tortdog

>what would you propse they do? Should the BSA be allowed to have surprise home morality insepctions, seeking out "contraband" deemed immoral, such as playboy, Maxim, and other "immoral" possesions? If a scoutmaster is found with any photogrpahs of scantaly clad women he will no longer be allowed to participate in scouting? We could relegate this to be silly basket, but I think it's a legitimate (and serious) question. Certainly we can agree that certain conduct should disquality someone from BSA leadership, e.g., murder and child abuse. I cannot fathom the BSA standing by and allowing

>Obtain from his Scoutmaster a signed merit badge application and the name of a qualified counselor for that merit badge. Well, if you read that LITERALLY then it means the Scout has to go to the Scoutmaster and the Scoutmaster is the one who gives the boy ONE counselor's name. Now, did the BSA mean that the Scoutmaster is supposed to filter BSA counselors? I don't think so. I see no problem with the boy choosing a counselor from a list. I also see no problem with the Scoutmaster giving the name of the counselor to the boy. But if you want to be technical (kind of like a te

>Canoeing in a metal canoe in an electrial storm, etc. What's wrong with that?

I was considering making another thread, for fear the discussion might get buried under this title. But the thought came to me as I considered more the diverse opinions brought forward here regarding pornography and scouting: The BSA has set a standard that homosexual leaders are not acceptable to Scouting, as their conduct violates the Scout Oath/Law. But, the BSA has NOT set similar standards for anything else, right? There is no automatic removal of leaders who cuss, use pornography, lie, cheat or even steal. Or am I wrong? If not, why did the BSA draw a line with homosexual acti

>What if the boy has no interest in environmental science or archery? He paid to attend camp, he should choose what merit badges if any he wants to pursue. Sure, but getting an eagle required merit badge ought to be fairly high on his list, no? >What gives you the right to take things that do not belong to you? Same reason electronics are prohibited at woodbadge, I'd suppose. They interfere and distract from the program and the purpose for which the scouts are there. >My Son has a cell phone because I gave it to him, we have deep personal reasons for wanting him to

Thanks for your thoughts, JD. I'd differ in that I believe there are moral absolutes. However, I don't want the BSA to start defining the morality of everything in the universe. I guess, for me, I see certain things as beyond the pale. And, yes, to me it is irrelevant whether a scouter engages in moral/immoral conduct whether in or outside of scouting. I think the oath/law are to be upheld in our daily life, and not just at a team/troop meeting or at a scouting event. I certainly can understand why some would disagree on my views. But, the reason these issues may start to play a gre

First, the Supreme Court is full of religious symbols. I don't see how that could be questioned. Second, what's the problem with a school (or city) sponsoring a BSA unit? They do in Houston. We believe that the United States is formed under God. We don't believe it belongs to the Catholics, Mormons, Baptists or Jews...but we do believe it belongs to God. What's the problem with a government that believes in the creator sponsoring a BSA unit that believes in good citizenship and a duty to God and country?

Nice post, Torveaux. The first question was not supposed to be debated. The intent of the poll is merely to ask if pornography is in keeping with the Scout Oath/Law. I provided suggested definitions at the urging of NJ who wanted something definitive. So, to each his own definition. I really only wanted to see if scout leaders believed you could indulge in pornography and still be viewed as obeying the Scout Law/Oath. My view is that it is like stealing - that a person engaged in it would be morally unclean. I see that all do not agree.

Yeppers. I'm a lawyer (but not a tort attorney). That was the name of our small section torts group in school (a dog that commits torts). I am astonished that so many find this question difficult. So far, every person I have talked to that I am familiar with has immediately, I mean IMMEDIATELY, responded that any form of pornography has no place in scouts. These same people either have/had children in scouts or are/were scouts and scout leaders. Most are in my church, but I have asked more than a few. Interestingly, not one sat and debated to themselves whether or not something was p

Corrected Tally: A: 1 B: 0 C: 0 D: 3 Lots of talking about how it's hard to pick one. I'm wondering how all y'all do an SAT test...write in the margins? >I for one consider this thread ridiculously absurd, for it serves no real purpose or leads to any meaningful discussion. We'll disagree. >Tortdog what the heck is your point? I thought I made it clear. The purpose is to get an idea about how the self-proclaimed Scouters in this forum view pornography with the scouting. I am 100% sure that every youth and adult in our four units (cubs/troop/team/crew)

The tally so far: A - 1 B - 0 C - 1 D - 2 BTW, I am not going to pass this as a "judgment" on someone's viewpoint. I have my own, as does each person no doubt, but I'm just curious to see where scouters lie. I'd also be curious to see how scouters compare with America as a whole.

NJ >See, Tortdog, you are a moral relativist and you don't even know it. Dang. [mutters] Regarding making morality relative, I would argue that those who do so are taking the easy way out. It allows man to justify wrong behavior and feel good about oneself. I would not label that name-calling, but I do wonder how one could believe in a God who can't make up his mind whether something is wrong or right. In all seriousness, I'm open to hear the thought behind that proposition. >So, in those states [that prohibit discrimination against gays], it is morally wron

Sorry that you see the fix as a slight, NJ. People will look at the first post, not the third to figure out what the question being asked is. I explained why you had responded as you had, and directly addressed your concern. BTW, I've asked this same question to three scouters in my office and all IMMEDIATELY responded that in their opinion any form of pornography is definitely contrary to the Scout Oath/Law.(This message has been edited by tortdog)

D for me. I edited my post because of NJ's question. I also modified "C" to make sure people understand that if you select it you are saying pornography is okay with the Scout Law/Oath.

Too bad we can't do this anonymously, but a question arose in a discussion that I would assume would be unanimous among scouters. Which answer do you most agree with: (A) Viewing hardcore* pornography violates the Scout Oath/Law (B) Viewing softcore* pornography violates the Scout Oath/Law © Viewing any form of pornography conforms with the Scout Oath/Law (D) Both A and B. *To avoid the discussion turning into a philosophical discussion on "what is pornography", please use the following definitions: Softcore: materials that feature nudity and sexually suggest

>Who is right and who is wrong? I am. >Its not mathmatics. There is no defined answer. Okay...seriously, I have a major disagreement on this point. If there is a creator, then there is a definite answer to right and wrong. You judge as moral any consensual sexual activity within the private bedroom. That is a judgment that you have made. Another man/society may believe that consensual sexual activity outside the bedroom is perfectly fine. That is a moral judgment and you have made it. For people who believe in a God, morality is not relative. Something is or is not moral,

If the question is whether or not it's appropriate at camp, I'd agree that it's not the place. Not because of some moral purpose, but if youth are spending time playing a game at Scout Camp they obviously aren't signed up for enough merit badges. Get them into archery and environmental science. That should take their time up easily.

EV. Actually, I strongly doubt that the ACLU has loads of money. It relies on donations for its "causes". If the ACLU was loaded, this country would be REALLY screwed up. The ACLU does not make money to fight cases...that costs the ACLU money. What the ACLU gets is public attention, and that results in more donations from like-minded people. >Ok, I'm probably going to get myself into some sort of "debate hole" with this, but let's go ahead. I'm not trying to bait you, and I'll try to be as open and honest as I can. >I'll say no, I wouldn't be ok with that because human sa

>sex between two consentual adult males is not the same as incestuous rape or beastiality, because children and animals are not capable to consent to sexual activity. First, an 18-year old child can consent. Second, since when did we require an animal's consent? We can kill a chicken and eat it without it's consent. Why would you require consent for sex with an animal but not for killing it, i.e., murder by your analogy. Before I get into your argument, let me attempt to summarize your viewpoint. You believe that Society cannot prohibit any sexual conduct within the bedroom by co

Some in my church think its satanic. I never saw a problem with it (unless you carry it to the extreme). I have played Magic, and some in my church had a dim view of that game as well. I think whether it's good or bad merely depends on how you treat it (as a game or some altnerate reality). Going down this road, I've heard some churches preach against Harry Potter (satanic and witchcraft). I've always enjoyed fantasy books so I never really agreed with that view. Short answer: I don't see a problem at all.

If I remember right, the Orthodox Jews and the LDS Church have taken official stances that they would leave the BSA if the BSA accepted those engaged in homosexual activities as being morally straight. I suppose the argument is that the BSA is tacitly agreeing that homosexual activity IS morally straight, by allowing organizations to define it that way. For example, if an organization defined "morally straight" to include theft, I assume the BSA would not allow that organization to sponsor a BSA unit (picturing the mafia as a BSA sponsor). Regarding the United Methodists, I recall the sta

I am not making the argument that homosexual behavior = (i) incest or (ii) sexual cannibalism. Note that my example was of a father and a daughter, which is not homoseuxal. A standard was put forward of consensual sexual conduct within the private bedroom as being protected. I argue that this standard is NOT protected (and never has been). I brought you many examples of where I think a vast majority of the People would agree on legislation in the bedroom: (i) incest, (ii) sexual cannibalism and (iii) surgery (not sexual but still conduct in the bedroom). I'm asking you to recon

Answering the original question: >With this hypothetical, my questions is...What would you do? Would you continue in scouting? Would you quit? Would you 'wait and see'? If the BSA removed God from the scout oath, and accepted homosexual activity as moral, I would reluctantly leave the BSA. I think that makes the poll: Stay: 11 Leave: 8 I would do so as I would see the BSA turning from long established norms and traditions of what it means to be morally straight. Having abandoned morality in the desire to be accepted by all parts of society (whether moral or not)

>In what way does what a homosexual couple does in the privacy of their bedroom brind down society, and in what way does what a homosexual couple does in the privacy of their own bedroom any different then what a heterosexual couple does in the privacy of their own bedroom in terms of directly harming children? It introduces sexual perversion as normalcy. In what way does incestuous sexual conduct in the privacy of the bedroom between a man and his adult daughter bring down society and harm children? In what way does sexual conduct between a man and an animal in the privacy o

I have acted as counselor for my boy. I think he wishes there was someone else, though. I find it hard to not be HARDER on my own son (expecting more than I otherwise would).