Boy Scouts march in Utah Gay Pride Parade

[Scouter99]

Ineffectiveness of the particular attempt. I think you all do a fine job especially given the crummy state of the software you have to work with.

[NJCubScouter]

Scouter99, nobody shut down the thread you are talking about, and nobody tried to shut it down. I made a request of my fellow forum members, which any member can do, you do not need to be a moderator. I do have the "button" to shut down a thread, but in a year and a half as a moderator, I have never used it, not counting spam threads. To my recollection I have edited one word out of one post, which for whatever it's worth, was a post by Merlyn.

[AZMike]

That Merlyn! He's quite the scamp.

[packsaddle]

We're not talking about members expressing or holding opinions, we're talking about members using their uniforms to participate in political activities, which you know as well as anyone else is prohibited. It was prohibited before the vote, and it is again specifically prohibited in the membership resolution: "...nor may any member use Scouting to promote or advance any social or political position or agenda..."

 

 

Right. Ineffectiveness notwithstanding.

 

 

Yes we are talking about members expressing opinions. NJ expressed an opinion and you invited him to join the BPSA. That is what I responded to with my question.

Here's your response in part: "When it gets to the point that you want to ignore the rules and make ridiculous equivalencies to progress a political movement? Yes, I think it's probably best that one save himself the agony and find the organization he should have joined in the first place: One that shares his values, where he will be happy. You and are are discussing the very Super Moderator who shut down a thread because he doesn't like what people think about the heroes of his pet movement, is that where this forum is, pro-gay or shut up?"

 

Aside from the subsequent ad hominem attack on NJ, it is clear that you objected to his opinion and invited him to join another organization. And now you're trying to shift your response to the gay pride marchers, which is not what I asked about and clearly not what you responded to originally.

 

So I ask again, is this the standard that we apply now, that any member who expresses an opinion contrary to BSA policy is invited to leave? Really? I ask this because that is what you did.

 

BTW, within the last week or so I shut down a thread and permanently banned a forum respondent. You may be unaware of this. The moderators have discussed actions like this and we have agreed to 'sign' any action like it and hopefully have input from other moderators as well. In the distant past, my dim memory is of one thread (I can't remember what it was about) being deleted by FScouter. I think that might have been before your time, I could be mistaken about all of the details it's been so long ago.

 

But your diatribe attacking NJ had to have a response. You made a direct accusation and we have asked you to back it up with some evidence. Your inability to do that is evident.

 

Edit: FYI the thread you referenced is still active if you'd like to respond.

[Peregrinator]

Aside from the subsequent ad hominem attack on NJ

 

I may not be following this thread closely but I missed the ad hominem.

 

[packsaddle]

I asked about the standard when Scouter99 invited NJ to go join BPSA simply because he expressed an opinion. In post 21, Scouter99 made his response all about NJ by starting with a complaint and following with various other statements including that 'agent' description. All in all, it was a fairly open attack on NJ. At least that's the way I see it. He didn't mention anyone in the parade which was the subject of the OP until the very end.

[Peregrinator]

My impression is that the 'agents provocateurs' were the "former and current" scouts in the parade. But I could be wrong.

[Scouter99]

I did not answer the largest portion of your second-to-last reply to me because I had already made my thoughts on the matter clear (which you have now quoted in your last reply), and repeating them didn't serve anything.

 

Peregrinator has it exactly right when he says that the agents provocateur are current scouts/scouters who break policy to use their uniforms to protest. I named several, but you saw NJ's name and I imagine saw no more.

 

I did not tell NJ to consider joining BPSA because he expressed his opinion, I told him if he's got so much grit in his mouth that he can't stand it, to the point that he'll defend these dirtbags who are trying to do nothing but wreck BSA, who deliberately and repeatedly break the regulations you say you' yourself will support if shown them, then he ought to find a movement that he's in line with. And that's true of anyone. I am not a vegetarian, I do not go to the PETA meetings and demand they start serving hamburgers.

 

Frankly, I have to say I find the suggestion that when a moderator says let a topic die or else I might have to kill it is any different than a moderator just pulling the switch to be a little silly. If you want to split hairs, split them. So, yes, I find it more than a little ironic that you're all bent out of shape over my thoughts on association, and think it's just peachy that a mod tells people he disagrees with to can it. We see the ultimatum differently.

 

I don't have any personal problem with NJ in general, he's a likeable guy. I disagree with him on a certain point. He seems to understand that disagreement doesn't equal ad hominem, I don't think you need to white knight him any further. Should I have kept it buttoned or expressed myself in a more suave manner? Absolutely, my apologies. Do I hate NJ or think anyone with an opinion should leave? Oh, please.

[Peregrinator]

Speaking of joining the BPSA:

http://bpsa-us.org/2014/06/welcome-to-geoffrey-mcgrath-and-98th-rainier-scout-group/

[joeselvidge]

A group of uniformed Boy Scouts carrying the flags of their nation and their state would be a non-event at almost any parade

[fred johnson]

A group of uniformed Boy Scouts carrying the flags of their nation and their state would be a non-event at almost any parade

 

 

At almost any parade ... except this parade. In this parade it's a political statement. Everyone knows that ... including the uniformed. IMHO, anyone using scouting to make a political statement should lose their membership ... either side. It's one thing to present the flags when people discuss controversial topics such as at a political convention. It's a very different thing when presenting the flags IS the political issue.

[Horizon]

If we want to get more specific around use of Scouting in politics, it will get tough. There were Boys Scouts doing the flag ceremony at the Democratic National Convention. One of the people published in the voting guide in California for Proposition 8 listed in his profile his role in the San Diego Council - would we want him tossed out?

 

If a Scout or Scouter wants to broadcast their membership - great! The only time to remove him or her from scouting is when they are in violation of the oath and law. Being involved in politics is not a violation of the oath and law, in my opinion. Rather - involvement in politics is encouraged by our beliefs.

[fred johnson]

Horizon ... Scouts at RNC or DNC is about pride in our country. It's not about a specific topic or issue.

 

Marching in this parade would be similar to scouts in uniform picketing an abortion clinic. It's using the good reputation of scouts to fight a hot button topic. If the scouters did not stop when requested, they should be thrown out.

[Scouter99]

If we want to get more specific around use of Scouting in politics, it will get tough. There were Boys Scouts doing the flag ceremony at the Democratic National Convention. One of the people published in the voting guide in California for Proposition 8 listed in his profile his role in the San Diego Council - would we want him tossed out?

 

If a Scout or Scouter wants to broadcast their membership - great! The only time to remove him or her from scouting is when they are in violation of the oath and law. Being involved in politics is not a violation of the oath and law, in my opinion. Rather - involvement in politics is encouraged by our beliefs.

 

Do your homework.

Scouts/Scouters were prohibited from wearing their uniforms in support of political causes before the membership vote, the membership resolution itself again explicitly prohibited Scouts/Scouters from using their uniforms to participate in political campaigns (precisely because everyone knew that the supporters were going to march in uniform beside the pervs that populate these parades).

 

A candidate saying "I'm a Boy Scout leader" is indicative of what values he holds, not using his unit/uniform to promote his platform--there's no comparison unless the guy wears his uniform to the debate. And if he does, then, yes, he should be disciplined.

 

BSA's encouragement for boys to be active in their patriotic duties, such as participation in the political process, does not mean that Boy Scouts should put on their uniforms and campaign for a particular party. You know that and you're being deliberately obtuse, or else you're dumb. and I say so right out because it's so annoying and tiresome. Or can I expect your support if I go march in uniform at the Klan rally? That is exactly why when in the past BSA has done things like put out election doorhangers, they say "Vote as you think" not "vote for Roosevelt!"

[Horizon]

"You know that and you're being deliberately obtuse, or else you're dumb. and I say so right out because it's so annoying and tiresome."

 

Not exactly a Scouting response there. I was raising the issue of the grey areas between supporting a candidate, a party, etc. The BSA, in the link, above, discussed the issue of the boys doing a flag ceremony for a particular party. They are expected to leave the stage. So they can come, but they can't be seen as TOO supportive.

 

Once you decide to start punishing, be ready for the unintended consequences. Be ready for interpretations that you might not like. Be ready for the letter due to staying on stage too long after a flag ceremony, or for marching in the wrong parade, or for other ways of stepping over the line.

 

So a few Scouts marched in a pride parade. Is anybody really surprised? They did it again in New York last weekend:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/30/nyregion/boy-scouts-make-provocative-statement-at-gay-pride-parade.html?_r=0

 

Who determines when a parade is political or not? What is the criteria?

- Is a Columbus Day parade political? After all, that holiday was created to help curry political favor with the growing Catholic vote.

- There are many parades around Martin Luther King day - are those political? They often involve issues around Civil Rights.

- Cinco De Mayo parades here celebrate Mexican identity and culture as well - political?

 

Again - if we are going to punish for marching in a gay pride parade, what is the punishment for Robert Bolingbroke, Council Commissioner for the San Diego-Imperial Council? He used that title (and only that title) in his argument in favor of Proposition 8: http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/past/2008/general/argu-rebut/argu-rebutt8.htm

He is still a Commissioner for the Council as of 2013.

 

In political chess, you have to think a few moves ahead or you will find yourself trapped.