Discrimination Against Me.

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

Luckily, I like the homemade apple pie so much that I keep coming back even tho I don't like their choice of vegetables. I keep coming back for the pie, hoping that while I'm there I can convince them to let us have carrots. :-)

 

Ok, so, I'm not real sure where this analogy is headed anymore, but I like the tone a whole lot more than other threads I've seen. Thanks so much.

 

OGE, I like your analogy of adding meat to a vegan shop and understand the implications. I guess it depends on who's running the store. :-)

 

 

[Bob White 20]

"OGE, I like your analogy of adding meat to a vegan shop and understand the implications. I guess it depends on who's running the store."

 

Why do I suddenly feel like quoting Prof. Henry Higgins?

So Prairie Scouter, who do you understand to be the people who "run the store" of scouting. Not who do you think it should be, or what your opinion is, but who do you know for sure makes these decisions in the BSA?

 

[Eamonn 61]

NJCubScouter

You are right when you say that so far only a couple of people have stated that they are homosexual or do not believe in God.

We do seem to be lost in a sea of analogy's. But here I go with yet another one.

I am a Roman Catholic and like to think that I'm doing my best to follow the teachings of the church.

I have several friends that were baptized in the church went on to make their First Holy Communion and were Confirmed, some went on to be married in the R/C Church. Then for reasons of their own they stopped going to church and following the rules of the church.

The Parish Priest we had before the one we now have would not allow these non-practicing Catholics to be God Parents. (He did allow people that were practicing their faith in other religions to be God Parents.)

This caused a stir in our small town, people came out for and against.

Sure these non-practicing Catholics were members of the church, they had been Baptized and Confirmed in the church, but the Priest used the argument that if these people were not looking after their own spiritual welfare how could they be expected to be responsible for the spiritual welfare of a child?

When the time came for me to look for God Parents for my Son, I didn't choose just nice people or people who were great friends of the family, I choose people who were living the faith.

I used to think that everyone was aware that the BSA was a values based program. I am now not so sure if everybody is aware that the values are the very core of what we are about. It could be that we all need to do a better job of bringing the values front and center. That way maybe everyone will know that Scouting isn't just about rubbing two sticks together, helping little old ladies across the road, or camping.

Duty to God, is not going to be taken out of Scouting.Not now, not ever.

The BSA has stated very clearly where they stand on the homosexual issue.

Membership in the BSA is not a right. If anyone feels that they can't live with the rulings of the BSA, they ought to examine their values and think about what they want to do.If people feel as vehemently about these issues as has been displayed in this forum over the past week or so, I would think that they have no choice but to look for a youth organization that is a better fit.

This talk about the BSA being a political organization is pure out and out twaddle!! While it might be said that some of the Organizations that charter Scouting units are churches and my knowledge of other churches and other religions is not that great. I know that the church I attend does at election time hand out flyer's which states where each candidate stands on abortion, there has never been politics spoken from the pulpit. I also know that there are no Republicans on City Council.

The BSA Web site has posted:

Adult volunteer leaders not only espouse Scoutings values and beliefs, but more importantly they embody them as role models to Scouting youth. Through teaching, counseling, and role modeling, adult leaders play a critical role in transmitting Scouting values and beliefs to the boys.

I have to think that this does not leave any "Wiggle" room

Eamonn.

[evmori 11]

Chestnuts! I like chestnuts! Save a log for me!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Scoutndad 10]

I feel a bit responsible for the creation of hard feelings, strong opinions and some "animosity" over the past few weeks from my original posting re the Agnostic Parent.

 

I am not going to justify my religious beliefs or my opinions re homo v heterosexuals within the BSA, but the help (and subsequent threads)that followed in and outside my original thread were truly eye opening.

 

Bottomline, you were all there to help me when I needed it and I thank each and every one of you.

 

Pls...no group hugs...

 

Thanks

Brian

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

>So Prairie Scouter, who do you understand to be the people who "run the store" of scouting. >Not who do you think it should be, or what your opinion is, but who do you know for sure >makes these decisions in the BSA?

 

Bob,

What I've been told is that there is a sub-committee, which reports to the BSA Board of Directors, that is responsible for establishing policy.

[Hunt 11]

Let's run the cafeteria analogy a bit more.

Let's say you'd like the cafeteria to buy tuna from local fishermen as a matter of principle. The cafeteria owner says they only buy dolphin-safe tuna as a matter of principle, and the local tuna isn't dolphin-safe.

Some people would say that the owners of the cafeteria make the decisions, and you should just be quiet and go elsewhere if you don't agree.

Others say that it's perfectly OK to try to get into a discussion of which principle is more important, and to try to persuade the cafeteria to change its policy.

Wouldn't we all agree that it shouldn't matter which policy would result in the cafeteria selling more tuna?

Many of the cafeteria customers may have an opinion on which principle they prefer, but it may not be a "make or break" matter for most of them--they will keep eating there whatever kind of tuna the cafeteria serves. Others are strong advocates of one or the other kind of tuna, and will only eat there if the right kind of tuna is served. Customers may disagree about whether the tuna policy is a core policy of the cafeteria, or is rather only one of a number of policies, or is a subordinate policy.

If you are the cafeteria owner, how do you respond to the request to change your policy? If you are a reasonable person, you listen to the arguments made by both sides, and consider whether there is a reason to reexamine your principle. Maybe you keep your old policy, maybe you change to a new one--and maybe you decide to offer two kinds of tuna. You may swallow hard if you you think the principled decision will cost you customers, but hopefully you decide to do what is right.

One more thing--to make this on point with the first post in the thread--the regular patrons of the cafeteria can be expected to be annoyed if people who don't even eat there want to get involved in setting the cafeteria's tuna policy. Those outsiders don't really care about the cafeteria's well-being or that of the patrons, but ONLY about the tuna. That's why they're much more likely to label the cafeteria owner as evil if he follows the "wrong" tuna policy. They don't know--and don't care--about all the good things the cafeteria does and all the other positive policies it follows.

[packsaddle 753]

All this food stuff...is a bit distracting to someone like me who is perpetually hungry.

I must have missed the part where someone said that BSA is a political organization. I always understood that BSA claims to be a religious organization. What gives?

And although Eamonn has partly clarified things in his answer to NJ's question, I see some wiggle room regarding the issue of wiggle room. I hope that no one is suggesting that there can be no dissention by members of an organization. No one is suggesting THAT are they?

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

Eamonn,

 

I have a quandary with some of this. Maybe you can help clear this up in my head, since you do so well with your writing.

 

I'm sort of torn on this. I can accept the "duty to God" in Scouting, and agree that, the way things stand, atheists are not able to be members. It's clearly stated by BSA and has been for a long time. I may not agree with the underlying principals behind it, but that's ok for my purposes right now.

 

The gay issue is a little different for me. Disallowing gays isn't a "value", as such, it's a policy, and as far as I can tell, wasn't actually put into words by BSA until sometime around 1978. Maybe there was a prevailing attitude against gays before that, but there's nothing specifically stated that I know of; it seems to be taken as interpretation of various statements of Scouting, as opposed to something that was clearly stated like the Duty to God. Am I wrong about that? If I'm correct in that, then, well, policies can change, and sometimes should.

 

We may be on different sides of these issues, but in our ways, we all want BSA to be the best that it can be. The fact that some may not agree with BSA policy is not necessarily a bad thing, while it will certaily appear that way to those who don't agree. BSA policies have changed over time to adapt to the needs of the organization and the society it lives in. By changing the policies on membership age, Scouting has been able to get it's message to younger boys, ie, the creation of Cub Scouting. By changing the policies on female membership, women are now able to fully participate in Scouting. In some countries, boys and girls are all welcome to gain the benefits of the Scouting movement. While there is always a delicate balance between what's good for an organization and what's not, any organization that falls back on a philosophy of "that's the way we've always done it" can be in danger of marginalizing itself to the point of irrelevence. Scouting is too good a program to let that happen.

 

Regards "BSA as a political organization", ok, let's try this. Maybe not a "political organization" like the GOP, but maybe more like a PAC (Political Action Committee). PACs make their views known to legislators, try to get legislation passed to their advantage, contribute to candidates that agree with their views, etc. Wouldn't it be fair to say that BSA National is doing at least some of that?

[evmori 11]

Back to the tuna thing. Since it is illegal to catch dolphin with tuna that would be a "National" policy. Now if the local council decided to sell tuna that went against the "National" policy, that wouldn't be a local option. That would be a direct violation of policy.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[shawneetrainer 10]

Can I bring the Pie Irons to the campfire?

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

shawnee,

Sure, but we're having a bit of a problem with tuna right now, so you might want to just bring along some ham and cheese. :-)

[jr56 92]

Pizza fresh out of a dutch oven is really great, you can put almost anything on it too, tuna, or ham and cheese.

[ManyIrons 10]

Im late to the discussion as usual (I was camping this past weekend), but Ill place myself with Eamonn et al. Im all for open discussions and dissenting opinions when theyre civil, but too many participants allow their emotions to overrule their manners. Its one thing to be passionate, quite another to be emotional.

 

With regard to the recent unpleasantness, Im disappointed by what I interpret as a sense of satisfaction some members appear to exhibit over the ACLUs success in lawsuits against the BSA. If anyone is posting here simply to bait others, or as an attempt to rub someones nose in a recent litigation, then as Eamonn requested, and many of us seconded, please leave.

 

[packsaddle 753]

Uuuuuhhh, passion without emotion? That's difficult to imagine. My dictionary actually uses 'emotion' as one of the definitions of 'passion'. The best line: "PASSION applies to an emotion that is deeply stirring or ungovernable".

 

But I agree with what I think you are trying to say.

 

And for the record, fish on pizza...is just wrong. Canadian bacon and sauerkraut, ok. Tropical fruit, ok. Chocolate, ok. Fish, no way.

Well,...maybe.