BubbaBear

C'mon Bob White, step up to the plate...don't skirt this issue...are you going to help me lead the way or not?

Bubba

Korea-

Well said.

I respect you opinion just as I do everyone's in this forum (with the exception of maybe Bob White who hurt my feelings).

I want to suggest a "compromise"...that is if anyone has the intrepidy to accept...I will discontinue debate in this forum (not give up my principles) if say, Bob White or Rooster will equally withdraw (without compromising their morals). Whatsay? We are not going to decide this issue anyway.

Willing to begin disbanding this open debate...or do you prefer it to go on? I'm hoping that if it starts with us, others will follow our noble lead.

Wouldn't everyone like to see this debate off the air??

By the way, Korea...thanks to you and all over there defending our freedom! Essayons!(This message has been edited by BubbaBear)

...taking the knot...

In as much as I have tried to be neutral in this argument, I have failed. I would advise those of you whom seek change to contimplate a glacier.

It is formed over time by powers that we cannot challenge and by shear size which we will be crushed by should we throw our bodies in front of.

Its course is predetermined and only the Almighty can stear its direction. Those whom ride on its size will only find themselves crushed by it eventually.

When the time comes that the glacier is to change the face of the earth, it will. Neither you nor I can dictate when that will be. We can dynamite it,

chip away at it steadily, but only time will change its direction, if at all.

Not everyone wants to change the direction of the glacier. Some revel in the shear power of it and some hide behind it. We will all take our positions as we see fit.

Who is right and who is wrong? Only the glacier will know, through time.

I ask forgiveness from God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit for my sins, not from mortal man.

You, Oh Lord, hold the glacier in your hands. Should I be wrong in where I position myself in relation to that glacier, set me on the path You deem righteous.I do not trust in those whom choose to speak on your behalf. And please guide my fellow Scouters as well, Oh Lord. AMEN

...passing the knot...(This message has been edited by BubbaBear)

littlebillie-

For what it is worth, I think that your summation of the question is the best I've read from anyone (to date).

On another note, I am ready to pass the knot.

I wish to appologize to everyone reading this forum. Bob White was right, I did indeed attack him personally which was clearly wrong.Of course I wouldn't dare to ask for an appology from him.

I also wish to state that I am offering this appology not because of fear of any consequences but because what I did was wrong. Please have me removed it it will make you sleep better at night.

This last flurry, TJ, NJCubScouter, and others reading this post, is what I was referring to as the "glacier", and why I believe it to be the natural order of change.

In the meantime,I will pray for all y'all.

Before I go, however, I would like you to answer my other question: "How can you take something as simple in theory and pure in intent and lend it to COs to manipulate it to their own purpose"?

I'll second the "Have a happy fourth" sentiment.

Please keep in mind those young men and woment who stand on the front lines defending the freedom we celebrate tomorrow.

Bubba

I think you would make a good politician. Bob White. At least you did not dispute the arrogant or pompas remarks.

The question was: Is compromise good or evil?

Notice that it did not say :"Is compromise good or evil, but if the chicken crosses the road and a watermelon is there...". I am trying to speak in generalizations and you and others insist on bringing the topic back to your moralities.

There is true logic in the USA-BSA anology I made,it is a simple logical inference. Matter of fact, I know my argument to be a truism in the real world.

Your logical connections alude me.. I spoke of taking offense to your inferences and you used those remarks in the light of my determination of national policy. How did you arrive at the link?

Bob White,you have made your point; you will not compromise. Good for you. You can rest assured that you are true to yourself.

As for your civics lessons; we have a duty to civil disobedience in this country...remember? It is what allowed us to seperate ourselves from the King of England. Disagreement is healthy in society, whether you agree or not. That is what will protect this country from a religious dictatorship.

Now, for the rest of you whom have not responded to the origional question of this post; Is compromise good or bad?

Bob White-

If we are a "republic governed by representatives" (USABSA), and we know that there are immoral and deceitful representatives in our government, then it would follow that some of the representatives governing Scouting are immoral and deceitful... is that what you are saying?

Bob White-

OK, so I take it that your vote is for."compromise is evil"?

You say,"How could we as a national program develop programs and resources to operate by if every unit had its own definition of what Scouting was?"...well, that is a very good question...actually, the one I asked in my doctoral thesis for the Univeristy of Scouting Arts.

How can you take a program as simple in theory and pure in nature,and lend it to COs to manipulate it to their own purpose? Whether promoting citizenship of spreading their particular "word of god", it is the COs "own definition" (in your words).

No sir, what I am asking is for all of us, whom profess to profess the beauty of Scouting, to not impose their definition of Scouting on us all.

Furthermore, thanks for validating my argument about "majority rule". What should be majority rule (in the U.S. or the BSA,as you have set me straight) is in fact policy dictated by a the consensus of organizations whom supposedly represent what we as volunteers think. Please tell me that they speak for us all.

I take offense to your suggesting that I leave Scouting because I do not wish support the "rules and values". That was an arrogant and pompas statement. You have no idea of the good I have done in Scouting as a volunteer, nor do you have any idea how much personally needed money I've sunk into Scouting.

You are right about one thing, however; "Scouting has a right to determine its own values and rules". And that I might add, should be a consensus of everyone whom supports scouting, not just its biggest supporters.

I would like to know what faith you belong to, if that is not too much of an imposition Bob White. I would like to ask a local CO of that sect if you speak for them in your arguments.

T.J.-

I have to agree with Quiote on this one; is it not fair for one side to ask the other to give up its convictions in favor of the other any more that visa versa?

Sorry, you set this one up...I am asking you (T.J.), are you willing to give up your convictions in favor of the other side of the argument?

My answer to the first is "yes", and to the second; well it goes back to what I have been asking all along.."How do the boys benefit from any change?"

Now getting back to the question I posed (it is my thread after all)...Are ALL issues non-compromisable?

Do we not allow the majority to rule in the case of selection of a President of the United States? When the president elect is not the one we choose, don't we work toward change in the future so that our position prevails? Frnankly, I had to tolerate the immorality and poor example of Bill Clinton for EIGHT YEARS, I didn't quit being an American because of it (although I secretly hoped for some bad to come to him). Now, I am enjoying what I view as a really good president, while others are looking to "depose him" as soon as possible.

I am sorry folks, in order to this world to continue functioning in an ever so complicated fashion, we have to compromise to some extent (while secretly hoping for demise to come to that which we are against).

Remember that wars are fought over seemingly intolerant issues...are we willing to accept that without thought or effort to prevent it?

Bare in mind that I would be willing to die for the freedom we have in this country. Is YOUR personal freedom that important to you?

T.J.-

I have to agree with Quiote on this one; is it not fair for one side to ask the other to give up its convictions in favor of the other any more that visa versa?

Sorry, you set this one up...I am asking you (T.J.), are you willing to give up your convictions in favor of the other side of the argument?

My answer to the first is "yes", and to the second; well it goes back to what I have been asking all along.."How do the boys benefit from any change?"

Now getting back to the question I posed (it is my thread after all)...Are ALL issues non-compromisable?

Do we not allow the majority to rule in the case of selection of a President of the United States? When the president elect is not the one we choose, don't we work toward change in the future so that our position prevails? Frnankly, I had to tolerate the immorality and poor example of Bill Clinton for EIGHT YEARS, I didn't quit being an American because of it (although I secretly hoped for some bad to come to him). Now, I am enjoying what I view as a really good president, while others are looking to "depose him" as soon as possible.

I am sorry folks, in order to this world to continue functioning in an ever so complicated fashion, we have to compromise to some extent (while secretly hoping for demise to come to that which we are against).

Remember that wars are fought over seemingly intolerant issues...are we willing to accept that without thought or effort to prevent it?

Bare in mind that I would be willing to die for the freedom we have in this country. Is YOUR personal freedoms tht important to you?

Good Gravy! All those diffences in one unit...what on earth was Baden Powell thinking of? Don't worry, that will all change when they get to be adults, perhaps dispite our best efforts to teach them a simple concept; Respect.

In the "pure" spirit of Scouting...

Bubba

I keep hearing references to "major religions" and sometimes wonder if you all refer to Methodists, Catholics, Presbyterrians and the like as "major religions"? I am hopeful that you all realize that they are sects of Christianity, which is a "major" religion.

Hey packsaddle...that was view from the "South" side of the Trade Center!

By the way, I am a transplant to the South. I remember a farm along Interstate 71 in Ohio where they flew the Confederate Battle flag.

You know, the Civil War was fought over State's Rights? It is just a matter of time when one heated issue will lead to the same kind of division all over again...not that I condone it.

Thank you, Quiote...

I, too, believe that is what it boils down to.

The question remains; in any issue of this nature, shouldn't the majority rule? And if the majority does rule, should the deciision stand for eternity or (like the ERA) wait in the wings of society?

OK packsaddle...ya want a response from the

South?

GoTo...

http://personal.jax.bellsouth.net/jax/l/c/lchaplin/unkarock/flag.htm

tjhammer and NJCubScouter-

With all do respect, I am trying very hard to keep to the subject at hand, that being "compromise".

You two are intelligent enough to realize that this homosexual debate will not determine national policy and that all can be accomplished in the continuance in this forum is the further allienation of both sides.

Please keep your remarks generalized here (I am asking).

Thanks

Hey Ed...that's a good point.

Did you know that there is an organization known as (I think) Tne National Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) that is petitioning Congress to pass legislation allowing adult men to have consentual sex with boys?

Ed...I do not take offense when friends criticise me...how else would I grow?

I do not have the definitive answer to anything in life. I thought I did when I was younger. I won't know all the answers until I am standing in judgement by the Almighty.

In the meantime, I prefer to go with what I believe is the American way...majority rules...or at least that is how I perceive it should be.

Noone in this forum has shown me a solid argument on either side of the issue. I will follow what the rules are, I always have.

And so...what's on the spit?

KoreaScouter...

Hey! Did you get to see any of the World Cup in person?? Golly, I would have liked to have been there...at least for that!

Sorry, I've decided not to "Beat Secretariat" as one of the boys said...so I will not comment on the gay issue. (oops! I just did!)

As far as the last paragraph of your post,I am not sure that your anology is right...the BSA would be more like the federal government in real sense if the councils were like the states.

Getting back to the theme of this post...do you think compromise is good or not. Some of the folks in this forum are stern on their opinions (to which they have the right to their opinions). Is this an issue there can be no compromise on.

I think that your post offered some insight into what noone else has alluded to so far...

I would like to be able to sit around a camp fire with all of y'all, just to see if we could share the spirit of scouting without interjecting our own personal opinions about anything.

Howse-come you all haven't "passed" the knot?

I don't know exactly about that education thing, sctmom.

Some pretty educated people have destroyed a lot of people's lives by diverting funds and the like.

I remember a Business Management professor I had once; He joyed in the fact that he made his real money by writing pornography while teaching to pay the bills. No crime ultimately comes from that.

Over all, I get your point, and for the most part you are right.

The problem here is that there is no loyalty anymore. Look at the Social Security funds. By the time you and I get to recieving, there may not be any left. I would rather have the option of putting the money away for my retirement so that I can see it all the way there. That's how I view the education thing, I would rather put my money where I know what the results will be.

Geeze Ed, were those stones I detected?

I don't think I ever said that I WANTED homosexuals in Scouting, but then again I don't want alchoholics, theives or a vast array of others in Scouting either.

What I have been saying right along is that I believe it should be up to the CO's to make that decision.

I made a mistake by starting this thread...I really intended to "Pass the Knot" but was lured into another argument that led back here. I will post my final statements about this topic on the "Pass the Knot" thread after some more people have passed it.

Please understand that in not responding to this anymore, I am only silently stating that I believe that all that is to be said on the topic, has been.

Sorry if I struck a nerve with the "H" word Ed, I don't believe you are one.

"Oh, I used to be a Bear, a good ole Bear too.

And now that I'm done Bearin', I don't know what to do. I'm growin' old and weary, and I can't Bear no more, so I'm goin' to work my ticket if I can!"

(No I ain't runnin' off!)

FScouter, isn't it equally interesting that tax dollars of those whom have supported private schools also supported public schools their children never attended? And what about the home schoolers, and the elderly whom spend tax dollars to support schools at all? Where do we draw the line?

Maybe we should create a tax dollars system that allows us to direct our tax dollars just like in giving to the United Way?

I just read an article written by the AP which said that the author of the pledge did not want "United States of America" included.

The author, Francis Bellamy, apparently was a socialist editor and Baptist minister, and supposedly wrote the pledge at the request of Benjamin Harrison as a proclamation of the newly created "Flag Day", a salute to the flag.

This story is based upon an interview with a decendant who claims tht this was written to his father by his great-grandfather shortly before his death.