Boy Scouts to lift gay ban? (1 Viewer)

[J-Donk]

Actually, it's not. Slavery was not a religious issue; homosexuality is, for many faith based groups. What about tolerance and respect for the religious beliefs of those troops affiliated with religious organizations? By allowing the individual troops to decide, this allows gay children the freedom to join, and the freedom of religious based troops to follow the beliefs of their charter organization. Why does tolerance and respect have to go one way only? Why is forcing a troop to violate their spiritual beliefs any less tolerant than preventing a gay boy from joining a troop?

I think allowing the troops to decide for themselves is win-win for both sides of the coin, and would allow those troops who might be extremely opposed the opportunity to mingle at council events with troops who do allow gay members, and would increase the acceptance of these boys throughout BSA over time. But by forcing the policy on everyone from the start, you create even more animosity between the two sides. How is it less "tolerant" to put the "bigot" label on troops that choose to follow the former policy? Tolerance doesn't mean we must agree with a point of view, and many forget that. It means we respect that point of view even though we don't agree with it. By showing tolerance to BOTH sides of the issue, it allows each side to see, learn and respect what the other side is about. Respect for religious beliefs; respect for sexual orientation. Both are important, IMO.

I don't tolerate bigotry. I think that's going to be a new theme in our society going forward. I don't have to respect your belief if it's full of hate.

From what I know of the issue this isn't something the scouts wanted to do. There was a gay scouts lobby that got most of their funding cut. Sponsors have been dropping the scouts faster then Rush Limbaugh.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Actually, it's not. Slavery was not a religious issue; .

incorrect - plantation owners ability to justify slavery on biblical grounds (Paul's letters proscribing how masters should treat their slaves, etc)

until the turn of the 20th century southern baptists taught of separate (white & black heavens)
you're attempting to find biblical justification for gay discrimination is really no different from sharia law
.
.
.
well, it's not

 

[Jeff Miller]

I'm glad to see that an organization like scouting is finally realizing that homosexuality and sexual predators to two entirely different things.

 

[primadox]

I'm glad to see that an organization like scouting is finally realizing that homosexuality and sexual predators to two entirely different things.

And they are; they're completely different, I agree. I hate that the "predator" label is assigned to someone just because of their sexual orientation. It's wildly inaccurate.

 

[lades]

And there is a BIG difference between not approving of someone's lifestyle and actively persecuting them for it. IF the BSA was out in the streets beating up gay boys and picketing them, that would be a whole different matter. But that isn't the case at all.

Being gay or straight or bisexual is not a lifestyle. I know a lot of folks out on the Christian right want to define homosexuality as a lifestyle, because they think it then allows them to discriminate against gay people, but that doesn't wash. It just one of those code words that identifies you as a rightwing Christian bigot. So if you are not a right wing Christian bigot, you might want to choose your words more carefully.

 

[tenordas]

Being gay or straight or bisexual is not a lifestyle. I know a lot of folks out on the Christian right want to define homosexuality as a lifestyle, because they think it then allows them to discriminate against gay people, but that doesn't wash. It just one of those code words that identifies you as a rightwing Christian bigot. So if you are not a right wing Christian bigot, you might want to choose your words more carefully.

Sorry, I'm not terribly good at word choices! I often find myself having to apologize to someone because I said something that I didn't know was offensive to them. My son is an Asperger kid and I sometimes wonder if I at least don't have some traits of it because of how often something like that happens.

Anyway, my point was that not approving of someone's sexual preferences (and that includes promiscuous heterosexuals) is very different than persecuting them for it. My friends know I don't approve of extra-marital sex, but they also know I'm not going to come burn down their house or beat them because of it; same with my homosexual friends (and being a musician, I have a LOT of them). I believe G-d created us and as such, everyone deserves full respect because they are little self-portraits of Him. I actually stood against my congregation and Youth Minister in new Orleans when they tried to start a rally to keep homosexuals from being employed as school teachers. Such actions have no place among true Christians, IMHO.

But again, I believe tolerance should be in all directions. We don't have to agree with each other to be tolerant (in fact, demanding that pretty much negates the whole idea of tolerance).

 

[Optimus Prime]

I'm glad to see that an organization like scouting is finally realizing that homosexuality and sexual predators to two entirely different things.

I agree. Films like this that kids were exposed to in the 50s didn't help much

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Pcy_6anmVUc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Galbreath34]

Comparing the relatively smaller consequence bigotry to slavery is like comparing the Patriot Act to the Gestapo, maybe some connection but the degree sort of blows the comparison out of the water.

That said, the idea that "respect for religious beliefs" over human rights, small or large, makes it different isn't the case. As guido noted, one of the big arguments pre-secession was that the Bible endorsed slavery. Another pillar of the arguments was that it should be a state or local issue. One of the ways bigotry and oppression (yes even in small forms) clings to life and fights to continue is by insisting on religious or personal prerogative as being above or exempt from human decency and basic rights to be treated as equal. It's a centuries old tactic that works to delay, but in the end usually fails to the point now where it seems impossible that such tactics were once used to allow people to be owned as property.

 

[SharonT]

It is not impossible to change Charter Organizations. If your troop is currently chartered by an equally bigoted organization, find another. It should be a whole lot easier if this change goes through. Many groups who supported scouts in the past have not been able to Charter (sponsor) based on the exclusionary language at the national level. Boy Scouts is not a religious organization, in that it does not set preference. It was never intended to used by groups in isolation or at the exclusion of others. The whole "private club" idea is polar opposite of the vision and goals of scouting.

 

[steltz02]

I'm an Eagle Scout, and I was very close to returning my medal and badges until I read this change of stance. I signed petitions and wrote a letter to BSA.

Our troop was based out of a catholic church; however, I wasn't catholic, in fact I was and am a pantheist mystic. No one ever told me that I couldn't be a boyscout in my troop due to my beliefs not lining up with that of the 'charter organization'..... as long as I wasn't gay I guess.

 

[steltz02]