Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vermont Scouts denied July 4th vendor permit and withdraw

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by packsaddle View Post
    The 'brave' reaction by the troop would have been to shrug off the small-minded gesture by the city and do the service anyway - and teach the city some humility. They missed that opportunity to 'teach' as well as to 'demonstrate' the true scout spirit.
    I am glad you mentioned this as I expected a larger number of similar responses. My IH and COR agree with you, turn the cheek and be a good scout and help with the cleanup. Maybe but I doubt this town council would have "learned" from that teaching approach.

    My father told me, a dog will only take so much kicking after that he won't come back.

    My $0.01

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Scouter99 View Post
      If Guerlain is going to build gas chambers let him and his voters be the first ones in.
      If the late great OGE were here, he would probably say this thread should be closed under "Godwin's Law." I will just say that the sentence quoted above is just about the most hideously inappropriate statement ever made in this forum. It is absolutely disgusting. Scouter99, you should be ashamed of yourself

      Comment


      • #18
        I wonder how much of the units' reaction is youth motivated?

        Comment


        • #19
          RememberSchiff, that is a testimonial to the character of your IH and COR. It is also what Jesus would likely do. The town council can't possibly learn from it if they aren't given the chance. But if as you say, the object lesson would not 'take' with the town council, it is still the right thing to do.

          Edit: I really miss OGE. NJ, shame is sometimes a rare commodity.
          Last edited by packsaddle; 07-01-2014, 08:50 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            I would favor giving the water away. Walk the route of the parade, and give the water away. I bet you could find suppliers to donate the bottles, or heavily discounted. . Or suggesting another group sell the water and give the money to the Scout Troop. I would suggest asking Mr. Guerlain to come camping with us, and see how discriminatory the local Scout Troop is. And send him a subscription to Boys' Life.

            Comment


            • #21
              Does anyone else besides me think it is significant that the council did not actually ban the Scouts from doing anything? They asked the local unit leaders to discuss the subject, and instead the Scouts withdrew from the event entirely. That does not seem like the best way to have dealt with the issue. The comments of the council SE in Vermont are also interesting. He is basically saying, yes, National is being stupid and is forcing a bad policy on us, which an overwhelming majority of Vermont Scouters oppose, and it is hurting Scouting here, but I have to go along in order to keep my job, so what do you want from me? Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the policy.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by packsaddle View Post
                It is also what Jesus would likely do.
                Or maybe He would have shaken the dust from His sandals.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by packsaddle View Post
                  Edit: I really miss OGE. NJ, shame is sometimes a rare commodity.
                  I do too; and yes, it is often a rare commodity. I guess we will soon find out if there is any available in this particular case.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Who "claimed" they were a Christian?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by NJCubScouter View Post
                      Does anyone else besides me think it is significant that the council did not actually ban the Scouts from doing anything? They asked the local unit leaders to discuss the subject, and instead the Scouts withdrew from the event entirely. That does not seem like the best way to have dealt with the issue. The comments of the council SE in Vermont are also interesting. He is basically saying, yes, National is being stupid and is forcing a bad policy on us, which an overwhelming majority of Vermont Scouters oppose, and it is hurting Scouting here, but I have to go along in order to keep my job, so what do you want from me? Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the policy.
                      A troop is not in a position to discuss a B.S.A. policy. Look how well the "chapter" rep did.

                      Given these statements by the leader of the "No" effort, would many troop-level Scouters be expected to want to participate in the "discussion"? ("So are you ready to renounce this abhorent policy?")

                      Do we hold troop Scouters to the standard of conduct of Christ?

                      Are you confident in speaking for Jesus? Many are.

                      What was the objective of the "discussion"? Hearing out the troop or what the leader of the ban effort said it was?

                      Guerlain stated that “all politics is local” and said he hoped Montpelier would make national news with a position not to allow any group that discriminates to operate with the city’s stamp of approval.
                      . . .
                      “That they are part of an organization that takes that stance ... and they are free to take that stance, but there are certain consequences,” he said.
                      . . .
                      “I hope that we don’t approve (the vendor requests), and I hope that it makes national press, and I hope that the message gets to Washington that we said no,” said Guerlain. “We’re not going to let a group that openly discriminates against gays sell water at our parade. ... It’s difficult, it’s uncomfortable, but I think it’s our chance to do the right thing."

                      In my limited experience, a rational discussion with people concerned with "a matter of principle" are difficult. They want a trial and victory, not settlement - except one where thet get all they want and you get zilch.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by RememberSchiff View Post
                        My father told me, a dog will only take so much kicking after that he won't come back.
                        And he was right. But who is doing the kicking here? I think the current BSA national leadership bears most of the responsibility for this mess, and others like it. And you don't have to read too much between the lines of the SE in Vermont to see that he agrees. The comments of my own council's SE here in NJ been along the same lines, though maybe not as pointed or as publicly. He seems to be more adept at staying Out of the newspapers than some other SE's.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by NJCubScouter View Post
                          If the late great OGE were here, he would probably say this thread should be closed under "Godwin's Law." I will just say that the sentence quoted above is just about the most hideously inappropriate statement ever made in this forum. It is absolutely disgusting. Scouter99, you should be ashamed of yourself
                          I'm not. I find your embracement of government putting people's convictions in front of the muzzle to be disgusting. 1983 was a warning, not an instruction manual.

                          Originally posted by packsaddle View Post
                          RememberSchiff, that is a testimonial to the character of your IH and COR. It is also what Jesus would likely do. The town council can't possibly learn from it if they aren't given the chance. But if as you say, the object lesson would not 'take' with the town council, it is still the right thing to do.
                          "Let totalitarians be the first into their furnaces" -Jesus. See, Jesus says whatever we want him to say.
                          In all seriousness, chasing people with whips and flipping over tables is not out of the question when we ask what Jesus would do.

                          Originally posted by TAHAWK View Post
                          A troop is not in a position to discuss a B.S.A. policy. Look how well the "chapter" rep did.
                          Exactly. The"subject" is the scouts' application to sell water, not the membership policy, so what does NJ mean when he blames the scouts for not discussing the matter at hand when the council wants to discuss a different matter? He wants gays so don't expect anything except flagellation.
                          Last edited by Scouter99; 07-01-2014, 11:33 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Scouter99 View Post
                            .... In all seriousness, chasing people with whips and flipping over tables is not out of the question when we ask what Jesus would do. ....
                            To be clear, it was a rope whip. (This being a scouting forum, we can't let the importance of rope work go neglected.)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              If the city council wanted to make a statement about the BSA policy on homosexuals, they should be talking to the scout council, not taking it out on units that are doing them a service. I totally agree 100% with the reaction of the units. If you are in the middle of a fracas that doesn't concern you...MOVE someplace else. They have more important things to be doing than trying to sort out someone else's problems.

                              Stosh

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                It makes me wonder ... what if the borough councilmen in my conservative denied a neighborhood troop the permit to sell hot-dogs at our community fair because of last year's permissive decision?

                                Would the SM feel pressured to say he was PEHMOC (pro-exclusive-herterosexual-monogomy-or-celibacy) just like the majority in our community, just so he could be on equal footing with his political elites?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X