Good Citizenship and Banning Things

[Beavah 205]

I fully confess to bein' a conservative old coot. I think a lot of newfangled notions are derived from just sloppy, emotional thinking. That bein' said, I hope I'm always opposed to the notion of banning. I don't see that it has any good place in a free society.

 

Banning books is one of those things. If your ideas are so weak that the only way they'll convince anybody else is if there's no other ideas allowed, then your ideas should probably wither and die, eh? But really, that same principle applies to everything else, too. A few people abuse firearms, either in anger or in stupidity, just like a few people abuse alcohol and some others abuse driving a car. But that doesn't mean that banning guns, or reinstituting prohibition, or eliminatin' automobiles is a just act.

 

When I see people who right out the gate start makin' rules and banning things, it really gets my American up. I remember when kids first started showin' up on ski slopes with snowboards. Lots of prejudice because they were kids. Lots of prejudice because they dressed funny. Some real issues in terms of safety and courtesy, because the skiers and snowboarders hadn't yet figured out how each other moved so as to be courteous or safe. And right away the "let's ban it!" crowd got goin'.

 

Yeh see it in cities banning skateboarders (kids dressin' funny again)... sheesh, you'd think we'd be happy they're doin' something athletic and not smokin' weed and gettin' obese. Just Googled and found bans on snowball fights and sledding by various schools and districts.

 

And it seems like we've got a veritable army of "Let's ban it!" types in Scouting.

 

Does anybody really think that Authority "banning" things ("we know better than you do...") is anything other than an assault on the fundamental notions of Liberty that are necessary for American citizenship? How can it have any place in Scouting, where our very aim is Citizenship?

 

Teach children. If your ideas or your character are so weak that you can't convince or inspire others, then you will never succeed by trying to prohibit others or squelch ideas. But yeh will teach them about tyranny.

 

Beavah

 

 

[Eamonn 61]

Beavah,

While I may well be on my way to old coot-hood, I have never seen myself as being a Conservative.

While I'm not active in trying to get things that might be banned, un-banned, I do at times think banning them in the first place wasn't such a good idea.

We as an organization talk a lot about "Ethical Choices".

I suppose we could debate for many happy hours what this really means.

Some see the choice being following the rule or not following the rule.

I tend to see it as being more. In my book it's doing the right thing because it's the right thing to do.

We old coots do our best to set the right example and at times teach what is accepted as being the right thing to do.

A lot of what we do in Scouting is about something specific, but has a much deeper meaning under the surface.

We can inform and teach a Lad what to pack in his pack before the hike.

I'm happy to leave it at that.

If he then decides he wants to pack the kitchen sink. He has made that choice -He is the poor soul who ends up carrying it!!

Others will have a shakedown and tell him that Kitchen sinks are banned or not allowed!!

This to my mind is not teaching him anything about making choices.

My big beef about banning things is that the lists seem to take on a life of their own and become bigger and bigger.

If this truly is the Land of the Free?

Every-time we ban something it takes away someones freedom.

Ea.

[packsaddle 753]

I sympathize with the libertarian viewpoint. At the same time I see strong disagreements on banning certain other things such as smoking, abortion, the UUA religious award, loud noise, trans fat, gays, atheists, CFCs, alcohol at scout functions...you get the idea.

[CalicoPenn 729]

Beavah,

 

I'm with ya - AND 'agin ya on this (being one of the moderate progressive mid-age nowhere near ready for coothood persuasion).

 

I'd almost fully agree that bans are pretty stupid - but since I didn't see any qualifier used like the word "most" as in "most bans are pretty darn stupid" I can't fully agree.

 

I think bans come about due to lack of common sense. To me, the stupid bans are because the people doing the banning lack common sense which leads to those absurd bans on books, wreaths, flags, etc.

 

Some bans come about because we, the general public, don't necessarily share the same common sense (thus the sense can't really be called common) so bans are put in place to keep us all on the same page. Such bans would, in my opinion, fall out of that "most" qualifier and I would consider them reasonable, good bans - like bans on open fires in Utah during extreme drought and dry conditions, or bans on doing 70 mph in a school zone, or bans on shooting/collecting endangered species. I think we accept these kinds of bands without believing they take away our freedoms because we understand that one of the responsibilities of living in a free society is looking out for each other and being good stewards of the place in which we live.

 

Then there are those middle of the road bans - bans that in the short term may be good but in the long run are bad - the bans that should be considered temporary until people/places can adjust. I think your example of the snowboarders fits here. My first reaction when I heard about those bans was that the bans were absolutely ridiculous and based on prejudice. Then I thought of your second notion - there were safety issues involved until Snowboarders and Skiiers could get used to each other and learn the way each other moved. In most cases, after I read the arguments of those ski hills banning snowboarders a little more closely, it was also to give the mountains a chance to rearrange their physical plants, to give snowboarders challenging hills that didn't also mean they would hit (or be hit by) skiers. It would have taken just one fatal collision on a run between a skier and snowboarder to see a permanent ban. In this case, a temporary ban, though frustrating, served a useful purpose.

 

Calico

[Gonzo1 10]

If you'd like to celebrate freedom, read a banned book!

 

We had a lady in Georgia who wanted to kick Harry Potter books out of school libraries. She had her day in court and LOST!, then, she appealled! It's just plain nuts.

 

I can see the point of banning skate boarding on public shopping areas/sidewalks/RAILINGS! Too much liability for the shopping center. However, Johnny can grind his heart out at home or at a friends house, or skate park, or better yet, maybe Johnny dressed like a slacker can open his own skate park.

[GernBlansten 10]

Banning things/people/activities seems to stem from wanting/needing others to bend to your ideals, exercised by those in power on those without. Some of these bans are for the safety of the whole, others are to eliminate threats to the organization, some are just cowardly rules to eliminate direct confrontation with the violators.

But in every case, bans whittle away at our liberties and diminish our freedom and expectations of personal responsibility.

[evmori 11]

Has anyone ever seen the damage a skateboard can do to railings & steps & walls & other stuff that wasn't built to be used by skateboards? It can be downright ugly!

 

While I don't think banning is always the answer, a ban on banning is way to extreme.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Perhaps rather than ban skateboards and related activities it would be better to teach our youth respect for themselves and others and to respect property, both private and public. Some sort of program that could teach youth to make ethical decisions in their life based on some predetermined core of values

[DanKroh 11]

Excellently put, OGE. Couldn't agree more. Instead of treating the symptoms (by banning stuff), it is much better to treat the underlying cause (lack of respect).

[DanKroh 11]

Although, I have to admit that when I got flattened from behind by an inattentive snowboarder while I was skiing last week, I did find myself muttering something about banning.

 

But a hot bowl of chowder later, I was over it.

[packsaddle 753]

This is a shameless attempt to hijack the thread but Dan is responsible. I'm with you, Dan, regarding that chowder. I'm hoping it was CLAM chowder, my favorite. So what's the best. The best clam chowder I've ever had has to be split between 4 sites. One was at Copely Place in Boston. Evenly tied with that was a bowl of chowder I have not eaten often enough at Multnomah Falls, OR. Close to those two would be Ivar's in Seattle and a place in Newport, OR, I think it was called Mo's. Yum, I'm ready for another bowl right now.

 

However, if it was seafood chowder that Dan mentioned, I go for the gumbo around the Deep South. Gumbo, the right way, is just wonderful. My favorites keep changing on that one, though. I guess I'll just have to keep sampling...

Now...what was the original topic?

[SR540Beaver 116]

To further hijack the thread.....clam chowder is known as snot stew by us landlubbers. We don't eat anything that smells like a bait shop. Now a good corn chowder....yum!

[packsaddle 753]

Picking up that good-natured gauntlet....

On average, each of us produces about a quart of 'snot' every day and we swallow most of it. So get used to it.

But Corn? You have to be kidding. You stew a bunch of grass seed and call that 'good'? I guess it's next best thing to chewing a cud.

I suppose it has a lot to do with upbringing. For some reason I can't seem to explain, I'm mysteriously drawn to the smell of fish and seafood in general. As a matter of fact, it's 1100am here...time for lunch!

[SR540Beaver 116]

Taking up the way off topic gauntlet. It must be because of the readily available "corn" oil, but around here it is generally accepted that God intended fish to be coated in cornmeal and deep fried. Say, it is time for lunch isn't it? Of course, they should be served with deep fried cornmeal hush puppies.

 

Yeah, yeah, it might kill us.....but we'll die with a big old smile on our face.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Holy Mackerel,

 

Far be from me to Carp, but some have to stop being so Bullhead(ed) about the situation and quite appealing to the Bass instincts of others.

 

First of all, when you are in Boston and north along the coast, its Chowdah', and don't you forget it. In Seattle and the Pacific Northwest, its Chowder and you may even have a geoduck or two thrown in.

 

I knew I Smelt something fishy all along and I Shad(n't) be quiet either as I Perch here and no, I didnt do it on Porpoise but I can tell you I feel mighty Crappie about now as I got a Shiner walking into a door (?!?) Maybe I should Drum up support for getting us back on tract.

 

Speaking of Lady Country singers, whatever happened to Dolly Varden anyway?, well back to my medical studies, I hope to be a Sturgeon someday