Bishop responds to Boy Scouts' decision on admission of homosexual members [CWN]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWN_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
pnewton said:
Boy Scouts are not required to have a creedless God or reject Jesus.
Click to expand...
You are very correct, Pnewton; Scouts sure are not required to have a creedless God or reject Jesus. What is required is at least the following, they can believe in more than this, but this is the minimum:

Article IX. Policies and Definitions—From the Charter and Bylaws
Section 1. Declaration of Religious Principle, clause 1.

The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God. In the first part of the Scout Oath or Promise the member declares, “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law.” The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members. No matter what the religious faith of the members may be, this fundamental need of good citizenship should be kept before them. The Boy Scouts of America, therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member, but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training. Its policy is that the home and the organization or group with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life.
 
Quoting Bishops is argument from authority.

Rene Descartes taught us that fallicy. Yet he was a faithful Catholic all his life. He taught us that sometimes authority is wrong. Therefore it is important to understand authority - to understand the history, gist and thrust of their thought.

But sometimes the moral thing to do actually transcends authority.

This is what Jesus taught us when he distilled all the commandments and laws down to two: Love God and Love your Neighbor.

The point is to do both without violating the other. In this way you keep ALL the commandments of Jesus.

I pray for peace. And that we all find our moral center. The center that Jesus taught us.
 
Dave_McGrath said:
Please, don’t put words in my mouth. I am not advocating sexual immorality.
Click to expand...
Ditto. I never said you did. That was Peter Brownstein who marched in that promotional parade.
But sometimes the moral thing to do actually transcends authority.
Click to expand...
So you would understand then if scouting groups ignore the BSA ruling, or just bail on the BSA altogether.
 
Dave_McGrath said:
Indeed. This was the intent. The point is that BSA itself violates its own code (Laws, Oaths, Promise, Slogan). However: “Once an Eagle, always an Eagle” applies. My current Eagle Project is to demonstrate that with moral fortitude brave individuals can stand in the face of institutional bullying with impunity.
Click to expand...
Dave, I am in favor, as anyone can tell reading my posts here, of the current change in policy (I am not in favor of gay adult leaders though) and I applaud your dedication to your cause, however realize that a Scout is Loyal and a Scout is Obedient are not optional parts of the Scout Law. Deliberately violating BSA regulations or getting others to do so was never taught to you in Scouting. An Eagle Scout can’t pick and choose which points of the Scout Law to live by, you need to live by all of it.

There are ways of getting what you want accomplished without causing scandal to all of the BSA by wearing a Scout uniform at a gay pride parade in violation of a direct instruction by the Greater Salt Lake Council Scout Executive. A lot of damage was done to the organization by that act as you can see in the news. You basically gave ammunition to your opponents to fire back at you and you hurt your cause. It was not a wise move, in my opinion.

I think we need to do more teaching in the field about what those two points of the Scout Law mean. We don’t emphasize them enough, I fear.
 
pnewton said:
Daniel did not violate his oath in the Lion’s Den. He was put their for fidelity to God, not promotion of sexual immorality. But hey, if sexually immorality is your new God, I guess the comparison could stand. At least Brownstein demonstrated clearly that this is a real agenda and not a civil rights issue. Next will come homosexual scout leaders, NAMBLA, pedophiles, and who knows what is in the wings.

I have a great idea. The Catholic groups can take their lead from Brownstein and just ignore BSA rules they don’t like. That is the message Brownstein teaches in this march.
Click to expand...
Your fear is palpable. Yet we are not advocating sexual immorality, nor NAMBLA, nor pedophiles nor whatever else you conjure up.

Look closer. Look at the videos, photos and words of our mouths. Let’s deal with real things. Some of those things are here:
oldscoutspromise.blogspot.com
 
gilliam said:
There are ways of getting what you want accomplished without causing scandal to all of the BSA
Click to expand...
One takes it that you do not consider one scout telling another “I am gay” is scandalous. Correct?
 
gilliam said:
…Scout is Loyal and a Scout is Obedient are not optional parts of the Scout Law…
Click to expand...
Indeed. They are not optional parts of the Scout Law.

Aside: Sir gilliam - it will be easier to answer one thing at a time - simpler is better.

Because I am an Eagle Scout, yet not currently affiliated, I can act as a completely independent Moral Agent without any corrupting influence. A corrupting influence may be my fear of loosing my membership. Therefore, my participation in the SLC Gay Pride March isn’t particularly brave, although it did cost me money to participate (I had to drive 250 miles from my home with my son and wifey - no small cost to someone of modest means like myself).

Because I am currently unaffiliated with the Corporation of the Boy Scouts of America (although I’d very much like to be - I intend shortly to start a brand new Pack at a school I own) my obedience is currently not organizational. I don’t belong to the organization. Instead, my obedience is to principles. I am loyal to those principles.

However, the BSA itself is not obedient to the Scout Law. Because when a policy against gay people exists it actually violates every tenat of the Scout Law. In other words: “A Scout is Friendly” becomes “A Scout is Friendly, unless we suspect you are gay.”

Do you see where my loyalties lie? That is why I am called “The Old Scout.”

I cannot speak for Peter Brownstein. However, I can talk about what I saw. Peter will speak for himself. He is his own Moral Agent.

Scouting is a movement. It is not a corporation. That is the point.

Peace.
 
Ridgerunner said:
One takes it that you do not consider one scout telling another “I am gay” is scandalous. Correct?
Click to expand...
No. We are human beings. Not human doings. The sexual identity of the other is not itself anything to fear. It is not sexual “behavior.”

Every mental health worker knows this. As does the best and most legitimate scientific institutions in the land. 50% of religious America agrees: they are already gay tolerant or affirmative (wiki this if you need the list or I can provide a link if you like).

The identification of what you discover yourself to be is not scandalous. It may be whatever you decide to do with it - but let’s face it: all sin and fall short of the glory of God. His commandment is to love our neighbor. Even the gay neighbor.

It’s not like I don’t know what I am talking about. Out of my six sons and a daughter, two are gay. As is my identical twin who is also an Eagle Scout.

My project is to introduce America to their gay countrymen. They are there: brothers and sisters, children, aunties and uncles, parents and grandparents. They are part of our American Family.

Peace.
 
gilliam said:
In this day and age, no.
Click to expand...
I must disagree. The day and age do not determine whether asserting one’s inclinations to grave sin, or perhaps even one’s engagement in it, without having any good reason to do so beyond one’s concept of one’s normalcy in that inclination, is scandalous.

If it’s scandalous for boy scouts to parade in uniform in a “gay pride” parade, it cannot fail to be scandlous for another boy to assert his homosexuality to another scout individually. The only difference is in the numbers.
 
Dave_McGrath said:
(although I’d very much like to be - I intend shortly to start a brand new Pack at a school I own)…
Click to expand...
Dave,
That may be the single most helpful thing you can do right now; with the more conservative churches dropping units, there will be a need for more institutions to volunteer to charter units.
 
Ridgerunner said:
I must disagree. The day and age do not determine whether asserting one’s inclinations to grave sin, or perhaps even one’s engagement in it, without having any good reason to do so beyond one’s concept of one’s normalcy in that inclination, is scandalous.

.
Click to expand...
You just put a lot of qualifications on this statement didn’t you? :rolleyes:

You were a teenager once, I assume. Right? :cool:
 
gilliam said:
You are very correct, Pnewton; Scouts sure are not required to have a creedless God or reject Jesus. What is required is at least the following, they can believe in more than this, but this is the minimum:

Article IX. Policies and Definitions—From the Charter and Bylaws
Section 1. Declaration of Religious Principle, clause 1.

The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God. In the first part of the Scout Oath or Promise the member declares, “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law.” The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members. No matter what the religious faith of the members may be, this fundamental need of good citizenship should be kept before them. The Boy Scouts of America, therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member, but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training. Its policy is that the home and the organization or group with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life.
Click to expand...
There is no particular creed mentioned here and there is no mention of Christ. I’m not saying there is anything wrong with that, I think it will be good for the existing organizations that are Christ-centered, Christian and not a part of the BSA such as the groups that have been mentioned in this thread.
 
gilliam said:
Dave,
That may be the single most helpful thing you can do right now; with the more conservative churches dropping units, there will be a need for more institutions to volunteer to charter units.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I am running seven different simultaneous operations to try to help BSA understand that the correct thing (the moral thing) to do is to wrap their heads around this and get with the program. The pain stops when they abolish the 1991 policy and the abomination of 2013.

And say: “I’m sorry.”

Campaign number 1: Expand the membership.
Campaign number 2: Demonstrate solidarity with human rights (Gay Pride Parades falls here)
Campaign number 3: Accountability for funding (e.g. United Way campaigns and others)
Campaign number 4: aak… forgot the rest. I launched 'em, but don’t have to monitor them.
 
Dave_McGrath said:
Indeed. I am running seven different simultaneous operations to try to help BSA understand that the correct thing (the moral thing) to do is to wrap their heads around this and get with the program. The pain stops when they abolish the 1991 policy and the abomination of 2013.

And say: “I’m sorry.”

Campaign number 1: Expand the membership.
Campaign number 2: Demonstrate solidarity with human rights (Gay Pride Parades falls here)
Campaign number 3: Accountability for funding (e.g. United Way campaigns and others)
Campaign number 4: aak… forgot the rest. I launched 'em, but don’t have to monitor them.
Click to expand...
Campaign number 2??

Wow, this really smacks of activism if you are advocating this.

It seems the old ploy that was the same thing for “same sex marriage”, going something like “my partner got hurt in Montana and I was denied visitation rights even though we were legally married in another state. So this is why marriage should be redefinied.”
 
The Boy Scouts’ Doomed Compromise…

…The compromise policy’s short life is predictable, in the first place, in light of the kind of people it is meant to placate, people that the Scout delegates have seriously misjudged. Socially liberal political activists don’t believe in compromise. They believe in winning.

If they believed in compromise, there would be no constitutional “right” to abortion, but a variety of more or less permissive abortion regimes across the states. If they believed in compromise, there would be no legal crusade for same-sex marriage, but a willingness to accept same-sex civil unions.

Indeed, proponents of gay-friendly scouting, the very activists whose demands the present compromise is meant to satisfy, have already proclaimed that the fight will go on: The next goal is to open the Scouts to openly homosexual Scout leaders…

Blue excerpt above from article at link:

The Boy Scouts’ Doomed Compromise
catholicexchange.com/the-boy-scouts-doomed-compromise/
 
Ridgerunner said:
…scandalous…
Click to expand...
I fail to draw the connection…

I wasn’t scandalized when at age 22 my identical twin asked me if I was gay. I told him I wasn’t. I asked him why he asked. His shoulders drooped when he told me: “I thought the whole world was playing a joke on me. I know you are honest. So if you aren’t gay, but I am, then I must be the only one.” This is the gist of what he said, I’ve written about this elsewhere.

I was raised an arms length from my brother. Nothing “happened” to him. He simply is. As am I. As are two of my six sons. I actually pretty much could tell at age four or so which of the two were gay.

Nope. Not scandalized. Grateful. For the blessing. That they would trust me enough to tell me.

Peace.
 
Dave_McGrath said:
I fail to draw the connection…

I wasn’t scandalized when at age 22 my identical twin asked me if I was gay. I told him I wasn’t. I asked him why he asked. His shoulders drooped when he told me: “I thought the whole world was playing a joke on me. I know you are honest. So if you aren’t gay, but I am, then I must be the only one.” This is the gist of what he said, I’ve written about this elsewhere.

I was raised an arms length from my brother. Nothing “happened” to him. He simply is. As am I. As are two of my six sons. I actually pretty much could tell at age four or so which of the two were gay.

Nope. Not scandalized. Grateful. For the blessing. That they would trust me enough to tell me.

Peace.
Click to expand...
Wow, now we have the Twins, one gay, one not scenario.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top