Boy Scouts Introduce Merit Badge For Not Pirating

[metadigital]

Does that mean slightly absurd comments are slightly false?

[Sand]

Yes. The falsehood correlates in parallel degree on the original exaggeration of the absurdity.

Edited October 22, 2006 by Sand

[metadigital]

That's absurd.

[Sand]

That's absurd.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Which that can be true, however in the case of the organization of Boy Scouts of America they have pretty much been open with their discrimination policies towards homosxuality and atheism.

Edited October 22, 2006 by Sand

[metadigital]

... Unless you're a Scoutmaster. <_<

[Sand]

Scoutmasters have been fired when they are found out to be gay.

[metadigital]

I didn't say it was officially endorsed.

[Sand]

Point.

 

In any case because of their discriminating ways a few communities are no longer being nice to the Boy Scouts. For example, last I heard Philadelphia is cutting funding to the Boy Scouts in that city. Boy Scouts feel they are being treated unfairly but the City of Philadelphia feels strongly against those who actively discriminate others for any arbitrary reason. They are also evicting them from a facility that the Boy Scouts have been using for some time now"

 

    In mid-September, City Solicitor Nelson Diaz determined that by allowing the Boy Scouts to occupy the property at 22nd and Winter streets rent-free, the city was violating its Fair Practices Ordinance, which prohibits "the use of public accommodations" by any person or organization that discriminates based on race, sexual orientation, religion or handicap. If the Cradle of Liberty Council were forced to pay market-value rent for the building, it certainly couldn't afford the overhead. As one activist puts it, referring to the council's decision to cave to pressure, "All they need to do to keep their good deed is to do a good deed."

 

    In hopes of avoiding a showdown, city officials drafted nondiscrimination language in collaboration with the Cradle of Liberty Council. City officials want the Cradle of Liberty Council to embrace the same nondiscrimination policy the Greater New York Council adopted last year. While the new language doesn't specifically ban discrimination against gays and atheists, it stresses that "prejudice, intolerance and unlawful discrimination in any form are unacceptable." Philadelphia board members approved this wording in mid-October. Now everyone can only hope it satisfies the Boy Scouts bureaucracy in Texas, as well.

 

The article continues:

 

Language that opposes discrimination isn't enough, however. What's important is that the Cradle of Liberty Council not engage in discrimination against atheists and gays. If they do, they are in violation of the laws which regulate who can and cannot use their headquarters. If they don't, though, they will be in violation of their agreement with the national Boy Scouts of America organization. Will they be willing to take that step?

 

Smaller groups have defied the BSA, but the Cradle of Liberty Council would be the first regional group to do so. They are the third-largest council in the nation and they might just have the clout to pull it off, especially if they get enough local and national support. The Supreme Court has ruled that their discrimination is legal, but that doesn't mean that the government should help fund that discrimination. That's the key.

 

Some argue that gays are hurting themselves by making a big issue of this - that they should "lay low" and accept non-discrimination that occurs informally. But it is a big issue - official discrimination coupled with unofficial nondiscrimination simply isn't acceptable. It teaches that atheists and gays really are second-class citizens, but of the type that can be tolerated with a "wink and a nod" by magnanimous leaders. What Christian or Jew would be willing to live under such a system?

 

 

Source: http://atheism.about.com/b/a/042266.htm

Edited October 23, 2006 by Sand

[Fenghuang]

The boy scouts are a highly discriminatory group which no sane organization or government should align themselves to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

...?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They don't let girls in. There was a big brouhaha or however you spell it when some girls wanted to be boy scouts and they wouldn't let them in.

 

Kind of like how these girls up here sued the school board so they could try out for their high school boys hockey team. They won and were allowed to try out, and were the first ones cut.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I am all for girls being on boys sports teams...as long as they have to use the same locker rooms.

[Skynet]

According to the article, this patch isn't an official nation-wide merit badge that can help a scout earn a new rank, but instead a generic Los Angeles based award. There are tons of these kinds of things since lots of organizations like to make them and the requirements to make them 'official' scout patches are fairly easy. So this really isn't a big deal (although it is very funny).

 

 

Scoutmasters have been fired when they are found out to be gay.

I'll probably be called a gay hater and yelled out of this forum for saying this, but I can't blame the Boy Scouts for dismissing (not technically firing, since they're volunteers) gay scoutmasters. If I was a parent, I would feel uncomfortable entrusting my son to an openly gay man who spends lots of time with young boys, and I know I'm not alone with that feeling of concern. They have that restriction for the same reason why there are similar restrictions on fathers of Girl Scouts; they're just looking out for the kids.

 

And as for the religious aspect of the BSA, that really differs from troop to troop. Some really do take a strong anti-atheism stance (as Sand is trying to emphasize), but the majority seem to be apathetic toward it, as the two troops I was in did.

[Sand]

<_<

 

Gay does not equal pedofile.

[thepixiesrock]

Ok, but just because they are gay doesn't mean they aren't. The Boy Scouts are just playing it safe, you know, always being prepared and stuff.

[Calax]

According to the article, this patch isn't an official nation-wide merit badge that can help a scout earn a new rank, but instead a generic Los Angeles based award.  There are tons of these kinds of things since lots of organizations like to make them and the requirements to make them 'official' scout patches are fairly easy.  So this really isn't a big deal (although it is very funny).

 

 

Scoutmasters have been fired when they are found out to be gay.

I'll probably be called a gay hater and yelled out of this forum for saying this, but I can't blame the Boy Scouts for dismissing (not technically firing, since they're volunteers) gay scoutmasters. If I was a parent, I would feel uncomfortable entrusting my son to an openly gay man who spends lots of time with young boys, and I know I'm not alone with that feeling of concern. They have that restriction for the same reason why there are similar restrictions on fathers of Girl Scouts; they're just looking out for the kids.

 

And as for the religious aspect of the BSA, that really differs from troop to troop. Some really do take a strong anti-atheism stance (as Sand is trying to emphasize), but the majority seem to be apathetic toward it, as the two troops I was in did.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From what I can tell each troop has ALOT of leeway in what goes on in their own territory. At camparees (for those who don't know this is where all the "local" troops get together for a three day weekend and have competitions) you find that there are troops that take the military backround QUITE seriously. Literally... after the flag was put up and the Lord Scoutmaster (my own title) said at ease you'd see most troops fall apart but there was at least one that fell into the military at ease stance.

You also find that the scoutmaster himself has alot of power in terms of what happens. My scout master was a fairly authoratative person who would generally try and force the entire troop down the "right path". He wasn't competetive about it but he almost forced me to try and get Eagle. He was also pretty lax about rules and patrols and such. But there is another local troop whos scoutmaster was a die hard lord and master who requiered that everything be done according to rules. It's also kind of interesting because in my general area (within say five miles) theres three fully populated troops that spun off of the die hards own troop. Anyway the die hard was also EXTREMLY competitive and literally was shaking his head in anger at the fact that my troop (one of the two spin offs) had one of our patrols win almost every single event in a camparee... twice in a row. (Mine got squat the first year except a special award for sinking an unsinkable raft because they gave us a time bonus for the more boys on the damn thing.)

 

Anyway. I think that if a guy in san fransisco (gay capital, usa) was gay and a scoutmaster the majority would just ignore it and frown on getting rid of a good leader.

 

(I can get into my problems with the scout leadership if you REALLY want me to... or the way it's designed anyway)

[Tigranes]

Fair enough, Skynet, as long as you are equally concerned about female teachers being alone with your sons, male teachers being with your daughters, etc, etc.

[Calax]

Fair enough, Skynet, as long as you are equally concerned about female teachers being alone with your sons, male teachers being with your daughters, etc, etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

well the female teachers thing....

 

but just remember that currently pop culture consideres gays to be either A) a very feminine person who is like queer-eye on Crack. or B) a normal person who has pedophiliac tendancies on the side.

 

Also people fear that which is different in terms of anything. Hence homophobia, Xenophobia, and the fact that in the grand scheme of things we as a race seem to be getting more conservative (in a wierd light but it's true! as cavemen we ran around in nothing, victorian age had nudes abound but also had immense amounts of consealment of flesh and corsets. Now we have concealment of flesh and no artistic nudes but with an entire subculture of raunchy/taboo/sex-for-money things on the web.)

[metadigital]

Ok, but just because they are gay doesn't mean they aren't.  The Boy Scouts are just playing it safe, you know, always being prepared and stuff.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Using that logic they should prevent evil using the demonstrably overwelmingly predictive trait of all hardenened criminals (i.e. above 98%): masculinity. Just throw every man in jail: no more serious crime.

[LoneWolf16]

I agree with Skynet. It's as much a concern issue as anything and really, parents have a right to know everything about the people spending time with and teaching their children. They also have a say in who those people are.

 

They don't let girls in. There was a big brouhaha or however you spell it when some girls wanted to be boy scouts and they wouldn't let them in.

 

Kind of like how these girls up here sued the school board so they could try out for their high school boys hockey team. They won and were allowed to try out, and were the first ones cut.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmm. I wonder why there wouldn't be girls in an organization called the Boy Scouts, or on a Boys hockey team.

 

What next, boys wanting to be Brownies? FFS.

[metadigital]

I agree with Skynet. It's as much a concern issue as anything and really, parents have a right to know everything about the people spending time with and teaching their children. They also have a say in who those people are.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, it's flat out bigotry against gay people.

 

Seriously, homosexuality is not synonymous with pederasty, and it is pure demonizing to make that claim.

 

In fact, it would be more logically sound to claim that most of the marketing industry is over-sexualizing young girls in their products. Some extremists might even debate whether this is a cause or an effect in higher rates of p

[LoneWolf16]

I didn't say it wasn't bigotry.

 

It's obviously an area of concern for the parents and the institution. They've got a right to decide who teaches and spends time with their children away from their supervision. It doesn't matter if the scout master is gay, black, catholic, or Irish, the parents still have that right.

 

Bigotry? Sure. Justified? In a way, yeah.

[kirottu]

I didn't say it wasn't bigotry.

 

It's obviously an area of concern for the parents and the institution. They've got a right to decide who teaches and spends time with their children away from their supervision. It doesn't matter if the scout master is gay, black, catholic, or Irish, the parents still have that right.

 

Bigotry? Sure. Justified? In a way, yeah.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I would say parents can be bigoted, but organisations can

Edited October 23, 2006 by kirottu

[Walsingham]

I agree with Meta, although there might be a gentler way of putting it. Yes, you are correct to wonder about a gay man teaching your son. Just like you should be alert about a hetero male teaching your daughter. No more, no less.

 

Gay people have enough damn problems without drawing fire for things they don't do!

[LoneWolf16]

Did I mention I suck at debating? I'm trying to word it differently and I'm not getting it across....

 

Last stab. A flailing one, no less.

 

Actually, the hell with it, I'm wrong. Happy now? :'(

[Pope]

Thank the powers for making European scouting vastly different from its American counterpart.

 

Those badges are worse than MySpace!

[Skynet]

Fair enough, Skynet, as long as you are equally concerned about female teachers being alone with your sons, male teachers being with your daughters, etc, etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

An interesting point Tigranes.

 

If my child seems to be spending quite a lot of time with a teacher of the opposite sex when I know its not an activity in which a large number of students or other adults are present (a play, sports game, etc.), I will feel that concern. Suspicious stuff happened at my high school, so I know those kinds of things are a reality.

 

 

To those who mentioned it, I realize that being gay does not automatically make oneself a pedophile. However, if an authoritative figure possesses influence over a group of individuals who are of the sex he or she is attracted to, restrictions and safeguards need to be made, no matter the age of the individuals.

 

Expressing concern about a gay man being with young boys does not make me a bigot. I would be just as concerned if a heterosexual man was with young girls, as I mentioned in my last post when speaking about fathers and girl scouts.

[Nartwak]

Expressing concern about a gay man being with young boys does not make me a bigot.

Yes, it does. You're making the assumption that men are some sort lurking predator. <_< This reminds me a bit of Qantas policy of not seating men next to unaccompanied children.