And yet more changes - even Pedro is not spared

[blw2]

4 hours ago, Pale Horse said:

I guess I just don't understand.

Please explain to me what in fact is the role of the father...what is the role of the mother?  

To me those roles are exactly the same: love, nurture, educate and discipline as needed.  None of those are unique to either a mother or father, nor are they specific to a certain sex when a one parent of a same-sex couple "assumes" the role of the opposite sex parent.  In a traditional family, a mother and father may approach those tasks in different fashions, just like I would approach it differently than other dads out there.  Doesn't mean one of us isn't fulfilling our role in the family.

 

In large part you made the point I was trying to drive at.

I think you're missing the meaning....  look at it this way, what is the goal that you'd want your kid to shoot for?  Do you wish for your daughter to aim to be a single mom?

[Eagledad]

Just now, shortridge said:

Barry, you can assume whatever you want about my motivation, but you’ll still be wrong.I

I don't think so, and here is why.

 

1 minute ago, shortridge said:

I was frankly shocked to see a Scouter express the opinion that certain types of families are inferior to the traditional heterosexual two-parent nuclear family. Considering that nearly a third of children in America do not live with two parents, that’s a pretty broad brush to paint potential members’ families with. I am genuinely curious how someone with those opinions would react if a nontraditional family - remember, he regards them as inferior - approached their unit or asked them about Scouting.

I also regard them as inferior too. I don't base that off of religious beliefs, politics, or emotion. My opinion is the result from life experiences after watching several generations of families in similar situations. So what! If you don't agree, then respectively say so like an without being judgement. 

Funny, I didn't pay attention to who I was responding to until your last post. You seem to really struggle with respecting posters of which you don't agree. If you have a different opinion, then just be honest and strait forward instead of trying to cleverly disparage the poster with judgmental guilt. We may still agree to disagree, but at least we leave with our integrity.

Barry

[Pale Horse]

1 minute ago, blw2 said:

In large part you made the point I was trying to drive at.

I think you're missing the meaning....  look at it this way, what is the goal that you'd want your kid to shoot for?  Do you wish for your daughter to aim to be a single mom?

Honestly, if I had a daughter, I would just want her to be happy.  (Doesn't everyone say this?)  But really it's up to her whether that's through finding love and heterosexual companionship to raise a child or through other avenues.

We all want the "best" for our children, but everyone's "best" is subject to interpretation.  I'd much rather she find happiness through a non-traditional route than follow the path of least resistance.  Should I also verify that any potential suitors my (imaginary) daughter brings home has the financial means to support X level of lifestyle?  And try to convince her that marrying John is an inferior choice because Bob is going to be a Lawyer and make big bucks?

 

[walk in the woods]

19 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I can't believe I'm making this point, but here goes....

The challenge is that we're entering a realm of discussion where the views themselves can be considered inherently offensive.  "Some families are superior to others", "being gay is morally wrong".

'Mothers and Fathers are interchangable" should be included in your list of views that can be considered inherently offensive......

[David CO]

17 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I could never imagine having a discussion about whether being gay was morally wrong. 

Just a short time ago, I couldn't have imagined that we would be having a discussion in which scouters were arguing that homosexual conduct is morally straight. Yet here we are.

[Eagledad]

16 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I can't believe I'm making this point, but here goes....

The challenge is that we're entering a realm of discussion where the views themselves can be considered inherently offensive.  "Some families are superior to others", "being gay is morally wrong".

While I agree that we want respectful dialog, the very dialog itself is offensive to some.  I am not surprised to see the pushback.  For example, I have a gay sister in law.  I could never imagine having a discussion about whether being gay was morally wrong.  I have divorced friends - I could not imagine having a discussion about whether a two parent family was superior to theirs.  

You are assuming there is only one reason for our opinions like religious morality. My opinions are based from life experiences, but are supported by my spiritual guidance. Mothers and fathers instinctively have different approaches to raising kids because they instinctively view situations differently. The differences balance each others reactions toward their kids to where most kids in a father/mother homes grow up basically more balanced than a home where the two human instincts aren't balanced. Most human behavior experts agree, or agreed until political correct activist forced a tamer opinion. 

So, the challenge is how the BSA could discuss the differences of fathers and mothers without implying suggesting ideal situations. I think that is where qwazse was saying. Maybe there isn't a good approach in this political environment. 

Barry

 

[David CO]

13 minutes ago, Pale Horse said:

I would just want her to be happy.  (Doesn't everyone say this?)

No, we don't all say this.

I would prefer that my family/students/scouts be faithful and true to our religion, rather than pursue happiness on Earth, even if that requires some sacrifices on their part. 

Edited May 30, 2018 by David CO

[ParkMan]

3 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

'Mothers and Fathers are interchangable" should be included in your list of views that can be considered inherently offensive......

Understood.

2 minutes ago, David CO said:

Just a short time ago, I couldn't have imagined that we would be having a discussion in which scouters were arguing that homosexual conduct is morally straight. Yet here we are.

This is why I'm coming to the realization that the BSA needs to be out of the business of determining what morally straight means.  

 @NJCubScouter and @blw2 - both your points are well taken.  I see what you're saying.

I don't think it does the BSA any good to become part of the narrative about what morally straight means or what defines character.  I think the CSE needs to stand up and say that it is up to each CO to define morality for themselves.

[Eagledad]

37 minutes ago, qwazse said:

To be fair, @shortridge, you weren't merely using @blw2's words. You were using a non-sequitur to set up a false dichotomy. And using that to put his posts in the worst possible light.

It does not follow that someone who disdains my restrictive sexual ethics would be less welcoming to me and my family in their scout unit. Nor, would it follow that someone who thinks less of a family built on a permissive sexual ethic would be less welcoming to that family. In fact often the reverse is true. Many times people go out of their way to point out they don't like my world view (or even how I may parent, at times), but will gladly let me hike and camp with them. I certainly pass that kindness along to others.

And part of that kindness has been to point out to certain parents (once I've earned their trust) that they aren't being very effective in their roles.

My apologies to shortridge and the rest of the forum members. Qwazse's response is soooo much better and respectable. I still have so much to learn.

Thanks qwaze.

Barry

[ParkMan]

2 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

You are assuming there is only one reason for our opinions like religious morality. My opinions are based from life experiences, but are supported by my spiritual guidance. Mothers and fathers instinctively have different approaches to raising kids because they instinctively view situations differently. The differences balance each others reactions toward their kids to where most kids in a father/mother homes grow up basically more balanced than a home where the two human instincts aren't balanced. Most human behavior experts agree, or agreed until political correct activist forced a tamer opinion. 

So, the challenge is how the BSA could discuss the differences of fathers and mothers without implying suggesting ideal situations. I think that is where qwazse was saying. Maybe there isn't a good approach in this political environment. 

Barry

 

Fair enough.  I'd expand just beyond morality.

I think there are ways you could discuss it.  Knowing that it's a sensitive topic you ask the scout to discuss the issues he believes are involved here.  Then ask the scout to articulate his views on the topic.  Ultimately I think it matters most that the scout understand the issues involved here.

Ultimately I think it helps the BSA more to be known as the group that encourages character development as determined locally than to be known as the group that advocates a particular set of moral beliefs.

 

[Saltface]

1 minute ago, ParkMan said:

Fair enough.  I'd expand just beyond morality.

I think there are ways you could discuss it.  Knowing that it's a sensitive topic you ask the scout to discuss the issues he believes are involved here.  Then ask the scout to articulate his views on the topic.  Ultimately I think it matters most that the scout understand the issues involved here.

Ultimately I think it helps the BSA more to be known as the group that encourages character development as determined locally than to be known as the group that advocates a particular set of moral beliefs.

 

By taking that position, BSA would be tacitly supporting the belief that truth is relative. It's a slippery slope...

 

[blw2]

11 minutes ago, Pale Horse said:

Honestly, if I had a daughter, I would just want her to be happy.  (Doesn't everyone say this?)  But really it's up to her whether that's through finding love and heterosexual companionship to raise a child or through other avenues.

We all want the "best" for our children, but everyone's "best" is subject to interpretation.  I'd much rather she find happiness through a non-traditional route than follow the path of least resistance.  Should I also verify that any potential suitors my (imaginary) daughter brings home has the financial means to support X level of lifestyle?  And try to convince her that marrying John is an inferior choice because Bob is going to be a Lawyer and make big bucks?

 

yes, lot of nuances for sure.

ok, so happiness is the ultimate goal.  What's the easiest way to achieve that?     through drug use maybe....artificial happiness.  No, we certainly don't want to encourage that.

but more to the point, what's the most likely way to be in a happy situation with regard to marriage? 

On one hand you have a couple who right or wrong is going to have a lifelong road of odd looks from others, misunderstandings, and all sorts of uncomfortable problems and situations (this could be based on religion differences, racial differences,  or diverging from any other cultural norm).  Another extreme might be two folks from very different cultures coming together...I don't know.. say a headhunter born and raised on some jungle island marrying a rich girl from the hamptons.

on the other hand you have a single parent who will have at least twice the workload, will not have a partner to brainstorm things with, will not have the yang to their yin, a widower dad that won't know how to deal with a multitude of issues that girls face (how to use makeup, braiding hair, biology issues, and the rest), etc....

and on yet the other hand you have, at least in our culture, a man and a woman who are emotionally compatible, fiscally compatible, share the same religious beliefs, come from similar backgrounds, and live in a community with folks just like them, etc...

 

[ParkMan]

13 minutes ago, Saltface said:

By taking that position, BSA would be tacitly supporting the belief that truth is relative. It's a slippery slope...

 

But if the BSA is out of the morality definition business it's not. 

It would be BSA saying it's your job to figure it out.  As I tell my kids sometime - "not my job"

 

[NJCubScouter]

Sometimes being a moderator in this forum is like being Homer Simpson watching the nuclear reactor start to melt down, and he can't find the button to shut everything off.

But I can see when the temperature is starting to rise to dangerous levels.  One of the things that is sure to raise the temperature in here is questioning other posters' motivations, or appearing to do so - and that goes in both directions.  It isn't against the "rules" to do so (in my interpretation of them at least), but it often leads to things that do violate the "rules."

So could we please turn down the temperature?  For Homer's sake, at least?

[Pale Horse]

18 minutes ago, blw2 said:

but more to the point, what's the most likely way to be in a happy situation with regard to marriage? 

Careful, you might not like the answer to that question.

https://www.google.com/search?q=divorce+statistics+gay+vs+straight&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS775US776&oq=divorce+rates+gay+&aqs=chrome.2.0j69i57j0l4.9023j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Take your pick of studies.