Defending the Scout Oath

[DanKroh 11]

I can't help thinking of Dustin Black's recent words:

 

"Most of all, if Harvey had not been taken from us 30 years ago, I think hed want me to say to all of the gay and lesbian kids out there tonight who have been told they are less than by their churches, or by the government, or by their families, that you are beautiful, wonderful creatures of value. And that no matter what everyone tells you, God does love you..."

 

And those gay and lesbian kids grow up to be gay and lesbian adults, who continue to be told that they are less than. And that *does* do great harm.

[Eagledad 2779]

>>By excluding gays the BSA is telling the youth of America that it is not okay to be yourself and be true to your heart.

[TheScout 10]

Should we let them live the lie that being gay is OK?

 

Children must be taught right from wrong at an early age.

[shortridge 184]

I don't get into the politics threads a lot, but I did feel compelled to respond to this one.

 

TheScout wrote: "A lot of people just don't like homosexuality and don't like to be around homosexuals."

 

I'm not sure if you meant this as a justification for the ban or not, but to me, this is where the slope gets really slippery.

 

A lot of people just don't like people of different skin colors, or ethnic origin, either, and don't like to be around them.

 

Does that justify their exclusion?

[TheScout 10]

Private organizations have the right to ban whoever they wish.

 

If the members of an organization do not like to associate with another group why shouldn't they exclude them?

[AnniePoo 13]

Interesting discussion, and one that people certainly feel strongly about on one side or the other.

 

I understand that BSA is a private organization and can choose to ban homosexuals. However, I think that it is wrong and is based on incorrect information and prejudice. Even though I don't agree with the policy, I feel like Scouting overall is a good program, and will continue to volunteer in my son's pack.

 

"A lot of people just don't like homosexuality and don't like to be around homosexuals". A lot of people don't like women Scout leaders, but that doesn't mean that I should allow their opinion to affect my leadership position.

 

"If the members of an organization do not like to associate with another group why shouldn't they exclude them? " Which members? When do I get to vote on this, 'cause I'd like to exclude adult volunteers with negative attitudes.

 

"But, do you want to play the odds with your child?" No, but as others have mentioned, the vast majority of pedophiles are heterosexual in their adult relationships.

 

"Do you also want to play the odds with your gay friends and the accusations that could be made against them?" No, but as others have mentioned as well, I wouldn't want myself or the other heterosexual adults in my pack to be accused either. My husband is a coach - should he quit because a child could accuse him of something?

 

I have yet to hear a logical, fact-based argument from anyone about why homosexuals should be excluded from scouts, other than people's specific Christian beliefs and/or fears.

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Its been pretty much established that private organizations can legally set membership standards, I don't think that is in question here. The question is, how does a private organization that has several members who do not beleive in the memebership standards handle the situation?

 

That the BSA can exclide Atheists or gays has been established, but is this a policy that is supported by its rank and file? That would seem to be the question

[SR540Beaver 116]

BSA owns the program and can decide their membership. If that is detrimental to their continued success, it is up to them to decide whether or not to continue the bans they have in place. Members have never had a vote. What they do have is a choice to associate with BSA or not. I'm a Baptist. I have no interest in attending and participating at a Catholic church. The Catholic church is under no obligation to make me a member if I chose to remain Baptist in my theology. As a Baptist, I have been down this road before with a married couple who were charismatic. They claimed to be Baptist, they just believed a "little more" than the rest of us at the church. The problem was that they were teaching their "little more" to everyone else. They were removed as Sunday School teachers for teaching what was contray to Baptist faith and doctrine. The church had the right to decide what was taught in their church. What I never understood was why this couple wanted to be members of a Baptist church when there were other churches that shared their belief. BSA owns the program. Right or wrong, like it or not, they can set their membership policy.

[Horizon 97]

I am very happy that the BSA won its USSC cases to be allowed to choose their membership. Now I just want them to let the Charter Organization decide who to register.

 

I already have to spend time talking to Ministers and Rabbis so that they will support the youth in their church being involved in Scouting. Those Ministers and Rabbis are concerned that I run a bigoted organization contrary to the tenets of their faith. Their concern is based on the bigotry of the BSA's official policies towards homosexuals. So far I have been successful at keeping their support - but it has required a significant use of my time.

 

One of the most moral men that I know is an openly gay youth Minister. One of the more difficult conversations I need to undertake is asking him if he would be willing to work with my son on his God and Church medal. I will once again have to defend my Honor and openly state that even though I belong to an organization that has bigotry in its code, I am not myself a bigot. I will tell him that I am one of those on the inside working towards change.

 

It would be easier to quit smoking than to change your sexual orientation. To quote a gay friend, "You think I would CHOOSE to be gay? To be beaten in high school? To be thrown out of my family? To have my church equate me with Satan?"

[evmori 11]

You make some broad statements that can't be backed up, aquaticeagle, and it sounds like you have an agenda. You also seem to be hung up on the "physically strong" part of the Oath.

 

From what I have read, I get the feeling the point of this thread is, well, nothing.

[SR540Beaver 116]

Horizon,

 

You might want to stop and consider your location of southern California in having to talk those ministers and rabbis into supporting scouting. Just about everywhere else in America other than the east and west coast, the ban on gays is not an issue with the clergy when considering becoming a charter organization. I did have one church I dealt with decide not to charter a unit. It wasn't because they disagreed with scouting's policy. It was because a sister church had recently been picketed by a gay/lesbian organization and they didn't want all the drama for their congregation.

[Horizon 97]

I am fully aware that my location has an impact on the types of people I interact with on a daily basis. I come from the Bible Belt, and can easily see the difference in culture in many ways (both positive and negative).

 

I simply believe that we should trust the Charter Organization and Parent's Committee to make the right decisions. In America the Episcopal Church, the Presbyterian Church and the Methodist Church are all moving towards an acceptance and welcoming of Gays and Lesbians.

 

The original topic is certainly an interesting one.

Physically Strong: We don't ban smokers, we ban smoking. We don't ban the overweight, we limit their participation in high adventure.

Mentally Awake: We don't ban drinkers, we ban drinking.

Morally Straight: We only ban open homosexuals. We don't check on tithing levels, marital obligations, divorce rates, gambling, or dancing. We are open to ANY faith, yet on this one issue we take the position of some faiths (a position that is changing) and apply it across the board.

[aquaticeagle 10]

"What if your heart tells you to be a pedophile?"

 

If you'll read what I've been posting here, you'll see that I've written several times that when a belief involves harming anyone it is not okay.

 

"Should we let them live the lie that being gay is OK?"

 

Explain to me why being gay is unacceptable and wrong.

 

"You make some broad statements that can't be backed up, aquaticeagle, and it sounds like you have an agenda. You also seem to be hung up on the "physically strong" part of the Oath."

 

What statements have I made that can't be backed up? Can you post some examples so that I can try to back them up? Also, since the entire point of this thread is aimed at the "physically strong" part of the Oath I believe that makes it okay that I am discussing it.

[AnniePoo 13]

Wow! According to SR540Beaver, ministers sympathetic to people who are persecuted because they are homosexual must only live on the east & west coasts. Gee, another "fact" related to gay people that I didn't know!!

 

 

[SR540Beaver 116]

Annie,

 

That isn't exactly what I said. My best friend who is gay was the pastor of a gay church in Dallas, TX for many years. My point is that if you want to look at the percentages, the east and west coast is typically my "progressive" than middle America. You will find more acceptance by clergy in those parts of the nation than you will in others as admitted by Horizon who has lived in both. Will you find ministers who are accepting of homosexuality in Kansas? Yes. Will you find ministers in California and New York who are not accepting of homosexuality? Yes. Will the east and west coast have a higher concentration of ministers who are accepting of homosexuality than ministers in middle America? Yes. There is a mix across the nation, but a higher concentration of one over the other depending on where you look.