CNN wrote:(CNN) -- The eyes of the country are upon Texas today.
That's where 1,400 members of the Boy Scouts of America's National Council are voting on whether to end the 103-year-old group's outright ban on gay youths.
The outcome, to be announced in the late afternoon, follows months of intense debate among interest groups and within the ranks of Scouting itself.
It comes down to a single sentence at the end of a resolution: "No youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone."
If the policy change is approved, the BSA will maintain its ban on openly gay adult leaders.
In February, the Boy Scouts' national executive board postponed a vote on the issue and ordered a survey of its members. That survey showed an organization divided by age and, in some cases, by region.
While most adults in the Scouting community support the BSA's current policy of "excluding open and avowed homosexuals, young parents and teens tend to oppose the policy."
A BSA spokesman called the issue "among the most complex and challenging issues facing the BSA and society today."
A recent Washington Post-ABC News Poll showed that 63% of Americans said they would support allowing gay youths to join the Boy Scouts.
But 61% of surveyed adult members said they support the current BSA policy, which excludes gay youths and adult leaders, the group said.
The vote comes more than a decade after the Supreme Court ruled that the organization has the right to keep out gays but also at a time of declining participation in the American institution.
Membership in Boy Scouts has declined by about a third since 1999. About 2.7 million people now participate nationwide.
The Boy Scouts relies on "chartered organizations" to provide facilities and sponsorship for the individual units.
More than 70% of troops are affiliated with a church or religious groups. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Catholic Church sponsor 43% of troops in the country.
In April, the Utah-based Mormons said, "while the church has not launched any campaign either to effect or prevent a policy change, we have followed the discussion and are satisfied that BSA has made a thoughtful, good-faith effort to address issues."
The vote could have an impact in at least two Western states.
The heavily Mormon-populated states of Utah and Idaho reported that if a unilateral change in the policy were to be made, 97% of chartered organizations would probably leave the organization. The proposal that will be voted on Thursday would allow gay Scouts but forbid gay leaders, so it is unclear how many Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints churches would leave under those conditions.
The Catholic Church in the United States says it will strive to maintain ties with the BSA, regardless of the outcome.
"We would hope that the Boy Scouts of America will continue to provide young people a formative experience grounded in virtue and directed by service to God and others," the National Catholic Committee on Scouting said in February.
A full picture of opinions was not captured in the survey, according to the BSA.
"When the survey process was originally announced, several chartered organizations, including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Baptist church, and many parents asked that their youth members not be contacted as part of the survey."
There's been no shortage of lobbying on the issue, which will be taken up at the BSA's annual meeting in Grapevine, Texas.
"This ban hurts kids and undermines key scouting values like helpfulness, friendliness and courteousness," says the Human Rights Campaign. "It's time to send a message of inclusion -- not discrimination."
James Dale, an Eagle Scout and former assistant troop leader who was kicked out of the Boy Scouts in 1990 because he is gay, criticized the proposal to continue the ban on adult leaders who are gay.
"The Boy Scouts have ruled with a tight fist and said that no gay member can be a part of the Boy Scouts, whether youth or adult," he said. "So, likewise, if they are going to end this policy, they need to end it from the top down and say 'we as the Boy Scouts of America are against discrimination.' "
In an opinion piece for USA Today on Wednesday, BSA President Wayne Perry endorsed the policy change. "Parents, adults in the Scouting community and teens alike tend to agree that youth should not be denied the benefits of Scouting," Perry wrote. "The resolution is not about adults; it is about what is best for young people."
Conservative groups and some religious organizations have argued against making any change, saying it would dilute the Boy Scout message of morality and potentially destroy the organization.
The Family Research Council says the vote is "critically important to the future of the Scouts and the moral fiber of our nation."
It urged people to visit OnMyHonor.net, a group opposing the policy change, to send their thoughts to Scout leaders and executives.
That website reposted an article by the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, who said the BSA was "at the brink."
"For the last few decades, the Boy Scouts have had to fight battles with both secularists and homosexual activists," wrote R. Albert Mohler Jr.
"How, exactly, are openly gay boys to be included in the activities of scouting? We are talking about boys who will now be expected to participate in everything from camping trips to travel with boys who are openly gay," Mohler said. "Boys of these ages just might be the least equipped of all God's creatures to deal with the complexities of the situation. Most parents are likely to decide that, all things considered, this is just not something they want imposed on their sons."
President Barack Obama has been become outspoken in his support of gay rights and same-sex marriage.
When asked about the BSA policy in February, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama believes the Boy Scouts is a valuable organization that has helped educate and build character in American boys.
"He also, as you know, opposes discrimination in all forms. And as such, believes that gay Americans ought to be able to participate in the Boy Scouts. But in terms of the process of their evaluation of their policies, I don't have a comment."
If approved, the new BSA rules would take effect on January 1.
Not sure how many Dakka members were/are scouts, but if you've had anything to do with the program you know this is a huge issue. The Boy Scouts of America is literally damned if they do lift the ban, and damned if they don't. The ban, for those wondering, would only be lifted on homosexual youths entering the organization. Even if this measure passes, homosexual males will still be banned from being leaders in the program.
If the ban is lifted, the BSA stands to lose millions in donations, thousands of churches that host troops, and suffer potential backlash from parents. It could literally kill the program. It also adds in a degree of hippocracy to the organization, as religion is a key part of it. How can you claim you're faithful to religious beliefs when you're allowing people in who actively defy some of your more important teachings (this stands true for Christian troops at least) And since churches are the primary organizations that host boyscout troops, this is a big deal.
If they don't lift the ban, they'll be labeled as a discriminatory organization (which would be true sadly) earning them massive heat from civil rights groups, putting a mark against the program, and severely hurting scouts who are still in. For example, kids working on their Eagle Scout projects have been getting rejected right and left by businesses that used to have no problem donating hundreds of dollars in equipment or services. Why? Because if Lowe's, Walmart, or any other even remotely high profile business were caught donating to an organization that discriminated against people, it'd be a publicity nightmare. As a result, good and honest scouts are getting hurt over something they have nothing to do with. This isn't conjecture, this is actually happening. My brother was turned down by multiple businesses that donated to me no questions asked for this very reason.
As an Eagle Scout, this has been extremely painful to watch. I know an Eagle Scout who is gay and has kept it secret for years so he wouldn't lose his rank. I've worked at scout camps where I knew some of the scouts I was teaching and leading were homosexual, but they had to keep it quiet or they could be thrown out of the program. They deserve to be a scout as much as anybody else, and they earned the ranks they got just like I did.
What hurts the most though is that I see no good outcome of this situation. No matter what the BSA does, people will be furious. There is no easy way out, no perfect solution, nothing. They will lose support somewhere. There will be parents who will be furious and will pull their children from the program. The BSA will get raked over the coals by one news agency or other based on which way they lean. And when people get angry, it won't be the higher ups who will shoulder the brunt of the anger. It'll be the poor scouts trying to sell popcorn, or the kid trying to finish his Eagle Project, or the group of kids hiking out in the woods.
Maybe I'm just overthinking this, though. Maybe they'll lift the ban, the churches will keep their troops all the same, and everything will work out fine. I just hate to see an organization that's done so much good in the world literally getting torn apart over this issue. And of course, once they're done with this issue, they need to figure out what they'll do over non religious scouts (which believe it or not, being an atheist can cost you your Eagle Scout rank)
MrMoustaffa wrote: If the ban is lifted, the BSA stands to lose millions in donations, thousands of churches that host troops, and suffer potential backlash from parents. It could literally kill the program. It also adds in a degree of hippocracy to the organization, as religion is a key part of it. How can you claim you're faithful to religious beliefs when you're allowing people in who actively defy some of your more important teachings (this stands true for Christian troops at least) And since churches are the primary organizations that host boyscout troops, this is a big deal.
So now, rather than "Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.”, the more important teachings of christianity are "Eww Gays"?
I remember scouts, Never made it to eagle because the only program where i was was a morman one, where they get extremely religious in the later part(All scout programs are like this)
I think the religious part is what kills it, I remember an employer saying that he gives eagle scouts first consideration for employment and drop outs last, which made me ineligable, and many others who didnt even go. Scouting is expensive so many people cannot afford it. I think the value we place on it is extremely overhyped and useless.
Well obviously gay men and boys are a risk to the other scouts, after all, they're probably paedophiles hoping to take advantage of them on camping trips.
I was a scout, and have no problem with gay scouts in the organization.
In 1916, the Boy Scouts started the first Negro scout troop, as it was called, despite horrific opposition. In keeping with the times, it was nor a perfect integration, but eventually the Boy Scouts rose to meet the challenge of teaching boys about how to tie knots, survive in the wilderness, the fundamentals of self sufficiency, and so forth regardless of the color of their skin. I'm confident that the organization will again rise to meet this challenge.
MrMoustaffa wrote: If the ban is lifted, the BSA stands to lose millions in donations, thousands of churches that host troops, and suffer potential backlash from parents. It could literally kill the program. It also adds in a degree of hippocracy to the organization, as religion is a key part of it. How can you claim you're faithful to religious beliefs when you're allowing people in who actively defy some of your more important teachings (this stands true for Christian troops at least) And since churches are the primary organizations that host boyscout troops, this is a big deal.
So now, rather than "Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.”, the more important teachings of christianity are "Eww Gays"?
Really?
There are churches that would do it.
That's also why I'm not as nearly religious as I used to be
hotsauceman1 wrote: I remember scouts, Never made it to eagle because the only program where i was was a morman one, where they get extremely religious in the later part(All scout programs are like this) I think the religious part is what kills it, I remember an employer saying that he gives eagle scouts first consideration for employment and drop outs last, which made me ineligable, and many others who didnt even go. Scouting is expensive so many people cannot afford it. I think the value we place on it is extremely overhyped and useless.
Please edit your post, I got through the higher parts of scouting without getting a religious emblem beyond the age of 15. If your program was one related to the Latter Day Saints, that is their choice and that Troops specific choice. Yes technically to advance through Star, Life, and to Eagle, you had to live the Scout Law in your daily life (the 12th point is Reverent, the 13th point is Hungry, and the 14th point is Duct Tape), but as long as you were at least agnostic you could skate by on reverence. Like the old camp staff joke goes... "Scouting is a safe haven, unless you're gay or an atheist" which ironically enough was first told to me by a CIT who is gay an an atheist. Small world.
Glad the scouts finally wised up, but they're projected to lose 10% of the scouting population over this decision though, which sucks because those boys just as much as the gay boys that wanted to learn from scouting, could probably use the ideals scouting teaches.
Edit: Should be noted that before this ban, you could not be considered gay until you were 18, because until you were 18 you were still growing and confused. This is a bupkiss argument, but it allowed many of my friends to stay in the program. Also note, gay leaders, still not allowed...
hotsauceman1 wrote: I remember scouts, Never made it to eagle because the only program where i was was a morman one, where they get extremely religious in the later part(All scout programs are like this)
I think the religious part is what kills it, I remember an employer saying that he gives eagle scouts first consideration for employment and drop outs last, which made me ineligable, and many others who didnt even go. Scouting is expensive so many people cannot afford it. I think the value we place on it is extremely overhyped and useless.
Please edit your post, I got through the higher parts of scouting without getting a religious emblem beyond the age of 15. If your program was one related to the Latter Day Saints, that is their choice and that Troops specific choice. Yes technically to advance through Star, Life, and to Eagle, you had to live the Scout Law in your daily life (the 12th point is Reverent, the 13th point is Hungry, and the 14th point is Duct Tape), but as long as you were at least agnostic you could skate by on reverence. Like the old camp staff joke goes... "Scouting is a safe haven, unless you're gay or an atheist" which ironically enough was first told to me by a CIT who is gay an an atheist. Small world.
Glad the scouts finally wised up, but they're projected to lose 10% of the scouting population over this decision though, which sucks because those boys just as much as the gay boys that wanted to learn from scouting, could probably use the ideals scouting teaches.
Edit: Should be noted that before this ban, you could not be considered gay until you were 18, because until you were 18 you were still growing and confused. This is a bupkiss argument, but it allowed many of my friends to stay in the program. Also note, gay leaders, still not allowed...
Seconded. I made Eagle in my Troop just fine without really any of the religious focus that has been presented here. Maybe our Troop was more progressive than others at its time, but religion was never a big part of our Scouting experience. We weren't directly (or even indirectly that I am aware of) supported by a church or other religious organization.
I am pleased with this development and think that it is at least partially spurred by the U.S. military elimination of DADT policy.
As a private organization, Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. respects the values and beliefs of each of its members and does not intrude into personal matters. Therefore, there are no membership policies on sexual preference. However, Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. has firm standards relating to the appropriate conduct of adult volunteers and staff. The Girl Scout organization does not condone or permit sexual displays of any sort by its members during Girl Scout activities, nor does it permit the advocacy or promotion of a personal lifestyle or sexual preference. These are private matters for girls and their families to address.
Emphasis by me-- do not advocate either heterosexuality or homosexuality, because neither one is within the bounds of the organization. Quite simply, it is none of their business, and they recognize that and respect it. Similarly, the girl scouts accept transgender people who identify as girls, and whose family present as girls to the scouts. "For 100 years, Girl Scouts has prided itself on being an inclusive organization serving girls from all walks of life. We handle cases involving transgender children on a case-by-case basis, with a focus on ensuring the welfare and best interests of the child in question and the other girls in the troop as our highest priority."
Perhaps the Boy Scouts of America have come to realize that this is by far a better approach. If so, good for them.
hotsauceman1 wrote: It was indeed latter day saints, But they where the only troop near us, so it made eagle impossible for me
It had to have been troop specific. I live in Utah, have been a Packmaster, and have my boy in the local Boy Scout troop. We never blocked anyone's advancement to the highest ranks no matter their religion.
I am quite happy with this decision.
As an Eagle Scout. I had threatened to give them my Eagle Badge until they came to a decision. At least they did. Finally.
hotsauceman1 wrote: It was indeed latter day saints, But they where the only troop near us, so it made eagle impossible for me
It had to have been troop specific. I live in Utah, have been a Packmaster, and have my boy in the local Boy Scout troop. We never blocked anyone's advancement to the highest ranks no matter their religion.
It was like that here. It involved going into the temple so i couldnt.
Looks like they've made the right choice. It's better to limp towards the right side of history than die a slow death by refusing to leave the wrong one.
hotsauceman1 wrote: It was indeed latter day saints, But they where the only troop near us, so it made eagle impossible for me
It had to have been troop specific. I live in Utah, have been a Packmaster, and have my boy in the local Boy Scout troop. We never blocked anyone's advancement to the highest ranks no matter their religion.
It was like that here. It involved going into the temple so i couldnt.
Something is funky then if what you say is true. I would complain to the people in charge in your area because that is totaly not right for that troop to do.
Quite frankly, They wanted me out the second i got there, They where ALL morman and didnt like me there, The fellow boy scouts atleast did, I was glad to leave.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Quite frankly, They wanted me out the second i got there, They where ALL morman and didnt like me there, The fellow boy scouts atleast did, I was glad to leave.
Sorry you got into a group like that, but I still say let the council leadership know what goes on with that troop because if what you say is true, they are a disgrace and need to be dealt with.
Got some interesting reactions talking to a guy I know when the ban was lifted. He said something along the lines of "I feel my Eagle has been cheapened. A major point of being a scout is being religious (he's a christian) Homosexuality is explicitly forbidden as part of my faith and allowing it while saying a scout can still be reverent feels like hypocrisy." And as much as I hate it, he has a point. Not that I agree with it, but it's one you're going to be hearing a lot over the next few days I'd bet.
Boy Scouts is a private organization, and regardless of how religious your troop may have been, it is a religious organization as a whole. Would you force the Catholic Church to allow homosexual men to be the pope, because it's discriminatory to deny them? When their religion clearly states that yes, that's something they're not allowed to do or encourage? When they're a private organization that technically could deny you entry for whatever reason they felt like? I realize what I'm saying right now is going to come across as extremely offensive to some people, but it's a valid point. The Boy Scouts of America is a religious organization, and a private one at that. They can allow or deny entry to whomever they want, for whatever reasoning they wish, no matter how politically correct it may be. It is not the equivalent of the high school football team, where anyone who wants to join is to be allowed regardless of their lifestyle. The BSA is a private institution and as a result can technically refuse membership however they see fit.
In the eyes of people who opposed lifting the ban, allowing homosexuals or atheists into the scouting program erodes the mission of what scouting tries to accomplish, and to be brutally honest, they're right (partly). How are you reverent when you ignore a clear rule of your god (homosexuality is a sin)? How can you be reverent if you don't believe in god at all? Religion is an incredibly important part of scouting, regardless of how religious an individual troop may have been. It's part of the Scout Law, and the code all scouts are expected to live by.
Keep in mind that even after I've said all this, I'm not against gay males in scouting. I have several friends who are homosexual and were some of the best scouts I have ever met. I'm just trying to point out that the people who do oppose are not doing it so much as a "we hate the gays, we need to keep them out," hate crime, so much as "homosexuality directly contradicts with some of the messages scouting teaches about religion. We will not allow it as it is against our values." People really need to keep that in mind. This has less to deal with homosexuality, and more of people believing that the BSA should stick to its values no matter how much pressure society puts on them. It's the same reason why you catch flak for being an atheist in scouting, because you're actively going against the program's message.
Also: Mormons are a bit infamous for being... strict, when it comes to religion and scouting. I've met many people who were chased off from scouting for good because of an overbearing Mormon troop. Best luck I've seen with troops seems to be with ones that are sponsored by protestant churches like Baptists or Methodists, as they seem to be a bit more relaxed.
MEh OT. I am interested on how they will take this, especially my old troop.
Quite Frankly, I never understood the importance put on scouts.
IMO they teach things that are no longer needed, Why do i need to learn basket weaving and wood carving?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrMoustaffa wrote: This has less to deal with homosexuality, and more of people believing that the BSA should stick to its values no matter how much pressure society puts on them. It's the same reason why you catch flak for being an atheist in scouting, because you're actively going against the program's message.
That is th problem, So much emphasis on scouting is pushed, some colleges even considerate it in application, Non-religious ones aswell, that it is wrong to deny it to people. It like when country clubs where forced to allow women. They where so vital to business ventures that it was consdered wrong.
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrMoustaffa wrote: This has less to deal with homosexuality, and more of people believing that the BSA should stick to its values no matter how much pressure society puts on them. It's the same reason why you catch flak for being an atheist in scouting, because you're actively going against the program's message.
That is th problem, So much emphasis on scouting is pushed, some colleges even considerate it in application, Non-religious ones aswell, that it is wrong to deny it to people. It like when country clubs where forced to allow women. They where so vital to business ventures that it was consdered wrong.
That's because being an Eagle Scout used to mean something. The Eagle Rank takes a lot of serious work to get if you're doing it right, and requires quite a bit of community service, leadership, and showing that you live by the Scout Law (trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. Those all tend to look good on an application ). It was a big deal to get it and seeing that on a person's resume showed that they had leadership experience, were a hard worker, and had a good moral compass.
It's meant to prepare you for life as an adult. To teach you independence, confidence, good morals (both religious and non) manners, and useful skills. Sure, things like basket weaving weren't exactly that useful, but First Aid, Wilderness Survival, Swimming, Hiking, the Citizenship badges, Personal Fitness, Family Life, Emergency Preparedness, Pioneering, and other merit badges taught you extremely useful skills, or at the very least taught you to be more self reliant. Heck, I still use knots I learned from the Pioneering merit badge every day as a stagehand.
Merit badges should never be the be all end all of the program. They're simply a tool that's supposed to be used to teach you helpful skills that you can use for the rest of your life.
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MrMoustaffa wrote: This has less to deal with homosexuality, and more of people believing that the BSA should stick to its values no matter how much pressure society puts on them. It's the same reason why you catch flak for being an atheist in scouting, because you're actively going against the program's message.
That is th problem, So much emphasis on scouting is pushed, some colleges even considerate it in application, Non-religious ones aswell, that it is wrong to deny it to people. It like when country clubs where forced to allow women. They where so vital to business ventures that it was consdered wrong.
That's because being an Eagle Scout used to mean something. The Eagle Rank takes a lot of serious work to get if you're doing it right, and requires quite a bit of community service, leadership, and showing that you live by the Scout Law (trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. Those all tend to look good on an application ). It was a big deal to get it and seeing that on a person's resume showed that they had leadership experience, were a hard worker, and had a good moral compass.
It's meant to prepare you for life as an adult. To teach you independence, confidence, good morals (both religious and non) manners, and useful skills. Sure, things like basket weaving weren't exactly that useful, but First Aid, Wilderness Survival, Swimming, Hiking, the Citizenship badges, Personal Fitness, Family Life, Emergency Preparedness, Pioneering, and other merit badges taught you extremely useful skills, or at the very least taught you to be more self reliant. Heck, I still use knots I learned from the Pioneering merit badge every day as a stagehand.
Merit badges should never be the be all end all of the program. They're simply a tool that's supposed to be used to teach you helpful skills that you can use for the rest of your life.
Sorry for OT
If it is a resume booster, then why should it be denied to people because of how they believe? They cant ask you for your religion on your resume. And i got more prepared for being an adult from HS then i did scouts. You want to know what someone did for their eagle rank? Built a Bench, that is all, they got their rank.
This is a good move for the BSA. It may mean some short term pain, but in the long run they needed to adapt or they would die off. The longer they put this issue off the more damage will be done in regard to leaders as well.
Some of these new Gay scouts will be some of the future leaders. They might as well deal with that sooner than later as well.
There are plenty of Christian churches that accept homosexuals in their church, so the whole Christian religion excuse really doesnt hold up any more. As far as the Latter Day Saints go, feth them, they wouldnt even allow black people in their church until what, the 70s? (Dont remember exact date but they discriminated against blacks well into modern times).
As far as the value of your Eagle badge, it was NEVER worth more than the individual effort you put into it anyway. Your badge is likewise not diminished if someone put less work into theirs. Thats the reality of the situation.
MrMoustaffa wrote: In the eyes of people who opposed lifting the ban, allowing homosexuals or atheists into the scouting program erodes the mission of what scouting tries to accomplish, and to be brutally honest, they're right (partly). How are you reverent when you ignore a clear rule of your god (homosexuality is a sin)? How can you be reverent if you don't believe in god at all? Religion is an incredibly important part of scouting, regardless of how religious an individual troop may have been. It's part of the Scout Law, and the code all scouts are expected to live by.
I get the argument.
Ultimately the only real, satisfactory conclusion to the whole mess will come when Christians opposition to homosexuality disappears.
@Motyak: it seems to mean less now for no reason that has to do with gays. Instead it seems to be more of just a general indifference to scouting in general. I imagine that would have something to do with the drop off in membership and the fact that sadly, many kids experience with scouting ends up like hotsauceman's or SlaveToDarkness's.
@HotSauceman, he got off lucky if that's true. You're supposed to do a heck of a lot more than just put up a bench. You sure he didn't do anything else?
Also realize that I'm just playing devil's advocate here when I'm arguing guys. I'm very happy the ban was lifted, and hope that more progress is made soon. Just trying to explain why you're even seeing resistance to this in the first place. Otherwise the ban would've lifted a long time ago.
MrMoustaffa wrote: @Motyak: it seems to mean less now for no reason that has to do with gays. Instead it seems to be more of just a general indifference to scouting in general. I imagine that would have something to do with the drop off in membership and the fact that sadly, many kids experience with scouting ends up like hotsauceman's or SlaveToDarkness's.
I knew I was misinterpreting it, I'm going to go back and edit, in the context it read to me like you meant because of the lifting of the ban, but I get it. Mah bad. I just thought that, on the off chance you weren't, it needed to be said.
It's sad that some folks interpret their religion as disallowing the acceptance of homosexuals as fellow Scouts, and ethical and moral human beings. Hopefully those who hold that their faith is a major component of their Scouting will come to interpret that as meaning that they need to prioritize the command to love their neighbor, and that sexuality is none of the organization's business.
I think Ouze has a good point that the acceptance of black Scouts provoked similar uproar, and that Scouting got past that.
And Melissia's comments about how the Girl Scouts handle it hopefully also show how the Boy Scouts can approach the issue..
So now, rather than "Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.”
My thoughts exactly.
Anyways, don't Churches have better things to do with their money?
The BSA is a great cause and all, but surely there are better ones out their for religious groups to donate to?
Yeah but then they wouldn't be able to indoctrinate the youth as effectively...
Don't have a clue do ya boy? What are you twelve?
Are church has botha boy scout and girl scout troop. When the fires came through. The Scouts were at the church serving drinks and food to the firefighters.
It fits with churches rather well.
Meh. Some churches will drop them. Others won't. The GS don't have such structures. They get flack and are less supported, tbut they still exist.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JWhex wrote: This is a good move for the BSA. It may mean some short term pain, but in the long run they needed to adapt or they would die off. The longer they put this issue off the more damage will be done in regard to leaders as well.
Some of these new Gay scouts will be some of the future leaders. They might as well deal with that sooner than later as well.
There are plenty of Christian churches that accept homosexuals in their church, so the whole Christian religion excuse really doesnt hold up any more. As far as the Latter Day Saints go, feth them, they wouldnt even allow black people in their church until what, the 70s? (Dont remember exact date but they discriminated against blacks well into modern times).
As far as the value of your Eagle badge, it was NEVER worth more than the individual effort you put into it anyway. Your badge is likewise not diminished if someone put less work into theirs. Thats the reality of the situation.
Maybe its a good move. Maybe its helps them from dying off, maybe it does the opposite. We shall see (but Frazzled not care actually).
none of this matters when box car derby time comes around. Get out of the way kids. The Dad's must compete!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mannahnin wrote: It's sad that some folks interpret their religion as disallowing the acceptance of homosexuals as fellow Scouts, and ethical and moral human beings. Hopefully those who hold that their faith is a major component of their Scouting will come to interpret that as meaning that they need to prioritize the command to love their neighbor, and that sexuality is none of the organization's business.
I think Ouze has a good point that the acceptance of black Scouts provoked similar uproar, and that Scouting got past that.
And Melissia's comments about how the Girl Scouts handle it hopefully also show how the Boy Scouts can approach the issue..
JWhex wrote: As far as the value of your Eagle badge, it was NEVER worth more than the individual effort you put into it anyway. Your badge is likewise not diminished if someone put less work into theirs. Thats the reality of the situation.
I disagree with the bolded sentiment. As someone that officially earned his Eagle 2 weeks before his 18th Birthday (Board of Review was for the month after my birthday, but that's allowed by the BSA), I congratulate any person that has taken the time and the effort to take their full 7 years (or so) to get their Eagle badge. I worked for 6 years at a local Boy Scout Camp (Beaumont Scout Reservation in Rock Creek, Ohio), and during my tenure there I met hundreds of young men that were in scouting because of their dad, their friends, or even themselves. Most of the boys that I had met were in it to camp, have fun, and get their Eagle if they wanted it. My third year on camp staff I was in charge of the first year scout program, and the first week of the summer we were "bought out" by the local LDS diocese (idk their word for it) so that the LDS troops from around Ohio could go to the scout camp without issue. I had a young boy who was 10 and had joined scouts a month or two before camp. By the end of the week (5 days) his dad was congratulating me on helping his son achieve first class... ("4th" rank after joining). It took me 2 years or so to reach first class (granted I had life by the time I was 15, and had everything done for Eagle with the exception of my last few Eagle required badges by 16), but still to reach First Class in a week?! I didn't see that kid again because for some reason the diocese wanted to do something else instead of summer camp idk...
I also know the youngest Eagle Scout from the Great Trails Council (Akron, Ohio/Summit County), the kid earned his eagle right around 13yrs old (right around the earliest you can earn it). This kid had a "bright" future in scouting. The kid went to the local National Youth Leadership Training program, and was kicked out because he was a hassle for the staff, the other campers, and didn't know basic scouting skills (like knots and lashings, things you need to know to earn your tenderfoot, second class, and first class ranks). So I have major problems with kids that are pushed through the program and are churned out like an Eagle rank factory. Do I believe the addition of Gay scouts cheapens my badge? Feth no! I worked hard to get it, and a gay scout is now just a scout, and if he works hard to get his badge I have no problem with him.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Got some interesting reactions talking to a guy I know when the ban was lifted. He said something along the lines of "I feel my Eagle has been cheapened. A major point of being a scout is being religious (he's a christian) Homosexuality is explicitly forbidden as part of my faith and allowing it while saying a scout can still be reverent feels like hypocrisy." And as much as I hate it, he has a point. Not that I agree with it, but it's one you're going to be hearing a lot over the next few days I'd bet.
The thing is, thats a BS excuse. Most Christian groups (at a high enough level to think about these things) say "I don't care what your sexuality is, just don't go having sex with your own sex". Just the same as they say "don't go having sex outside marriage". IMO they are on the same level but people get so much more angry about one than the other. From my point of view it seems that the religious argument is nothing more than an excuse to hang your homophobia on.
Boy Scouts is a private organization, and regardless of how religious your troop may have been, it is a religious organization as a whole. Would you force the Catholic Church to allow homosexual men to be the pope, because it's discriminatory to deny them?
Don't know about popes (kind of a limited data pool), but there are plenty of homosexual priests. It used to be the job of choice for intelligent gay men 100+ years ago. Or at the very least gay sons were encouraged to become priests.
In the eyes of people who opposed lifting the ban, allowing homosexuals or atheists into the scouting program erodes the mission of what scouting tries to accomplish, and to be brutally honest, they're right (partly). How are you reverent when you ignore a clear rule of your god (homosexuality is a sin)? How can you be reverent if you don't believe in god at all? Religion is an incredibly important part of scouting, regardless of how religious an individual troop may have been. It's part of the Scout Law, and the code all scouts are expected to live by.
In the eyes of some people letting catholics in is wrong... As I found out in one of the troops I was in when I was young. I was clearly told that I would not be able to stay in the troop if I did not attend the various CofE services they held... On a Sunday... when I was at Church...
MrMoustaffa wrote: This has less to deal with homosexuality, and more of people believing that the BSA should stick to its values no matter how much pressure society puts on them.
The problem is, though, in my mind that it is based on a poor implementation. IMO they should keep out of it or ban people who are cohabiting from being leaders and start asking about everyones sex life.
Too many people have a hang up about being gay yet never stop to look at the context. The BSA should really have a "Sex has no place in the BSA, gay, strait or otherwise." attitude like the girl scouts do.
MrMoustaffa wrote: @Motyak: it seems to mean less now for no reason that has to do with gays. Instead it seems to be more of just a general indifference to scouting in general. I imagine that would have something to do with the drop off in membership and the fact that sadly, many kids experience with scouting ends up like hotsauceman's or SlaveToDarkness's.
@HotSauceman, he got off lucky if that's true. You're supposed to do a heck of a lot more than just put up a bench. You sure he didn't do anything else?
Also realize that I'm just playing devil's advocate here when I'm arguing guys. I'm very happy the ban was lifted, and hope that more progress is made soon. Just trying to explain why you're even seeing resistance to this in the first place. Otherwise the ban would've lifted a long time ago.
MrMoustaffa wrote: @Motyak: it seems to mean less now for no reason that has to do with gays. Instead it seems to be more of just a general indifference to scouting in general. I imagine that would have something to do with the drop off in membership and the fact that sadly, many kids experience with scouting ends up like hotsauceman's or SlaveToDarkness's.
@HotSauceman, he got off lucky if that's true. You're supposed to do a heck of a lot more than just put up a bench. You sure he didn't do anything else?
Also realize that I'm just playing devil's advocate here when I'm arguing guys. I'm very happy the ban was lifted, and hope that more progress is made soon. Just trying to explain why you're even seeing resistance to this in the first place. Otherwise the ban would've lifted a long time ago.
Nothing else but a bench.
I painted a room. Granted it was for the 1st graders and kindergarden students of the elementary school attached to our charter organization (a Catholic churg with a k through 8 school attached to it) after the professional painters came in and fethed it up! Granted it was a large room, and they haven't had to repaint it in the 8 years since I did it, and shouldn't have to do it for at least another 12
On one hand, sexuality has no place in Boy Scouts. There's no logical reason why someone should be loudly declaring how homosexual or not they may or may not happen to be. Sexuality has nothing to do with community service, knots, camping, or any of the other awesome things the Boy Scouts are about.
On the other hand, sexuality has no place in Boy Scouts. Whether or not one of the kids is into dudes or women isn't a reason to ostracize him. Sexuality has nothing to do with community service, knots, camping, or any of the other awesome things the Boy Scouts are about.
In short, do whoever or whatever makes you happy, seriously, whatever you want, just don't make me have to hear about it, because I don't give a damn.
On one hand, sexuality has no place in Boy Scouts. There's no logical reason why someone should be loudly declaring how homosexual or not they may or may not happen to be. Sexuality has nothing to do with community service, knots, camping, or any of the other awesome things the Boy Scouts are about.
On the other hand, sexuality has no place in Boy Scouts. Whether or not one of the kids is into dudes or women isn't a reason to ostracize him. Sexuality has nothing to do with community service, knots, camping, or any of the other awesome things the Boy Scouts are about.
In short, do whoever or whatever makes you happy, seriously, whatever you want, just don't make me have to hear about it, because I don't give a damn.
That's pretty much how I feel about it. I was watching World New Tonight last night, and they had a father say, "Now we have to teach boys as young as 6 about homosexuality." I was yelling at the TV, "NO YOU DON'T YOU BLITHERING IDIOT!" It just means that instead of straight scouts and gay scouts we now just have scouts... Time to move on and get some merit badges. Also if anyone is interested I am a merit badge counselor for the Game Design Merit Badge
On one hand, sexuality has no place in Boy Scouts. There's no logical reason why someone should be loudly declaring how homosexual or not they may or may not happen to be. Sexuality has nothing to do with community service, knots, camping, or any of the other awesome things the Boy Scouts are about.
On the other hand, sexuality has no place in Boy Scouts. Whether or not one of the kids is into dudes or women isn't a reason to ostracize him. Sexuality has nothing to do with community service, knots, camping, or any of the other awesome things the Boy Scouts are about.
In short, do whoever or whatever makes you happy, seriously, whatever you want, just don't make me have to hear about it, because I don't give a damn.
That's pretty much how I feel about it. I was watching World New Tonight last night, and they had a father say, "Now we have to teach boys as young as 6 about homosexuality." I was yelling at the TV, "NO YOU DON'T YOU BLITHERING IDIOT!" It just means that instead of straight scouts and gay scouts we now just have scouts... Time to move on and get some merit badges. Also if anyone is interested I am a merit badge counselor for the Game Design Merit Badge
hotsauceman1 wrote: Now see we always did the lame merit badges at my troop,, Not the cool ones.
Why did i have to learn basket weaving? WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You missed out big time. One year at summer camp for me was rifle shooting, archery, motorboating, swimming, and climbing (on the new rock tower they just built).
hotsauceman1 wrote: Now see we always did the lame merit badges at my troop,, Not the cool ones.
Why did i have to learn basket weaving? WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You missed out big time. One year at summer camp for me was rifle shooting, archery, motorboating, swimming, and climbing (on the new rock tower they just built).
Best year ever.
Well i had some cool ones, But i tend to went towards the intellectual ones rather then really physical(I love the one where we learned about nature and went diviing) They had Rifleshooting, But this is cali remember?
hotsauceman1 wrote: Now see we always did the lame merit badges at my troop,, Not the cool ones.
Why did i have to learn basket weaving? WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You missed out big time. One year at summer camp for me was rifle shooting, archery, motorboating, swimming, and climbing (on the new rock tower they just built).
Also if you got Basket Weaving before it became more than 2 requirements, you have every right to brag about that ridiculously easy badge .
Surprisingly I didn't have half the merit badges I taught. I taught First Aid, Emergency Prepardeness, Camping, Hiking*, Cooking, Pioneering*, Rifle*, Archery, Backpacking*, Wilderness Survival*, Photography, Citizenship in the Nation... there were probably a few more that I taught... and I guess also technically Game Design... but I haven't taught that one yet.
* - Denotes a badge Alf taught but did not earn!
Edit: Frazz, is GC a GS or is she a part of Venturing?
Alfndrate wrote: Also if you got Basket Weaving before it became more than 2 requirements, you have every right to brag about that ridiculously easy badge .
Surprisingly I didn't have half the merit badges I taught. I taught First Aid, Emergency Prepardeness, Camping, Hiking*, Cooking, Pioneering*, Rifle*, Archery, Backpacking*, Wilderness Survival*, Photography, Citizenship in the Nation... there were probably a few more that I taught... and I guess also technically Game Design... but I haven't taught that one yet.
* - Denotes a badge Alf taught but did not earn!
Edit: Frazz, is GC a GS or is she a part of Venturing?
I cant remember, But it took me two years(Two different camps)
NEver did get fishing though, No fish grow big enough to eat around here.
Alfndrate wrote: Also if you got Basket Weaving before it became more than 2 requirements, you have every right to brag about that ridiculously easy badge .
Surprisingly I didn't have half the merit badges I taught. I taught First Aid, Emergency Prepardeness, Camping, Hiking*, Cooking, Pioneering*, Rifle*, Archery, Backpacking*, Wilderness Survival*, Photography, Citizenship in the Nation... there were probably a few more that I taught... and I guess also technically Game Design... but I haven't taught that one yet.
* - Denotes a badge Alf taught but did not earn!
Edit: Frazz, is GC a GS or is she a part of Venturing?
Wow, I actually misunderstood what they were voting on, so I appreciate this posting of the OP.
If it is simply to allow scout, not leaders, to be homosexual then I see absolutely no issue with them allowing it (my personal opinion, of course!).
The thing I have been personally grappling with is whether or not the boy scouts should allow homosexual leaders. For some of you, maybe this is a no-brainer "yes", but as others have stated it's a private organization with religious ties.
One of the things I really cherish in this country is freedom of religion. Most churches do not allow homosexual ministers because their teachings forbid it, and that's 100% their right in this country. In a similar way, the boy scouts may choose not to have homosexual troop leaders and that is their right.
So, to get back to where I started- I did not realize this was only on whether or not the scouts themselves could identify as homosexuals. I think that makes it a lot easier "yes" vote, just as it is easier for churches to have homosexual members (who, if the church does not believe in homosexuality, they are obviously trying to change the mind of just as they would be with a heterosexual couple having sex out of wedlock) than to have homosexual leaders / ministers.
Anyway, as the OP said, they're a bit screwed either way, but they'll have to make the best of it!
RiTides wrote: Wow, I actually misunderstood what they were voting on, so I appreciate this posting of the OP.
If it is simply to allow scout, not leaders, to be homosexual then I see absolutely no issue with them allowing it (my personal opinion, of course!).
The thing I have been personally grappling with is whether or not the boy scouts should allow homosexual leaders. For some of you, maybe this is a no-brainer "yes", but as others have stated it's a private organization with religious ties.
One of the things I really cherish in this country is freedom of religion. Most churches do not allow homosexual ministers because their teachings forbid it, and that's 100% their right in this country. In a similar way, the boy scouts may choose not to have homosexual troop leaders and that is their right.
So, to get back to where I started- I did not realize this was only on whether or not the scouts themselves could identify as homosexuals. I think that makes it a lot easier "yes" vote, just as it is easier for churches to have homosexual members (who, if the church does not believe in homosexuality, they are obviously trying to change the mind of just as they would be with a heterosexual couple having sex out of wedlock) than to have homosexual leaders / ministers.
Anyway, as the OP said, they're a bit screwed either way, but they'll have to make the best of it!
Here is the thing, It isnt the government enforcing this or anything like this, the court has upheld that it is their right to ban gay members. Freedom of religion is not applicaple here because the GOVT isnt enforcing this, it is the orginization itself.
RiTides wrote: Wow, I actually misunderstood what they were voting on, so I appreciate this posting of the OP.
If it is simply to allow scout, not leaders, to be homosexual then I see absolutely no issue with them allowing it (my personal opinion, of course!).
The thing I have been personally grappling with is whether or not the boy scouts should allow homosexual leaders. For some of you, maybe this is a no-brainer "yes", but as others have stated it's a private organization with religious ties.
One of the things I really cherish in this country is freedom of religion. Most churches do not allow homosexual ministers because their teachings forbid it, and that's 100% their right in this country. In a similar way, the boy scouts may choose not to have homosexual troop leaders and that is their right.
So, to get back to where I started- I did not realize this was only on whether or not the scouts themselves could identify as homosexuals. I think that makes it a lot easier "yes" vote, just as it is easier for churches to have homosexual members (who, if the church does not believe in homosexuality, they are obviously trying to change the mind of just as they would be with a heterosexual couple having sex out of wedlock) than to have homosexual leaders / ministers.
Anyway, as the OP said, they're a bit screwed either way, but they'll have to make the best of it!
Letting homosexual leaders be open in the boy scouts is 5 to 10 years down the road, if that. Especially once you start having the first major crop of openly gay scouts start hitting 18 and want to help volunteer for their troop after they "age out".
Steve steveson wrote: Don't know about popes (kind of a limited data pool), but there are plenty of homosexual priests. It used to be the job of choice for intelligent gay men 100+ years ago. Or at the very least gay sons were encouraged to become priests.
The incitement of religious hatred of homosexuals in general, and gay males in specific (the cultural concept of homosexual females barely even existed until fairly recently; the idea that "it isn't real sex unless a man's involved" is sadly still prevalent to some extent in how lesbians are treated), is a lot more recent than many folk would readily admit-- while it began as a political tool of certain Byzantium politicians against their political enemies, it really only started to take off in the Victorian era more than a thousand years later, and was escalated up to its current extreme by Puritans. It was certainly not present during the time of the writing of the books, at the very least not in any form that modern Christians might find recognizable.
Humanity, suffice it to say, has issues. Not all of them are ancient. Based off of what I have read from historical accounts, including accounts of modifications made to the Bible, I believe that there is no hatred of homosexuals promulgated by the original Christian texts, and that the texts have been modified and mistranslated over the years to include them as the Christian culture changed over the years. In many ways, our focus is far different than the original writers likely would have intended.
This is something that the Scouts in the US have to get past.
This has been a non-issue in the UK Scouting for quite some time.
I've worked with quite a few openly gay scout leaders over the years without any problems.
Parents largely didn't care, scouts didn't care either.
Also, Scouting in the UK is growing, we have waiting lists for most groups.
It should be an inclusive movement, not an exclusive one.
At the international camps I've been to, mixing with scouts all over the world, most express dismay about how backwards BSA are over this issue.
This is a step in the right direction.
Well, I'd assume that now that there will be gay members gay leaders are just around the corner. Now that the organization legitimately recognizes them as members they are a lot harder to ignore.
Goliath wrote: So now, rather than "Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.”, the more important teachings of christianity are "Eww Gays"?
Really?
Welcome to the American version of Christianity. 'Love thy neighbor' is passe. "Hate the gay and all his works" is the modern golden rule.
Because God and America obviously have nothing more important to do than to extend their morality into every single bedroom in America. Much more important than things like cure cancer or forment global peace or prevent people from starving...
hotsauceman1 wrote: Now see we always did the lame merit badges at my troop,, Not the cool ones.
Why did i have to learn basket weaving? WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The gay scouts by asking to do that merit badge were educating you on homosexuality. I suppose after the basket weaving badge came back, sack, and crack merit badge , both of which form part of the process to becoming a peacock scout.
I leave for one friggin day and now I'm behind on everything.
Melissia wrote:
Steve steveson wrote: Don't know about popes (kind of a limited data pool), but there are plenty of homosexual priests. It used to be the job of choice for intelligent gay men 100+ years ago. Or at the very least gay sons were encouraged to become priests.
The incitement of religious hatred of homosexuals in general, and gay males in specific (the cultural concept of homosexual females barely even existed until fairly recently; the idea that "it isn't real sex unless a man's involved" is sadly still prevalent to some extent in how lesbians are treated), is a lot more recent than many folk would readily admit-- while it began as a political tool of certain Byzantium politicians against their political enemies, it really only started to take off in the Victorian era more than a thousand years later, and was escalated up to its current extreme by Puritans. It was certainly not present during the time of the writing of the books, at the very least not in any form that modern Christians might find recognizable.
Humanity, suffice it to say, has issues. Not all of them are ancient. Based off of what I have read from historical accounts, including accounts of modifications made to the Bible, I believe that there is no hatred of homosexuals promulgated by the original Christian texts, and that the texts have been modified and mistranslated over the years to include them as the Christian culture changed over the years. In many ways, our focus is far different than the original writers likely would have intended.
Welcome to 'Murica. We hate everyone different than us. Especially if they're different in a way that makes our brains hurt.
Soladrin wrote:I read motorboating completely out of context there.
Alright you win, enjoy your exalt
hotsauceman1 wrote:Now see we always did the lame merit badges at my troop,, Not the cool ones.
Why did i have to learn basket weaving? WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Because you're a square No but seriously I feel bad for you man, I've seen a lot of kids quit scout because their troop decided to do some easy "boring" badges first, and they just lost interest.
MrMoustaffa wrote: @Motyak: it seems to mean less now for no reason that has to do with gays. Instead it seems to be more of just a general indifference to scouting in general. I imagine that would have something to do with the drop off in membership and the fact that sadly, many kids experience with scouting ends up like hotsauceman's or SlaveToDarkness's.
@HotSauceman, he got off lucky if that's true. You're supposed to do a heck of a lot more than just put up a bench. You sure he didn't do anything else?
Also realize that I'm just playing devil's advocate here when I'm arguing guys. I'm very happy the ban was lifted, and hope that more progress is made soon. Just trying to explain why you're even seeing resistance to this in the first place. Otherwise the ban would've lifted a long time ago.
Nothing else but a bench.
I painted a room. Granted it was for the 1st graders and kindergarden students of the elementary school attached to our charter organization (a Catholic churg with a k through 8 school attached to it) after the professional painters came in and fethed it up! Granted it was a large room, and they haven't had to repaint it in the 8 years since I did it, and shouldn't have to do it for at least another 12
God you guys are lucky. My project alone had 40 something people show up. We cleaned up an entire cemetery, reset tombstones, cleared and burned god knows how much honeysuckle, filled in sunken graves, etc.. My troop's motto was apparently "if it ain't moving heaven and earth, you don't get the badge." To be fair though, that's because we had 10 guys in a row do nothing but raised flower beds over and over again. I could probably put one up in my sleep.
Alfndrate wrote:Also if you got Basket Weaving before it became more than 2 requirements, you have every right to brag about that ridiculously easy badge .
Surprisingly I didn't have half the merit badges I taught. I taught First Aid, Emergency Prepardeness, Camping, Hiking*, Cooking, Pioneering*, Rifle*, Archery, Backpacking*, Wilderness Survival*, Photography, Citizenship in the Nation... there were probably a few more that I taught... and I guess also technically Game Design... but I haven't taught that one yet.
* - Denotes a badge Alf taught but did not earn!
Edit: Frazz, is GC a GS or is she a part of Venturing?
I remember back when the art meritbadge was pretty easy to get. Our handicraft director came up with a contest amongst the staff to see who could "earn" it the fastest.
I think the record was 37 seconds. Man that was a fun day. Obviously if we wanted the badge we had to go back and do it "right", but it was all in good fun.
MrMoustaffa wrote: God you guys are lucky. My project alone had 40 something people show up. We cleaned up an entire cemetery, reset tombstones, cleared and burned god knows how much mulch, filled in sunken graves, etc.. My troop's motto was apparently "if it ain't moving heaven and earth, you don't get the badge." To be fair though, that's because we had 10 guys in a row do nothing but raised flower beds over and over again. I could probably put one up in my sleep.
Hey, screw you My project was immensely involved. Have you ever seen 13 to 16 yr olds try to scrape paint off of a wall when we weren't allowed to use scaffolding? Also the paint was very strange, it would come off if you scraped at it with your thumb, but using actual like paint scrapers... nope! . And I started my project at the beginning of June and finished it at the beginning of September, so don't tell me I was lucky . I also actively went searching for the project. I spoke with my church, my charter organization (another church), local groups in the area. Everyone but my character organization would give me an idea, I would do some preliminary leg work and then get told that it wasn't in the cards (even though they didn't have to do anything...). Finally my charter organization gave me the idea and asked me to come up with a project plan, and an expected timeline (I had to have it done before school started, because of my summer job though we were 2 weeks late, but at that point it was a matter of getting the final coat on).
In suburban Atlanta, northern Idaho and a number of other places, churches have moved swiftly to sever ties with the Boy Scouts of America in protest over the vote last month to let openly gay boys participate in Scouting.
To date, it's far from the mass defection that some conservatives had predicted before the vote by the BSA's National Council. But the exodus could soon swell, depending on the outcome of the Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting next week in Houston.
Baptist leaders say the agenda is likely to include a resolution encouraging SBC-affiliated churches to phase out their sponsorships of Scout units.
"I would bet there would be a resolution expressing disappointment with the Boy Scouts' decision and calling on Southern Baptist churches to prepare for the need for alternatives," said the Rev. Russell Moore, president of the SBC's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.
"How quickly that happens will probably differ from congregation to congregation," Moore said. "I do think most Southern Baptists see the Boy Scouts moving in a direction that's not going to be consistent with our beliefs."
The Southern Baptists — the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S. — already have a youth program for boys, the Royal Ambassadors. SBC leaders have suggested it could expand to accommodate boys leaving the Scouts.
According to BSA figures, Baptist churches sponsor Scout units serving about 108,000 of the BSA's 2.6 million youth members.
While many Baptist churches may be awaiting the outcome of next week's meeting, some already have decided to break with the BSA.
In Marietta, Ga., pastor Ernest Easley said his Roswell Street Baptist Church is ending its affiliation with Boy Scout Troop 204 that dates back to 1945.
"I never dreamed I'd have to stand up publicly and say to parents: 'Pull your kids out of the Boy Scouts,'" Easley told Baptist Press, the SBC's official news agency.
Baptist churches in Elizabethtown and Rineyville, Ky., Helena and Pelham, Ala., and Jacksonville, Ark., also say they're cutting ties with the BSA.
Tim Reed, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Gravel Ridge in Jacksonville, said in an e-mail that his congregation — including a 15-year-old boy on track to win the coveted Eagle Scout rank — strongly backed the decision to end sponsorship of a Scout troop.
"He was set to be one of the youngest boys to make Eagle," Reed wrote. "He said that he must uphold God's word over the Boy Scouts' decision no matter what the personal cost."
Among the latest to cut ties was Candlelight Christian Fellowship, a nondenominational church in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, which announced this week that it would end its charter of a Boy Scout troop at the end of this year.
"We're a Bible-believing church, and the Boy Scouts have opted to pursue a different moral path," said the associate pastor, Buck Storm. "It's a sad time for us."
In all, about 70 percent of the 116,000 Scout units in the United States are sponsored by religious organizations.
Some are liberal denominations that welcomed the change of policy on gay youths and want the Boy Scouts to go further by lifting the still-intact ban on gays serving as adult leaders. But some of the largest sponsors are relatively conservative churches that had long supported the Scouts' no-gays policy, and have been wrestling with how to respond to the May 23 vote.
To the relief of BSA leaders, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has said it accepts the new youth policy and will not cut ties. The Mormons sponsor more Scout units than any other organization, serving about 430,000 boys.
The United Methodist Church, the second-largest sponsor serving about 363,000 boys, has shied away from official endorsement or rejection of the BSA policy change. Some individual Methodist leaders have been critical, while the General Commission on United Methodist Men, which oversees the denomination's youth programs, says it will continue to support Scouting.
Similar divisions have surfaced within the Roman Catholic Church, the third-largest Scout sponsor serving about 273,000 youths.
A Catholic pastor in Bremerton, Wash., the Rev. Derek Lappe of Our Lady Star of the Sea, wrote an open letter to his parishioners announcing that the parish would cut its ties with the Scouts and develop new youth programs of its own.
"I am very aware that my objection to the change ... is increasingly considered bigoted and backward," Lappe wrote. "But I won't put public opinion ahead of the good of the boys and young men in my parish."
In the Chicago suburb of Crystal Lake, the pastor of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Catholic Church notified local Scout leaders that the church would no longer sponsor a Cub Scout pack and Boy Scout troop. In a letter conveying the decision, the Rev. Brian Grady wrote that it would be "not only unjust, but immoral" for straight boys to have to share tents on camping trips with gay Scouts.
And in Arlington, Va., Catholic Bishop Paul Loverde issued a statement saying the new membership policy "forces us to prayerfully reconsider whether a continued partnership with the BSA will be possible."
"It is highly disappointing to see the Boy Scouts of America succumb to external pressures and political causes at the cost of its moral integrity," said Loverde, who predicted the policy change will bring "continuing controversy, policy fights and discord."
However, the National Catholic Committee on Scouting — which works with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to coordinate the church's involvement in Scouting — has taken a more positive view of the policy change.
"We should be encouraged that the change in BSA's youth membership standard is not in conflict with Catholic teaching," Edward Martin, the committee's chairman, wrote last week in an open letter to Catholics involved in Scouting.
Martin, an Eagle Scout with five children who've been Scouts, said his committee would form a task force to work with Catholic dioceses and parishes on how best to go forward in light of the change.
"Our youth don't want to leave Scouting. Scouting is still the best program around," Martin wrote. "Let's continue this important journey together."
Another conservative denomination, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, says it is "deeply concerned" by the policy change, and continues to deliberate on how it will respond.
From its headquarters in Texas, the BSA has formed a task force to smooth the path of implementing the new policy, which will take effect on Jan. 1, 2014.
Meanwhile, the BSA says it is reaching out to the organizations that sponsor Scout troops, including those which oppose the policy change.
"We're finding that for many people, when they read the new policy they see it is reflective of the beliefs of most of Scouting's major religious chartered organizations," said BSA spokesman Deron Smith.
Russell Moore, the Southern Baptist official, said he doubted the Scouts' outreach would succeed in overcoming his denomination's opposition to the policy change, in part because of a sense that the BSA will eventually lift the ban on gay adults serving as leaders.
"Most Southern Baptists are seeing a trajectory that we've seen before in other cultural institutions," Moore said. "We know how this movie ends."
It's not what people are doing with their bodies,it's what people are doing with their bodies to other people.
These people know rightly that "the gays" are just waiting to leap out and gayify the unsuspecting public , because that's what those sex mad deviants are all about .. <----- satire
Well, isn't... err.. "receipt" of an action willfully still something you're doing with your body?
For example, if I get a tattoo, I'm not giving myself a tattoo. I'm sitting there while someone else is injecting me with ink. But it's still something "I'm" doing.
"Scouts Canada has a policy not to discriminate for reasons of gender, culture, religious belief or sexual orientation. Although Scouts Canada's principles requires a basic spiritual belief, members are not required to subscribe to a religion or belief in god."
is says "subscribe to a religion or beleief in god"
You do not have to be part of a denomination or believe in god, but if you go in thrying to say everyne is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts or UFO's then you are gone
hotsauceman1 wrote: is says "subscribe to a religion or beleief in god"
You do not have to be part of a denomination or believe in god, but if you go in thrying to say everyne is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts or UFO's then you are gone
But I believe in J.R. "Bob" Dobbs, my short-term savior, who says that everyone is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts, or UFO's, including Dobbs. I'm probably the stupidest out of all stupid followers of religion, but I LIKE IT that way. The Church of the Subgenius: forever pulling the wool down over our own eyes.
(My point is that the justification of a goofy rule that won't logically evaluate still a cop-out)
hotsauceman1 wrote: is says "subscribe to a religion or beleief in god"
You do not have to be part of a denomination or believe in god, but if you go in thrying to say everyne is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts or UFO's then you are gone
yes actually. You have to be part of some organized or unorganized religion to be spiritual.
"You ever hear girls say that? “I’m not religious, but I’m spiritual.” I like to reply with “I’m not honest, but you’re interesting!”"
-Daniel Tosh.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Then what is frazzled saying?
He is saying that you cant have spritual belief and not be part of a religion.
Im saying you can.
Frazz is saying that "Spiritual but not religious" is a non-phrase that doesn't really mean anything. I agree with that. I realize what you're saying, I just don't think your argument is sound.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: Someone who believes in flower power is an idiot.
I always preferred the cape myself. It could kill more stuff than the flower power could AND you could fly with it.
hotsauceman1 wrote: is says "subscribe to a religion or beleief in god"
You do not have to be part of a denomination or believe in god, but if you go in thrying to say everyne is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts or UFO's then you are gone
yes actually. You have to be part of some organized or unorganized religion to be spiritual.
Because clearly believing in what you want to believe in yourself is not allowed.
Because clearly believing in what you want to believe in yourself is not allowed.
To turn the point around: Does religion have to be organized, in nature?
Spirituality is an attribute of self as it relates to what one holds sacred. Religion is an set of beliefs.on how the world relates to the metaphysical. Spirituality is feeling, religion is practice.
At least that's how I pin the two down. Solid definitions of what those words mean to people appear to not really exist so much. Maybe my mind is too small to comprehend how one could be one but not the other, but it still seems like a cop-out that means "I'm a Christian by default, but i don't go to church or think about the hard things." Again, drawing upon my experience with women I've dated, who are the only ones I've ever heard actually use that phrase with a straight face in real life.
Religion is a set of practices and formalized beliefs about deity, worship, and the nature of the divine.
Spirituality is the general belief that there is a non-physical, supernatural component to the world and reality, without tying that to a formal set of religious practices or a specific deity or set of deities. People who believe in ghosts or spirits or faeries or totems or ancestors watching over us or the collective unconscious might consider themselves spiritual but not religious, if they don't participate in a formalized system of worship.
hotsauceman1 wrote: is says "subscribe to a religion or beleief in god"
You do not have to be part of a denomination or believe in god, but if you go in thrying to say everyne is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts or UFO's then you are gone
yes actually. You have to be part of some organized or unorganized religion to be spiritual.
Because clearly believing in what you want to believe in yourself is not allowed.
Well if you believe in something, thats religion. Just saying you're spiritual with no actual belief doesn't cut it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mannahnin wrote: Religion is a set of practices and formalized beliefs about deity, worship, and the nature of the divine.
Spirituality is the general belief that there is a non-physical, supernatural component to the world and reality, without tying that to a formal set of religious practices or a specific deity or set of deities. People who believe in ghosts or spirits or faeries or totems or ancestors watching over us or the collective unconscious might consider themselves spiritual but not religious, if they don't participate in a formalized system of worship.
But I believe in J.R. "Bob" Dobbs, my short-term savior, who says that everyone is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts, or UFO's, including Dobbs. I'm probably the stupidest out of all stupid followers of religion, but I LIKE IT that way. The Church of the Subgenius: forever pulling the wool down over our own eyes.
(My point is that the justification of a goofy rule that won't logically evaluate still a cop-out)
The church of Fox? I agree, you sound like you qualify as a member
hotsauceman1 wrote: is says "subscribe to a religion or beleief in god"
You do not have to be part of a denomination or believe in god, but if you go in thrying to say everyne is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts or UFO's then you are gone
yes actually. You have to be part of some organized or unorganized religion to be spiritual.
Because clearly believing in what you want to believe in yourself is not allowed.
Well if you believe in something, thats religion. Just saying you're spiritual with no actual belief doesn't cut it.
yeah, your right frazzled. Keep pushing more people to my atheist side : )
But I believe in J.R. "Bob" Dobbs, my short-term savior, who says that everyone is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts, or UFO's, including Dobbs. I'm probably the stupidest out of all stupid followers of religion, but I LIKE IT that way. The Church of the Subgenius: forever pulling the wool down over our own eyes.
(My point is that the justification of a goofy rule that won't logically evaluate still a cop-out)
The church of Fox? I agree, you sound like you qualify as a member
Awww. :(
Google the Hour of Slack podcast. It's gonzo broadcasting in the 21st century.
Being gay or not in a scout troop is literally the least important issue ever.
'Hi I'm Bob. I like grass, trees and cake. I don't like girls'
'Ewww girls'
'eughhh girl germs'
'lets stick twigs up our nose'
'Yayyyy'
yani wrote: Being gay or not in a scout troop is literally the least important issue ever.
'Hi I'm Bob. I like grass, trees and cake. I don't like girls'
If that were true, there wouldn't be an article about it, and uproar about it, or the need to take a vote on it. Really unimportant things have none of this stuff. Mind you this isn't Earth shattering by any means, but to pretend it is nothing shows a lack of understanding the issue.
yani wrote: Being gay or not in a scout troop is literally the least important issue ever.
'Hi I'm Bob. I like grass, trees and cake. I don't like girls'
'Ewww girls'
'eughhh girl germs'
'lets stick twigs up our nose'
'Yayyyy'
Don't trivialize the Boy Scouts. It's a noble organization.
'Hi I'm Bob. I like grass, trees and cake. I don't like girls'
'Ewww girls'
'eughhh girl germs'
'lets burn gak with bug spray and lighters rigged to blow torch mode while drinking that apple cider we secretly left to ferment for the last three weeks in the sun.'
'YAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!'
yani wrote: Being gay or not in a scout troop is literally the least important issue ever.
'Hi I'm Bob. I like grass, trees and cake. I don't like girls'
'Ewww girls'
'eughhh girl germs'
'lets stick twigs up our nose'
'Yayyyy'
Thats about right. I remember the Boy in BS. Trying to corral the little buggers and keep them wandering off was the biggest thing.
GS are much better in that regards when camping. WAY less sophisticated on the finer camping aspects-which is why we went to teach them that stuff, but the food was awesome.
BS camp: supper:hot dogs, and marshmellows
breakfast: dutch oven biscuits
GS camp: supper, burgers, dogs, potato salad, french fries. Desert: Smores, cake, some sort of melted chocolate treat on top of cake. Oh yea baby
breakfast: biscuits, eggs, bacon, sausage, a selection of cereals, cupcakes!
Frazzled gained weight when we went camping with the GS.
Mannahnin wrote: Religion is a set of practices and formalized beliefs about deity, worship, and the nature of the divine.
Spirituality is the general belief that there is a non-physical, supernatural component to the world and reality, without tying that to a formal set of religious practices or a specific deity or set of deities. People who believe in ghosts or spirits or faeries or totems or ancestors watching over us or the collective unconscious might consider themselves spiritual but not religious, if they don't participate in a formalized system of worship.
See my definition of "religion" includes that.
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
You can say that your definition of a "knife" includes a spoon, but that doesn't make that the correct usage of the word if you tell people that I'm eating ice cream with a knife. Or maybe I should have said that a Dachshund has a lot in common with a cat if you don't look at it closely. But that doesn't make them the same thing.
hotsauceman1 wrote: is says "subscribe to a religion or beleief in god"
You do not have to be part of a denomination or believe in god, but if you go in thrying to say everyne is stupid for believing in gods, ghosts or UFO's then you are gone
yes actually. You have to be part of some organized or unorganized religion to be spiritual.
Because clearly believing in what you want to believe in yourself is not allowed.
Well if you believe in something, thats religion. Just saying you're spiritual with no actual belief doesn't cut it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mannahnin wrote: Religion is a set of practices and formalized beliefs about deity, worship, and the nature of the divine.
Spirituality is the general belief that there is a non-physical, supernatural component to the world and reality, without tying that to a formal set of religious practices or a specific deity or set of deities. People who believe in ghosts or spirits or faeries or totems or ancestors watching over us or the collective unconscious might consider themselves spiritual but not religious, if they don't participate in a formalized system of worship.
See my definition of "religion" includes that.
Well, your definition of religion is simply wrong then. I believe my hands are real therefore it's a relgious belief, right?
And frgsinwntr, I don't need any pushing for that. Though Atheists are just as obnoxious about not believing. I'll just remain with the belief that everyone on this planet is fething stupid. (includes me btw)
yani wrote: Being gay or not in a scout troop is literally the least important issue ever.
'Hi I'm Bob. I like grass, trees and cake. I don't like girls'
'Ewww girls'
'eughhh girl germs'
'lets stick twigs up our nose'
'Yayyyy'
Thats about right. I remember the Boy in BS. Trying to corral the little buggers and keep them wandering off was the biggest thing.
GS are much better in that regards when camping. WAY less sophisticated on the finer camping aspects-which is why we went to teach them that stuff, but the food was awesome.
BS camp: supper:hot dogs, and marshmellows
breakfast: dutch oven biscuits
GS camp: supper, burgers, dogs, potato salad, french fries. Desert: Smores, cake, some sort of melted chocolate treat on top of cake. Oh yea baby
breakfast: biscuits, eggs, bacon, sausage, a selection of cereals, cupcakes!
Frazzled gained weight when we went camping with the GS.
Soladrin wrote: I've never been in boy scouts. I was however in the water scouts which involved sailing and drinking boat loads of alcohol.
I am interested in your organization and would like to know more.
Only did that for about a year. (I like my liver) Headquarters was a river cargo boat powered by the engine from a Sherman. We often used the thing to just tug our sail boats along rivers untill we got to a nice lake... and stop at any dock we came across to reload the alcohol stocks. 16 year old me was very amused by these preceedings. (beer is legal at 16 )
As a Southern Baptist I will honestly say that the stand they took is absolutely stupid. Flat out dumb.
Besides the whole "We are voting that Boy Scouts don't judge people enough now, so bail" it shouldn't even matter if Boy Scouts are gay/bi/straight/whatever.
Really, how hard is it to simply go "As a faith organization we believe that pre-marital sex is bad. So independent on where you want to stick your wang, or have a wang stuck in you, keep it in your pants".
There you go. Instead of the whole "gay/straight/whatever" thing, just make the official Boy Scout position "don't feth". Problem solved. The freaking Girl Scouts were able to figure this out a long time ago, it's not that hard.
Really, how hard is it to simply go "As a faith organization we believe that pre-marital sex is bad.
This is a remarkably sober view that both supports their viewpoint and also quits creating an issue when there isn't one. now admittedly The Boy didn't hang with the scouts more than two years. Is there some sort of weird change in Scout outings once they hit Jr. High? With GS the issue literally never ever ever came up. We were too busy trying to keep them from setting themselves on fire, and doing cool stuff like campground Halloween (complete with forest haunted house), lock ins at the San Antonio Zoo overnight, and the "unofficial" meeting at the local shooting range. And of course eating really awesome deserts. Boy Scouts have no clue what good camp food is.
Really, how hard is it to simply go "As a faith organization we believe that pre-marital sex is bad.
This is a remarkably sober view that both supports their viewpoint and also quits creating an issue when there isn't one.
now admittedly The Boy didn't hang with the scouts more than two years. Is there some sort of weird change in Scout outings once they hit Jr. High?
With GS the issue literally never ever ever came up. We were too busy trying to keep them from setting themselves on fire, and doing cool stuff like campground Halloween (complete with forest haunted house), lock ins at the San Antonio Zoo overnight, and the "unofficial" meeting at the local shooting range. And of course eating really awesome deserts. Boy Scouts have no clue what good camp food is.
At 5th/6th grade, the boy scouts start to pick up as it becomes more outdoorsy with monthly outings and the merit badges. Before that it's just cub scouts...
just as they would be with a heterosexual couple having sex out of wedlock) than to have homosexual leaders / ministers.
