W
Bishop responds to Boy Scouts' decision on admission of homosexual members [CWN]
- Status
F
fix
Guest
Using the new moral logic the transgender issue has more merit than the BSA policy. The transgender boy is supposedly not attracted to girls so sharing facilities should be no problem at all. But, in the BSA case we have same sex attraction.
B
Brendan
Guest
Lack of attraction alone would not be sufficient grounds to allow a boy into a girls private facility (bathroom, shower etc.)
I have zero attraction for Rosanne Barr, but that doesn’t mean that I should share a rest room with her
Modesty encompasses more than just sexual attraction, it is about the relation of one’s body to another person.
Which is also why I think that the BSA would gravely err if it did not put in separation requirements between homosexuals and other Scouts similar to those between boy and girl Venture Scouts.
F
fix
Guest
I am not disagreeing. I am pointing out the logic that claims one is wrong and one is right. Those who support the BSA policy claim that there is no problem with SSA boys using the same showers and bathroom and that it goes on right now in many venues with no problems. If that is the standard then there is no reason to deny the transgendered boy access as I am sure it goes on now as well with little problem.Lack of attraction alone would not be sufficient grounds to allow a boy into a girls private facility (bathroom, shower etc.)
I have zero attraction for Rosanne Barr, but that doesn’t mean that I should share a rest room with her
Modesty encompasses more than just sexual attraction, it is about the relation of one’s body to another person.
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
Thank you as well, but whatever work I do means nothing if you don’t spread the word. Tell your pastor, tell your boys and volunteers who are involved in the BSA, tell the chancery staff of your Bishop. Give them the Vatican and USCCB docs. Show them what they need to know. Work to start alternative programs in your parish.
I will add my simple gratitude as well. Keep up the great work.
:clapping:
S
sw85
Guest
I tend to think this good be a counter-evangelization opportunity for Catholics and the BSA, generally. The BSA exists to help make boys into men. It seems to me that effete boys need this help more than any others, and Catholics are uniquely situated to provide it.
B
BroomWagon
Guest
I believe Gilliam meant to post this in this thread:
I’ve erred before doing this just like the good brother.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I think the Bishops know as well as you what the Holy See has said, and they probably understand it better. That is why Bishop Malone was able to say what he did without contradicting Catholic teaching. The statements you linked in Catholic teaching do not imply that gays should be excluded from scouting. That is your interpretation. So when you say “spread the word” you are really asking us to spread the personal opinions of Cat Herder, and I just don’t see why I should do that. You have not made your case to connect the doctrines you quotes with the conclusions you draw.
You are so worried about the mere possibility that some boys might be misled that you are willing to ensure the certain harm done to gay boys when they are told they may not participate.
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
All episcopal statements, except maybe one, have adopted a tentative “we need to look at this further” attitude. I think you know that better than I do, since you have no doubt poured over those statements for longer, and so you surely understand them better. And yet you’re saying something you know just isn’t true.
The reason why all or nearly all of the Bishops’ statements are tentative is because they need time to study the policy–and that study includes considerations stated in Magisterial documents like the ones we have repeatedly presented.
Attacking me isn’t going to help your case any, it just shows you have an axe to grind. I am far from alone! And for the record, I wasn’t asking for my opinions to be spread. I was asking:
If I just wanted to spread my opinions, why am I linking to authoritative documents and asking people to add more?
Again, you saw that, so you understand it and you knew it and yet you came out with something that just isn’t true and a personal attack to boot, and you used selective quoting to justify it, just like all advocates of this horrible policy are selectively quoting the Catechism without even mentioning other Magisterial documents.
It’s not a possibility; it’s a repeat of the wholesale collapse of Scouting that played out in Canada in the name of “inclusivity.” If you actually read all the documentation on my profile you wouldn’t be saying this; instead you’d be arguing to the merits and not to the person. And I won’t even ask you to explain why Camp Fire USA has failed to, well, catch fire if inclusivity is the bee’s knees as you say.
You’re also putting way too much trust in the corporation “Boy Scouts of America,” which has an abysmal record on sexual abuse and has proven that it does not keep its promises about its policies. I won’t bother with individual links to back those statements up because I have no clue if you’ll even read them. If you want to, check my profile.
M
mitex
Guest
The change is consistent with Christian sexual ethics in general not just Catholic. Any sexual or gay political activity is inappropriate as stated by the resolution.
The Catholic Committee on Scouting and their designated Bishop support the change as consistent.
What more do you need? Just because someone admits they have same-sex attraction or a homosexual orientation doesn’t alone give you a license to exclude them from BSA especially if they’re celibate like me.
Now if they’re sexually active or promoting gay political rights then we can talk on exclusion. But if we’re talking about someone who is chaste with a homosexual orientation open or not I see no basis to exclude them.
And this is something as an Eagle Scout I firmly believe is the best policy for BSA.
The Catholic Committee on Scouting and their designated Bishop support the change as consistent.
What more do you need? Just because someone admits they have same-sex attraction or a homosexual orientation doesn’t alone give you a license to exclude them from BSA especially if they’re celibate like me.
Now if they’re sexually active or promoting gay political rights then we can talk on exclusion. But if we’re talking about someone who is chaste with a homosexual orientation open or not I see no basis to exclude them.
And this is something as an Eagle Scout I firmly believe is the best policy for BSA.
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
… is owned by the BSA
… has begrudgingly accepted it subject to further review
This statement from the Vatican. Read paragraph 11.
Agree as to SSA alone, disagree as to homosexual orientation, the latter of which implies that you’re openly asserting it and thus presenting it as normal. The old policy did not exclude on the basis of SSA alone, it did exclude if one was openly asserting a homosexual orientation, and that was correct.
It’s not just political rights, which really has no business in Scouting. Scouting is a moral formation program. That is why promoting SSA as not disordered is dangerous to the youth as they could easily become misled into thinking that SSA is not disordered. This is all covered in the Vatican statement.
If it’s open, they’re out for the reasons stated by the Vatican. If they keep it to themselves, invite me to their Eagle court of honor.
I’m also an Eagle Scout and I firmly disagree. The problem is that you, like the rest of the supporters, do not account for the fact that homosexual attraction, while not sinful, is disordered. You don’t understand Catholic teaching on the matter, but you’re a Protestant and so you can’t be expected to. But Catholics have no excuse to be presenting open homosexuality as morally licit OR same-sex attraction as not disordered.
B
buffalo
Guest
How best to “save each soul” should be the overriding concern.
C
CPC
Guest
No surprise here. Bishop Loverde in Arlington, VA will not commit to further support. arlingtondiocese.org/newsdetails.aspx?Pageid=422&id=5304
As an Eagle Scout (1978) Im very disappointed the US Bishops could not come to a common position on this issue BEFORE the vote an influence the BSA. I guess once the LDS caved it was a fait accompli.
In the Love of His Sacred Heart,
Patrick
As an Eagle Scout (1978) Im very disappointed the US Bishops could not come to a common position on this issue BEFORE the vote an influence the BSA. I guess once the LDS caved it was a fait accompli.
In the Love of His Sacred Heart,
Patrick
T
Tigg
Guest
God bless this bishop! I agree how unfortunate for the faithful the shepherds cannot speak with one voice on an issue of such importance. Of course, parents must ultimately make the decision to do what they can to limit harmful exposure and be very discerning should they decide to keep their boys in Scouts.
F
fix
Guest
What I never see addressed is that the old policy was accepted by the Church. It was not unjust. So anyone who claims it is was has to explain how the bishops accepted it. Excluding was fine until gay activists pressured people.
As you say the new policy does not have full throated support but they said they can live with it which means on paper it seems acceptable but more info is needed.
G
gilliam
Guest
Thank you very much
G
gilliam
Guest
The local council via their charter with the BSA has the authority to grant memberships and drop memberships.
G
gilliam
Guest
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
Since it was their decision she could have taken the matter to National. Do you have any information about whether she exhausted her remedies before playing the public relations game?
- Status