, campsite staff and many more) and most districts and counties quietly tolerated it unless someone's actions forced their hand. In effect, you basically had to be an evangelical style Richard Dawkins type atheist to not get in.

 

The change to officially have atheist leaders was simply acknowledging what has been the reality for many years.

 

Worth noting as well that has never been a technical ban on atheist youth members, although you could argue there was a constructive ban. As a youth member you have to make the scout promise to be admitted. Until 1 Jan this year the only official versions of the promise referred to duty to some kind of deity. If a youth member made the promise they were in, even if they turned round right after being invested and declared themselves to their leader as an atheist.

[packsaddle]

Thanks for adding that Cambridgeskip. It's good to have your voice to explain a quite different approach. I was unaware of the changes you mentioned...maybe I haven't been reading carefully enough. From what I just read, Scouting in the UK seems to take the approach that I advocate for this country. I do have to note that comment about not liking authority, though. I think that is something we share over here. Seems that there was a rebellion or something, lol. Or maybe it was just a bunch of people who wanted 'local option', lol.

[Peregrinator]

Good news everyone! Someone mentioned Baden-Powell (as people are wont to do on these forums) and I was inspired to look up what our friends across the pond are up to in relation to this question.

 

Why, because you're under the impression that they actually follow Baden-Powell's original program and principles? Because they don't. Look how they have changed the Law:

 

http://members.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/2943/scout-promise-law-an

 

I see several of Baden-Powell's original (1911) articles (useful/serving others, friend to animals, obedient, clean) missing here, along with a general dumbing down.