Boy Scouts Of America

My wife and I had an interesting debate on the BSA.

Her position:
Because the BSA bans atheists and Gays from being BSA
leaders, we
shouldn't let our fictitious children attend any BSA events
because
then we'd be implicitly endorsing their discrimination and
possibly
funding it.

My position:
Lots of groups have these same rules: Catholic Church (some
sects),
Jewish Church, etc., but also stand for the Golden Rule,
honor, etc.
If our children were to attend events and there was an
implicit or
explicit agreement not to discuss their discriminatory
reasoning, then
it would be ok.  (I think there's a larger principle here
about
favoring a homogenous society vs. a tolerant society too)

So who's right?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~|
Get the answers you are looking for on the ColdFusion Labs
Forum direct from active programmers and developers.
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion
/webforums/forum/categories.cfm?forumid-72&catid=648


Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups
/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:245797
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/s
ubscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/un
subscribe.cfm?user=22184.15789.5

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gruss Gott [mailto:grussgottgmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 11:28 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Boy Scouts Of America
> 
> My wife and I had an interesting debate on the BSA.
> 
> Her position:
> Because the BSA bans atheists and Gays from being BSA
leaders, we
> shouldn't let our fictitious children attend any BSA
events because
> then we'd be implicitly endorsing their discrimination
and possibly
> funding it.

Just to be clear: they ban atheists and gays, period.  Not
just from being
leaders but also from being scouts.  While it's not
formalized they also
present a clear conception of "God" which tends to
exclude polytheistic
beliefs (Hinduism, Tribal beliefs, etc) and non-personified
beliefs
(Buddhism for example) and strongly favors a strict
Christian
interpretation.

> My position:
> Lots of groups have these same rules: Catholic Church
(some sects),
> Jewish Church, etc., but also stand for the Golden
Rule, honor, etc.
> If our children were to attend events and there was an
implicit or
> explicit agreement not to discuss their discriminatory
reasoning, then
> it would be ok.  (I think there's a larger principle
here about
> favoring a homogenous society vs. a tolerant society
too)
> 
> So who's right?

Well... neither. It isn't a matter of right or wrong, I
think.

Rather it's a compromise: can you still support a group when
you disagree
with some of their policies (I assume you disagree with the
BSA on the
discrimination issue)?  Where's the line drawn?

The decision is personal.  Simply put: nothing's perfect. 
How much
imperfection are you willing to accept before you choose not
to accept the
thing being reviewed?

Do you buy that car even tho' it lacks a sunroof?  Do you
attend a Jamboree
even tho' the scouts lack certain fundamental American
values?

Another way to say it is: how much cheese do they have?  In
the classic
experiment a rat will accept a certain amount of pain
(electric shock) to
obtain a certain amount of food ("cheese").  At
some point however the pain
becomes too great for any amount of cheese.  So, do the Boy
Scouts have
enough cheese for you to accept that level of shock?

For my part (being an atheist and having gay family members)
I can't bring
myself to support the scouts in any way (despite having had
a very happy
time as a scout in my youth).  Honestly I find the Scouts
(and many of the
other groups you mention) clearly hypocritical: the
principles they claim
are done a disservice by the policies they apply.

I am further incensed organization defends its
discrimination by claiming
privacy rights and yet still accepts millions of dollars of
public funds
annually.  I don't actually get to make a decision to
support or not: my tax
dollars are doing it regardless of my wishes. 

Jim Davis


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~|
Create robust enterprise, web RIAs.
Upgrade to ColdFusion 8 and integrate with Adobe Flex
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RV
JP

Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups
/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:245798
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/s
ubscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/un
subscribe.cfm?user=22184.15789.5

It's not the same model as buying a car that suits you
"sort of"; it's about
principle.

If the scouts had a rule that said "We believe _____ to
be beneath our code,
so we will not allow them to join or participate," what
would that blank
have to be filled with in order for you to say to yourself,
"That's just
wrong?"

....Gays?
....The mentally challenged?
....People with HIV/AIDS?
....Blacks?
....Mormons?
....Catholics?
....Wiccans?
....Jews?
....Your own answer?

So if it's okay to ban the group that makes you shift in
your seat a little
when you hear they've been banned, why is it then acceptable
to ban any
other group?  

You see, if you can fill that blank with the name of a
group, then it's
_you_ who have the problem, and you've just found a
formalized group of
people with the very same problem that you will probably
feel comfortable
with.

To solidify this concept, gather a list of all the groups
that exclude types
of people based on a code, and you will see a pattern that
will hopefully
make you uncomfortable.

Now before anyone starts in with the "choosing a
car" or "church
denomination" argument, cars don't take stances, and
denominational groups
(and Star Trek clubs, etc) are focused-interest groups that
support a
central highly-targeted focus.  Scouts has a
non-denominational focus that
purports a wide-ranging set of general values, but excludes
certain groups
of people who may indeed share those values but who are
assumed not to be
the scouting leadership.

Respectfully,

Adam Phillip Churvis 
President
Productivity Enhancement

-----Original Message-----
From: Gruss Gott [mailto:grussgottgmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 11:28 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Boy Scouts Of America

My wife and I had an interesting debate on the BSA.

Her position:
Because the BSA bans atheists and Gays from being BSA
leaders, we
shouldn't let our fictitious children attend any BSA events
because
then we'd be implicitly endorsing their discrimination and
possibly
funding it.

My position:
Lots of groups have these same rules: Catholic Church (some
sects),
Jewish Church, etc., but also stand for the Golden Rule,
honor, etc.
If our children were to attend events and there was an
implicit or
explicit agreement not to discuss their discriminatory
reasoning, then
it would be ok.  (I think there's a larger principle here
about
favoring a homogenous society vs. a tolerant society too)

So who's right?



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~|
ColdFusion is delivering applications solutions at at top
companies 
around the world in government.  Find out how and where now
http://www.adobe.co
m/cfusion/showcase/index.cfm?event=finder&productID=1522
&loc=en_us

Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups
/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:245800
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/s
ubscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/un
subscribe.cfm?user=22184.15789.5

I'm late to this thread, but here goes:

When I was in cub scouts as a kid, we had a pretty good
group for awhile. I
had no idea of any of these issues- what gay was, etc. so I
didn't care.
Later on, we got a new scout leader whose son shared all
sorts of racist
things his father had to say about his dark-skinned
neighbors. That was the
last time I went to scouts.

Intolerance breeds more intolerance.

On 11/4/07, Gruss wrote:
>
> My wife and I had an interesting debate on the BSA.
>
> Her position:
> Because the BSA bans atheists and Gays from being BSA
leaders, we
> shouldn't let our fictitious children attend any BSA
events because
> then we'd be implicitly endorsing their discrimination
and possibly
> funding it.
>
> My position:
> Lots of groups have these same rules: Catholic Church
(some sects),
> Jewish Church, etc., but also stand for the Golden
Rule, honor, etc.
> If our children were to attend events and there was an
implicit or
> explicit agreement not to discuss their discriminatory
reasoning, then
> it would be ok.  (I think there's a larger principle
here about
> favoring a homogenous society vs. a tolerant society
too)
>
> So who's right?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~|
ColdFusion 8 - Build next generation apps
today, with easy PDF and Ajax features - download now
http://download.macromedia.com/pu
b/labs/coldfusion/cf8_beta_whatsnew_052907.pdf

Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups
/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:245903
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/s
ubscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/un
subscribe.cfm?user=22184.15789.5