Worth reading

[littlebillie 10]

the phrase "to protect the rights of the individual against the tyranny of the majority" rather mischaracterizes most such defense, and in the case of one of the more obvious tyrannies - eminent domain - well, pretty much they stand powerless. the majority of the majority is happy to let things ride - this isn't tyranny as much as apathy or indifference, which may be worse than tyranny but that's a different topic.

 

so it's not tyranny of the majority so much as the interests and assumptions of the majority, and regardless, only recently have we begun to truly understand that the community has rights as well.

 

the founders of the constitution were establishing a society that would respect the rights of the individual within the greater framework of a nation. within, not above. but even so, they were likewise establishing a nation that would respect those individuals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[littlebillie 10]

"we are getting further and further from what the writers actually intended"

 

that's an interesting view. really, all we can do is interpret what they wrote, not what they 'intended'. just figuring out what they wrote has been hard enough in some cases. as to what they 'intended' - well, they INTENDED that state governments choose their Senators, and that sure got changed. some amendments clarify, and some alter.

[Zahnada 11]

Bob White wrote:

 

"Don't kid yourself. The Democratic National Committee in 2000 asked the local BSA council to provide an Eagle Scout honor Guard to present the nation's flag and lead the Pledge of Allegiance to open the Convention.

 

Then the thousands in attendance waited for these boys to enter and on national TV boo'd them until they left. Thousands of adults ambushed these boys and you think they want what is best for scouting. They want what is best for their personal political agendas. They want to gain public acceptance threough the aknowledgment of the BSA or they want to shut the BSA down. PERIOD."

 

 

Well, Bob, your example is about the Democratic National Convention which took place only months after the Supreme Court decision in Los Angeles. Hardly a representation of the United States.

 

Do I doubt that there are gay activist groups who want to make BSA their battle ground? No. Do I doubt that there are political lobbyists who want to use this situation to their advantage? No. Do I think the majority of opponents to the BSA policy fit into these two categories? Not at all.

 

Many of the people who don't agree with the policy are in scouting and want the best for scouting. This is especially important to keep in mind when posting in this forum. To generalize all opponents into one group is flawed because not all of us have the same goals. We feel scouting has made a mistake and this may hurt the program. Most people on this forum wish no ill will upon BSA at all. They just disagree. Even Merlyn does not advocate the end of scouting or even a change in scouting's values. Merlyn only wants to stop government funding of scouts.

 

This is just something to keep in mind before you mentally start dividing the country into two camps on the issue.

[acco40 95]

Any author that writes about "coalitions" (shades of right wing conspiracy theorists?), hidden agendas, hidden meanings, etc. tend to turn me off. If they want to argue facts, fine.

 

I agree with Bob White that many (usually a minority but many times a very vocal minority) of these groups really are gunning for certain groups. But just as idiots who shoot abortionists don't make abortion "right" by their stupid behavior, boorish behavior by the DNC (I wonder what Gephardt thinks) doesn't make the BSA position either right or wrong.

 

It all boils down to the public opinion of homosexuality. Don't think for once that public opinion on issues does not influence the Supreme Court, public and private organizations. There is a battle waged by a vocal minority on both sides of the issue concerning the gay/BSA issue trying to sway public opinion. I also think that many are tired of hearing the battle being waged.

 

In trying to sway public opinion groups tend to use terms that justify their cause (pro-life as opposed to anti-abortion, pro-choice as opposed to pro-abortion). I hate the use of terms like "traditional values" which are in use by the BSA and the LDS Church author. Is slavery a "traditional value?" Is "eye for an eye.?" I agree with the values espoused by the Oath and Law of the BSA (although I don't like the "morally straight" because is it to ambiguous, sort of like saying "do good."). However, I wish they didn't use such terms as traditional values because although they make many feel good, it doesn't really mean anything.

[Yak_Herder 10]

I cannot swallow the argument that members of the BSA who support those trying to affect this change love the BSA and want what is best for it. If their motives were pure, if they truly loved the BSA, they would do it no harm.

 

The pressure they are bringing to bear is not some kind of medicine that must be taken by the BSA in order for it to get better. It is destructive. It is inhibiting the ability of the organization to fulfill its mission.

 

Rather than manipulating the media by feeding it falsehoods and fodder for the sensationalism that is craved, rather than adding to the stress on already tight budgets faced by councils around the nation, rather allowing volunteers and professionals already short on time to focus their efforts on further building the program and helping boys, rather than attempting to make right seem wrong, they would go their own way and create a new organization that follows their ideals.

 

The fact that they havent is all the evidence needed to demonstrate that they are not interested in the well-being of Scouting. They are interested in advancing their cause at the expense of Scouting.

 

Scouters who are playing both sides of this issue, make no mistake; you are being used.

 

[evmori 11]

Merlyn,

Thanks for your post. I'm mot feeling real good & we are leaving for camp on Saturday. I'm going home & going to bed. I want to respond but my brain is mush right now.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White 20]

Zahnada,

I never said the DNC was representative of America, and I don't think all democrats are opposed to scouting.

 

In fact I think the members of Boy Scouting are repesentative of America. I think the majority of Americans support and accept the values and membership standards of the program. That is precisely why certain political action groups are trying to use us.

 

I know a lot of people both in and out of scouting. Anyone who knows me knows I'm a scouter. I have only had three people tell me they disagree with the membership rules in 25 years. All three of them said that if they had scout age children they would still let them join scouting. Because even though they did not agree with this one element, there are far more benefits to scouting that more than outweigh it.

 

I have had numerous parents ask when signing up their Tigers if we still maintain our membership atandards, and when I say yes they tell me that is one of the reasons they are joining.

 

So I think the BSA represents the values that most Americans still beleive in and want for their children. We are not trying to please everyone and should not be coerced to.

 

Bob White

[Rooster7 11]

So I think the BSA represents the values that most Americans still beleive in and want for their children. We are not trying to please everyone and should not be coerced to.

 

Bob, I think you've captured it in a nutshell. But, I might add. Even if most Americans did not believe in the same values, the BSA believes in these values and has the character to fight for them. Despite the declarations of some on this board, true morality cannot be ruled by popular opinion. Fortunately, the powers-to-be in the BSA appear to recognize this fact.

[Zahnada 11]

I guess this leads into a question to ask of Yak Herder, Bob White, and Rooster. I hope for an honest response (which I do not doubt you will provide).

 

Do you consider a person like me to be an undesirable element in scouting? I know that none of you know me personally, but you know my views. While I would never discuss these opinions in front of the boys, it is very obvious that I do not agree with the BSA policy on a number of issues.

 

If you had the choice, would you want me in your troop and interacting with your son?

 

I hope you answer honestly instead of something like, "Well, it's not my choice if you belong in scouts." I don't intend to open this up for debates because I'm asking for your personal opinion. I will respect your opinion and let it stand where it is. So, to rephrase the question, do you personally have any problem with me as a scouter?

[silver-shark 10]

I'll bite.

 

Agreeing with rules and abiding by rules are 2 completely separate issues.

 

I have absolutely no problem with anyone that can:

 

1. Abide by the rules.

 

2. Treat other individuals in a civil manner.

 

3. Make me laugh.

 

4. Work with and love kids.

 

P.S. I almost forgot, it would be great if they could make coffee, and it would be even better if they would set a cup outside my tent in the morning, but maybe that's just dreamin'... I'm still trying to train boys to do this but they don't seem to be too motivated.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

[Bob White 20]

Sign an application saying you will follow the rules, methods and programs of the BSA, provide me your Social Security number so that I can do criminal background check, provide me with three personal references, let me watch yo on a campout and a few troop meetings to see how you behave with kids. Then I will take my recommendation to the Committee Chair.

 

Why should I treat you any differently then a parent in the troop?

 

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Rooster7 11]

Zahnada,

 

Let me give you an analogy. In my church, which happens to be pretty conservative, I know that there are some folks who believe abortion should be a woman's choice. This does bother me. I would prefer that they believed as the church preaches - that abortion is wrong...that it's a sin. However, these individuals know the churchs position and they do not attempt to sway other members in the church. Nor do they teach Sunday school...or at least, they don't teach their own opinions over that of the church's position. That being the case, I cautiously accept these folks as church members. Do I seek them out for their opinions on theology, the interpretation of Bible verses, or doctrinal issues? No. Would I nominate them for a lay position within the church? No. Am I willing to have friendly conversations with them? Yes. Do I try to treat them as a brother or sister in Christ? Yes. Do I try to build relationships with them? I like to think so.

 

So, in your case - Would I recommend you as Committee member? That would depend on the job and what I knew of your capabilities. Would I recommend you as a member of the Scoutmaster's corps? If you didn't share your contrary opinions about the BSA with the Scouts, I probably would. Would I be willing to have friendly conversations with you? Yes. Would I try to treat you as a fellow Scouter? Yes. Would I try to build a relationship with you? I like to think so.

 

I don't like every opinion that my friends hold, but I still value those friendships.

 

[Zahnada 11]

I don't have a problem with any of those responses.

[acco40 95]

Rooster, this may be WAY off topic and I'm not questioning your beliefs but if your church "happens to be pretty conservative", would they not be in favor that an abortion should be a women's choice? Conservative has many meanings but one is tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions. Right now abortion is legal. A conservative idea would be to maintain the status quo. Conservative may also mean less government control, rules, etc. Having no abortion restrictions is a conservative idea.

 

Now a liberal idea would be to have government laws to influence individual behavior, i.e. outlaw abortion.

 

I know these are not the normal labels that are applied but that is what happens when politics enters into it.

 

[Yak_Herder 10]

Wonderful questions, Zahnada.

 

snip

Do you consider a person like me to be an undesirable element in scouting? I know that none of you know me personally, but you know my views. While I would never discuss these opinions in front of the boys, it is very obvious that I do not agree with the BSA policy on a number of issues.

/snip

 

Actually, I didnt know your views before this morning. I took a several hours and read the stuff you have posted over the last few months in order to understand them better. You express yourself very well. I appreciate someone who is clear thinking, articulate and skilled at debate. I differ with your conclusions, but you are each of these things. Frankly, that pleases me.

 

I cant be certain what a person like me is meant to convey, but I have to assume it means someone who is a member of the BSA and opposes the policy regarding homosexuals. Ill base my response on that assumption.

 

I live in an area dominated by what the article that heads this thread describes as liberal secular humanists. I am much more the bible-based conservative. We have the usual spectrum of Scouters in our council, maybe more diverse than most. San Jose in particular is wonderfully blessed with a diversity of race, religion and culture.

 

I enjoy this area and the people that live here immensely. There is one notable exception, an ASM I met briefly at a Wood Badge reunion. Making conversation, I asked him about a knot that he was wearing that I didnt recognize. I no more than got the question out of my mouth before I figured out for myself what it must stand for and regretted having made the inquiry. It looked something like the Eagle Scout award knot, only with a rainbow of colors. He explained to me that he disagreed with the BSA policy on homosexuals and this was a form of protest.

 

I believe myself to be a person who trusts and respects others without first requiring supporting evidence. I very easily engage others in conversation and enjoy getting to know them. Everyone has his or her quirks. Thats part of the fun. This man was a pleasant enough fellow, but showed a lack of character that I found very distasteful. On a day when I was to be awarded my own Wood Badge beads and in a day when the BSA faces the opposition it does, I frankly didnt have much interest in hearing it from one of our own.

 

I didnt challenge him. I uncharacteristically just let it go and moved on to other events. Its been some time now and I still havent resolved for myself what the appropriate response should have been. That bothers me. Its hard to determine where to draw the line between being nice and not hurting peoples feelings and standing up for what you believe. I really respect those who possess the diplomatic skill to do both.

 

I feel very strongly about this issue. By this I mean the issue of a Scouters character. The fact is the BSA has a policy with respect to homosexual membership. What was once understood has become necessary to define. It was established in proper order once clarification was demanded.

 

You cannot belong to the BSA, hold opposing views, and still have integrity. You cannot be loyal to Scouting and fail to support it, or worse, work to subvert it. You cannot be obedient and not follow duly established rules. You cannot be consider yourself trustworthy and violate the trust others show you. This man was for the most part helpful, friendly, courteous, kind and cheerful. I would assume he is thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. But by demonstrating disobedience and disloyalty, he cannot be trusted. He does not posses integrity. He is not the example of character I wish my son to model himself after.

 

There are honest, above board means of affecting change within the BSA. Those advocating change have failed in that arena. That failure does not justify the adoption of tactics of civil disobedience, however mild. I can neither support nor respect those who engage in it.

 

I also draw a distinction between the question of homosexual membership of youths and adults. Both contradict the stated ideals, but the youth are in their formative years. Were in the business of shaping and guiding that development. Excluding them would be utter foolishness. So long as they are interested in learning what we teach, they are welcome. Should they decide to take a different path, integrity would demand they re-evaluate their membership. An adult who truly cares will continue to be a part of that young mans life whether a Scout or not.

 

Adult membership is a different matter. The great majority of and adult leaders function in the organization is to be a role model and mentor. Therefore, their personal ideals are subject to review. It is chaos to allow a leader to remain a member and a leader of an organization if his or her viewpoints are in opposition to it. It is not a question of diversity. It is not a matter of discrimination. It is stupidity.

 

snip

If you had the choice, would you want me in your troop and interacting with your son?

/snip

 

The question is simply too hypothetical to respond to adequately. The Scouting units I am involved with are sponsored by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. You would certainly be welcome. We do, however, stand for something and expect those who join with us to adopt those standards as well. That is largely the purpose of the Church. The question then becomes, Can/Will you support the policies of the chartering organization and be able to use Scouting in a manner that advances its (the chartered organizations) goals?

 

Our religious beliefs clearly reflect on our viewpoint of human sexuality. It is indeed obvious that you disagree with the BSA policy. I believe you when you state that you would never discuss these issues in front of the boys. However, teen-agers are remarkably adept at discernment. You may be more able to mask your views than I give you credit for, but dont you think it would also be obvious to the boys?

 

snip

So, to rephrase the question, do you personally have any problem with me as a scouter?

/snip

 

No, but given your views on this issue you might have a problem with us.