Morality: Thought Experiment

[packsaddle 753]

So which is it, discuss the various arguments about issues surrounding the morality of adults feeding children alcoholic beverages, or whether I'm politically correct in using a term that others around me use casually and with connotations that go both directions? If you want to hide from the first question, I'll be glad to oblige you with a discussion of the second.

[johndaigler 10]

I didn't mean to sidetrack the thread and I'd rather not be the processed-cheese-food-slice in a Packsaddle/Rooster7 sandwich. I'm already fed up with Dusty Baker and the Cubs, and I always wait till after the NFL draft to talk about it, so back to this alcohol/driving thing . . .

 

I think, that if you accept the first glass, but know that somewhere along the line Mr. Z is going to cross into immorality - then aren't we saying that morality is gray and flexibly applied? Mind you, I'm not making that argument. I'm asking a question.

 

Someone spoke to the cultural traditions of sharing wine with dinner - even with minors. Culturally, these traditions come from places that would have different views on nudity, fidelity, gender roles, work family balance, etc. Cultural norms are culture-centric. Is morality? Again a question.

 

This is a dimly lit, slippery path . . .

 

jd

[Bob White 20]

Mr. Z is no longer an ASM. Not only are his morals in question but by leaving a Playboy in his bathroom when he knew he was having company over, he showed that he is not smart enough to be a Scout leader.

[acco40 95]

"In my view, if he drinks enough to violate the law, that's also clearly immoral, because he has a moral obligation to obey the law." Hunt, I respectfully disagree. If one violates a law, ones behavior is illegal, not necessarily immoral. I feel I have no moral obligation to obey the law. I have a civic duty to obey the laws of the land and a moral obligation to "do right." In those rare instances where I feel a law is immoral, I may not follow it.

 

BW, before we judge Mr. Z as a dimwitted SA with questionable morals, what about my council executive who gave the okay for Cub and Boy Scouts to attend an NFL game (BSA sponsored event) with scantily clad cheerleaders who he knew would be in attendance? Ithink you draw lines in the sand much to easily.

[Bob White 20]

I would be willing to bet that every parent who sent their scout to the game had full knowledge that there are cheerleaders present, and how they dress. Unlike the committee members, that Mr. Z knew were coming, who had no idea that a playboy magazine would be openly on display for them.

 

Also the SE was not responsible for the presense of the cheerleaders or for their costumes, mr. Z on the other hand had full control and responsibility for the items in his home.

 

Sorry, but the ASM won the "stupid" contest easily.

 

BW

[scoutldr 726]

"he showed that he is not smart enough to be a Scout leader"

 

That should probably be a question on the Adult Leader application..."Are you smart enough to be a Scout Leader (Y/N)"

 

It would go right after the question "Do you use illegal drugs?"

 

[firstpusk 10]

"That should probably be a question on the Adult Leader application...'Are you smart enough to be a Scout Leader (Y/N)'"

 

Catch 22. If you say yes, you are probably not. ;^)

[packsaddle 753]

I was sitting there enjoying the afternoon and all the interesting things happening around me...when a voice from above ordered me to leave the bible belt. And go to California. My flight was boarding.

 

Anyway, JD I agree. About the slippery slope too. Scoutldr, good one. Firstpusk, ouch.

[Lynda J 10]

50 years ago when I was first in Girl Scouts my dad (the leader) had a friend that was a total durnk. Dad would have him come to teach knots. This guy could tie knots better than an elephant can carry a trunk. And he could teach kids to tie knots just as well. Did my dad ever take him with us when we went anywhere? NO. Did any of us ever get in a car with this guy? No. Did we learn from this guy? Yes and more than just knots. When we started asking about why the guy acted like he did, my dad sat down and talked to us about the disease of alcoholism. How it hurt people and the people that love them. Did we respect this guy? Probably not. Did we feel sorry for him? Yes.

Do I still know how to tie those knots I learn back then? Yes. Have I been able to pass his teachings along to scouts in my 40+ of working with both GS and BS and make knot tieing fun. Yes.

[Hunt 11]

""In my view, if he drinks enough to violate the law, that's also clearly immoral, because he has a moral obligation to obey the law." Hunt, I respectfully disagree. If one violates a law, ones behavior is illegal, not necessarily immoral. I feel I have no moral obligation to obey the law. I have a civic duty to obey the laws of the land and a moral obligation to "do right." In those rare instances where I feel a law is immoral, I may not follow it."

 

Hmmm. I certainly agree that a person may have a moral obligation to violate the law, if the law is immoral. However, it seems to me that the obligation to obey the laws of the land is also a moral obligation, and that is immoral to disobey a law simply because I don't like it or think it's useless. In other words, I'd say the obligation to perform one's civic duty is itself a moral obligation.

 

[Trevorum 24]

Most moral issues are slippery slopes. Very few moral issues are so black and white that there is no grey area. (Even "Thou shalt not kill" is ammended to "... except if duly authorized by your government".)

 

In my opinion, one of the great things about our society is the tremendous diversity of perspectives we allow. We do not insist on a one-size-fits-all morality as did the Taliban or the Inquisition. We are civilized and respect each other. People are welcome to examine the issues and draw their own lines in the grey areas and, on that basis, join this religion or that one, this political party or that one. Consensus determines where the lines are established for legal purposes, but these lines can and do change as society changes (remember the 18th and 21st amendments?)

 

No one view is right for everybody. For any given moral issue Rooster and Bob will draw the line in different places than Hunt and Acco (just to make a guess, fellows). Even those who insist I am wrong and there are black-and-white moral issues are welcome to their opinion. Ain't this country great?

 

[cliffgolden 10]

 

I once had a philosophy course back in college that dealt with morality. I remember reading Plato, Heidegger, Kant, and others. The decades following since have dimmed much that I once knew (or thought I knew).

 

I seem to remember that some philosophers looked at consequence of actions. Kind of; no harm, no foul, view of morality.

 

Machiavelli looked at the end justifying the means.

 

Some considered the free will of the individual to be the moral source, more so than the physical action or its consequence.

 

If the Scouter used the Playboy for donating sperm at a bank in order to help a couple with infertility problems, that might be considered a moral act, even a generous one.

 

If he used the publication as a vehicle for some fetish, that might reveal something else and be viewed differently.

 

If he really subscribes to Playboy for the articles (some people actually do), and only sought intellectual nurishment, that might be considered moral, even admirable.

 

Maybe someone thought it would be a cute joke to subscribe to the magazine in his name, then his son discovered it and took it into the bathroom and left it there.

 

There could be many possible scenarios.

 

As for the BSA, I understand that we are not to enquire about anyone's sexuality. It's a "don't ask, don't tell" situation and those with alternate lifestyles, if not avowed, do not affect our organization's expressive message, so we do not make it an issue.

 

In this case the Scouter in question has not made any announcements or expressed any messages to youth (as far as we know). He may be quilty of not policing his bathroom before having a meeting of Scouters in his home, or something more sinister?

 

That may be more a reflection of his attention to detail and thoughtfulness, than his morality.

 

Is he guilty of bad housekeeping, or something darker? We really can't say based on the information furnished.

 

I don't think we have any reason to report him.

(We might keep a watchful eye on him though.)

 

Of course we should always be policing each other when the health and safety of youth is involved.

 

Cliff Golden

[packsaddle 753]

Cliff, 'Playboy' and intellectual nourishment? But of course! If any you jokesters out there would like to send some bogus subscriptions or crank mail, PM me and I'll give you a mailing address. Heck, here it is, use it as often as you want:

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500

[cliffgolden 10]

 

Packsaddle,

 

1600 Pensylvania Avenue; Washington D.C.?

Now is that your home address, work address, or both?

 

Are you the head of the household? Can I visit you this summer after Jambo?

 

Cliff Golden

 

[packsaddle 753]

Welllll, I didn't exactly say it was MY address, did I?

 

Edited part: forgot the smiley thing.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)