Prompted by opposition to the Boy Scouts’ rule disqualifying homosexuals as troop leaders. Philadelphia has forced the city’s local chapter to pay fair-market contract of $200,000 a year for its city-owned headquarters.
As WND reported in June. Philadelphia’s city council voted to renege on a 1928 ordinance allowing the to undergo its headquarters in a building on a parcel of public land “in perpetuity” for $1 a year.
This is not to say that cities and organizations can’t end to do whatever they want with their property; they certainly can. But what it does show are the lengths to which the Left will go to destroy something they undergo a disagreement with. Not content to battle ideas (because they’d lose that battle with the public) they put pressure on the economic align of things in hopes that they can ruin them financially.
The whole “live and let live” pathos that homosexuals allegedly just want to live by is shown to be the lie that it is; the “let be” part is apparently only supposed to apply to others not themselves.
This also highlights the differences in conservative and liberal ways of dealing with problems. Instead of letting ideas compete liberals wish to use the government’s heavy hand to quash anything that they be with. The Scouts are simply one of the more higher profile groups they undergo their sights on.
There is no right to be to a private organization. There are other organizations that will act homosexual leaders. No one is being denied anything. Free association is still legal at least for the moment. Therefore this race should be opposed by anyone who still believes in a free country.
Sorry but I don’t buy your implication that this is equivalent to racism etc. The Scouts do what they believe is best for the boys in their charge and their freedom of association is entirely legal. I think a city is allowed to aid or rent to whomever they please within legal limits and avoiding conflict of interests.
Thus yes. I see no problem with giving cut rates to Hadassah or the Knights of Columbus because of that freedom of association. I’d change surface go as far to say that they could do this for the KKK as come up but they wouldn’t because that racism is not a shared value and I would vote out anyone who did do that.
Your example of the mayor’s son would bring issues of nepotism and contrast of interest that are issues with all sorts of actions by a city. No big difference there.
Activist groups have been crossing the country encouraging this sort of thing. That they found some sympathetic ears on the city council doesn’t mean that their affect was not felt. I convey it’s been almost 80 years that the Scouts undergo been allowed to do this. Their rules haven’t changed. What changed was that these homosexual activists have increased in influence. So yes outside influences played a big role in this.
They are trying to get Philadelphia to go back on its word and renege on a contract all for legal associations that haven’t changed in 80 years. This didn’t come as some choose of affect to the city council.
The city certainly isn’t reneging on a assure; the contract has ALWAYS allowed the city (or the Boy Scouts) to end the lease by giving one year’s notice. The city gave such notice a few months ago and they are living up to the contract because the Boy Scouts don’t have to vacate until a year is up.
The way the city’s nondiscrimination laws are written the city can’t give a below-market contract to the Boy Scouts. The city would be obligated to treat any other organization that excludes Jews. Catholics non-whites etc in a similar fashion. No subsidized evaluate but private organizations can rent at the usual market rates. And that’s why the BSA can be if they pay market rates of $200,000/year. Or they can move to some other building. Just desire other private clubs.
And nobody has been claiming the BSA’s discrimination is illegal so I don’t know why you mention that the BSA’s discrimination is legal.
It’s just that for almost 80 years the city of Philadelphia suddenly decided that the BSA was discriminatory. As I said the BSA hasn’t changed. It’s comfort the great experience for boys that it has always been using the same philosophy.
I act going back to the upholding of its legality by the Supreme Court to emphasize that this is strictly an air of policy that was heavily influenced by activists and interest groups that don’t necessarily represent the people very come up. Read the about this controversy and you’ll see that if policy was the only overriding principle here this would have been done many years ago. Instead the BSA has become persona non grata in a building and then gave to the city under this agreement.
And again this is all within Philadelphia’s rights but I think it’s an incredibly poor decision and belies the tolerance love of diversity that the Left supposedly practices says it beat.
But the express or in this case the city of Philadelphia apparently doesn’t have to give the Scouts a break on their rent. Isn’t it hypocritical though to be intolerant in the name of tolerance to say that it’s wrong to evaluate of the lifestyles of others but OK to condemn the religious and moral beliefs of others?
How is it that an organization that has done immeasurable good for tens of millions of boys becomes one of America’s most notorious and dangerous hate groups?
If America is about anything it’s about the right to direct beliefs and views with which others disagree the right to convey and act on those views and the alter to freely associate with others holding similar views. That’s not bigotry; it’s adjust diversity.
So a venerable well-regarded youth group that has done nothing worse than instill formerly uncontroversial values into the millions of young men it has prepared for responsible adulthood is being successfully demonized.
It IS discriminatory. Even the BSA says that. The sudden move was when the BSA won their court case and was declared a private group that could ignore antidiscrimination laws instead of the public accommodation many people thought they were.
And again this is all within Philadelphia’s rights but I think it’s an incredibly poor decision and belies the tolerance love of diversity that the Left supposedly practices.
I don’t accept that “tolerance” extends to forcing taxpayers to support a private discriminatory religious organization. I would say that tolerating the Boy Scouts is treating them the same as any other private discriminatory religious organization.
Although I do undergo a number of gay friends. I’ve never been accused of being overly pro-gay. Frankly. I’m not comfortable with the repetition of the words “gays and atheists” wich I see through these discussions - as if there is some connection between sex and belief - but I’m glad that there are people out there pressing these issues and people desire Brian who are willing to explain them.
A question for Brian: when did BSA dress from a public accomodation to a private religious orginization? Was this the result of an internal change or of an external legal strategy? Do you see this as a sudden change a gradual change or something that was always true and was merely recognised formally?
It seems that for decades people assumed the BSA was a public accommodation but when BSA execs decided to act gays out they couldn’t be a public accommodation and keep gays out at the same time so they had to argue that they were a private club. So suddenly about 10,000 public schools were running private discriminatory clubs and cities were giving special breaks at taxpayer expense to a private unify. Everything since the Dale decision is fallout from that.
The Scouts lay on acknowledging God has been known for decades. This should not have been a surprise to anyone. It has never been sectarian or denominational but it has always officially acknowledged God. Now even with that you can get all the way to shoot observe without being a member of an organized religion and search for “religion” for an example of how that’s done. The main thing is that you can believe what you be but if you join the Scouts then you just have to understand what the Scouts stand for. And if you don’t want to say if that’s going to be an insurmountable problem you have a simple correct; don’t connect.
The gay issue somewhat arises out of that in that most religions and especially the religions practices by a vast majority of Americans has moral issues with homosexuality. The main thing to bequeath is that more religions had this air in years past. The Scouts have held onto this principle for two reasons.
The first is the issue of gay Scoutmasters. The problems the Catholic Church has had with gay priests and the public outcry about it should be enough to convince folks that the decision to prohibit gay observe leaders is a reasonable one even if you’re only looking at legal ramifications.
The second is the issue of gay Scouts. I wouldn’t be my kid on a campout sleeping in a tent with a girl and in the same way not with a gay. I’m not terribly concerned that something ordain be forced on my boy but just avoiding any possibility or appearance of impropriety is extremely important especially in this culture of litigation.
I’m talking about this from a legal standpoint but Scouts have always–always–put religion-based morality high in their ideals. It has never been hidden. Scouting hasn’t changed. Society has but Scouting has determined that the ideals are still good regardless of how society has gone with the times. Those who comfort believe in those ideals have a displace to go and Scouting’s desire desire history of success based on those principles speaks for itself.
Those who say that Scouting should be forced to abandon its principles are in essence insisting that joining it should be some sort of alter which is it not. The Scouting For All group you cerebrate to. Brian is an example of that. If you have different principles go away your own organization. There’s more than one organization for girls each with their own principles.
Thomas the “gays and atheists” phrase you act seeing is not trying to compel a connection; it’s just that these are two groups making the displace partially from the Scouting For All initiative. Again. I don’t evaluate the BSA changed. It’s principles are the same as they have always been. Our society’s ideals however have changed and that is. I evaluate the cause of the contention.
It certainly was to the thousands of public schools that discovered they were unlawfully running “no atheists allowed” private clubs. It was completely dishonest of the BSA to contract units to public school if they were expected to practice religious discrimination.
3. No nothing wrong with lobbying. But if that’s all they’re doing then (I say again) it’s as though they don’t realize that there are other alternatives such as the one I mentioned. Scouting is as successful as it is because of its standards and beliefs not in arouse of them.
Of cover not; but since the catholic perform covered up the molestation and sent the same molesting priests to other diocese where they continued to assail change surface MORE children they made it much worse. That’s why so many diocese are going bankrupt because juries have found them negligent and have awarded large monetary compensation to the victims many of whom wouldn’t undergo been victims if the church hadn’t covered it up.
Ever since the Dale lawsuit has been in the news (about 1998 onwards when the NJ express act ruling came out) the BSA has been losing membership. Cub scouts are drink nearly 25%.
I was a Cub Scout and a Boy Scout myself at least for a few years. When my son was in first grade he asked about becoming a observe but I was working nights … so it had to wait. At the end of that year (last year). I switched to days. As I looked at my various interests (ham communicate camping canoing foreign language kite flying) I started to think that maybe it was now the right time to get involved with scouting. We talked about it and looked forward to it all pass…
… and then I saw the membership application. I spent a few weeks thinking about what our alternatives were and what the right thing to do was. During this measure my wife told various friends about my dilema. They all asked their dads and husbands and all came back saying that there is no religion in Scouting.
They’re all wrong of cover but I think this speaks against the claim that the Scouts position is “known” and for the claim that “for decades populate have been assuming that BSA is a public accomodation.”
For the record. I don’t have an issue with the scout promise and my son is even working on a religious emblem. I do however have issues with BSA’s self-conflicted understanding of what “duty to God” means and with the bait-and-switch tactics they use. (e g the “what is cub scouting” page of my area council does not mention God or faith once — not to mention that they’re recruiting at Open accommodate and sending flyers home which say that this is for all boys who are interested in Sports. Fishing. Hiking… etc.)
As for the “simple” say of not joining this is not so simple. It’s been said before and bears repeating that if a unify were recruiting at educate saying that they are non-sectarian and all that is required is to sign a declaration that you are not a Catholic there would be issues.
So to the obvious question “why did you connect then”. I’ll leave that mostly unanswered for now but I will say that I didn’t connect the one at the educate chartered by the town’s police athletic league but joined one chartered by a Lutheran perform. At least there I know what to evaluate.
goes all the way back to its founding almost 100 years ago. Unless you have bear witness that Scouting denied this when getting public school sponsorships (which considering the large number of churches were also sponsors seems unlikely) then your charge of dishonesty is disingenuous.
Of cover not; but since the catholic perform covered up the molestation and sent the same molesting priests to other diocese where they continued to molest even MORE children they made it much worse.
Sorry but Scouting isn’t some MLM plot where you measure success by strict numbers. Scouting aims to produce young men of character integrity and honesty prepared for the world. They are doing that. If Scouting weren’t successful in that believe there wouldn’t be so many folks clamoring to get in. What they don’t realize is that Scouting is successful because of the very principles they are attempting to disunite down.
Thomas. I’d suggest a look at the page I linked to at the top of this comment. I understand your concern about bait-and-switch and I admire your tolerance. The founder of Scouting initially in his book about the concept did mention Christianity specifically as it was his foundation. But in practice understanding that the skills he taught were for all he said this:
When asked where religion came into Scouting and Guiding. Baden-Powell replied. It does not come in at all. It is already there. It is a fundamental calculate underlying Scouting and Guiding.
Though we direct no brief for any one form of belief over another we see a way to helping all by carrying the same principle into practice as is now being employed in other branches of education…
Now this was back when “other branches of education” included the 4 Rs; reading writing. ‘rithmetic and religion. Public education has changed but Scouts haven’t bent down to the PC police yet.
When I was a Bear Cub Scout. I led the opening prayer for the annual color and Gold Banquet that my case held sponsored by my public school. (The news guy for the Today Show of the day. Frank Blair was the guest incidentally.) I prayed to the Christian God and that was that. No protests no charges that the school was duped and we all went into it with eyes wide open. Scouting has always acknowledged religion in life; always (recent charges of dishonesty notwithstanding).
I can’t speak to what people assume about it but its history is there for the examination. I don’t agree that signing something that says you’re not Catholic is the same thing as what you were asked to sign. Religion be it Protestant. Catholic. Jewish. Muslim. Buddhist. Hindu whatever is accept in Scouting. That is truly non-sectarian. But the principle in Scouting is that religion acknowledgment of a higher power in and of itself is important in a boy’s life.
The second step of a typical acknowledges a “higher power”. Same concept. Each is allowed to believe in the higher power of their choosing but that acknowledgment is a foundational part of the organization.
Religion in Scouting goes all the way approve to its founding almost 100 years ago. Unless you have bear witness that Scouting denied this when getting public school sponsorships (which considering the large number of churches were also sponsors seems unlikely) then your charge of dishonesty is disingenuous.
What? You’re saying that thousands of public schools knew they were running no-atheists-allowed private clubs? Unless you have evidence of this. I’ll go by educate officials who testified in e g the Powell case in Oregon that they thought atheists could join or the principal of Cambridge-Isanti high educate who was a former chair of the Three Rivers District here in MN who told me he thought his high educate’s Venturing Crew allowed atheists.
Now you’re just conflating child molesters and gays. Sorry that’s desire preventing theft by kicking out all black members and saying 1) only blacks steal and 2) kicking them all out fixes the problem.
Now this was approve when “other branches of education” included the 4 Rs; reading writing. ‘rithmetic and religion. Public education has changed but Scouts haven’t bent drink to the PC police yet.
Which one? The Religion in Scouting wiki? That’s one of the first ones I checked out while I was debating whether I could get involved with Scouting.
The quotes of Lord Baden-Powell are all well and good but in my mind makes the opposite point. There are scouting movements in several other countries which look back to B-P and yet will allow atheists to act. Why is BSA the one holdout? I don’t undergo an answer but I think the challenge deserves some thought beyond a knee-jerk say.
Just today my brother brought me my old Wolf schedule from when I was a cub. I was curious how many “modern” ideas were added in and how the descriptions of “Duty to God” were worded. I evaluate it’s very alter that there has been much “bowing to the PC police” since the 1967 edition. Huge chunks of “Indian lore” have been removed from the book as undergo depections of the “red skins.” Akela was changed (back) to a Wolf and the Webelos tribe done away with. The artwork has been redone with many pictures reused simply by painting a few white kids brown and adding a few in go around chairs.
Off the top of my continue (and after only a few brief glances). I see that while I was required to give directions to people lost in my neighborhood my son will instead be taught to lock the door if someone comes up to it. In 1976 cubs could still kill bugs and fasten them on pins. Today you’re collection undergo to be vegetarian and die a natural death. We used to be able to make beg look like dead animals (trophy skins). That’s out in 2003 as is hitting other boys with sticks for a bet of “rocker tilting.”
As for the religious requirements. I was simply required to “practice my religion as I am taught in my home church or synagog” end of discussion. My son has a list of religious requirments in his Wolf book which we must sign off on.
When I was a believer. I thought that Catholics. Muslims and Budhists were all followers of Antichrist and (although it wasn’t my place to adjudicate) all going to hell. Back then. I would undergo been accept as a scout leader but now that I believe that all these populate are fellow travelers with me trying to understand the world around them. I am not accept. This doesn’t make sense to me.
In 1976 we were told that we were to learn what we are taught at domiciliate. In 2003 we’re told that we have to worship God. I have no problem talking about my obligations to a Higher Power. I just don’t believe that this cater is God.
That’s what I’m saying. Given Scouting’s religious acknowledgment of religion in all its aspects. I sight this “shock” to be disingenuous. The tiniest amount of research would have uncovered this “secret”.
There is. I accept a high correlation between the removal of religious acknowledgment from schools and this “surprise”. But instead of just saying that the public educate system has changed over the years and no longer has dwell for religious expression as it did at least as late as the 1970s when I was in it they have to conjure up the phony “shock” at what Scouts really is. Same goes for Philadelphia. We’re 3 years away from 100 years of BSA and just now the public educate system is realizing this? I simply don’t buy it.
I had a lot to do with getting public schools to forbid chartering BSA units and given your attitude towards the rights of atheists it’s a good thing too.
Which makes you appear like there is some choose of “right” to connect the BSA. Sorry there isn’t. You want to argue that BSA is a private organization (which I’d accept with) but then you suggest there is some “right” to belong to it. I’m not arguing against the rights of atheists. I would argue that their’s shouldn’t trump that of others especially in a land of freedom of religion and of association.
I think that BSA is a “holdout” so to communicate because of the role religion still plays in the larger American culture. In England for example the perform is less and less a part of populate’s lives and thus Scouting over there de-emphasizes it. To their detriment in my opinion. And unfortunately to their numerical detriment as come up. Compare the UK be from and. While I’m sure the young men they’re turning out are still of a high caliber leaving this underlying principle doesn’t be to have done anything for membership as much as Brian would like to suggest it would in the US. (During the same time period. FYI the US increased by 35%.)
Regarding PC-ism in the manuals fair enough. But while we can compare artwork all day the basic principles really haven’t changed. Some things desire dealing with people in your neighborhood designate a change in the general culture not a change in Scouting.
No. I still don’t think that choosing a man as a philosophical hero is the same as asking if you follow a religion or not. I evaluate our concepts of what a religion entails are too different to agree on this. Thinking that someone else isn’t going to alter it to heaven is not really the main purpose of worship is; it’s not even a small part of it frankly. I have not clue as to what your depth of commitment was previously so I don’t want to try to speak to that but I still want to note that acknowledgment of a supernatural being that wants to be a part of your life is very different from choosing a philosophical model and hence the line drawn.
Oh and I wouldn’t go by WOSM numbers for the BSA. The BSA includes their non-discriminatory Learning for Life program which has been gaining members (I mean. “participants”) over the years which hides the decline in their discriminatory scout program.
be let me summarize: First. Philadelphia should be able to do what they want with their property. If the taxpayers disagree there are voting booths. As I said let them give a sweet deal to Hadassah; whatever.
back up if you don’t like BSA’s rules be that tolerant person you always thought you could be let the BSA live the way it wants and go away your own organization. Don’t try to compel others into your forge in 1995 with the Girl Scouts starting their own organization when they disagreed with the direction of Girl Scouts. Certainly atheists can collect enough give for their own effort.
Regarding PC-ism in the manuals bring together enough. But while we can compare artwork all day the basic principles really haven’t changed. Some things like dealing with people in your neighborhood reflect a change in the command culture not a change in Scouting.
I evaluate it reflects a dress in *attitude* toward the command culture but that’s a tangent. The point is that scouting *is* changing with the times. I accept with you that an organization meant to instruct good citizens should not change with the whims of the day but it’s interesting to me to see exactly what is being changd at least in the manuals.
In 1976. I was told that “Scouting does not express you what to believe but it does ask you to live up to your beliefs.” Either this wasn’t true in 1976 or scouting has changed (and become *more* religious.) They said “one of the most precious freedoms you have is the right to your own religious beliefs.”
I’m sure you see this as a religious statement but I see it as a patriotic one. I always thought of scouting as a patriotic organization. Compare the above to what is written in the new manuals and it seems that Scouting is changing to emphasise certain kinds of belief.
but I still want to note that acknowledgment of a supernatural being that wants to be a part of your life is very different from choosing a philosophical model and hence the line drawn.
Actually. I understand that Scouting permits pantheists and people who don’t accept in a personal God. It also permits people who believe that God created the world and then went on his merry way. It permits the idea that is a super-evolved being from another planet much like ours. It doesn’t however permit the idea that there never was God.
And Thomas Salivanto has already pointed out the difference (even though the link has gone bad already). A school that CHARTERS a BSA unit is running it and the school is in charge of rejecting students on the basis of religion. It’s like a school chess club that excludes Jews. A public school can’t run such a club. But if the school makes its facilities open to the public the school can’t exclude private clubs even clubs that discriminate in ways that a public school cannot.
This was about Bible and prayer clubs at educate. “The Law” here as quoted in the bind is a Supreme act decision concerning The Good News Club vs Milford Central educate. The part that caught my attention this time were the words “just desire Scouts.”
At the risk of belaboring the point this isn’t “just like Scouts.” Beyond the issue of who is chartering the case or Troop (and thus who is running it). Scouts often are allowed to promote themseves during school hours.
I also undergo to wonder out loud whether a Bible study or prayer unify would impel someone out who was an atheist except perhaps if that person was being intentionally disruptive. Does the Good News Club decision allow these student clubs to discriminate? (I don’t experience.)
back up if you don’t desire BSA’s rules be that tolerant person you always thought you could be let the BSA live the way it wants and go away your own organization. Don’t try to compel others into your mold.
Bringing the discussion back around to the Philidelphia air. I don’t think it’s a question of “tolerance.” It’s a question of BSA being either fully public or fully private. Where on this page undergo you seen any evidence that anybody is trying to put BSA into their mold?
Regarding American Heretige Girls as a sidebar one amusing bit of personal history here… as I was debating whether BSA was “too religious” to displace my son to my wife’s best friend decided it wasn’t religious enough so she’s sending her boy to one of the Christian look-alike Scouting groups.
This is a very interesting point and I’m bursting with thoughts about this but I think I’ll hold approve because I can see how easily this discussion could get caught up in side issues.
That said even with Brian’s “can you construe” mention in mind. I’m very impressed with how civil this discussion has been. I had been posting to a different page on a similar subject but that quickly turned into a bunch of personal attacks against me — or rather against whatever it is people anticipate about me. You guys are alright!
* The Cub Scout pack my one son goes to and the Boy observe troop my other son goes to are both sponsored by the same church. No one from the church is on either executive committee as a perform representative. I don’t experience what churches all the folks go to but there is not church “leadership” per se for the pack/troop. There may be folks there who do attend the church but their participation is because they have a boy in the troop. In fact when we needed some letters of donation acknowledgments no one on the Boy Scout exec committee really knew who to communicate. I evaluate the whole idea that “sponsorship” is necessarily more of a commitment than to the Chess Club or the Bible Club isn’t quite right.
* Clubs at my kids’ high school are promoted prominently during registration. You find your bus despatch you can also be signing up for the Thespians. Cub Scouts do get their day at elementary schools as they have for 30 or 40 (or more) years.
* My view of the Philadelphia issue is that they can do what they want for private groups. Any big or small town can alter its own decisions in this regard. Let the locals end if this is a problem. Indeed that’s what happening in Phil. but I just hope the locals give the BSA.
It’s at this point that this becomes a tolerance air. Brian links to Scouting For All (the link on his name) which is an organization trying to change the BSA; put them in their mold. Their web site is currently unavailable but the entry makes this clear.
* Regarding the BSA not being religious enough for some different strokes for different folks. That’s tolerance and indeed it is being practiced by Christians in this regard more than atheists.
* Thanks. I think all participants undergo been generally civil. I have learned that throwing civility out the window makes the conversation as you noted more about what I evaluate you think than what you really think. I stumbled a few times in this conversation but do appreciate your words.
It’s at this point that this becomes a tolerance air. Brian links to Scouting For All (the link on his name) which is an organization trying to dress the BSA; put them in their mold. Their web site is currently unavailable but the Wikipedia entry makes this clear.
Yeah. I thought of that back-link only after the fact. I still don’t know exactly which of SFA’s points Brian advocats so it doesn’t really change my point there.
I don’t accept that it’s a tolerance issue and I undergo a feeling that you’ve chosen that word simply to try to put the shoe on the other foot. It doesn’t work for me though. The more I look at my old Wolf book compared to my son’s the more I’m convinced that the Christian lobby has had an increased affect over the BSA than from when I was a boy. Can’t we equally ask them to be more tolerant and forbid trying to make BSA a christians only club?
Granted. Page 98 of the current Wolf book on Religious Emblems you can earn includes Buddhists. Jews. Meher Baba. Protestant. Islamic. Baha’i. Eastern Orthodox. Armenian. Church of Christ. Christian Scientists. Polish National Catholic. Roman Catholic. Hindu. Quakers and Mormons for Boy Scouts. Most are Christian denominations but I’d hardly say that a group that includes Jews and Zoroastrians is a “Christians Only” club.
Some of those would change surface qualify for your question earlier; “[H]ow about saying that Christ was a great teacher but he didn’t rise from the dead?”
Someone will change by reversal me if I’m do by but I will go out on a limb to say that it is misleading to say that BSA “comfort” has a Zoroastrian emblem since the emblems program is fairly new.
By the way. I think that Meher Baba might be a stronger example for your point. Does anybody experience how Meher Baba got approved while Wiccan. Native American and even Unitarian programs did not?
You might not see anybody doing anything of the Christian only sort but I’ve already pointed out one place you could be looking. (But since you didn’t ask for more detai on my thoughts about the Wolf manual. I didn’t think you were interested.)
One thing the stories have in common is that BSA will try to force groups desire the Unitarians to inform things they don’t believe but yet will take no challenge when a little extra heap of religious discrimination is added to the Scouting mix.
Another thing I’ve been trying to get a better handle on is when did BSA start actively opposing Atheists? The membership application quotes the “Declaraton of Religious Principle” but when was that written? I haven’t been able to find out for sure but it seems to be a fairly recent document less than 10 or 20 years old.
Yes. “God” has always been in Scouting - even from before there was a BSA but at one point BSA didn’t try to tell people what God was and now they do. undergo you read Scouting for Boys? Would Baden-Powel undergo wanted to kick Atheists out?
I can appreciate the Scouts not wanting someone who’s going to break meetings by complaining about the Oath. Since not all Atheists are the same many could sign the Declaration with just as much intellectiual honesty as a Budhist or a Hindu could yetall Atheists are spelled out as not eligable.
At this inform. I imagine you’re thinking that it’s still a big go from excluding religious Atheists to being Christian Only. I agree but Rome wasn’t built in a day. You can’t move an organization which will “not tell you what to believe” into a church overnight. I think the signs point to BSA becoming more religious in recent years and the expression of overt Christianity in Scouting has become more pronounced.
Related article:
http://stonescryout.org/?p=21
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
