BSA as a right-wing political organization?

[Bob White 20]

Earlier I asked

"So Fog are you saying that the end doesn't justify the means? Or just not in this situation?"

 

Fog answered "Can a moral end ever justify an immoral means of reaching that end?"

 

I guess it depends FOG. Do you consider murder an immoral means?

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Fat Old Guy 11]

". Would you urge a scout to knowingly break a law because it will serve your cause?"

 

Depends. I would have encouraged German Scouts to hide Jews during WW II. I would encourage a Scout to ignore a "No Swimming" sign, there was a drowning person. I would encourage a Scout to pull a fire alarm to summon help, even if there was no fire.

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"I guess it depends FOG. Do you consider murder an immoral means? "

 

Another example of Bob White not living by the Scout law.

 

What murder are we talking about? I haven't murdered anyone (that's my story and I'm sticking to it), have you?

[Bob White 20]

Let's back up a little.

In your post http://www.scouter.com/forums/postings.asp?action=ReplyForm&threadID=41104&forumID=15#id_41191

you seem to suggest that the ends do not justify the means.

 

When I asked if that is all the time or just this time you responded, "Can a moral end ever justify an immoral means of reaching that end?"

 

I do not know where you stand yet. When you say ever, I ask does murder qualify to you as a justifiable means. In other words can a moral end ever be achieved by murder?

 

You original post suggests you do not believe that a moral end can come from breaking laws. Is that a fair understanding of what you meant. So if that is the case, ould you agree that murder is breaking a law and so it is not a justifiable means to an end. Would you agree with that?(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"You original post suggests you do not believe that a moral end can come from breaking laws. Is that a fair understanding of what you meant. So if that is the case, ould you agree that murder is breaking a law and so it is not a justifiable means to an end. Would you agree with that?"

 

Ah Bob White, trying to put words in my mouth. Breaking of the law is not necessarily immoral and obeying the law isn't always moral.

 

Next we need to define "murder." Murder, is the unlawful taking of a life. If the law says that I can kill you because I don't like you, that wouldn't be murder but it also wouldn't be moral, at least by my reckoning.

 

On the other hand, if I come to your house and find you attempting to carve your wife for dinner, I could kill you in her defense and that would be both moral and legal.

 

 

[Bob White 20]

No i am not trying to put words in your mouth, I am trying to ubnderstand the point you were trying to make. So I aked you a quaestion . Am I understanding you correctly? I have yet to get a straight answer. You are not being very clear.

 

Bob White

[Bob White 20]

WOW, Sometimes I think the computer scrambles the letters in my typing when I hit the submit button.

 

OK FOG here is my dilemma. When you say at the end of your post "do the ends justify the means?" It sounds as if you don't think so. I am trying hard not to put my own interpretation in, so I am trying to get a straight answer from you. Do you think the ends justify the means?

 

You resonded but you did not answer. You asked "Can a moral end ever justify an immoral means of reaching that end?" That does not answer the question it simply poses a new on.

 

So if we could please take one step at a time. Do you believe that the ends justify the means? If you believe the the answer is "no" then do you think it is no sometimes or all the times?

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[bpilati 10]

Ann Coulter (who I like) is an inappropriate speaker at any Boy Scout event. Ollie North is an appropriate speaker at any Boy Scout event because he has an association with the organization. Any speaker at a Boy Scout event should be speaking about scouting issues, and any related current events. They should not be discussing world politics in a way unrelated to the Boy Scouts. The Boy Scouts of America are a non-partisan organization that happens to embrace values and beliefs that are also supported by conservative politicians. Since the Boy Scouts of America adhere to values also supported by a large portion of Americans, it is not unusual that there are politicians with the same beliefs. This is not bad; in fact it is good, this is how politics should work.(This message has been edited by bpilati)

[Hunt 11]

I think they are both very poor choices for a scouting event, because of the deviation between their prior behavior and the principles of Scouting, as well as their extremely partisan views. I am surprised at the degree to which Oliver North has been able to rehabilitate his image. I would also think that speaking invitations shouldn't be extened to Al Franken or Bill Clinton, for similar reasons (although Clinton, at least, would be unlikely to use such an occasion to bash the Republicans).

As to the disgusting display of booing of scouts at the DNC, it's a sad reminder of how far out of touch Democratic leaders are with many rank and file Democrats.