POLICY CHANGE, Diversity and Inclusion MB

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

Just now, Mrjeff said:

Because I didn't know there was a time limit.

Ok, that addresses the first part. What about the second?

If there's no need the debate "the issue", which is (at least) four issues as per your statement above, then why bring up "the" issue?

[Mrjeff 248]

34 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Three possible?  Maybe he did not see that the thread was two months old... it was probably in his Unread queue.

 

Because is no concern of yours.  If you carefully red my post I said that was my opinion and it was not open for debate.

[Mrjeff 248]

48 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Then why did you chime in with this opinion on this thread, two months after the last person said something?

If there's no need the debate "the issue", which is (at least) four issues as per your statement above, then why bring up "the" issue?

I see two possible answers. 

Because, Awake, this is a just another attempt to force young people to openly except things that really have no business inn Scouting.

[Mrjeff 248]

5 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Ok, that addresses the first part. What about the second?

If there's no need the debate "the issue", which is (at least) four issues as per your statement above, then why bring up "the" issue?

Because it's something that we're stuck with and will always be there.

[Mrjeff 248]

I think it's funny when somebody posts something that people don't like, some attack the author, redirect the facts and pretend that they don't understand the meaning.  You know exactly what I mean and it reflects the views of many other Scouters.

[Mrjeff 248]

Before I get scolded again for being un scout like, I will simply let this drop.

[AwakeEnergyScouter 247]

@Mrjeff this is all I need to see, thank you.