Update On Adult Leadership Standards

[Scouter99]

Again you are not understanding that your religious convictions can be enforced upon your willing flock, and not the public at large, no matter how you twist yourself into knots to try to argue you have a right to do so.. But, I will agree the paper they sign should just state their opting out based on religious conviction, the insurers should only need the written opt out from them, with that the Insurers should then be able to set up a side insurance for any employee who can prove they are employed by a company who has signed the opt out.

 

You can't be in earnest here. You don't actually think that employees are "the public at large" do you? You do understand that no one forces anyone to work at any particular place?  Any employer—religious or secular—does not force their values on any employee, because employees choose their employers. 

The exact opposite of what you're saying is happening: The public, through its (barely) representative government, is forcing its ideals on a private entity, in this case Little Sisters.

But let's not get complicated, because if your honest starting point is that you think Little Sisters, or Joe's Burger Shack are forcing their ideology on anyone who walks through the door and asks to work there knowing where they're applying, then we've got to start slow.

 

Sorry, but No..  You as a conservative religion are free not accept homosexual leaders, if you find out someone is homosexual you can end their volunteering for your unit.. You can expect them not to publicly promote homosexuals  (like a gay parade, or bringing in photos of a same-sex wedding to a scout meeting and passing them around)..  But you do not have total control over their day to day personal lives.. Therefore you do not have the right to approve or disapprove of every friend they have out of scouting, or approve or disapprove of every function they attend..  That is like stating that because BSA requests you not drink alcohol  or smoke on an outing then you can not have a drop of alcohol or smoke when not at a scouting event sitting in your own home..  If you are going to be that demanding, then you had better only accept adult leaders who are members of your religion..  Being a scout leader but not of your religious belief means that they follow your rules while at scouting events or with scouts, but it does not mean that they are forced to follow your religious rules in their personal lives when they are not members of your religion..  But, hey try go for it.. I guess you can let them go for being civil to a person you want them to damn to H*LL.. I am sure they will be happy you showed your true colors and allowed them the ability to see that they do not want to bring up their child to share your values.  Most conservative religions will at least say "love the sinner, not the sin"..  Even your staunch republican politicians acknowledge it is not a good idea to totally spit on and crucify homosexuals..

Again, you're wrong.  That's exactly what it means.  That's why even your staunch Democratic teachers unions don't have a problem with morality clauses in contracts. 

Even teenagers recognize what you're arguing for—one set of values in public and different, opposing values in private—as hypocrisy, that's what really turns them off about adults when they hit 15. 

Edited July 16, 2015 by Scouter99

[Stosh]

Once the courts felt it necessary to step in on religious issues, the First Amendment began to deteriorate.  

[moosetracker]

 

@@moosetracker ... Whose staunch republican politicians ?  You have no clue.  Get past righteous indignation and writing diatribes and stop trying to find the bad guy.

 

We live in a pluralistic society and our policies need to reflect and support that.  It means people believe different things and we need to find a way to live together.  

 

 

 

That's the whole point of a "ministerial role".  It's leading a life that reflects the teachings of the organization.  To be a minister in the church, churches may or may not require you to be a member of the faith, but they can rightfully expect that you believe in what they teach.  How you lead your life is a strong reflection of your beliefs.   I am sure the vast majority of churches will be as you said, show respect and courtesy while you are there serving as a scout leader.  But some churches can and will expect certain boundaries not be crossed.  

 

 

This policy is not about "crucifying" people or "damming them to hell".  This policy is about scouting providing a consistent program to millions where the charter organizations teach different things and the members believe different things.  We've got to find a way to work together otherwise our own irrationality will dam a great youth organization to hell. 

 

 

I am not having the righteous indignation, here..  There was an article about a week back where the main question asked of the Republican presidential candidates were if they would attend a same-sex wedding of a friend.. Some said they had, Some said they would, others said not the wedding but the reception afterwards, few said absolutely not. If you want only scout leaders who practice your religion, you better only accept applications from members of your church.. Otherwise you will have scout leaders who will use contraceptives, have homosexual friends, not go to church on Sunday etc. etc. etc.   They should respect your views not to contradict them to scouts or in a public setting, but since they are not of your religion they will not practice your religion..  A volunteer of a scouting program is not a minstrel role.. You can expect your ministers to follow your religious rules.. Not the general public that is employed (or volunteer) for you..  In the case of the teacher fired from a Catholic school for in Vitro fertilization, the courts sided with the employee and awarded her a cash settlement..  A scout leader is simply an adult (often a parent of a scout) giving their time voluntarily to a program so that their son's scouting experience and/or the experience of other youth are  rewarding..

 

Sure a teacher who posts to facebook in a way that belittles her students can be fired (they publicly crossed the line in an area that can be seen by students, teachers and faculty).. Rick_In_CA's bearded example is something that again is easily seen in public and they are now unable to sport the beard at a BSA meeting..

 

I suppose you have the right to accept an adult app or not, and you have a right to terminate any adult you wish for whatever reason.. If though it is something they do that is part of their private life that has absolutely nothing to do with the job they do for you, then, just be careful that you do so in a way they have no reason to sue you over it. Better yet, again if you are going to expect such ridged adherence you best only accept the applications of members from your church.

 

Yes we do have to work together, and that means respecting the fact that good people have different values and respecting each other for that.. Working together does not mean that you get the right to demand that everyone follow your views because everyone else is wrong.  Anyone who is now upset with this policy change is upset because they have lost the right to demand that religions and people who are fine with homosexuals now have the right to practice their religious beliefs in their BSA youth program, rather then being forced to practice yours.. We will respect your right to instill your religious values in your youth program.. You now have to find a way to respect the fact that we have the blessing of BSA to be able to instill our religious values in our youth program.. I will also respect anyone who chooses to leave because they can not do so, but that is their decision, and I am sorry to see them go.

[Scouter99]

Anyone who is now upset with this policy change is upset because they have lost the right to demand that religions and people who are fine with homosexuals now have the right to practice their religious beliefs in their BSA youth program, rather then being forced to practice yours.. We will respect your right to instill your religious values in your youth program.

 

No, I'm upset because they're going to be having sex with the Scouts.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

A baker that wouldn't put 2 brides on top of a cake lost their business and has to pay $135,000.00.  They were not mean or demeaning, they just wouldn't disrespect their God.  $135,000.00.

 

An LGBT organization didn't levy that fine -- A complaint was filed by two people, and Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian determined the fine for violating state law.  This fine is comparable with other fines from OBLI (e.g. http://www.ktvz.com/news/Bend-dentist-loses-discrimination-case-appeal/19864260 )

 

A pizza parlor that wouldn't cater a hypothetical gay wedding (not even a real service request!) suffered death threats, protests, and had to shutter their doors.

 

And that's illegal.  However, if you're going to try to justify excluding all people from the BSA who merely share a trait with some jerks who issue death threats, I've previously posted in this forum about atheists who get death threats and rape threats from Christians for getting a prayer banner or a cross removed from public property, so to be consistent you'd have to use that as a reason to exclude Christians.

[EmberMike]

I'm really happy with this decision. I had already started to move on from the BSA in light of the membership policy against gay scouts and leaders. I was a paying member of the BPSA and actively involved in that organization, but now I'm pretty comfortable returning to the BSA and enrolling my son when he's of age. 

 

I get that people will leave because of this. I left because of it as well, although because I was opposed to the policy restricting gay members. So I understand that sometimes policy can push you away. I've said it before, that I couldn't be happy with myself if I brought my family into the BSA while the anti-gay policies still stood. But that's my personal belief, and I get that others have an equally strong personal belief that will now prevent them from participating. It's a bitter-sweet thing to see this final step in changing the policy. 

[eagle77]

Those of you that don't think that this is a fatal blow need to look back on the LGBT's past actions.

 

A baker that wouldn't put 2 brides on top of a cake lost their business and has to pay $135,000.00.  They were not mean or demeaning, they just wouldn't disrespect their God.  $135,000.00.

A pizza parlor that wouldn't cater a hypothetical gay wedding (not even a real service request!) suffered death threats, protests, and had to shutter their doors.

 

So you can bet that somewhere some LGBT activist is going to apply for SM or ASM or CBW and be refused, because of the CO's beliefs.  (It won't matter that the applicant hasn't camped in 20 years and doesn't own a pair of boots - it will only matter that he is gay and was turned down...)

 

There will be protests that the CO doesn't need.  Amid a flood of negative media attention, the CO will shut down the troop.

And other CO's will take heed and choose not to re-charter when their option is up.

 

Trail Life should be gleeful.  

 

  Yeah I heard about bakery and pizza parlor thing. Don't know all the specifics.

 

  CO's have always been able to approve or disapprove of any adult application. They could require that you be a member of their church or group. The new rule isn't going to change any of that. LGBT or not the troop, pack or crew belong to the CO and they have any and all rights to who they will allow to lead their units.

[eagle77]

No, I'm upset because they're going to be having sex with the Scouts.

 

  Same thing they said when women were allowed to become SM and ASM.

[Scouter99]

  Same thing they said when women were allowed to become SM and ASM.

BSA didn't already have 80 years' worth of files on women who had sex with Scouts when they made that decision. 

[eagle77]

BSA didn't already have 80 years' worth of files on women who had sex with Scouts when they made that decision. 

 

 It also didn't have the Guide to Safe Scouting and background checks either. Listen I understand where and what you are saying. I just don't agree with it. Even if this new rule doesn't pass it will happen too.

[David CO]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I will once again say that it is the Chartered Organization who owns the unit. It is their unit, lock, stock, and barrel.

 

It is understandable that some may come to feel a sense of "ownership" in their unit. They are entitled to their feelings, but they are not entitled to any real ownership in the unit. The unit still belongs to the CO.

 

 

Registering and participating in a Scout unit does not give you any ownership in the unit. Nor does it give you the right to have your religion, values, or morals represented in the unit, if they conflict with those of the CO.

 

BSA has not given individuals a blessing to install their values into units they do not own. Nor is it right for people to describe a unit as "our youth program" to disguise the clear fact that they have no ownership in the unit.

 

It is very generous of CO's to allow nonmembers to register and participate in their units. One should not reward such generosity by claiming ownership in the unit or by undermining its values and goals.

[Cambridgeskip]

No, I'm upset because they're going to be having sex with the Scouts.

 

One of the most ignorant and offensive things that I have ever read on the internet. And I've seen some shockers. I'm quite shocked that the moderators are allowing this to stand.

[qwazse]

I'm really happy with this decision. I had already started to move on from the BSA in light of the membership policy against gay scouts and leaders. I was a paying member of the BPSA and actively involved in that organization, but now I'm pretty comfortable returning to the BSA and enrolling my son when he's of age.

....

 

@@EmberMike, maybe a topic for a different thread, but what is it about BPSA that would make a scouter want to leave it just because some other organization moves toward more permissive membership, yet still less permissive than BPSA? Edited July 16, 2015 by qwazse

[packsaddle]

One of the most ignorant and offensive things that I have ever read on the internet. And I've seen some shockers. I'm quite shocked that the moderators are allowing this to stand.

 

Cambridgeskip,

I only just read it and it might have been an easy decision if there hadn't already been several responses (which would  mean a cascading effect of editing, etc. which could just end up causing confusion - voice of experience here). I could invite you to read other statements that I've had to read in this I&P forum and you would understand that it isn't actually the most ignorant and offensive thing available...it's just the one that you read.

I admit that I'm uncertain, short of just deleting things wholesale, how to keep a forum like this one 'moderate'. It seems to naturally spawn the sort of thing to which you've just reacted. And since I'm in a profession that values open exchange of ideas, no matter how ignorant and offensive, I try to err on the side of permissiveness.

 

My personal approach to things like this forum and for that matter to those individuals who insist on standing in public place to spew this onto students and the public, is to let them stand and be the example of ignorance and offensiveness that they are. It isn't pleasant but in a sort of way, it IS instructive. So that's the approach I try to take here in the I&P forum. To the other moderators, please feel free to jump in on this.

Edited July 16, 2015 by packsaddle

[BDPT00]

That is like stating that because BSA requests you not drink alcohol  or smoke on an outing then you can not have a drop of alcohol or smoke when not at a scouting event sitting in your own home.

That's fine, however I feel that posting said activities on Facebook is very wrong and immature.  I see it all the time where I live, and I fail to see how posting a picture of some sort of brew is anywhere close to setting a good example for our Scouts (or the Scouters we train).