Transgender policy change

[Pale Horse]

So it is okay to say to a small child you can believe that Santa is "real" and pass it off with a wink and nod as a childhood fantasy.  Yet we expect them to then believe that God is not a childhood fantasy, too?  How's a developing child supposed to interpret that concept?  They trust the word of their parents and if they can betray them just as well with God, their sexuality, their intelligence and anything else that comes from their comments.  This is why once they pass through and work out which of their parents' comments may be truthful and which ones might not, the come to grips with some sort of variant conclusion of their own.  Sure most give up on Santa, but he's still around, one's intelligence is always ify depending on one's report card as proof one way or another, and one's sex is as well if there's a whole world is still promoting the idea that it is real.

 

That's a pretty heavy burden to dump on small children.  We as parents chose to go with honesty as a policy so my kids never believed in Santa, but they have a strong belief in their religion, they believed in their potential intellectually, one graduated Valedictorian and are assured in their scientifically proven sexuality.  To this day they still trust in what we tell them as to what we believe is the truth.

 

Can't tell if you're advocating for complete truth with children, which would be instilling them with the knowledge that there is no Santa, Easter Bunny or God.  If so, I could understand that.  

 

However, part of being a young child is developing their imagination, often through make-believe and games.  I see nothing wrong with living the fantasy to encourage this development.

 

However, it's a lot easier to outgrow the belief in Santa Claus than it is to rid someone of the notion of the supernatural, when the vast majority still believe in a god.

[Stosh]

Can't tell if you're advocating for complete truth with children, which would be instilling them with the knowledge that there is no Santa, Easter Bunny or God.  If so, I could understand that.  

 

However, part of being a young child is developing their imagination, often through make-believe and games.  I see nothing wrong with living the fantasy to encourage this development.

 

However, it's a lot easier to outgrow the belief in Santa Claus than it is to rid someone of the notion of the supernatural, when the vast majority still believe in a god.

 

Oh, don't get me wrong!  My children and I all have a strong belief in Santa Claus and God.  From an early age, on, my children and I faithfully hung our stockings out on St. Nicholas day (December 6th) and they hung there all through the season of Christmas, (January 5th).  Santa was the joy of Christmas giving to those we love and so if any artwork from school came home during that time, it was put in someone's stocking.  Maybe it was a candy bar for the kids, maybe it was something they made from school for us.  The kids made gifts for each other and shared among themselves, too.  Santa was alive and well in our family, but they weren't lied too either.

 

When my oldest was just beyond the toddler stage, we were at the local mall and of course they had Santa's Workshop set up so kids could get their picture taken with Santa.  We were there midweek and the shopping crowd was very light.  We walked by to see the decorations and stuff and Santa called out, "Do you want to come and tell me what you want for Christmas?"  She waved back and said she had to do something first.  She insisted that the traditional Santa likes cookies so we had to go over to the shop that sells cookies and she had me buy one cookie.  She then went back to Santa crawled up into his lap and whispered in his ear, "You're not really Santa, I am." and gave him the cookie.  He took her by the hand and brought her back over to us and thanked us for the best Christmas gift he had ever gotten.

 

Sometimes children's literal realities beat out their fantasies in spades.  God is not a fantasy to my children.

[DuctTape]

I thought this mom's idea of the Santa disclosure was fantastic...http://www.today.com/parents/santa-real-handling-santa-talk-your-kids-t105765

[Stosh]

40 years ago it is exactly what I did as a parent without first telling the lie.  We started out with the solution without the problem first. 

 

Kids can handle it well.  Our kids were told to say, "At our house he's real."  and nothing more so that it doesn't ruin it for other kids who think he is really for real.  They all kept the secret (it wasn't their place to tell).

Edited February 16, 2017 by Stosh

[RememberSchiff]

I thought this mom's idea of the Santa disclosure was fantastic...http://www.today.com/parents/santa-real-handling-santa-talk-your-kids-t105765

Extremely well done!

[CalicoPenn]

Premise 3:  It doesn't matter if it's a choice or not a choice - we're all human beings and it's our job to love each other, not judge each other.

 

Why do we have heavy violence in Chicago?  Hint - it's not about gangs anymore - it's about people feeling disrespected and not knowing how to appropriately respond.

[Stosh]

We got through the Civil Rights era and the Vietnam era, and we all pulled together, why are we tearing each other apart now?  It would seem that the more things change the more they don't.

[Ranman328]

In my honest opinion, we as a society have set our children up for failure.  We have allowed the "everyone gets a trophy"  and there are no "winner and losers" and the all too familiar "don't keep score so no ones feelings get hurt".  We did not fight back and tell them yes there are winners and losers and not everyone gets a trophy and yes at the end of the day score is being kept.  We are not preparing our youth for the real world.  Case in point, the 2016 Presidential Election.  All the lefties were told Hillary was going to win and life was going to be great.  Election night comes around and guess what, the man that had no chance became the President of the United States.  This group of everyone gets a trophy was not prepared how to deal with defeat.  What do they do?  Lash out, destroy property, call names, point fingers and everything else that is going on out there.  People have lost their minds because they do not know how to handle adversity.

 

There are groups out there that just want to cause trouble where ever they can.  Let me ask you all this question.  Can anyone provide me with some exact figures of how the BSA policy on Gay Scouts and Gay Leaders have made a positive impact on the organization.  Did BSA gain or lose members?  What have these groups that protested the BSA to get these changes done to assist with helping out since then.  I will tell you.  They have done NOTHING.  The BSA caved, made the policy changes and these people "high fived" each other threw down their signs and moved on to the next "Social Injustice".  Here we are again with the protesters and chanters wanting change.  They are getting change and where is their representative wanting to meet with BSA Leadership to help with the transition of this new policy that they have so vigorously demanded.  They are no where to be found.  They have left and moved on to the next opportunity.  Here we all are, some of us lifetime scouters and outdoor folks that just want to help a generation of BOYS be BOYS and get out from in front of the TV and video games and go camping, hiking and experience life without technology.  We are left to pick up the pieces and try to rework a program AGAIN that a bunch of "Scouters" that have not dealt with any boys in years have ruined. 

 

My oldest son wanted to leave scouts due to a gay scout that was very vocal about his lifestyle.  I would ask, how does this fit into "Morally Straight".  It doesn't and no one will question it for fear of retribution.  I know that five scouts have left this troop due to this scout.  Lets see, five scouts leave to due to the actions of a gay scout.  Those figures don't seem to add up in favor of the new policies. 

[David CO]

Premise 3:  It doesn't matter if it's a choice or not a choice - we're all human beings and it's our job to love each other, not judge each other.

 

Why do we have heavy violence in Chicago?  Hint - it's not about gangs anymore - it's about people feeling disrespected and not knowing how to appropriately respond.

 

It's the gangs.  It is definitely the gangs. Liberals now days feel that they have to be so nonjudgmental  that they can't even blame the criminals for the crime.  

 

Yes, we are all human beings.  But some people are good, and some people are bad.  A few are very, very bad.

Edited February 17, 2017 by David CO

[Pale Horse]

My oldest son wanted to leave scouts due to a gay scout that was very vocal about his lifestyle.  I would ask, how does this fit into "Morally Straight".  It doesn't and no one will question it for fear of retribution.  I know that five scouts have left this troop due to this scout.  Lets see, five scouts leave to due to the actions of a gay scout.  Those figures don't seem to add up in favor of the new policies. 

 

How exactly was he "vocal about his lifestyle"? A scout, any scout, who brags about how many "chicks he smashed" last week isn't Morally Straight either.  This isn't a gay/straight issue, it's a decorum issue.

 

The scout needed to be realize, and it's Leader's responsibility to educate, that there are times and places for everything.  Scouting is about scouting.

[qwazse]

How exactly was he "vocal about his lifestyle"? A scout, any scout, who brags about how many "chicks he smashed" last week isn't Morally Straight either.  This isn't a gay/straight issue, it's a decorum issue.

 

The scout needed to be realize, and it's Leader's responsibility to educate, that there are times and places for everything.  Scouting is about scouting.

How about scouts who brag about still being virgins? (Well, boys may not use that word with a straight face, but the girls in my crew never had such qualms.)

Time after time growing up, I saw examples of older scouts who fessed up that they *weren't* being promiscuous. Their talk, changed my "locker room" talk.

And, it was clear that there was no moral equivalence between permissive and restrictive camps, the latter being more certain to prevent more disease, increase the dignity of one's fellows, and provide our future with citizens capable of building and defending this great land.

 

Are you saying that I should now castigate the scout/venturer who extols celibacy until call to lifetime heterosexual monogamy? 

[Pale Horse]

How about scouts who brag about still being virgins? (Well, boys may not use that word with a straight face, but the girls in my crew never had such qualms.)

Time after time growing up, I saw examples of older scouts who fessed up that they *weren't* being promiscuous. Their talk, changed my "locker room" talk.

And, it was clear that there was no moral equivalence between permissive and restrictive camps, the latter being more certain to prevent more disease, increase the dignity of one's fellows, and provide our future with citizens capable of building and defending this great land.

 

Are you saying that I should now castigate the scout/venturer who extols celibacy until call to lifetime heterosexual monogamy? 

 

Ah...yes.  I would venture that talking about having sex, or not having sex, are both discussions that aren't scout-related.  Good for him/her if that's their choice to remain celibate, but that's not really a conversation that needs to be had.  Certainly not in a group setting.

 

Even Sex Ed classes, which specifically deal with this topic, don't solicit active feedback from participants regarding whether they celebrate the "extols of celibacy until call to lifetime heterosexual monogamy," or those who others feel are amoral sodomites.  

Edited February 17, 2017 by Pale Horse

[Pale Horse]

 

Edited February 17, 2017 by Pale Horse

[Eagledad]

Ah...yes.  I would venture that talking about having sex, or not having sex, are both discussions that aren't scout-related.  Good for him/her if that's their choice to remain celibate, but that's not really a conversation that needs to be had.  Certainly not in a group setting.

 

As I'm watching mothers proudly walk with their eight year old daughters at anti-abortion marchs on the news, I think to myself, "adults today don't allow our children any innocence". 

 

The adults in our troop allow the scouts their privacy in their tents. That's not a big deal when the adults are camped 300 ft away. But it's not uncommon to set tents next to each other in the back county on high adventure treks. It amazes me that scouts think their tents are sound proof. Sadly, sex is a political football in todays culture, so it is a typical topic of discussion for just about everyone of school ages. Is it really reasonable to not expect these discussions among scouts?

 

As an aside; do you think the mother has explained to her eight year old daughter that mom is fighting for the right to kill her daughters pre-born brothers and sisters? Makes me wonder just how far children are willing to trust their parents to raise them right.

 

Barry

[NJCubScouter]

Are you saying that I should now castigate the scout/venturer who extols celibacy until call to lifetime heterosexual monogamy? 

 

Isn't it the policy of the BSA that Scouts should not engage in sexual activity of any kind?  And I don't just mean in the context of Scouting activities (obviously), I mean anywhere, any time, with anyone.  I know there was a statement to that effect when they changed the policy on openly gay Scouts, but it was not limited to gay people.  I'm also pretty sure that the version of the handbook when I was a Scout had a statement about (paraphrasing here) "saving yourself for marriage".  I don't know if that's still in the handbook, but I think it is still pretty clear that that is what the BSA prefers, at least.

 

That being the case, I don't see how one can criticize a Scout for saying they are doing (or rather, not doing) exactly what the BSA wants them to (not) do.  On the other hand, a Scout bragging about his "conquests" (with persons of any gender) is a different story.  "Out of bounds", as we say in our troop.  Both are "talking about sex", in the broadest sense, but if one person is "modeling" the behavior preferred by the BSA and the other is modeling the opposite, I don't see how you treat those situations the same.