Shoulds gays allowed to be in the Boy Scouts?

[morningstar2651]

And as for Boy Scouting being a Christian organization -- that's not true.

The Beginning of Scouting

Scouting, as known to millions of youth and adults, evolved during the early 1900s through the efforts of several men dedicated to bettering youth. These pioneers of the program conceived outdoor activities that developed skills in young boys and gave them a sense of enjoyment, fellowship, and a code of conduct for everyday living.

In this country and abroad at the turn of the century, it was thought that children needed certain kinds of education that the schools couldn't or didn't provide. This led to the formation of a variety of youth groups, many with the word "Scout" in their names. For example, Ernest Thompson Seton, an American naturalist, artist, writer, and lecturer, originated a group called the Woodcraft Indians and in 1902 wrote a guidebook for boys in his organization called the Birch Bark Roll. Meanwhile in Britain, Robert Baden-Powell, after returning to his country a hero following military service in Africa, found boys reading the manual he had written for his regiment on stalking and survival in the wild. Gathering ideas from Seton, America's Daniel Carter Beard, and other Scoutcraft experts, Baden-Powell rewrote his manual as a nonmilitary skill book, which he titled Scouting for Boys. The book rapidly gained a wide readership in England and soon became popular in the United States. In 1907, when Baden-Powell held the first campout for Scouts on Brownsea Island off the coast of England, troops were spontaneously springing up in America.

William D. Boyce, a Chicago publisher, incorporated the Boy Scouts of America in 1910 after meeting with Baden-Powell. (Boyce was inspired to meet with the British founder by an unknown Scout who led him out of a dense London fog and refused to take a tip for doing a Good Turn.) Immediately after its incorporation, the BSA was assisted by officers of the YMCA in organizing a task force to help community organizations start and maintain a high-quality Scouting program. Those efforts climaxed in the organization of the nation's first Scout camp at Lake George, New York, directed by Ernest Thompson Seton. Beard, who had established another youth group, the Sons of Daniel Boone (which he later merged with the BSA), provided assistance. Also on hand for this historic event was James E. West, a lawyer and an advocate of children's rights, who later would become the first professional Chief Scout Executive of the Boy Scouts of America. Seton became the first volunteer national Chief Scout, and Beard, the first national Scout commissioner.

Boy Scouts is about scouting, not about religion.

RELIGIOUS SERVICES PROVIDED

Participants and staff members of all faiths will have the opportunity to attend religious services during the jamboree. These will be conducted by ordained and lay leaders of many faiths, including Protestant, Catholic, Episcopal, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Jewish, Eastern Orthodox, Christian Science, Reformed Latter-Day Saints, Lutheran, Buddhist, Islamic, and Unitarian-Universalist. Arrangements for other faiths will be made as needed. (2005 National Scout Jamboree)

 

[Scally Cap]

And as for Boy Scouting being a Christian organization -- that's not true.

This needs to be repeated several times. The leadership has been taken over by evangelicals and the LDS, so it may seem like an officially conservative Christian club, but it's explicitly non-sectarian. Theistic, yes, but not officially aligned with any specific denomination.

 

[LouTheWicked]

So since boy scouts was founded by Christians, gays can't join in? Wow, I'm surprised they let them step a single foot in a church!

 

[Ampoliros]

Boy Scouts aren't a specifically Christian organization. They are a religious organization at the very least - and they are predominantly Christian, which causes favorable treatment of Christianity over all others (at the very least).

 

[Scally Cap]

Boy Scouts aren't a specifically Christian organization. They are a religious organization at the very least - and they are predominantly Christian, which causes favorable treatment of Christianity over all others (at the very least).

And that's the unfortunate thing. I have absolutely nothing to back this up with other than personal experience and my gut feeling, but I suspect a significant number of people who otherwise would love to get involved with Scouting are put off by the religious emphasis. I was Cubmaster at my son's school for a couple of years, in a fairly progressive neighborhood in a mostly progressive town. Maybe two of the kids in the pack were traditionally religious. We were all in it for the outdoors and character-building aspects of the program. Then when the Dale case hit the news and our council took a strident anti-gay position based on Biblical principles (including sending copies of an editorial to every registered family titled "Protect Scouting From Assault By Homosexuals"), that was the end of the pack. Up to that point, it was okay to leave the "duty to God" up to the families' discretion, however they chose to explore spirituality--but it became painfully clear that, at least in this council, the definition of "duty to God" was to be set by the influential LDS presence. There was so much frustration for parents who genuinely wanted their boys involved in what we had quickly built into a good program, but who couldn't conscientously support an organization that excluded members based on who they love (those parents' words, unprompted by me). Some of looked into switching over to Campfire, but by that point we were too emotionally exhausted to do it.

 

[LittleNipper]

Scouting is what it because of it "Christian" background. I know of no perfect organazation in this world; however, the Scouts should stay just as they are. It isn't suppose to be picnic for liberals. Let them form their own club.

 

[SimplyMe]

Scouting is what it because of it "Christian" background. I know of no perfect organazation in this world; however, the Scouts should stay just as they are. It isn't suppose to be picnic for liberals. Let them form their own club.

Why should liberals form their own club? Don't you mean that the non-religious or non-Christians should form their own club?

 

[LittleNipper]

Why should liberals form their own club? Don't you mean that the non-religious or non-Christians should form their own club?

Let's just say, that those who do not like the scouts for whatever reason should form their own club and leave everyone else alone.

 

[outlaw]

Scouting is what it because of it "Christian" background. I know of no perfect organazation in this world; however, the Scouts should stay just as they are. It isn't suppose to be picnic for liberals. Let them form their own club.

The same can be said of the KKK. They are what they are because of their Christian background and the KKK isn’t supposed to be a picnic for liberals.





http://www.geocities.com/__izzy__/Dengue/kkk/history.htm

http://www.pointsouth.com/csanet/kkk.htm

http://users.skynet.be/terrorism/html/usa_kkk.htm

 

[""]

ebia and others have very patiently pointed out that the APA's definition of "homosexual orientation" is not dependent on which OED usage you want to select for the single word "orientation."

Yes, and wasn't that lovely of them?
The problem is that I didn't ask what the APA thinks of Homosexual Orientation, nor did I bring that topic up. I spoke of ORIENTATION, which suggests a "learned behavior" and what the DSM thinks about learned behaviors. Therefore, all of those patiently pointed out definitions were non-applicable.

If all you have to fall back on is splitting hairs about linguistics, rather than the substance of the APA's position on homosexuality, that's pretty weak.

Once again, you and your co-horts are off on the topic of homosexual orientation, and I am still on the topic of ORIENTATION, which is what I was discussing. Now it's very kind of you to go over (again and again) the APA's position on homosexuality, but let us point our focus toward my addition to this topic. ORIENTATION!

Are you capable of separating homosexuality from orientation or not? That has been my suggestion all along, yet none of you seem willing to do so. Ebia and Outlaw defended their beliefs that homosexuality is an orientation, by giving a definition that basically sums up my position: Orientation is a learned behavior which, according to the DSM, can be changed. I'm not the one that keeps attaching homosexuality to orientation, all of you are. Yet you're all getting after me for your own mistake. Why is that?

Okay, fine. Everybody here should call Adiya's bluff and quit using the term. Switch to two words whose definitions she seems to deem immutable--"innate" and "homosexuality." Don't talk about homosexual orientation anymore. Talk about innate homosexuality and see if the linguistic arguments evaporate.

Well... FINALLY. Somebody is making sense here. If you want to apply an "innate" quality to homosexuality, then yes, you should stop using the term orientation. There now. Was that so difficult?

By the way, Adiya, since you took every opportunity to demonstrate that your grasp of English is superior to ebia's, I assume you used "ponder" incorrectly in the quoted sentence above for humorous effect.

Are you a fan of literature my friend?

Ponder
pon·dered, pon·der·ing, pon·ders
1. To weigh in the mind with thoroughness and care.
2. To reflect or consider with thoroughness and care.

My use of it was correct, but the syntax I must credit to Mark Twain. He wasn't the most brilliant linguist (according to modern writers) but to me, he was amazing. He pondered at, about, on, over, and around, the subject, using the verb in a most ingenious manner. I love his writings. I'm a fool for literature, what can I say. I like to quote author's in my comments. Many posters don't grasp that, but those who are avid readers generally will, and they send me a note telling me that they got it. No big deal.

Have a lovely day.

 

[Dislike]

Y'know, Adiya, I can't tell you exactly why, or exactly how, but I find you to be the most annoying person I've ever had the misfortune of meeting!

On topic: Yes. Yes they should.

 

[""]

Y'know, Adiya, I can't tell you exactly why, or exactly how, but I find you to be the most annoying person I've ever had the misfortune of meeting!

Fantastic.
Now if we had only met, your impression would be applicable.

Have a lovely day.

 

[Dislike]

Fantastic.
Now if we had only met, your impression would be applicable.

Have a lovely day.

Y'see, just soooo AGGRAVATING!

Point. I have met people online, ask others, they have too.

 

[Caylin]

Y'see, just soooo AGGRAVATING!

Point. I have met people online, ask others, they have too.

Tis disturbing to my demeanor!

 

[""]

Y'see, just soooo AGGRAVATING!
Point. I have met people online, ask others, they have too.

So have I, but I have not met you, nor have you met me.

 

[Dislike]

So have I, but I have not met you, nor have you met me.

You haven't met this incarnation, no.

 

[""]

You haven't met this incarnation, no.

Very good. Now we are getting somewhere.

 

[Bevlina]

This thread is now closed for various Rule Violations.