mk9750 11 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 kwc57, You caught me not checking the dictionary for an exact definition, and I apoligize. However, you seem to have gotten the biggest part of my point. tj and others break at least the spirit of the rules by being homosexual. Regardless of anyone's knowledge, one cannot actively participate in homosexual activity and justify those actions as in alignment with the Scout Oath and Law. SagerScout, If the inclination toward homosexual tendencies is not chosen, as I think you argue, (I disagree, but I admit that disagreement is not based on any thorough knowledge of the science on the issue), than yes, I do believe that one could choose not to participate, just as people choose not to participate in heterosexual conduct that is inappropriate. It happens all of time. The obvious example is in the Catholic priesthood (well known and sad examples excluded), but more often it happens in everyday life that people deny their sexual urges. Singles who are as of yet or decide to remain unmarried, even married people who find themselves away from their spouse for extended periods all often choose to control their urges. Many people do this at least in part, because they believe to do otherwise is wrong (immoral, sinful, hurtful, or whatever wrong is). If one can choose to control heterosexual urges, than one could control homosexual urges if they believed them to be wrong. Therein lies the issue. Homosexuals do not believe the practice to be wrong. A legitimate disagreement between their position and the BSA's for sure. But since the BSA can make its own rules, and expect its members to comply, it doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong. To answer two other questions you raise: Yes, I believe as sexual human beings most anyone could (and probably have) have at least some sexual attraction to someone of the same sex. The libido is strong enough to overcome many societal barriers to satisfy itself, if not controlled. Secondly, I can only speak for myself, but I cannot come before this forum and address this topic as pure myself. I am not proud of many things I did in my younger days, but I have to admit to doing them. I also have asked for forgiveness from those whom I harmed, including God. It is this profession of contrition that allows me to begin each day with a clean slate. Without contrition, and the intention to not repeat my failures, I don't feel I could be living up to my promises, to my family, my friends, the BSA, or God. Again, I hope I am being clear here. Although I believe homosexuality is wrong, I don't feel that I am in a position to judge for someone else that they are wrong. That is God's place. But I think it is fair for me to present my opinion when it comes to the BSA. Mark Link to post Share on other sites
acco40 95 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 TJ, Scout on. It sounds to me that your "lifestyle" is Scouting. For those that profess the "start your own organization" approach, see: ------------------------------ Irving, Texas-The National Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America has reaffirmed its traditional leadership standards, as recommended by its appropriate committees. The board received three resolutions suggesting changes in leadership standards in order to permit avowed homosexuals to serve as Boy Scout leaders. The board referred the resolutions to the appropriate committee, which formed a diverse task force composed of chartered organization representatives to consider the resolutions. The BSA reaffirmed its view that an avowed homosexual cannot serve as a role model for the traditional moral values espoused in the Scout Oath and Law and that these values cannot be subject to local option choices. In affirming its existing standards of leadership, the board also agreed that duty to God is not a mere ideal for those choosing to associate with the Boy Scouts of America; it is an obligation, which has defined good character throughout the BSA's 92-year history. The board, the relationships committee, and the special task force are all comprised of volunteer members of the BSA. The BSA is one of the largest youth-serving organizations in America, serving more than 5 million young people between 7 and 20 years of age. --------------------- This shows that the BSA reviewed their policy. They will continue to review it, it my opinion, and will one day come to the conclusion that an avowed homosexual may serve as a role model for traditional moral values as espoused in the Scout Oath and Law (not Bible, Koran, Talmud, etc.). Until that day comes, do not become "avowed" to the youth you serve and as protection for yourself, always strictly obey all YPP guidelines. Good luck. Link to post Share on other sites
tjhammer 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 I have often criticized the policy as "vague, unevenly enforced and disingenuous". Now you get to see a personal example of that. The policy does not define to whom or how I must "avow" my sexuality. The only definition that has ever been offered can be found in the text of the Supreme Court Case, which essentially stated the position as "don't advocate against the BSA opinion in front of Scouts". I can assure you, I am not "avowed" by that definition. Who exactly am I allowed to "avow" to (is that a verb?), without risking banishment? Can I avow my sexuality to the person I have been with for the last 2.5 years? He was a Scout. How about to my best friend, an Eagle Scout, who also happens to be gay? If I "avow" to them am I violating a policy? What about to the Scout Executive friends I have, who strongly oppose the BSA's national position, and recognize that it is vague and within their power to enforce. Are they or I in any real violation for failing to "enforce" an arbitrary policy? BSA has no real definition for "avowed", and arbitrarily sets the benchmark for just how "avowed" you have to be before you are no longer welcome. In answer to your question, I am confident that I do not violate the BSA policy, nor do the nearly a dozen other Scouters that I mentioned earlier. My sexuality is but a small part of who I am, and it is an even smaller part of who I am in Scouting. Perhaps the closest I have ever come to violating the policy is posting in this [open] forum, though I submit that I am no more in violation by doing so than NJCubScouter, LittleBillie or any of the other "straight" members who have so adamantly advocated that a homosexual is not inherently immoral. I'm not "living a lie" in Scouting, and my integrity is in check. If you are a otherwise happily married man of 20 years who no longer has sex with his wife, and you never felt compelled to reveal such irrelevant information to Scouting, would you be living a lie? Of course not, your sexuality, and even your relationships outside the context of Scouting, are irrelevant. Link to post Share on other sites
tjhammer 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 >I applaud your honesty & courage in your post I would say my anonymous post is not so courageous, and I did not share this information to be honest. Had I made a similar announcement before posting for the past year, my arguments would have been skewed by perceptions. Otherwise, I don't really seek validation of any kind, however, I do accept your remark as well meaning. Link to post Share on other sites
tjhammer 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 >your choices in your sexual life and the consequences >thereof are between you and God Thank you ScoutParent, for being kind enough to leave this issue between me and my God... if you would only practice what you preach, we wouldn't have any disagreement. Link to post Share on other sites
tjhammer 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 >> tj and others break at least the spirit of the rules by being homosexual It is my opinion, based on a rather thorough understanding of the evolution of the policy, that the "spirit" of the rule is, in fact, inconsistent with both the Movement and the Organization of Scouting. The rule represents a very definite aggression by one BSA sponsor (the Mormon Church, supported to a lesser degree by various other sponsors) to legislate their morality, and their interpretation of God's will, onto me and the BSA. It is very much the goal of those behind this policy to homogenize (no pun intended) the BSA into something it has never been, and clearly states it shall not be: a mono-religious entity. I certainly do not violate the letter of the policy, and while it might be argued that I violate the "spirit" of the policy, I do not accept that spirit to be valid nor one that I should attempt to clarify. Link to post Share on other sites
tjhammer 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 mk9750 says>>one cannot actively participate in homosexual activity and justify those actions as in alignment with the Scout Oath and LawCan someone elaborate on how I violate the Scout Oath and Law simply by "being an active homosexual" (I am specifically asking for the rationale that explains how my sexuality violates the Oath and Law... oh, and one last request, perhaps you can qualify any explanation without basing it solely on your personal opinion or what your specific religion has taught you?)(This message has been edited by tjhammer) Link to post Share on other sites
acco40 95 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 For those that believe that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the tradtional values espoused in the Scout Oath and Law, please enlighten me why you feel this way. Please don't use biblical quotes or references, those are not in the Scout Oath or Law. Please don't quote the term "morally straight", the term straight is not in reference to heterosexual conduct. Morals are subjective and have to have a reference. For example, many Muslims (who are allowed to join the Boy Scouts of America) do not believe in lending or borrowing money. It is against thier religious beliefs, i.e. immoral. Does that make FOS campaigns immoral to them or just charitable giving? I don't know, but I believe they can be excellent scouters. Link to post Share on other sites
acco40 95 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 From your previous post (which I did not see when typing mine) I see we were on the same "brain wave." Scary. Link to post Share on other sites
tjhammer 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 Careful acco40, it might be contagious. (btw, sorry for the series of quick posts above, I thought it better to break up the points into smaller posts than just write a long one.) Link to post Share on other sites
mk9750 11 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 tj, You attributed a quote to ScoutParent I think that actually I made. It would be ashame to allow him or her to take any critism you mean for me. I belive you do not live up to the Scout Oath and Law in that you are not being truthful about your lifestyle. Do we all have to be truthful about ours? No, because ours does not violate BSA rules. Additionally, everyone can see how I live, happily married. I do not live a lie to the Scouting part of my life. I believe this is contrary to the first point of the Law. If I were I to cheat on my wife, this would be immoral, and not living up to the requirement that I be morally straight. There is no rules against unfaithful members (I think there should be, but again, by my membership I agree to the rules as they are). Participating in homosexual activity is just as immoral (or not morally straight) as is infidelity. Therefore, you do not live up to your commitment to be morally straight as an active homosexual. Your arguement about the belief Muslims have about money does back me into a corner, I must admit. At the same time I believe both that what is morally correct is an absolute, and not subject to personal interpretation, and that each person must be true to his own religion. It will take one more intelligent than me to help reconcile that dichotomy. I am not aware of the arguement you make that the BSA's stand is based on religous (particularly LDS's) opposition to homsexuality. I have nothing to offer as proof, but I don't believe this is the sole, or even major basis for the position. But, even if it were, I believe I have heard that the backbone of the BSA is it's Charter Organization partnerships, and as such it is probably proper that they do have an influence on policy. I am sorry that my opposition to your lifestyle looks like a comdenation of you. I really don't mean it to seem that way. But, just as I think you work so hard to convince others you are right because you belive in it so strongly, I feel compelled to argue the opposite. I bring very little in the way of facts or evidence, and perhaps for that I should retreat and let others who do have such make the arguement better than do I. But I cannot sit on the sidelines without protesting your position: Doing so to me implies that I agree, and I won't. One more time, I wish you the best. Mark Link to post Share on other sites
mk9750 11 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Now that I go back and read page one of the posts, I see that I am wrong, and ScoutParent did say that. Another apology. Perhaps I will now act on my offer to retreat and let better minds take up the discussion. Mark Link to post Share on other sites
RobK 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 Well, acco40 and tjhammer, if we're not to use religous texts or our own opinion to define "morally straight", then what are we to use? The law and oath are not self defining. They are based on external definitions. On what do you base your definition of morally straight and why? What do you use to define any part of the oath and law? Your personal opinion? On what or whose authority do you determine that being homosexual is "morally straight"? Your own opinion? I certainly don't think you base that belief on what the Bible says. Prove to us that it's not immoral. -RobK Link to post Share on other sites
Quixote 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Share Posted January 21, 2003 It's nice to see that the same crowd of people who practice moral relativism also subscribe to the Clintonesque practice of redefining words in the english language to suit their arguments. The relevant question is whether tj is an "avowed" homosexual using THE definition of avow, not "A" definition. According to your posting, you have told other scouters and if i read correctly, possibly some scout execs - I would say that you have openly told some of your homosexuality and are indeed an avowed homosexual and as such are in violation of the BSA policy. You can hide behind definitions all you want, but the fact is that, by your actions, you are in violation of the membership policies of the BSA. You can't pick and chose which rules you want to follow - it doesn't work that way. Link to post Share on other sites
tjhammer 10 Posted January 21, 2003 Author Share Posted January 21, 2003 I recognize that references to my "lifestyle" are well meaning. And I know it can be confusing to find the right term (whatever is PC these days). Personally, I must admit, I don't really know what "lifestyle" you are referring to (you hardly could guess that I have a nice apartment, work far too long and hard at the office and am affixed to the couch for Sunday afternoon football, I cant imagine that you know anything else about my "lifestyle" except likely incorrect assumptions). Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now