Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BSA24

Future BSA President Intent to Eliminate the Ban on Gays

Recommended Posts

"Why then does it not work the same way for society?"

 

Free will. People are free to do their own crazy thing (and they do) while "natural" objects follow set natural laws. It's not rocket science. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a reason that 'The Simpsons' has been so successful, Americans love them so much, lol.

 

Bart (no relation to the Simpsons), are you suggesting that humans are not subject to natural laws? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am willing to entertain the possibility that individualism can ONLY produce this outcome

 

But I've not said that. Of course the individual can choose to subordinate his goals to those of his family. And maybe the various systems of individualist philosophy (Objectivism excluded) even make allowance for that. The point is that individualist philosophy doesn't give any reason for it other than it makes one feel good. The error lies not in the fact that this is the ONLY outcome of individualism (it isn't) but rather that individualist philosophy has no basis for making a moral judgment when it IS the outcome. An individualist can't, for example, condemn a man who leaves his wife and children to start a new family with a younger wife -- at least not on moral grounds. He might find it distasteful but he can't say it's immoral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, two guys are still discussing the topic...

 

Bart said:

 

> Not just the LDS church, there's the LDS, Catholic, and Methodist churches, whose websites

> say that they don't support homosexuality. That's 39.32% of registered Scouts,

 

There are a lot of assumptions there that we have no facts upon which to base them:

 

* Units would fold if CO's said they were out

* CO's would follow their national guidance

* CO's national orgs are united on these policies as perceived

* BSA would not default to local control which would not threaten CO's at all

 

The UMC doesn't support the policy. Don't know where you read that. They have asked it be changed.

 

 

> Losing such a big hunk of Scouts, though, wouldn't just hurt finances. T

> hat'd be a lot of Scouts leaving

 

I don't think it will be that bad. It is inevitable. When it happens, it will end with a whimper and not a bang. LDS will get some special exception, the others will shrug, there will be two news stories of gay guys joining troops, and then not a another sound about it ever again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>I don't think it will be that bad. It is inevitable. When it happens, it will end with a whimper and not a bang. LDS will get some special exception, the others will shrug, there will be two news stories of gay guys joining troops, and then not a another sound about it ever again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um Barry, BSA already sells property to "save the program."

 

Are you certain you aren't confusing correlation with causation? Even if you aren't, since this horse has already left the barn, what the heck, we might as well open the doors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the Methodists don't leave, that's still over a quarter of registered Scouts over the whole US if the LDS and Catholic units close up shop, and well over half of all Scouts in the Western region. Some of the boys might go find another troop somewhere, but most parents just go with the easy youth organization that's offered and most kids just go where their parents send them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bart, A television blitz paid for by AT&T would replace those kids in one cycle. We're talking 200,000 nationwide - maybe. Remember that LDS signs up every kid in the church, but only a small portion actually participate. It's a way of funneling LDS money to BSA.

 

Barry, BSA already did this when they allowed blacks to join. Everyone said it would die. It doubled its size. It doubled again. And again. And again.

 

History says that lowering the discrimination gets rid of controversy without really doing anything negative culturally to scouting.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Barry, BSA already did this when they allowed blacks to join. Everyone said it would die. It doubled its size. It doubled again. And again. And again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then Barry, why doesn't the BSA follow the Scout Law and Oath and state the reason we have this policy is because we don't want to risk a membership decline? Yeah, that doesn't sound very good. How about - the reason we have this policy is because the vast majority of our charter organization members believe this.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Then Barry, why doesn't the BSA follow the Scout Law and Oath and state the reason we have this policy is because we don't want to risk a membership decline? Yeah, that doesn't sound very good. How about - the reason we have this policy is because the vast majority of our charter organization members believe this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The leadership is probably doing what the chartered organizations with the most authority want them to do. These COs are LDS, and the Catholic Church among other religious groups. This policy provides cover for the COs. They do not have to exclude gays as the "local option" would allow. Instead they can point to a National Policy. This is part of what a National organization does. It provides cover for those on the ground.

 

These organizations have a lot of power within BSA. Indeed more than the volunteers and that is the reason the Executive Board will not overturn the policy. They are reflecting the wishes of the COs.

 

You could try to change the mind of the COs, but that will not happen because their stance is faith based, and any attempt to change it based on reason (this is not saying that faith based groups are not reasonable. It is only saying that secular arguments based on reason will not change their minds) will not work.

 

As long as the majority of COs (by majority I mean each unit's individual CO), believe that gays should be prohibited by policy they will be.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Barry, that is not the public reasoning that the BSA is giving for their policy. It is not money, it is not members. Their reasoning is the "role model" issue (morals to some).(This message has been edited by acco40)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and to some it is a moral issue. I believe the point is that there could be a monetary issue for those who don't see it as a moral issue.

 

Sorry typed on phone

 

Edit: corrected spelling from the phone(This message has been edited by BartHumphries)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×