Why the BSA should have stayed away from the transgender trend, part 2

[SSScout]

#1:  Even logic can get things wrong.  Logically, slavery can be seen as "good", because it enhances one's cotton/sugar cane finances.  Until you become a grain farmer, at least.... Why , logically, should the Master manumit his enslaved people, if not for moral reasons?  Either the slave is a human, equal in worth to the Master of the plantation, or he/she is an animal, not worth more than a plow horse (if a bit more intelligent and trainable)?  

#2:  Jesus didn't, but he wanted folks to treat their slaves well, slavery being a social norm back then.   The idea that not all "Christians" follow Christ is inherent in the diversity of the denominations and claims.  Which are the least hypocritical? 

#3:  Yep. UK Scouting is now more inclusive, but the Scout Promise there still includes a sentence about Duty to God..... perhaps one's duty to God is perceived as NOT believing in him/her/it ?

#4:  Now Merlyn, you know what I meant. Somewhere in your dim past, you were given some moral teachings, some religious teaching (even that religion is wrong or unteneble). You accepted or rejected it, by your own experience and/or reasoning.  Atheism is a religious teaching. It is included in the category "religion", even if it denies the existence of a "Higher Power". 

I welcome good wishes from anyone. Even agnostics and settled atheists.   It does me no harm to welcome such and to offer such.  I will ask God's blessings on anyone.  My bumper sticker reads "Please God, Bless Everyone, no exceptions."  Even you, Merlyn, my internet debating partner. 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

1 hour ago, SSScout said:

#1:  Even logic can get things wrong.

I agree, but since religions have axioms that cannot even be questioned, they are even worse at trying to settle moral questions.

 

1 hour ago, SSScout said:

#2:  Jesus didn't, but he wanted folks to treat their slaves well, slavery being a social norm back then.

And I guess he and/or god wasn't omnipotent, at least back then.  Hey, the Qin Dynasty outlawed slavery over 200 years before Jesus showed up, so why couldn't he tell people not to own slaves?  It's possible to not own slaves even if the government allows it, so why didn't he tell people that?

 

1 hour ago, SSScout said:

#3:  Yep. UK Scouting is now more inclusive, but the Scout Promise there still includes a sentence about Duty to God

No, there's more than one promise, and there's one that omits any gods:

https://members.scouts.org.uk/documents/AdultSupport/Promise/FS322016.pdf

And B-P supposedly composed the  “Outlander's Promise”.

1 hour ago, SSScout said:

Now Merlyn, you know what I meant. Somewhere in your dim past, you were given some moral teachings, some religious teaching (even that religion is wrong or unteneble). You accepted or rejected it, by your own experience and/or reasoning. 

I'm pointing out that you are just doing "my religion says X, therefor anyone who believes X got it from my religion".

[NJCubScouter]

10 hours ago, Eagledad said:

How could the hideously flawed man even conceive right from wrong without a perfect timeless measuring stick.

Imperfectly.

Someone was questioning how this discussion relates to Scouting.  One way it relates to Scouting is that Scouting does NOT require its members to believe that our moral code was dictated by a higher power.  It merely requires a belief in a higher power.  I for one believe that a supernatural force, beyond our comprehension, created the Universe and then probably retreated to the sidelines to watch the show - leaving the creatures on planets that eventually developed “intelligent” life to work out their own moral code(s) the best they could and try to survive in the process.  I do realize that there is no organized religion that believes that, religious members of my own religion don’t believe that, and most members of this forum don’t believe that, but the great thing about Scouting is that I can believe that and still live the Scout Oath and Law at the same time.

[packsaddle]

"Hideously flawed man" Sounds like my wife describing me. 

[qwazse]

Facts not in evidence:

11 hours ago, Merlyn_LeRoy said:

... the Qin Dynasty outlawed slavery over 200 years before Jesus showed up, so why couldn't he tell people not to own slaves?  ...

what laws the Chin made fell along racial lines

https://www.zum.de/whkmla/sp/0910/hersheys/hersheys5.html#ii

Quote

            With the transition from a period of rising and falling of states and small kingdoms to the first unified empire, the slavery system also became more firmly established. Qin China marks the beginning of imperial China, with a centralized and bureaucratic government based on the beliefs of Legalism. The First Emperor - Qin Shi Huangdi - launched attacks against the other six kingdoms that survived the Warring States period and absorbed their territories to create a unified empire.  
            In order to keep feudalism at bay and impose a centralized, non-hereditary aristocratic system, Qin Shi Huangdi made the nobles of other kingdoms his slaves for they were the most threatening enemies of his system. The labor force who worked on his great mausoleum was comprised of 1:2 ratios of Han people and slaves brought from other regions. Origins of enslaved workers in the Qin dynasty were quite diverse, ranging from Han people to Ryukyuans and Japanese.

To Merlyn's main objection ... Jesus did address slavery, but not in a way that we would at all find comfortable. The theme of "ultimate toppling" was at the forefront of Jesus' teaching. (E.g., Make peace with your enemy while he is far off ... Lazarus the leper and the master who wouldn't employ him.) That is, if you sought to be a master with select servants -- effectively casting others out and subjecting them to disease and decay -- you could expect to rot eternally while those outcasts would hold sway in the "bosom of Abraham." He later began to model Biblical servitude, which his disciples didn't like at all ... to the point of insurrection on the part of one. Subsequent ancient Christians took this quite seriously and pagan sources are on record mocking believers lack of finery.

[Eagledad]

11 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

 

Someone was questioning how this discussion relates to Scouting.  One way it relates to Scouting is that Scouting does NOT require its members to believe that our moral code was dictated by a higher power.  It merely requires a belief in a higher power. 

Not specifically, no. But the Scout Oath says "On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law." The BSA mission statement says "The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.

NJ, you can interpret moral code however want. Your god, my God, whose god? The BSA seems to at the very least reference morality with higher power in the same objective of preparing young young people for life. Oh sure, a lawyer can find loop holes if that's what it takes to be part of the group. But I think your reasoning (defense) of higher power and morality only make understanding harder, not clearer. 

It guess morality really is accountability of our actions toward others. While most believers actions are accountable to god, you believe your actions are only accountable to you. 

Ironically, nobody directed a specific source of morality in this thread, not even from a higher authority. But once morality was mentioned, many here felt cornered or judged. Out of respect, no moral references were given. But I think, while you protest using a higher authority for judgement, most feel higher authority is the law. And they don't like it for this discussion. 

I'll be honest, I didn't expect this discussion to go this deep. 

Barry

[fred johnson]

18 hours ago, Merlyn_LeRoy said:

I think the BSA's decades-long disparagement of atheists both by word and deed contributes to the slurs against atheists in this forum.  You know, like when scouts write things like "Merlyn ... You're the Stalin of the web era", as if I'm equivalent to a mass murderer.

Oh, that was you who wrote that.

This is NOT about BSA.  This is about your using this blog for a personal agenda outside BSA and being willing to bring everyone down with you.  

I just don't understand what is going on in your life to cause you to post in this board as you do.  

Edited October 2, 2018 by fred johnson

[fred johnson]

13 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

... One way it relates to Scouting is that Scouting does NOT require its members to believe that our moral code was dictated by a higher power.  It merely requires a belief in a higher power.  ...

Agreed.  On a personal note, I really fully believe that morality is not self-evident.  Without faith, morality is an academic exercise at best.  At worst, an imposition by the state leaving decisions to personal benefit or avoiding punishment.  Example:  Everyone knows, but no one can me so I'll hand in thousands of pages of email, but claim I reformatted my email server. 

Edited October 2, 2018 by fred johnson

[cocomax]

What is really weird is a movement like Atheism, which seems like a very simple thing can be taken over by fanatic zealots and be almost destroyed.

The Atheism / Skeptic movement is but a ghost of its former self from a few years back and is now more about feels then facts.

The Linux operating system has been  taken over by anti-cis-white-males activists. . . 

Activists from the feminist and LGBTQIA+ communities have been trying to force the Linux project to join the Contributor Covenant since at least 2015. The Contributor Covenant is an agreement to implement a special Code of Conduct (frequently CoC from now on) aimed at changing the predominantly white, straight, and male face of programming. CC’s Code of Conduct is controversial particularly because it allows anyone to be banned from contributing code for any reason, usually with no mechanism for oversight or accountability.

On September 16 the pro-CoC side got their wish–Linux had officially committed to implementing and obeying the CC Code of Conduct–and they immediately set about using it to remove top Linux coders.

Here are the CoC goals.

1. Fostering an inclusive and safe space for women, LGBTQIA+, and People of Color, who in the absence of the CoC are excluded, harassed, and sometimes even raped by cis white males.
2. Lack of CC’s CoC sustains meritocracy, which “has consistently shown itself to mainly benefit those with privilege, to the exclusion of underrepresented people in technology“.
3. The vast majority of Linux contributors are cis white males. CC’s Code of Conduct would enable the building of a more diverse overall demographic as people who aren’t cis white males feel welcome to join and white male harassers are weeded out.
4. Being against the CoC means you want women, LGBTQIA+, and People of Color to be harassed.

I wonder what will happen when feminists and LGBTQIA+ take firm control of BSA.

Just how weird are things going to get?

 

 

Edited October 2, 2018 by cocomax

[Eagledad]

1 minute ago, cocomax said:

I wonder what will happen when feminists and LGBTQIA+ take firm control of BSA.

Just how weird are things going to get?

 

It's time National change the name of the organization to Scouts of America (SA). That would clearly define the difference between the traditional organization of the past and new (progressive?) organization of tomorrow. In fact, I think the change would open National to more opportunities with less resistance from conditional scouters. 

Then I wouldn't need to defend the changes of the organization of which I gave so much of life. "Oh, no no, I was in the BSA, not the SA", "My son earned his Eagle in the BSA, not the SA". 

Barry

[fred johnson]

40 minutes ago, cocomax said:

... Here are the CoC goals. ...

Fascinating controversy.  I found the original article.  I had no idea of this Linux controversy.  

[SSScout]

Bizarre. Something as non gender related as computer programming (a gender neutral electric plug is next?  Can there be a neutral, non directional electric current?  ) How can you possibly gender identify a program?  Unless the program HAS to have a name, gender ID attachment?  I have no connection with Linux or Windows or....   COBAL, FORTRAN,   WITRAN,  maybe. 

The striving for Power and Authority seems to be s a prime example of human emotional desire.  Even in computer stuff. 

Oh, and Merlyn?   Slavery has been a "social norm"  in almost every past  culture , sometime. Same as warfare, unfortunately.  War prisoners?  Make'm work for little or nothing.  Criminals?  Same.  Immigrants? Indenture.  Build up a debt that can't be paid ?  Work houses.  Profit motive ?  Somebody's organizational skills seeking wealth (Morgan, Carnegie, Ford, Firestone, Rothschild, Krupp, don't know any Chinese names) often depended on near slave arrangements.   Ego engrandizement?  Make someone do stuff "just because".   The elimination of slavery has been a goal of many faiths, many good people without religious faith. And the  convincement has often come with bloodshed.  Logic  and faith often  work together to win that goal of freedom for all humanity.  By their fruits shall ye know them?  "Some of the best Christians I know are athiests".   

What was the original topic of this thread?   Pass the pie, please. 

[SSScout]

19 hours ago, Merlyn_LeRoy said:

I'm pointing out that you are just doing "my religion says X, therefor anyone who believes X got it from my religion".

Merlyn, Merlyn. Shame on you for such over reaching.  My comment never implied such.  I am pointing out that EVERYONE gets some behavior/cultural preference/moral training from their upbringing, which , as they grow up, either accept or reject . Modifications are allowed in this declaration.   Even thou, must have had SOME education, no matter what, by example or teaching, that you ultimately reacted to. Cultural sources, parental sources, logical reduction,  personal reflection,  it is your results , not mine that you declare.  

[DuctTape]

For those interested in reading about the formation of ethics from an atheists viewpoint; ie not relying on religious or other teachings. Here is a link to an essay on the American Atheists website. While many may disagree with his viewpoint, it is a good read to understand where an atheist is coming from.  https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/ethics-without-gods/

 

[cocomax]

Slavery is still the social norm. Just now a days it is fluffy and has a happy face.

When one person, or group of people, lays claim to the labor of another person without real consent or just compensation, often but not necessarily claiming the other person as a piece of property.  The government demands that people pay money to it, presumably using an implied threat of violence to ensure that they do.

If you earn money through your labors, and if another party unilaterally lays claim to that money without your consent, this implies that said party is laying claim to your labors without your consent you at at least in part a slave.

I am a wage slave to the Government, who takes 40% of all my labor under the implied threat of violence.

I do not really own the land that I live on, I must pay rent (property tax) to the true owner or they will come with guns and take their land back.