Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

What does nonsectarian mean to you?

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    You have conviently misinterpreted Settle.. I don't wish to restrict anyones religious expression.. ANYONE's... unlike the conservative christion branch who wishes to enforce everyone to thier religious viewpoint.. So go out and pray 5 times a day, I even support you getting that time during work or school hours.. How long has smokers been allowed to take umpteen times with smokers breaks.. Well I think praying is a much healthier habit.. But, don't force me to stop what I am doing 5 times a day.. If your religious group does not want to marry homosexuals.. I will support that.. If you don't want them as members of your church go for it.. Just don't tell me that I must also treat homosexuals a pond scum.. Personally I am fine with local option which means, I will accept YOUR troop to not accept homosexual children or adult leaders.. Just don't tell ME that MY TROOP has to follow YOUR beliefs..

    It is both those who insist that all units MUST discriminate against homosexuals and yes the other side that insist that all units MUST accept homosexuals.. These are the groups not respecting other peoples religious beliefs..

    BSA, let the CO's decide for themselves based on the IH's beliefs, and HANDS OFF.. And then let parents decide which units they wish their children to particpate in due to their beliefs and everyone HANDS OFF..

    Comment


    • packsaddle
      packsaddle commented
      Editing a comment
      Did you miss this part of Seattle Pioneer's post? "...everyone is entitled to and encouraged to express their religious and moral beliefs, and to struggle to have them accepted by the community at large."
      What do you think that "struggle" is? It is as if merely having a belief and not worrying about what the "community at large" thinks about it...isn't enough. Instead, "everyone is entitled to and encouraged to express their religious and moral beliefs, and to struggle to have them accepted by the community at large."
      I'm reminded again of that quote by TheScout, "The purpose of religion isn't to bring people together"

  • #17
    Packsaddle I did see it, I chose not to comment.. Good thing, you probably interepeted it better then I.. I took it as conservatives have stated plenty of time on this forum.. He who has the biggest stick gets to rule over those who don't. So you can have beliefs different those of conservative religions, but as long as they can scream the loudest, make the most obnoxious threats, and pay the biggest bribes, all other religious beliefs must bow to them, and practice their beliefs..

    Not very nonsectarian if you ask me.. But, it is what most conservatives believe (at least if things go their way..) If things look like they might be slipping from being the ruling class, well then they will take their marbles and go home.

    Maybe yours & my interpretations are similar at that.. One religion must conqure the other religions, because there is no way that they can just except each others differences and live in harmany with each other..

    Comment


    • #18
      SeattlePioneer writes:
      "You recite the preferred position of atheists and the Supreme Court, which is to restrict or eliminate all religious expression in the public square. The only religious discussion to be accepted is that of atheists, on the theory that THEIR religious beliefs don't constitute a religion, and should therefore have a monopoly of expression in the public square."

      Baloney yourself, SP. The supreme court has hardly been promoting atheism all these decades. They've been pretty good at promoting religious neutrality, which some people just can't accept.

      Comment


      • #19
        Yeah, but just like the fact that a den meeting or troop meeting should not be the place for Mary Kay selling, asking if I want to buy some trinket for little Johnny's sport team or having an investment broker try to sell me securities - proselytizing doesn't have a place at most scout meetings. Go express your religious and moral beliefs elsewhere.

        Comment


        • #20
          This question came up as my newest youth was reading the BSA application. (I like this kid ... real VP Administration material.) She asked me what non-sectarian meant in the middle of the meeting.

          I used the "showing no preference in relgion" definition and went on to point out that we want you to bring your faith to scouting and we believe you'll grow in that faith as you see others express theirs.

          She didn't have any questions about the rest of application. Which brought something home to me. Most of us grew up hearing about the Irish and Lebanese civil wars. In college I met many of the victims of those conflicts. Sectarian had a visceral meaning to it that our kids hopefully will never know. Not because that type of violence has dissipated, but because the media is so diffuse these days.

          Anyway, the fact that we have to define non-sectarianism may just be due to it being so ubiquitous.

          Comment


          • #21
            Originally posted by SeattlePioneer View Post
            << It means not making rules that favor one religions beliefs over that of another religion.. It means not forcing one religion to follow the belief system of another religion.. It means hands off in the any differing viewpoints of what is moral and what is not, as well as if Jesus is or is not the son of God, or if there are many Gods, or if your higher power isn't even considered a god.. IT MEANS HANDS OFF.. >> Oh, balogney, Moosetracker. You recite the preferred position of atheists and the Supreme Court, which is to restrict or eliminate all religious expression in the public square. The only religious discussion to be accepted is that of atheists, on the theory that THEIR religious beliefs don't constitute a religion, and should therefore have a monopoly of expression in the public square. Of course, that's unreasonable and absurd. What REAL diversity involves is that everyone is entitled to and encouraged to express their religious and moral beliefs, and to struggle to have them accepted by the community at large.
            SeattlePioneer, I do not understand your point. Please help me understand, what does anything that Moosetracker wrote here have anything to do with atheism?

            Comment


            • #22
              Originally posted by qwazse View Post
              Anyway, the fact that we have to define non-sectarianism may just be due to it being so ubiquitous.
              I think that's true. I think that we can never know how deeply we are indebted to the founding fathers for ingraining both religious freedom and separation of church/state into our gov't and thereby culture before the rise of nationalism and the sectarianism that came with it. We just can't really imagine saying that you can't be an American if you're not a Baptist, much less going next door and jabbing our neighbors' eyes out because they're a different religion. For another thing, we rarely see non- in front of the word, and it's clear that most of the responders here don't even have a clear understanding of what sectarianism is. Let's look at the contrast: In France, the largest Scouting association is a federation of a scouting organization for protestants, one for Catholics, one for Muslims, one for Jews, and one that is inter-religious. Can you imagine? It's ludicrous in our estimation. Russia is worse. Austria is similar. etc etc.

              Comment


              • #23
                << Baloney yourself, SP. The supreme court has hardly been promoting atheism all these decades. They've been pretty good at promoting religious neutrality, which some people just can't accept.
                >>


                The Supreme Court has busily vacuumed religion out of the public square, but leaves atheism, environmentalism, socialism, science and other philosophical schools free reign in the public square.

                THAT is abusive. The Supreme Court and all the littler courts have written their own political biases into the constitution.

                Nothing new about that, of course.

                The Supreme Court is the oligarchy that displaced government of the people, by the people, whenever it chooses to do so.




                Comment


                • Merlyn_LeRoy
                  Merlyn_LeRoy commented
                  Editing a comment
                  "The Supreme Court has busily vacuumed religion out of the public square"

                  Really??!! No churches allowed anywhere? Strange, I can still see them in the public square.
                  Illegal to pray in public? Not true at all.
                  What bizarro world do you live in? What, exactly, is prohibited or restricted in your world?

                  "but leaves atheism, environmentalism, socialism, science and other philosophical schools free reign in the public square."

                  Yeah, baloney again. Name me any situation where atheism is permitted that Christianity isn't allowed.

                  "THAT is abusive. The Supreme Court and all the littler courts have written their own political biases into the constitution."

                  That's your bizarro-world, where atheism, somehow, has "free reign" in the public square while Christianity has been vacuumed out.
                  BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

                • King Ding Dong
                  King Ding Dong commented
                  Editing a comment
                  It never ceases to amaze me that people think that Christianity will forever and always be the majority religion in the US. If these people get their way and establish the US as a theocracy what happens when say some other religion like radical Islam gains enough power here. I for one do not want my descendants to have to walk around in burkas or get acid thrown on their face to preserve honor.

                  They just can't get it through their heads that the separation of church and state preserves their rights to practice their religion, not prevent it.

                  My only conclusion from all this nonsense is that like Sarah Palin they truly believe they will see the end of days in their lifetime. So what happens to future generations does not matter, they only live in the moment.

                • ThomasJefferson
                  ThomasJefferson commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Apparently Christians in the US are so used to being an unopposed majority that they interpret not getting their way with being oppressed.

              • #24
                TJ, what good is being in the majority if you don't get to dictate the terms for 'fairness'?

                Comment


                • King Ding Dong
                  King Ding Dong commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Baptists used to be huge supporters of freedom of religion, that is until they became the majority in many states.

              • #25
                Originally posted by King Ding Dong View Post
                Baptists used to be huge supporters of freedom of religion, that is until they became the majority in many states.
                The Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty is still very good at supporting religious liberty.

                Comment


                • King Ding Dong
                  King Ding Dong commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Not sure what the BJCRL is, will look that up. I know who Land is, and he does not support religious liberty.

                • packsaddle
                  packsaddle commented
                  Editing a comment
                  'Joint' committee? I assumed they advocate legalized pot for religious purposes.

                • King Ding Dong
                  King Ding Dong commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Brief tour of website seems like this is a very interesting group. Is there any evidence this group has the endorsement of the Southern Baptist Convention? They seem like oil and water.

              • #26
                You do know why Baptists don't have sex standing up? Someone might think they are dancing. :-)

                Comment


                • King Ding Dong
                  King Ding Dong commented
                  Editing a comment
                  A man walks into the lingerie department of Macy's in New York City. He tells the sales lady, 'I would like a Southern Baptist bra for mywife, size 34B.'

                  With a quizzical look the sales lady asks, 'What kindof bra?' He repeats, 'A Southern Baptist bra. My wife said to tell you that she wanted a Southern Baptist bra, and that you would know what she wanted.'

                  'Oh, yes, now I understand,' says the sales lady. 'We don't get as many requests for them as we used to. Most of our customers lately want the Catholic bra, the Salvation Army bra, or the Presbyterian bra.'

                  Confused, and a little flustered, the man asks, 'So, what are the differences?'

                  The sales lady responds. 'It's really quite simple. The Catholic bra supports the masses, the Salvation Army bra lifts up the fallen, and the Presbyterian bra keeps them staunch and upright.' He muses on that information for a minute and says, 'Hmm. I know I'll regret asking, but what does the Southern Baptist bra do?' 'Ah,' she replied, 'the Southern Baptist bra makes mountains out of molehills.'

              • #27
                Originally posted by King Ding Dong View Post
                Brief tour of website seems like this is a very interesting group. Is there any evidence this group has the endorsement of the Southern Baptist Convention? They seem like oil and water.
                They used to, but according to wiki they had a falling out in the 1980s and the SBC is not listed as a current supporting organization. The SBC has had its own "Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission" since then.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Are non-Christian prayers acceptable at council or district events?

                  At my local council and district events, the opening prayer or invocation usually takes one of two forms: overtly Christian (“In Jesus’ name, amen”) or generic (“May the great Scout Master...”). Almost never overtly Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, etc. Now I live in a diverse region, we have many churches and temples of different faiths in the area (there is even a Zoroastrian temple in town - I’ve been told one of the local troops has a pair of Zoroastrian scouts). In my own pack, most of the families are various flavors of Christian (mostly Catholic), but we have, or have had, Muslims, Jewish and Hindu families. So this topic came up for discussion with some scouters at a round table BBQ a while back.

                  One of the scouters said that his previous council (he has recently moved to our area) all the prayers were overtly Christian, and he had offered to give a Muslim prayer to open a round table (he is Muslim). He was told no because too many scouters would be offended so it wasn’t allowed (there is a story he was told to go along with that - I don’t want to derail the discussion, so I won’t repeat it here). I found this to be very surprising (and hope what he was told was incorrect). I have no reason to believe a similar rule exists in my local council or district.

                  So the question: would you be offended if an overtly Muslim, Hindu, Zoroastrian, or other non-Christian prayer was used to open a district or council event (unit events are a different issue)?

                  If yes, why? And if yes, are you also offended by overtly Christian prayers (and if no to that, why not)?

                  Does your local district or council have a rule against non-Christian prayers at district or council events?

                  Comment


                  • Trevorum
                    Trevorum commented
                    Editing a comment
                    At the National Councils meeting of the Religious Relationships Task Force last week in Grapevine, Texas, the opening prayer was given by a Muslim.

                • #29
                  Why does religious expression have to occur as part of a herd? Why can't each person just do their own personal thing without requiring the presence of others? This is something I've never understood.

                  Comment


                  • King Ding Dong
                    King Ding Dong commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Because of you are not seen by others it doesn't count as much or didn't happen.

                • #30
                  Originally posted by Rick_in_CA View Post
                  Are non-Christian prayers acceptable at council or district events? At my local council and district events, the opening prayer or invocation usually takes one of two forms: overtly Christian (“In Jesus’ name, amen”) or generic (“May the great Scout Master...”). Almost never overtly Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, etc. Now I live in a diverse region, we have many churches and temples of different faiths in the area (there is even a Zoroastrian temple in town - I’ve been told one of the local troops has a pair of Zoroastrian scouts). In my own pack, most of the families are various flavors of Christian (mostly Catholic), but we have, or have had, Muslims, Jewish and Hindu families. So this topic came up for discussion with some scouters at a round table BBQ a while back. One of the scouters said that his previous council (he has recently moved to our area) all the prayers were overtly Christian, and he had offered to give a Muslim prayer to open a round table (he is Muslim). He was told no because too many scouters would be offended so it wasn’t allowed (there is a story he was told to go along with that - I don’t want to derail the discussion, so I won’t repeat it here). I found this to be very surprising (and hope what he was told was incorrect). I have no reason to believe a similar rule exists in my local council or district. So the question: would you be offended if an overtly Muslim, Hindu, Zoroastrian, or other non-Christian prayer was used to open a district or council event (unit events are a different issue)? If yes, why? And if yes, are you also offended by overtly Christian prayers (and if no to that, why not)? Does your local district or council have a rule against non-Christian prayers at district or council events?

                  Our council pretty much keeps it generic. I would have no problem with Muslim or Jewish or Buddhist or any other prayer (with the exception of Satanic) at a Scout event, provided that it was done by a Scout or Scouter of whatever faith.

                  Comment


                  • packsaddle
                    packsaddle commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Or belief in Trolls for that matter, lol. I'd chime in with something to the effect that Satan is a myth but I used to get yelled at for doing that...so I won't.

                  • sailingpj
                    sailingpj commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Lol, I have talked to a couple satanists over the internet, and while I don't subscribe to their beliefs the ones I talked to were normal people.

                  • King Ding Dong
                    King Ding Dong commented
                    Editing a comment
                    No one on the Internet is normal.
                Working...
                X