Boy Scout New Policy

[Lyons in the Sea of Red.]

I get drunk occasionally, do I have deeper issues? '

 

Only if you're drinking Natty Lite.

Hey man! The college income only grants so many indulgences!

[JJ Husker]

 

Not everything that you might consider pornographic is objectification of women. Some porn is, but not all. You might consider 2 guys have sexual relations as pornographic. You might consider some ART in a museum as pornographic but others might see it just as an expression of the natural beauty of the human form.

 

I am sure if you think about it long and hard, you will see that "Viewing porn does not = objectifying women" 100% of the time.

I never made any claims to the contrary and neither did Landlord. Seems you are inventing things to argue about. You started this thread by posting 10 moral disqualifiers for scout leaders. We have since learned that these 10 things are items you made up in an effort at being sarcastic or more specifically as items that you feel are no less valid than prohibiting gay leaders. If you would've simply stated that you do not believe being gay should disqualify a person from being a scout leader we could've avoided a lot of senseless back and forth. I understand the tendency to want to apply preconceived notions to people who you disagree with on other issues but, as we've seen exhibited here, sometimes it just doesn't work out the way we hope. Now, if you want to have a real discussions about scoutings anti-gay policy, how about we start with their right to run their organization anyway they see fit. Nobody is forcing parents or their children into scouting. If you disagree with their no gay leaders stance, then don't support them by sending your kids there. If a person appreciates the fact that they are one of the few organizations that are attempting to maintain a higher moral standard, then those persons can elect to participate in scouting. If you want to highlight that being gay is not necessarily a sign of lower morals, you could've done that without creating a strawman list of immoral behavior that you cannot justify. to be clear and to prevent you from assigning further false positions to my position, I do not believe the simple fact that a person is gay should deem them unworthy to be a scout leader. However, I do believe the scouts should have the freedom to make that distinction if they wish. It very well may be inconsistent having that as the only "line in the sand" but at least people know what it is and are free to choose based on it.

[Someone]

Nobody is forcing parents or their children into scouting. If you disagree with their no gay leaders stance, then don't support them by sending your kids there. If a person appreciates the fact that they are one of the few organizations that are attempting to maintain a higher moral standard, then those persons can elect to participate in scouting. If you want to highlight that being gay is not necessarily a sign of lower morals, you could've done that without creating a strawman list of immoral behavior that you cannot justify. to be clear and to prevent you from assigning further false positions to my position, I do not believe the simple fact that a person is gay should deem them unworthy to be a scout leader. However, I do believe the scouts should have the freedom to make that distinction if they wish. It very well may be inconsistent having that as the only "line in the sand" but at least people know what it is and are free to choose based on it.

 

Your arguments (but I am not say YOU believe what I am about to compair to) remind me of white church leaders in the south using the Bible to argue in favor of segregation in the 50's and 60's.

Statemenst like: "one of the few organizations that are attempting to maintain a higher moral standard" sounds like something straight out of a KKK publication. If you don't believe me, add KKK and google it.

An organization can't stand on the "higher moral standard" pillar if they are unwilling to uniformly apply "higher moral standards". The list of morals that I listed are all in the Bible--the same reference that Scouts point to in their objection to homosexuality.

[JJ Husker]

Oh, so it's an all or nothing moral standard issue for you. You see no difference between the person who viewed 3 porn images ten years ago and the person who currently spends 4 hours each evening searching out images of under age boys? The scouts can't adopt any moral standards policies unless they adopt all of them? I would agree that an organization can't stand on a "higher moral standard" pillar without having their other standards questioned. In fact, their standards will be questioned regardless of any pillar they claim to stand on. So, is it your position that the Scouts need to drop any and all moral standards or that they need to adopt your biblical list of standards and have no leaders and cease to exist because nobody is good enough to meet them all? Or, are you just upset that they have singled out being gay as a disqualifier?

[StPaulHusker]

You guys are going bats$!t crazy about this. All this talk about porn and the KKK.

 

The fact of the matter is that the Boy Scouts are allowed to make any "moral standard" they choose at any time as long as they are not receiving money from the government. It's just like a church or a private institution. People who have children in the Scouts (I being one of them) pay dues to allow our child into the club. We as parents, and at some point down the road, the children understand the rules and regulations that are applied before we write the check. If I had a major problem with their not allowing of gays, I wouldn't let my child be involved. But as the case with me, I don't have a problem with them not allowing gays at all or just as Scout Masters. I think they are being uptight, but it is not enough for me to take my kid out of a program he clearly enjoys. Somewhere down the line, he will understand the rules more clearly and he can decide for himself what he wants to do.

 

If people don't like the way an organization is run, don't support it and start a new one. It happens all the time. This is no different than when Augusta National didn't allow blacks and women. Now they allow blacks thanks to Woods. They still do not allow women and that is their RIGHT. This is a dues paying PRIVATE club and they can allow anyone they want.

 

In the end it is not the Boy Scouts job to appease the entire masses. It is their job to put a program together based on a foundation of high moral character. And if homosexuality doesn't fit, then boycott it and have your children involved in something else.

 

People need to stop trying to change everything to THEIR liking and be innovative and start something of their own

[Junior]

You guys are going bats$!t crazy about this. All this talk about porn and the KKK.

 

The fact of the matter is that the Boy Scouts are allowed to make any "moral standard" they choose at any time as long as they are not receiving money from the government. It's just like a church or a private institution. People who have children in the Scouts (I being one of them) pay dues to allow our child into the club. We as parents, and at some point down the road, the children understand the rules and regulations that are applied before we write the check. If I had a major problem with their not allowing of gays, I wouldn't let my child be involved. But as the case with me, I don't have a problem with them not allowing gays at all or just as Scout Masters. I think they are being uptight, but it is not enough for me to take my kid out of a program he clearly enjoys. Somewhere down the line, he will understand the rules more clearly and he can decide for himself what he wants to do.

 

If people don't like the way an organization is run, don't support it and start a new one. It happens all the time. This is no different than when Augusta National didn't allow blacks and women. Now they allow blacks thanks to Woods. They still do not allow women and that is their RIGHT. This is a dues paying PRIVATE club and they can allow anyone they want.

 

In the end it is not the Boy Scouts job to appease the entire masses. It is their job to put a program together based on a foundation of high moral character. And if homosexuality doesn't fit, then boycott it and have your children involved in something else.

 

People need to stop trying to change everything to THEIR liking and be innovative and start something of their own

 

That isn't really true. A restaurant can't deny service to a patron because they are black or Asian, and then base that decision on morality. This was discussed on this board about a florist who denied service to a gay person. There are laws against discrimination in this country, and I don't know that the Boy Scouts would be exempt.

[StPaulHusker]

You guys are going bats$!t crazy about this. All this talk about porn and the KKK.

 

The fact of the matter is that the Boy Scouts are allowed to make any "moral standard" they choose at any time as long as they are not receiving money from the government. It's just like a church or a private institution. People who have children in the Scouts (I being one of them) pay dues to allow our child into the club. We as parents, and at some point down the road, the children understand the rules and regulations that are applied before we write the check. If I had a major problem with their not allowing of gays, I wouldn't let my child be involved. But as the case with me, I don't have a problem with them not allowing gays at all or just as Scout Masters. I think they are being uptight, but it is not enough for me to take my kid out of a program he clearly enjoys. Somewhere down the line, he will understand the rules more clearly and he can decide for himself what he wants to do.

 

If people don't like the way an organization is run, don't support it and start a new one. It happens all the time. This is no different than when Augusta National didn't allow blacks and women. Now they allow blacks thanks to Woods. They still do not allow women and that is their RIGHT. This is a dues paying PRIVATE club and they can allow anyone they want.

 

In the end it is not the Boy Scouts job to appease the entire masses. It is their job to put a program together based on a foundation of high moral character. And if homosexuality doesn't fit, then boycott it and have your children involved in something else.

 

People need to stop trying to change everything to THEIR liking and be innovative and start something of their own

 

That isn't really true. A restaurant can't deny service to a patron because they are black or Asian, and then base that decision on morality. This was discussed on this board about a florist who denied service to a gay person. There are laws against discrimination in this country, and I don't know that the Boy Scouts would be exempt.

Boy Scouts are a non-profit organization and faith based. They can deny homosexuals.

[StPaulHusker]

You guys are going bats$!t crazy about this. All this talk about porn and the KKK.

 

The fact of the matter is that the Boy Scouts are allowed to make any "moral standard" they choose at any time as long as they are not receiving money from the government. It's just like a church or a private institution. People who have children in the Scouts (I being one of them) pay dues to allow our child into the club. We as parents, and at some point down the road, the children understand the rules and regulations that are applied before we write the check. If I had a major problem with their not allowing of gays, I wouldn't let my child be involved. But as the case with me, I don't have a problem with them not allowing gays at all or just as Scout Masters. I think they are being uptight, but it is not enough for me to take my kid out of a program he clearly enjoys. Somewhere down the line, he will understand the rules more clearly and he can decide for himself what he wants to do.

 

If people don't like the way an organization is run, don't support it and start a new one. It happens all the time. This is no different than when Augusta National didn't allow blacks and women. Now they allow blacks thanks to Woods. They still do not allow women and that is their RIGHT. This is a dues paying PRIVATE club and they can allow anyone they want.

 

In the end it is not the Boy Scouts job to appease the entire masses. It is their job to put a program together based on a foundation of high moral character. And if homosexuality doesn't fit, then boycott it and have your children involved in something else.

 

People need to stop trying to change everything to THEIR liking and be innovative and start something of their own

 

That isn't really true. A restaurant can't deny service to a patron because they are black or Asian, and then base that decision on morality. This was discussed on this board about a florist who denied service to a gay person. There are laws against discrimination in this country, and I don't know that the Boy Scouts would be exempt.

And in response to the florist, the reason she may be in trouble is because if you run a BUSINESS, you can't deny service based on sexual orientation. Her argument is that she is denying service to a wedding that goes against her religious beliefs. It is a gray area.

[Junior]

Boy Scouts are a non-profit organization and faith based. They can deny homosexuals.

 

I've been looking at their website. I don't see where they claim to be faith based.

 

Not saying you are wrong, I just don't see it.

[StPaulHusker]

Boy Scouts are a non-profit organization and faith based. They can deny homosexuals.

 

I've been looking at their website. I don't see where they claim to be faith based.

 

Not saying you are wrong, I just don't see it.

Go to "I am a visitor". On the left side of that page, it has a place you can click that says Faith Traditions.

[Blackshirts007]

Homosexual people don't have any more or less deeper issues; just different ones.

 

What issues are those and how do they differ from the issues of heterosexuals?

 

I don't have any blanket statements to make because there aren't many if any that can be said; it comes down to individual people in their own upbringings and societal pressures and relational health and/or wounds.

 

Isn't the only difference between heteros and gays who they're interested in sleeping with? It's a sex issue. Every other "issue" is pretty much down to the individual, regardless of sexual preference. Yes?

There are more issues than just sexual preference IMO. There is the issue of the psychology of a homosexual. The discrimination they have to face. They have a much harder time fitting into society than a heterosexual. The issues of morality too. If it was just a difference in who they sleep with there wouldn't be issues of gay marriages, laws that say gays have equal rights, etc. I wish they were everyone was treated the same

[StPaulHusker]

Boy Scouts are a non-profit organization and faith based. They can deny homosexuals.

 

I've been looking at their website. I don't see where they claim to be faith based.

 

Not saying you are wrong, I just don't see it.

Faith Based may be strong wording. Maybe Faith-Incorporating. But the point is, it is a club that people pay to join so they can refuse to allow certain people as it stands today. It may not hold up forever as some states are trying to take away tax-exempt status for them because of these issues.

[Junior]

Boy Scouts are a non-profit organization and faith based. They can deny homosexuals.

 

I've been looking at their website. I don't see where they claim to be faith based.

 

Not saying you are wrong, I just don't see it.

Faith Based may be strong wording. Maybe Faith-Incorporating. But the point is, it is a club that people pay to join so they can refuse to allow certain people as it stands today. It may not hold up forever as some states are trying to take away tax-exempt status for them because of these issues.

 

Yea, it sounds to me like they are faith incorporating, being involved in many faiths. And not all "sects" of Christianity are as damning of homosexuality as others, so that argument really doesn't hold water.

[StPaulHusker]

Boy Scouts are a non-profit organization and faith based. They can deny homosexuals.

 

I've been looking at their website. I don't see where they claim to be faith based.

 

Not saying you are wrong, I just don't see it.

Faith Based may be strong wording. Maybe Faith-Incorporating. But the point is, it is a club that people pay to join so they can refuse to allow certain people as it stands today. It may not hold up forever as some states are trying to take away tax-exempt status for them because of these issues.

 

Yea, it sounds to me like they are faith incorporating, being involved in many faiths. And not all "sects" of Christianity are as damning of homosexuality as others, so that argument really doesn't hold water.

Either way, it is still a private club and they can deny membership how they see fit. I think they are hypocritical and silly but I also have a choice to not pay the dues for my kids if I see fit.

[Junior]

Being a tax exempt organization makes it less of a private club.