Its high time the boy scouts allowed freethinkers to join.

[PrinceofWands]

You sound like a very pleasant person to be around.

I reflect what I'm faced with. When people are decent human beings around me things tend to go smoothly. When people are ignorant asses I tell it to them bluntly, and things seem to deteriorate. Hence I don't associate with too many devoutly religious people.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Ah yes, an excellent example of complete tolerance of others. With an example like that, how could anyone not agree that the scouts need to be tolerant and inclusive of all viewpoints?

You seem like one of those militant atheists, no better than the religious zealots. Two sides the same coin, but I'm sure you can't see that.

I'm not an atheist at all any more, just not religious either. Despite the terrible examples given by most Americans there IS a middle ground.

 

[shortylickens]

Liberals don't exist in the US, outside of maybe vermont(and in your head).

So what are we talking about? Progressives?

 

[PrinceofWands]

I think you are mentally challenged. I feel sorry for you. Must be hard to be stupid.

Actually my intelligence puts me in the 99.999+ percentile and have a clean bill of mental health, but thanks for demonstrating that you know absolutely nothing. If you want stupid and mentally ill go to a church sometime.

 

[shortylickens]

And conservatives are any different?

wwww.logicalfallacy.com.net.org

 

[PrinceofWands]

There is nothing "immoral" about them having set rules of who can join. And a non-religious person wanting to force some religious organization to change their rules so they can join is just downright silly :|

I said no such thing, but you're too much of a stupid ass to possibly comprehend that.

 

[JM Aggie08]

I reflect what I'm faced with. When people are decent human beings around me things tend to go smoothly. When people are ignorant asses I tell it to them bluntly, and things seem to deteriorate. Hence I don't associate with too many devoutly religious people.

I just don't understand how so many of you manage to come into contact with so many devoutly religious people in your daily lives.

Where the hell do you work? Where do you live? Hell, Texas is always bashed around here for supposedly having Bible thumpers on every street corner (which is mostly blind ignorance), yet I can't think of the last time I encountered an overbearing fundamentalist on the streets, at work, or in my genreal vicinity.

I just don't associate a person's character with their beliefs I guess...most of the time it never gets brought up. If you're a decent person, then you're a decent person. If you're an asshole, you're an asshole. That's the end of it. No more, no less.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I just don't understand how so many of you manage to come into contact with so many devoutly religious people in your daily lives.

Where the hell do you work? Where do you live? Hell, Texas is always bashed around here for supposedly having Bible thumpers on every street corner (which is mostly blind ignorance), yet I can't think of the last time I encountered an overbearing fundamentalist on the streets, at work, or in my genreal vicinity.

I just don't associate a person's character with their beliefs I guess...most of the time it never gets brought up. If you're a decent person, then you're a decent person. If you're an asshole, you're an asshole. That's the end of it. No more, no less.

I live in SW Washington state...a significantly 'liberal' area (though I've traveled and lived throughout much of the country). I associate mostly with academics, hippie types, and alternative lifestyle livers. They're usually pretty ok. However, there's still piles and piles of stupid all around us all the time. People wandering around testifying to any who will listen, people writing letters to the editor in the paper, people on tv/radio, people at school meetings, people running groups and organizations (like the scouts), people pushing their elected officials to be their kind of special stupid, etc.

I actually don't prejudge, but my experience has been that a LARGE number of deeply religious people are ignorant, abusive, hypocrites responsible for much of the worlds ills. Not all, of course. There are a few exceptions that relegate religion to a back-burner on simmer. Generally, however, I have found that atheists and spiritual people are ok to good (by my standards), and religious people are at best a coin flip as to rather or not they're going to suck utterly (again, by my own biased viewpoint).

 

[JM Aggie08]

I live in SW Washington state...a significantly 'liberal' area (though I've traveled and lived throughout much of the country). I associate mostly with academics, hippie types, and alternative lifestyle livers. They're usually pretty ok. However, there's still piles and piles of stupid all around us all the time. People wandering around testifying to any who will listen, people writing letters to the editor in the paper, people on tv/radio, people at school meetings, people running groups and organizations (like the scouts), people pushing their elected officials to be their kind of special stupid, etc.

I actually don't prejudge, but my experience has been that a LARGE number of deeply religious people are ignorant, abusive, hypocrites responsible for much of the worlds ills. Not all, of course. There are a few exceptions that relegate religion to a back-burner on simmer. Generally, however, I have found that atheists and spiritual people are ok to good (by my standards), and religious people are at best a coin flip as to rather or not they're going to suck utterly (again, by my own biased viewpoint).

Thank you for mentioning this.

It seems the vast majority of posters on here equate spirituality with being religious. It's usually believe nothing, or GTFO.

:thumbsup:

 

[PrinceofWands]

Thank you for mentioning this.

It seems the vast majority of posters on here equate spirituality with being religious. It's usually believe nothing, or GTFO.

:thumbsup:

Not at all. It's where I am myself since my early 30s. Religious = dogmatic. Spiritual = hopeful/romantic.

 

[AstroManLuca]

The only thing the Boy Scouts have done wrong is position themselves as some kind of storied institution that is somehow essential for turning boys into men. And that's only partly their fault - they have been very popular for a long time and have a recognizable brand. So going into the boy scouts is considered "a tradition" among many families, one that started a long time ago when no one even gave a second thought to how religious it was.

In reality there are countless organizations that do similar things without an outright religious message, or without any religious affiliation at all. Growing up I went to a YMCA camp called Widjiwagan in northern Minnesota. They occasionally mentioned God but it wasn't weird at all and they never forced anyone to take part in prayers or stuff like that. And they were much more respectful of nature than the Boy Scouts anyway.

It's sort of like how AA has become the default organization people think of when it comes to rehab for alcoholism, because of name recognition and exposure through movies and TV. But AA is a highly religious organization that really isn't suitable for non-Christians. There are plenty of alcoholic support groups out there but AA is what everyone knows.

I disagree with the Boy Scouts' positions on basically everything, but I also recognize their right to run their organization the way they see fit. The only real problem is that not enough people understand that going into Boy Scouts is basically the same as going to church camp. If you don't want your kids to go to church camp, send them to a camp without a religious affiliation.

 

[Hugo Drax]

I am not questioning their legal right to deny who they want, simply saying it is wrong on a personal level. Legally they can do what they want.

Why don't you start the "Gayscouts" a LGBT version of the Boys scout?

Only LGBT allowed. And cater to the growing and profitable LGBT demographics.

 

[JM Aggie08]

Why don't you start the "Gayscouts" a LGBT version of the Boys scout?

Only LGBT allowed. And cater to the growing and profitable LGBT demographics.

Rather than campouts, there will be regular 'field trips' to H&M :biggrin:

 

[PlasmaBomb]

homophoby

Really? You couldn't have just used homophobia?

 

[zsdersw]

The progress gay people have made since Stonewall continues, as evidenced by all kinds of data. This trend will continue, and organizations that do not accept homosexuals in their ranks will become more and more ostracized... and face shrinking membership, shrinking funds, and shrinking influence. They will decide to either stick with their unpopular beliefs and eventually die, or they will adapt and survive.

 

[shadow9d9]

So what are we talking about? Progressives?

We are talking about a group that, in the US, is so small as to be considered insignificant. The democrats are middle/right. They are where the republicans were 20 years ago. Our democrats are to the right of the conservative parties of all other first world countries.

 

[Jeff7]

Thank you for mentioning this.

It seems the vast majority of posters on here equate spirituality with being religious. It's usually believe nothing, or GTFO.

:thumbsup:

I guess I'd be one of them. Or at least place them in very closely-related families.
What are the differences, to your knowledge? Religion often incorporates spirituality, but it has a lot more fluff and structure surrounding it, so that's where the association likely forms.
My view of spirituality is that it is something that deals with things that lean far into the supernatural realm, like eponymous and ethereal "spirits," or the notion of some manner of a "soul" sort of thing.

 

[chucky2]

Scouts must have really changed since when I was in. Almost our entire troop was composed of people that were religious, and from religious familes. We didn't do a damn thing religious when at scouts. They have some kind of rebirth program or something?

 

[jihe]

FFS we are talking about the boy scouts here, when I was growing up they were synonymous with lame and perhaps a little gay. Seriously no kid wanted to be a boy scout.

 

[nextJin]

The progress gay people have made since Stonewall continues, as evidenced by all kinds of data. This trend will continue, and organizations that do not accept homosexuals in their ranks will become more and more ostracized... and face shrinking membership, shrinking funds, and shrinking influence. They will decide to either stick with their unpopular beliefs and eventually die, or they will adapt and survive.

I'm pretty sure the BOA does not have to worry about that, any talk so far has just been the gay movements hammering, forcing the debate.

@OP I was in the Cub Scouts till I got to the corn thing then quit, however my brother in law is an Eagle Scout. The BOA can do whatever they want, and DCal calling himself a "freethinker" or hell even a critical thinker is hilarious.

I don't see the problem, they provide an actual society benefiting service unlike a hell of a lot of other organizations.

 

[Zebo]

I never join groups. Was in a fraternity in college as a means to an end (parties with lots of girls in attendance) but quit that once I learned i could get unfettered access to house even after I was out. You don't need a stupid group to learn anything or give you self worth.

 

[shortylickens]

I never join groups. Was in a fraternity in college as a means to an end (parties with lots of girls in attendance) but quit that once I learned i could get unfettered access to house even after I was out. You don't need a stupid group to learn anything or give you self worth.

Oh god you are so awesome the way you know everything.

 

[surfsatwerk]

I never join groups. Was in a fraternity in college as a means to an end (parties with lots of girls in attendance) but quit that once I learned i could get unfettered access to house even after I was out. You don't need a stupid group to learn anything or give you self worth.

 

[zsdersw]

I'm pretty sure the BOA does not have to worry about that, any talk so far has just been the gay movements hammering, forcing the debate.

In the immediate future, perhaps... but 10, 15, 20 years from now? This is a generational problem for people who don't want to see the BSA admit openly gay people. Younger generations treat homosexuality with no more enmity than being left-handed... and are more likely to not support organizations that have restrictions like this.

 

[chucky2]

In the immediate future, perhaps... but 10, 15, 20 years from now? This is a generational problem for people who don't want to see the BSA admit openly gay people. Younger generations treat homosexuality with no more enmity than being left-handed... and are more likely to not support organizations that have restrictions like this.

Not really sure about that. Most people I know really don't give a F about gays one way or the other, which includes 'support for the cause'. If they want their kid to be in Scouts, their kid will be in Scouts (unless their kid is openly gay). I'd say Scouting attendance issues are more society not caring about what the Scouts do and looking at it as 'not cool' more than anything.

Hard to replace your traditional merit badges with Xbox merit badge, Playstation merit badge, etc. Then you've got the problem of Scouting revolving around the outdoors, which again is demographic that to me seems to be going more negative that positive on the numbers scale.

Lots bigger fish to fry for them than this...

Chuck