Is there a merit badge for "Fabulous?" (Gays/Atheists in the Boy Scouts)

Remove all ads!

Founding an organisation technically similar but axiologically neutral (in theory, because you still have the law of the land etc) is a perfectly legitimate option. Just let the gay and the atheist scout wannabies get together and found one. If they wish, they can create The Gay Scouts of America or The Atheist Scouts of America.

I would like to remind SOME PEOPLE that we are talking about discrimination. This is not a 'your opinion on Christianity' thread. If you want to brag about how hateful, ignorant and stupid Christians are and want a Christian read and reply to that (in a hateful, ignorant and stupid way), I am ready.

At this point, it seems that Christians are ignorant because they won't acknowledge someone's opinions as facts. Basically, ignorant because they won't accept someone else's assumptions as axioms. They're stupid, because they don't agree with someone's ideas and they're hateful because they claim that it's not so obvious that they're wrong

This very same way, I could take a random Christianity basher and claim that he's ignorant because he doesn't accept that God exists, has created the world, that Jesus Christ is his saviour etc. Also stupid, because he believes contrary or even just differently from Christianity. And ultimately hateful because he won't be a good boy and give up his views just because I cast the light of reason upon him

However, I'd rather call him ignorant because he criticises the tenets of Christianity without knowing them, stupid because he doesn't realise his ignorance and hateful because he first shoots, then asks questions.

Do I do either? Not even the latter, even if some non-Christians would do. Instead, I'm talking calmly and arguing logically. I realise that truth for me is not truth for everyone and I don't force my assumptions on anyone. Nor do I feel outraged that people have different views. Contrary, I put effort in understanding different ideas and helping people expressing them to understand mine. However, I'm still ignorant, stupid and hateful. Because I'm Christian.

So, if I can be ignorant, stupid and hateful because I profess Christian religion with its tenets and legacy, what's wrong with people not being admitted by Boy Scouts on the grounds of their beliefs?

Still, above in this thread we have people who were scouts despite being atheists. And they weren't forced to disguise their atheism. I don't know, and it was not included in the story, how the brothers expressed their atheism. That should help us a little bit.

Ultimately, they and the gay former scoutmaster were removed from an organisation intended to promote specific values because they lived according to different values than the ones promoted by their organisation.

Should I go to an axiologically atheistic organisation of, let's say, roleplayers and demand to be kept there despite my constant Catholic reservations and observations when it comes to ideology? And it's basically a roleplaying organisation, isn't it? And I just want to roleplay

 

Me? Pope?

*thinks of all the destruction he could cause as Pope* Yes...that will be good. Inquisition/Jyhad time!



On topic: Homosexuals and atheists, if the Boy Scouts don't want to play with you, simply go play somewhere else and let them languish in their bigotry and ignorance.

There's no point debating with people whose wills aren't their own but are attributed to some deity anyway and who thus think they have a right to define morals for others.

No need for such a heated conflict.

 

LOL

I must admit I got a chuckle from reading Shura's post after reading Chevalier's.

My personal feelings are more in line with Chevalier's. I am not a Christian, but I feel you can replace the word Christian in his rant with many other words such as Jewish, Conservative, member of the NRA, etc. and it would still hold true.

If the topic had been that the scouts are refusing to allow pedophiles (and I am not implying that homosexuals are pedophiles) would we have seen quotes like this.

I tend to doubt it.

In my experience the people who moan the most about bigotry and ignorance feel it doesn't apply to their values for they must be right.

 

And that's the biggest problem with defenders of tolerance. They must be right... for they know they are They'll sooner concede their religion is false or their political views are false, or their morals are relative, but not tolerance and all related. Basically, they show more un-worldly faith and dedication than many religious people As a result, they're effectively the most radical folks around and the most prone to lynch other folks. They're also the loudest. Sometimes, when I feel like it and when I'm confident of my fortitude throws, I engage in debates with them, put my point beyond any organised religion or whatever system of beliefs and just stick to tolerance values and formal logic. Ultimately, I'm teaching them tolerance. I, Roman Catholic who's against abortion, euthanasia, gay marriages, gay adoption of children, contraception and several social, cultural and economic dogmas of present times (ban idolomania!) In all honesty, I don't see such zeal in the most bigoted fellow believers of mine

In most cases, from standing firm in defence of my views (for whose sake would I believe if I weren't going to take that seriously?), they imply arrogance and close-mindedness. I'm stubborn and will not submit to even the most logical of arguments - like "You're wrong. In fact, it's not evil.". If that's a logical argument, I'm Dubya's twin. However, they see nothing wrong about their own throwing rocks around in the name of tolerance. They will not concede, they will not get back for even an inch, they, ultimately, will never accept any logical argument. "Sometimes not everything that's right is logical", "There are things beyond human logic". I'm amazed. Shouldn't *I* be telling that to *them* ? Oh, and how logical they become when it comes to religions or morals when it suits them. The closest analogy that comes to my mind is Inquisition or some of mediaeval to renaissance Christians. They make a religion of their views, they put it above logic, but they apply logic, however very ably but in a misguided fashion, to any other beliefs to declare them false and blasphemous. For what else do they do?

Tolerance, folks, tolerance

[ November 17, 2003, 23:09: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

It's an odd thing how some people can see their own faults in others.

[ November 18, 2003, 04:10: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

I have said this so many times before, and I will likely be forced to say it again. One of the freedoms that Americans -- and most westerners, even if it's not entrenched in their constitutions -- is the freedom of peaceful assemble and association. That means that we have the right, without government intervention. The converse must also be true, then -- if they can't tell us who we may associate with, then neither may they tell us who we must associate with. Assuming our assemblies and associations are peaceful, then the government has no place regulating those assemblies or associations, either to force inclusion or exclusion.

[ November 18, 2003, 17:24: Message edited by: Lord Keldin Depaara ]

 

Talk about the pot calling the stainless steel kettle black.

My non-religion never launched an Inquisition. No Crusades either.

I won't even demean myself by arguing further. Some individuals just aren't worth any expenditure of my intellect.

 

I agree.

Sincerely,

Stalin and Mao.

 

Laches' comment was funny. But, Shura's point is still well taken, because Catholicism and tolerance are not usually used in the same sentence together, particularly when speaking of the Middle Ages. Even later, during the 17th and 18th centuries, while the Protestant Dutch had a "golden age of tolerance" (when even Jews were welcome in Amsterdam), the Spanish were setting the "savage heathens" on fire and hearding them into "missions" in the New World, all in the name of Catholicism.

To be sure, Catholicism has a wonderful wealth of traditions and great depth of belief, but its never been noted for its tolerance.

 

As long as the scouts don't go about digging moats around homosexual and athiest peoples' houses to keep them away from the 'untainted' of society it seems fine to me that they can deny access. Heck, it's their club, their rules, you don't like it: don't join.

I'd like to make a note on athists and agnostics. Most 'athiests' are agnostics yet all agnostics are not athiests. Just because you don't believe in a god doesn't mean you don't believe in the potential of there being a god (if proven to you beyond all reasonable doubt).

However, if the scouts are banning/not permitting athiests what about people from other religions?
OoC: I'm not athiest, I'm a pagan. I sacrifice small animals on pentagrams every day and drink their blood from a baby-bottle. I'm not homosexual. Can I be denied entry to the boy scouts?

What about a Hindu? Or any other religion? Can they be denied access to the boy scouts? If not the boy scouts need a good renaming session to something like "The Survival Skills Society of Hetrosexual Christian Boys" simply because "Boy Scouts" implies anyone of the male gender under a certain age can join.

 

I can answer that one -- the Boy scouts of Canada have symbols and badges for pretty well all faiths, from Buddhist to Sikh to Muslim. The goal is religious development -- if your'e not religious, I don't know why you would want to join other than to cause problems. it would be like me trying to join a sports team when my stated goal in life is to stop organized sports!

 

It might be similar, however just because someone is athiest doesn't mean they want to disprove all religion and stop all religious functions/activites, it simply means they don't think there is some divine presence in existance. Likewise, not all Christians try to push their beliefs upon others. Some do, but they are called fanatics.

It's more like joining a sports team for a code you don't actually enjoy. I see no harm to the Scouting chapter if you don't actively pursue an harassment policy towards their religious beliefs.

The Scout Chapter has a right to deny you entry for whatever reason they like (they don't like the look of you, you smell funny, homosexual, black) as long as they don't tell you. However its their own reputation they're soiling for discriminative behaviour, it's not illegal (except maybe if they denied a certain race) but it has its downside. However if homosexuals and athiests actively forced (no pun intended) their views upon the scouting chapter then they shouldn't be allowed entry.