B.s.a. Allows Gay Leaders, Church Responds

[Brian 2.0]

I read it as saying the leaders were out of their offices and unable to meet together to formulate a unified and authoritative course of action with regard to the pending vote, unable to exert an influence on the outcome. By ignoring the Church's request, the national council has been discourteous to this, the largest chartering organization under the BSA umbrella. The Church is clearly not taking kindly to the snubbing, and I'm afraid this is the beginning of the end of its association with Scouting.

I can't imagine the BSA had any question as to how the church felt on the pending vote. Their not voting asking themselves "I wonder how the LDS Church will feel about this? I wish they weren't on vacation so we could ask."

If the BSA knew which way the vote was going to come down, the church asking for more time is basically them asking for time so they can be ready to possibly announce their separation from the BSA and taking all those boy scouts with them. Basically giving the Church time to say "we don't agree with BSA". Why would the BSA want to give them that opportunity to steer the PR of the announcement into a rule change that caused a massive defection.

Seems less of a diss and more of a savvy PR move.

[TheSkepticChristian]

Well, its good that the church will not use your book in making this important decision.

 

Did you know the church in Chile allowed unmarried couples to live together? That was about 15 years ago. That was because there were no divorce laws, so that meant members couldn't get divorce. By "allow" I mean temple recommend, good standing, sacrament. 

 

When the church says openly homosexaul, it means practicing and promoting homosexaul relations.

 

I have a Question, Do Boy Scouts allow unmarried leaders that are living with a woman? If they do, did the Church say something about that?

 

All this is not strengthening my Faith. 

Edited July 28, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Danzo]

It doesn't follow that if a person abstains from the services of one organization due to its support of the LGBT community then they should probably abstain from the services of other organizations that also strongly support the LGBT community? Perhaps you're just uncomfortable that much of your day to day life is influenced by people who don't share your views.

Code writers do not have direct contact with my boys while they are camping. The code writers don't have the responsibility to teach my sons about being morally straight.

[mormonnewb]

The Church has been a friend and partner with Scouting for over a century. You don't treat your friend shabbily and not expect the relationship to be damaged, perhaps irreparably.

 

I see your point.  If my friend and business partner does something "behind my back," we're going to have a problem.  The only thing is that I thought was run by Christ and not by Mormonnewb.

 

One of Jesus' best friends denied Him three times.  I don't remember where the Savior saying to Peter, "You treated me shabbily, so we're through."  Or am I wrong to expect the Church leaders to act less like me and more like the Savior?

[mormonnewb]

Code writers do not have direct contact with my boys while they are camping. The code writers don't have the responsibility to teach my sons about being morally straight.

 

So your kids certainly don't go to public school then, do they?  Because if so, over 12 years or so, they are likely to be taught by at least one gay teacher who will spend 1,500-2,000 hours with them.  And sure, they won't be huddled up together in a tent, but I'd dare say that teacher will have more influence over your child during that school year than any other adult (likely, including his parents).  So if you think that gayness is contagious, the scouts are the LEAST of your problems.

[Scott Lloyd]

I see your point.  If my friend and business partner does something "behind my back," we're going to have a problem.  The only thing is that I thought was run by Christ and not by Mormonnewb.

 

One of Jesus' best friends denied Him three times.  I don't remember where the Savior saying to Peter, "You treated me shabbily, so we're through."  Or am I wrong to expect the Church leaders to act less like me and more like the Savior?

Not even Christ forgives unrepentant sinners.

I think, though, it's more a matter of trust. Love and trust are not synonymous.

[Scott Lloyd]

I can't imagine the BSA had any question as to how the church felt on the pending vote. Their not voting asking themselves "I wonder how the LDS Church will feel about this? I wish they weren't on vacation so we could ask."

If the BSA knew which way the vote was going to come down, the church asking for more time is basically them asking for time so they can be ready to possibly announce their separation from the BSA and taking all those boy scouts with them. Basically giving the Church time to say "we don't agree with BSA". Why would the BSA want to give them that opportunity to steer the PR of the announcement into a rule change that caused a massive defection.

Seems less of a diss and more of a savvy PR move.

We'll see how savvy it is after the Church withdraws and BSA, from lack of support, withers away into nothing.

[SmileyMcGee]

Code writers do not have direct contact with my boys while they are camping. The code writers don't have the responsibility to teach my sons about being morally straight.

And your sons and mormomaniac won't have much contact with openly gay leaders if they participate in LDS troops, so....

Edited July 28, 2015 by SmileyMcGee

[SmileyMcGee]

Not even Christ forgives unrepentant sinners.

I think, though, it's more a matter of trust. Love and trust are not synonymous.

Yet of you Scott it is required to forgive all men...dang those inconvenient scriptures...

[rockpond]

When the church says openly homosexaul, it means practicing and promoting homosexaul relations.

If that's what the Brethren mean, than they ought to clarify it somewhere. I doubt that's what the BSA intends with the use of the word "openly". I don't see how "openly homosexual" can be made to mean practicing and promoting sexual relations.

[carbon dioxide]

Scout troops interact with other troops.

 

If you are willing, please read the quotes in this post, then explain why you think the Church will have an ongoing exemption to today's rule change.  The BSA has said that the threat of lawsuits and their attendant "staggering costs" are perhaps the primary basis for today's change.  And now we read how the lawsuits will continue until the exemptions are extinguished.  If the BSA caved in the first instance, why won't it cave in the second?

 

I think Scott is right.  This is the beginning of the end of the Church's association with the BSA.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

 

 

The policy is not going to please everyone.  I think more likely than not that the policy will change again.  At that point the Church may have to leave scouting but as it currently stands, it is still safe.

Edited July 28, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[carbon dioxide]

One benefit for me if the Church leaves scouting is that I don't have to worry about being called to a scouting position and have to say no to the calling.  I have never really liked scouting since I was a kid.  Not much of outdoors person.

[carbon dioxide]

We'll see how savvy it is after the Church withdraws and BSA, from lack of support, withers away into nothing.

Scouting will survive if the LDS Church and other groups leave but they simply will not be as big.  The girl scouts are still around even though their are smaller.

Edited July 28, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[mormonnewb]

Not even Christ forgives unrepentant sinners.

I think, though, it's more a matter of trust. Love and trust are not synonymous.

 

So now, it's not that the BSA disregarded the Church's opinion, but rather that the BSA was "sneaky" (i.e., untrustworthy) in how it went out this very public affair?  Are you saying that the Church was caught off-guard by today's BSA decision -- the very course of action that the BSA stated it would pursue at its annual meeting two months ago?

 

From its May press release, it seems like the Church is the one who broke trust here.  Here is what the Church had to say back in May when the policy shift was announced:

 

 

 

The Church appreciates BSA’s reaffirmation of its commitment to “duty to God,” which includes service to others and moral behavior—central principles of our teaching to young men. As in the past, the Church will work with BSA to harmonize what Scouting has to offer with the varying needs of our young men. We trust that BSA will implement and administer the approved policy in an appropriate and effective manner.

 

Huh?  Did BSA somehow implement and administer the policy in an "inappropriate and ineffective" manner?

 

This isn't about the fact that the Church wasn't allowed to vote on the matter.  The Church had already given its conditional approval (the condition being that the Church could keep its own standards in choosing scout leaders).  What has changed since May?  Nothing from the BSA side of the aisle.

 

Now, maybe the change is that the Church has come to realize that this compromise isn't sustainable; that eventually BSA will be forced to implement a non-discrimination policy for ALL scout leaders.  In that case, the Church might be reasonable to re-evaluate its relationship with the program (I don't think so, but it's certainly a topic for debate).  However, for us to posture that "they don't know who their messing with" is not only unseemly but it simply isn't true.  In May, the Church gave its approval to today's vote.  It seems to have re-evaluated its position since then, but that is not due to some "untrustworthiness" or "disrespect" on the part of the BSA.

Edited July 28, 2015 by mormonnewb

[sunstoned]

For what I hope is the last time, the new BSA policy is not asking the Church to compromise its standards of morality and chastity one bit.  LDS troops will continue to have straight (and closeted-gay) leaders.  What some seem to object to is that OTHER scout troops will be free to have gay leaders.  In America, we are constantly surrounded by those who do not live up to our values.  So when are we going to withdraw our young men from the armed services, where they may have to serve under gay leaders?  When are we going to start withdrawing our children from the public school system where they may have gay teachers and coaches?  We're not.  Yet, we're going to withdraw our young people from a program because OTHER people may have gay leaders?

 

We didn't withdraw because other troops could be led by smokers, drinkers, or even anti-Mormons.  Yet, we would withdraw because other troops could be led by gays?  Do we think our youngsters are going to be damaged by second-hand gayness?  Or maybe seeing gay scout leaders will be a "gateway" to having them accept gay teachers, coaches, and bosses?  Exactly, what is the concern here for the Church (other than that the entire national scouting organization didn't move around its agenda to accommodate the Church)?

Thank you for this reasoned response Mormonnewb. Taken in a full perspective the BSA decision does not really affect the church at all.  It is unfortunate the church's response was not as well thought out. It came across as more of a spoiled child who didn't get his way. 

[iamchuck]

I am really surprised by the terseness of the statement, I sort of wonder if the B-team PR folks are in the office this week, and the rest are out on vacation with the rest of the officials. 

 

I am having a hard time grasping why the Church responded like this. This has been coming for some time, and it's not like it wasn't broadcast from Gates and whomever. The Church certainly doesn't own the scouts; it may have a lot of units, but certainly not the biggest troops. The BSA needs to survive in the world as it is, and it has just been pummeled, financially, over the last 15 years, partially because of public outcry on this issue.  

 

It also seems like an inconsistent response, considering their stance about welcoming gay members, and even lobbying for religious exemptions for performing same-sex marriages. How is this anything but a religious exemption for practicing the faith while still involved in the organization?

 

The church does have allies in the Baptist community who would just rather leave BSA than wade through this an any other potential changes that may be forthcoming. Now that I am writing that, maybe the church doesn't want to have to make the call when something more controversial comes down the line. Excuse the post-therapy.

[Duncan]

One benefit for me if the Church leaves scouting is that I don't have to worry about being called to a scouting position and have to say no to the calling.  I have never really liked scouting since I was a kid.  Not much of outdoors person.

 

same here!! camping to me is when room service ends at 1030 and it's 11 and you're waiting for KFC and you're like "wow, this is camping!"

Edited July 28, 2015 by Duncan

[Scott Lloyd]

Yet of you Scott it is required to forgive all men...dang those inconvenient scriptures...

I don't have to trust all men. In fact, it is quite unwise to trust some people. We are commanded not to do it in fact.

[mormonnewb]

We'll see how savvy it is after the Church withdraws and BSA, from lack of support, withers away into nothing.

 

Wow!  So you want BSA to wither and die for "dissing" the LDS Church?  All of the good that it has done for kids for the last century should cease so that the world learns a lesson not to mess with us, huh?

[Scott Lloyd]

Wow! So you want BSA to wither and die for "dissing" the LDS Church? All of the good that it has done for kids for the last century should cease so that the world learns a lesson not to mess with us, huh?

I've grown bored with this conversation. Go distort somebody else's words. Edited July 28, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

I read it as saying the leaders were out of their offices and unable to meet together to formulate a unified and authoritative course of action with regard to the pending vote, unable to exert an influence on the outcome. By ignoring the Church's request, the national council has been discourteous to this, the largest chartering organization under the BSA umbrella. The Church is clearly not taking kindly to the snubbing, and I'm afraid this is the beginning of the end of its association with Scouting.

I agree with what you've written here except for the final phrase. This change is equivalent to the removal of DADT from the US military. Except that with this vote, the Church (and many other units) get to keep operating as they always have. It simply allows freedom for other chartering organizations who believe differently.

In short, it's not a big enough deal for a church led by President Monson to end its affiliation with Scouting. I don't knowing about President Nelson's relationship with scouting, so I don't know what the coming years might bring when our beloved President Monson is called home.

[Danzo]

So your kids certainly don't go to public school then, do they? Because if so, over 12 years or so, they are likely to be taught by at least one gay teacher who will spend 1,500-2,000 hours with them. And sure, they won't be huddled up together in a tent, but I'd dare say that teacher will have more influence over your child during that school year than any other adult (likely, including his parents). So if you think that gayness is contagious, the scouts are the LEAST of your problems.

It's not that I think gayness is contagious, I'd rather have someone who respects the law of chastity. We work pretty hard as it is counteracting the immorality taught in school. It would be nice if we didn't have to fight it at scouts as well.

[carbon dioxide]

same here!! camping to me is when room service ends at 1030 and it's 11 and you're waiting for KFC and you're like "wow, this is camping!"

If I go on a boy scout campout, I am looking up hotels.com for the nearest motel available.

[Danzo]

If that's what the Brethren mean, than they ought to clarify it somewhere. I doubt that's what the BSA intends with the use of the word "openly". I don't see how "openly homosexual" can be made to mean practicing and promoting sexual relations.

I think the church has clarified it quite well. Have you ever visited Mormonsandgays.org?

[Scott Lloyd]

Scouting will survive if the LDS Church and other groups leave but they simply will not be as big. The girl scouts are still around even though their are smaller.

Apples to oranges.