Jump to content

packsaddle

Moderators
  • Content Count

    9103
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

Everything posted by packsaddle

  1. Yes, KWC57, I agree but my eyes deceived me. At my initial look I thought your first god was listed as 'Bubba'! Lots of those around here. I'm with you littlebillie. I always thought that scouting was a place where boys from diverse backgrounds, any background, could join to learn teamwork and leadership and to have fun...without debating whose morality is superior. At age 11, few boys have a solid idea of what their beliefs are and those who do are likely to change as they age. I still think that's the way it should be (capturing the flag, not searching for the Holy Grail). Reverent is n
  2. If not exactly for the same reasons, I agree about the judges. Perhaps I don't fully understand why they should not be permitted in but until then I feel they should be allowed in. I don't buy the contention that morality can only be derived from a religious source. Some like to have morals dictated to them but they should not conclude that that is how it should be for everyone. I suppose that if a moral code is derived, say, from physical laws (it's easy to do, by the way), someone would then just argue that the physical laws amount to a religion. Oh well. Rooster will contradict anything I s
  3. Thanks Pfann and littlebillie, Interesting stuff. I think I am a little less confused about Girl Scouts now...perhaps...maybe...I think. Ed, I would have to agree with you. BSA is correct to pursue what it thinks is right. However, persons or groups who disagree ought to be allowed to express themselves. BSA should not punish someone for exercising their constitutional right to such expression. There is another way to view this, though. Why shouldn't individual communities (i.e., churches) have the freedom to interpret scouting principles their way? Why shouldn't local community stand
  4. OGE, Thanks for understanding the way I feel. Your first example, I think, is not exactly the same. The boys' achievements would still be recognized by BSA even during the transition. And most of the burden of the transition should fall on the leaders. As for disruption, these things happen frequently (our scout hut was destroyed recently) but I would try to live up to the motto. The second example, although interesting, doesn't really apply to this case. Although the UUA probably would very much like for BSA to change its policy, all UUA did was express their disagreement. Obviously, for B
  5. Pfann, Thanks for your observation. I looked into my old standby, a huge unabridged monster, and it agreed with my characterization. I then toured my collection of various abridged dictionaries and indeed there is a more general definition in some of them which describes the term as (I paraphrase), "worldwide in range or applicability" and synonymous with 'universal'. For a less rigorous discovery, I searched the term on the internet. All of the top matches were orthodox Christian sites some of them in Cyrillic or Greek. Entering 'ecumenicism' returned similar results. [i found a nice little l
  6. ScoutParent, the resolution states their position and asks for BSA no longer to refer to the UUA as a chartered organization as a result. BSA isn't FORCED to do anything. But it is good that you included the letter by BSA. In that letter BSA states that it is an "ecumenical" organization as opposed to "secular". 'Ecumenical' is a category that has no relevance to Judaeism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam and others... as it is specific to Christianity. This a clear admission by BSA itself that it gives preference to and is dominated by one religion.
  7. kwc57, I am fairly sure that UU boys are still accepted by BSA as Scouts, although considering BSA's intent, I don't see why . The UUA (true to their heritage) encourages boys who earn the religious award to go ahead and wear it on their uniforms anyway, perhaps their initiation into civil protest. Right on. I seem to remember an earlier thread where a troop was 'dumped' because either the leadership or the sponsor openly disagreed with policy. Does anyone remember what that was all about? For that matter, I wonder how many of us would be retained if BSA found out about our disagreement wit
  8. Collateral damage. Rooster we are simply going to disagree on this. You would defend BSA over anything. If I granted all your points for the sake of argument, it would still leave my primary objection...BSA, in a fervor that you evidently understand fully, chose an act to the detriment of the youth. No hand was forced. The KKK, in their fervor to be true to their principles, bombed churches - nevermind the unfortunate children that got in the way. Their toadies, somewhere, probably still defend them. I take some solace, though, in knowing that for at least a couple of pages here, we'
  9. Absolutely right, NJ! I now answer the question I have occasionally heard from ScoutParent, "why don't we leave and create our own organization?" Years ago when I was cubmaster, the last time we allowed a 'professional scouter' to speak, that same night my pack experienced a significant decline in family membership. They didn't even want to discuss it for a couple of years. Once they did my conclusion was, families join scouting for reasons other than fear or hate toward homosexuals and atheists...they further don't much enjoy rants about it either. Word of that speech filtered into the com
  10. The boys are ALLOWED to wear it on anything they like, including their Sunday go-to-meeting clothes. Any boy (or girl, for that matter) can earn the religious award outside of scouting (they don't have to be a scout). It would exist if there was no BSA. It is a major award. When I earned it, after my Eagle, I was told that it was comparable to Eagle in difficulty and prestige. Considering the uncountable hours and years it took me, I would tend to agree. The UUA exercises their right to speak because they are true to their beliefs and because, importantly, BSA IS homophobic (they would just
  11. scoutldr, You are correct. It is the policy unless I have read the regulations incorrectly. You'll find more info at the usscout.org site. I only wish our district was as organized as yours and had its own list. As it is troops more or less fend for themselves and this leads to great disparities in MB quality.
  12. Rooster, Read the material that KWC57 identified carefully. I quote from BSA, "Although religious emblems are not Scouting awards, the Boy Scouts of America encourages its members to participate in religious emblem programs..." 1. It is not a scouting award 2. BSA made a demand and the UUA did modify their literature to meet BSA demands. 3. BSA rescinded their action and then reinstated it because UUA was still exercising their 1st amendment right but in a manner not associated with the award. BSA elsewhere states, "Scouting supports the spiritual view of life that underlies the tea
  13. Rooster, At least no-one can accuse me of holding back. Thomas took a break during that one. I confess a special sensitivity regarding children, all of them. The issue was indeed homosexuality and the church was the Unitarian Universalists. The decision has pretty much stopped participation by their youth as far as I can tell, not that they were a major presence anyway. I suspect that BSA chose them because they are such a small denomination - a nice object lesson for other (more important) denominations that otherwise might join in the arguments (keepa ya mouths shut or ya programs sleep w
  14. Rooster, I tend to defend the underdog and when that happens to be a child, the offender should prepare to pick their ear up off the ground. I have seen children in hopeless situations around the world and those are painful visions. But what BSA does is needless and hateful and the self-righteous indignance of its defenders makes them hypocritical as well. Here is what happened: BSA adopted a policy that was controversial. People and organizations spoke out against it, fair enough. Some put their objections in print. One church said that they disagreed. BSA, seeing that they could not s
  15. littlebillie, I think, ahem, it might have been Gilda Radner.
  16. kwc57, I have no problem with what you say or your beliefs unless you or any other believer becomes judgemental as a result (as I feel BSA has become). Your beliefs (and mine) are not superior to those of anyone else. Otherwise I tend to defend the underdog. I seek proof in neither religion nor science as neither is capable, as you say, of providing it (proof). One of the reasons I like science, though, is that it is neutral in these matters and, in itself, does not cause harm to others. At its best, the same can be said of religion. However, I do delight in the occasional conundrum emerging f
  17. Thanks to all for all these great responses. I see a lot of variety, maybe some of you are picking up new ideas as well. My troop has no problems with fund-raising. But there is a wide range of economic status between the families. The uniform is great at leveling the status and we can finesse many of the more modest outings. I want ALL the boys to have access to the big ones as well and that is my motivation. Keep the ideas coming and Thanks.
  18. evmori, When BSA refuses recognition of significant legitimate achievement by a boy (God and Country), simply because his church publicly disagrees with BSA policy, it goes against the 1st Amendment. And for doing this to a child, I consider them cowardly. Just a personal opinion. Rooster, One answer is that they don't proclaim the truth because they lack self-confidence and I sympathize with them. My favorite disciple is Peter (well-meaning but prone to error) but I also have great affection for Thomas (because of his doubt and skepticism). Almost every church I have ever visited
  19. Gammon, the only time I ever fail to carry a pocketknife is during air travel (lately), in foreign countries (local police in Mexico tried to extort money out of me because of it once, accusing me of supplying arms to rebels, it was pretty bad) and when I know I am going into a secure area (court, military, government offices). I try to plan ahead rather than lose my favorite Kabar. Regarding the zero-tolerance rules often encountered at schools (zero thought, zero judgement) I sympathize with the students to a great extent. However, remembering what we did with pocketknives when I was in scho
  20. Everyone, unpaid advertisement! While we're having all this fun, please try to divert some attention to a topic I just started in the Open Discussion forum. The topic is: funding for low-income boys. I really need your ideas and experience on this. And boys may actually benefit from your help. Carry on.
  21. Help! I need help with ideas on how to discreetly fund low-income boys. I would like to do this without calling attention to them personally, to single them out, or to do anything that may humiliate them. I would like to know best how to assist them in order to allow access to costly programs and outings (SeaBase, travel to other countries, etc.). If anyone out there has experience with this I am ready to learn from it.
  22. Rooster, No, not surprised. I was just trying to learn a few things. I am still curious, though...If a Hindu quotes from the OT, do you consider this invalid? I just happen to have come from a background based on the Christian bible (King James version, I was taught that all others were less valid because they had special agendas). But if I had used instead, say, Buddhist religious texts, would I automatically be examined as a Buddhist or ignored because I am not a Buddhist? Why not examine the idea rather than the person? And incidentally, I have no aversion to the OT or the rest of the Ch
  23. Hello Littlebillie, Perhaps the choice of terms is just a matter of preference. I agree with you on children with adoptive gay parents. A loving and supportive family is always good. A note to all, though, animal behavior is terribly difficult to study and our understanding of it is more questionable than our understanding in 'harder' sciences. Reaching behavioral conclusions about humans is the most difficult of all. I suppose it's fun to speculate and argue but, for now at least, the nature vs nurture questions being argued here have not been answered definitively. Might as well move on.
  24. Rooster, you obviously have a much stronger understanding of all this than I do. As a scientist I am bound to try for simplicity first and this is getting very complex. But I'll keep trying. And yes, I forgot about crabs. I like them too, shrimp as well, but (at the risk of offending NewEnglanders) I can take or leave lobsters. Something that requires melted butter for flavor is just not worth that price...just give me a platter of crayfish and I'll...oops, almost made a poor choice of words.
  25. Hello Rooster, Thanks for the explanation. Even many homosexuals agree with me that homosexuality is evolutionarily maladapted. But I try not to judge things I don't understand (homosexuality in this case), especially if I am not affected by them. I view God with love, not fear of His hate or jealousy. Just a difference in point-of-view. But unless my eyes deceive me, my KJV Bible says: Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." and later in 20:13, "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abo
×
×
  • Create New...