BSA SCHISM- RED STATE SCOUTS/BLUE STATE SCOUTS

[Fishsqueezer 10]

By Pappys apparent definition, one is only a man if he is willing and able to cut, kill, and build. It makes one wonder; how did we ever get to the point of developing the technology for cities, or chainsaws, or guns without people that were girly thinkers? I would suspect that the majority of our technological and philosophical advances were accomplished by men who rarely, if ever, cleared a forest or killed something with their bare hands. Wouldnt a real man be caring enough to wash anothers feet. Wouldnt he have enough empathy toward others and their future to sacrifice himself for them? Did a real man change the world by building forts and playing war or was he a servant to others?

 

I have done many of the things Pappy ascribes to real men and will continue to do so. I hunt and fish and have trapped. I have cut trees and built shelters and trails. I guess that makes me manly. But then, I do recognize that there are inherent values is something existing even if I do not use it or ever see it so I guess that makes me girly. I suppose I fit the definition of a certain governor and will live forever as a girly-man.

 

Is the world really so black and white or zebra striped for us girly-men? Ask a forester if an old growth forest is the same as a young forest. They function differently both biologically and ecologically. Forests have different values to people and to ecosystems depending on their age and species composition. Pappy seems to see the forest as merely a bunch of trees. I happen to see a forest as part of the larger world. Would a Christian say God was just messing around when he made different types of forests and trees, or might he think there is a purpose behind the variety? I seem to recall that God created and said it is good. That would imply that He liked things the way He created them right? Creation was independently good even before there were utilitarian values derived by man. The earth is Gods creation. I would propose that man is but the office manager for creation. I do not believe that I know better than God. God says man is to have dominion over the earth but what is dominion? Dominion, by definition, is to have the right or power of governing or having control of. I have dominion over my office, yet it is owned by others. My dominion does not give me the right to do as I wish with the office. I must work within the framework that the owners designate. Do I assume I know what they want me to do or do I seek their input and guidance from information provided by the owners? One must come to the logical conclusion that the resources and environment of the earth are not ours in any sovereign or unlimited sense; they belong to someone else.

 

A parent has dominion over his children, but none would consider sacrificing a child for a better home or view. Because man has been given dominion over the earth, that does not mean he can act out of wholly selfish reasons. Does man have an obligation to care for creation? Does he have an obligation to care for future generations? According to the Bible, the earth is bestowed upon all humanity not a single generation that can use it up. We are using the inheritance of future generations and should do so wisely. When He settles the accounts of the talents, will we have invested wisely? The bounty of the earth is to provide for the needs and survival of all humanity. That could become a challenge if many parts are missing or are damaged beyond use. Dominion has a strong implication of stewardship. The earth is ours to use wisely and to pass on to future generations for their wise use.

 

There is a time and place for all these manly activities. National Forests are designated to be recreational lands and used as natural resources with timber harvesting, mining, grazing, and hunting allowed, but all should be done with the future in mind. By Pappys definition of manliness, it is manly to cause extinction because we needed that dam. It is manly to pollute the rivers and air because we needed the power. It is manly to cut old growth forests because those old trees make for stronger homes. If we harm creation it must be because God wanted us to. If He didnt want us to use it up, He wouldnt have given us power over it. That sounds very similar to the argument for slavery.

 

 

Henry David Thoreau railed at his forebears for their negligence in the natural world:

 

. . . Thinking that I have here the entire poem, to my chagrin I learn that it is but an imperfect copy that I possess and have read, that my ancestors have torn out many of the first leaves and grandest passages, and mutilated it in many places.

 

Romans 1:20 "Ever since the creation of the world His invisible nature, namely, His eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made."

 

[Hiromi 9]

"By Pappys definition of manliness, it is manly to cause extinction because we needed that dam. It is manly to pollute the rivers and air because we needed the power. It is manly to cut old growth forests because those old trees make for stronger homes. If we harm creation it must be because God wanted us to. If He didnt want us to use it up, He wouldnt have given us power over it. That sounds very similar to the argument for slavery."

 

Never said or implied any of that. That is what you want to read into it. Just because we train our boys to have the ability to build civilizations from whole cloth - a benign but fantastic power- it doesn't follow that they would by virtue of their ability run rough shod over the land.

 

Your bigotry to the capable man is showing. I never implied pollution-laying waste to the land, or anything else.

 

Other than that- I find most of what you wrote to be wonderful and true.

 

I am not arguing for He-mannism and machismo- but freedom for men to be men and see the world for all its potential and their mind for all its possibilities.

 

 

Pappy

 

[Hiromi 9]

(This message has been edited by Pappy)

[Hiromi 9]

(This message has been edited by Pappy)

[Fishsqueezer 10]

I am firmly in the camp that says slashing and burning, cutting and building, is a lot more about conserving the manly arts and man's proper relationship with his environment rather than doing our darndest to keep the TV Indian from crying.

They love their scout axes because it symbolizes their power to change their environment and to make something of use from nature. You folks are quick to criticize the moralizing of Christian faith, but get all high and mighty about cutting down trees.

So, caring about your home is bad. I think I understand you much better now. Tis a far, far better thing I do to be manly than to care about this world. If we cant use it then it has no value? Didnt God create and say it was good before man ever came on the scene?

I see a forest primarily as something to cut and fashion and explore and shape and make suitable for human use. I see a mountain as something to cut into for its stone, mine for its minerals and paint for its beauty.

I believe that that, in a nutshell, is your primary problem. You see no intrinsic value in anything yet God said it is good. Do you not value what God does?

The greatest lie ever perpetrated on our youth was the myth of the pristine environment. It never existed. It is not a scientifically verifiable state of existence. Nature is aggressive, opportunistic, and does not heed mans whims or emotions.

A pristine environment by definition is one that is unchanged by man. I do believe that existed. You might want to review Genesis and note that the world existed before man and therefore was pristine. There were also pristine continents prior to man migrating to them. You may wish to read more educational stuff when you have a moment between watching westerns and hanging out with real men.

The role of man is to create a Heaven on Earth. He is trying to perfect his conduct and to perfect his earthly condition.

And I thought we were here to be stewards of creation and worship God. Silly me, I didnt realize God didnt make it the way He liked and we are here to tidy up for Him and get it right.

Your bigotry to the capable man is showing. I never implied pollution-laying waste to the land, or anything else.

You assume that because I disagree with you that I am bigoted against a capable man? Does that not also lead to your assumption that I am not a capable man? What information do you have to back that up? Do you know what I have done or accomplished? Is it that you assume that I am incapable of all the things you describe? Your tactic of ascribing bigotry to me is the same that is often used by PC police when referencing those of opposing views.

I do believe there are many outdoor skills young men should learn. They should spend time outdoors learning about the environment and how to care for it. Caring for it means both using it wisely when needed and conserving when possible. Caring about nature and using it wisely are not the same as trying to put it in a bottle and preserve it.

[Hiromi 9]

Fishsqueezer,

 

You wrote : A pristine environment by definition is one that is unchanged by man. I do believe that existed. You might want to review Genesis and note that the world existed before man and therefore was pristine. There were also pristine continents prior to man migrating to them. You may wish to read more educational stuff when you have a moment between watching westerns and hanging out with real men.

 

 

 

 

pristine ˈprɪs tin, prɪˈstin; especially Brit. ˈprɪs taɪn - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pris-teen, pri-steen; especially Brit. pris-tahyn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

adjective

1. having its original purity; uncorrupted or unsullied.

2. of or pertaining to the earliest period or state; primitive.

 

[Origin: 152535; < L pristinus early; akin to primus PRIME ]

 

Synonyms 1. undefiled, unpolluted, untouched.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2006.

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This

pristine (prĭs'tn', prĭ-stn') Pronunciation Key

adj.

1.

a. Remaining in a pure state; uncorrupted by civilization.

b. Remaining free from dirt or decay; clean: pristine mountain snow.

2. Of, relating to, or typical of the earliest time or condition; primitive or original.

There is no pristine because there is no original condition other than the one that states that this it how it was before man got here.

It is a ludicrous and misleading term used by the propagandists of environmentalism.

 

 

 

I never said you were incapable. I said that your view of things seemed to imply bigotry toward the capable man. Sorry if you took it personally.

 

I do not wish to get into a tit for tat with you concerning what I said and what you said. But I appreciate the effort you went to with all your cutting and pasting.

 

I think your interpretation of Genesis ( and God said. It is Good)is about as forced as perhaps my interpretation of the Lords Prayer (His Will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven).

 

I do not believe in the intrinsic value of things, it is true. Value is man made, or given to us by our creator. We ascribe value to things. God did not give us too many hard and fast rules about mining and damming rivers.

 

Other than that, please be rest assured that I teach my boys to have respect for the wilderness as well as to see all the potential that the earth has to relinquish.

 

Pappy

(This message has been edited by Pappy)

[FireKat 10]

I like your points, Fishsqueezer.

You assume that because I disagree with you that I am bigoted against a capable man? I get the feeling that pappy is the bigoted man. Bigoted against women. Why else would he use kids cool terms like manly, girly-man. Also the term hysterical for an angry woman? Has he used it in reference to any of the male posters?

Do you describe a marine as manly-man or an honorable man?

A manly-man is more of a cave man than a modern , honorable man. The term will go the way of macho.

Talk about honor, humanity, stewardship, face (oriental meaning) no more of this silly made up term of manly-man. And dont use terms for women as an insult to men. It just makes everyone focus on the terms not the ideas.

(This message has been edited by firekat)

[Hiromi 9]

Well hello Fire Cat,

 

You're right of course. I have failed to use the term hysterical for many of the male posters. My mistake. It would have been very appropriate.

 

But that would have been akin to calling them girly men as well- because hysteria is derived from a feminine term- referring to the womb.

 

Call me a bigot all you want- I am very prejudiced to a lot of behavior and attitudes expressed by a great deal of the members of this forum.

 

And they have been prejudiced against a good many of my ideas and attitudes as well.

 

SO be it.

 

Pappy

 

[Trevorum 24]

I wonder if manly-girls are as bad as girly-men?

[GernBlansten 10]

Pappy,

How would you classify Jesus? Girlyman? He did seem to care for people a lot.

[FireKat 10]

Trevorum - there are manly girls. They have always been called 'tomboys'. As to being good or bad I will depend on the individual and the person evaluating them.

[Gold Winger 9]

" It is a made up term by an actor/ politician (when have they ever been known to tell the truth?)"

 

I think that it was actually coined by commedians who were poking fun at an actor who was not yet a politician.

[Hiromi 9]

While I encourage my scouts to respect their fellow scouters the Brownies, playfully calling a fellow male scout a Brownie during an aggressive PT session is very common and the boys find it very funny. Sexist? Shock and Horror! Maybe a little. But the boys see the gargantuan difference between the unit they belong to and the Brownies. The idea of Brownie pretty much equates with girly. Boys don't want to be a girl- despite the efforts of Den Mothers across the nation to make it otherwise.

 

My scouts don't suffer from gender confusion in our unit, that's for sure.

 

OK Fire Cat- Now Breathhhhhhhhhhh.

 

Pappy

 

[gwd-scouter 11]

OK, Pappy, that's it. I've been tolerant. I've been mostly bemused by your posts. But now you've gone and done it. Insulting Den Mothers - the nerve!

 

By the way, the current term is Den Leader as there are quite a number of men doing the job these days. Yep, I was a Den Leader. Proud of it. Proud of the boys I helped moved toward becoming Boy Scouts. I can firmly attest that they did not suffer any gender confusion under my leadership.

 

You may now resume previous programming. Have a nice day.

[Trevorum 24]

FireKat, I suppose my beautiful bride would be considered a 'tomboy'. She feeds and waters the horses before breakfast, lifts 50 lb bags of grain, wears a ball cap and doesn't even own a dress.

 

(Obviously, I think that's a good thing)