- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Orson wrote:Rob4Hope wrote:LookingHard wrote:
And then on my lunch break I read this from the church
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-to-go-forward-with-scouting-program ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-to-go-forward-with-scouting-program This gives me the impression that the BSA is here for the long haul. Interesting. So, where did the 2017 number come from spoken of above? Hearsay?
Obviously it was hearsay, but it came to me as common knowledge.
The BSA thing doesn’t work in most of my experience, as implemented by the LDS church. I don’t know what the future holds, but I don’t have high prospects. Sorry…that is how I feel.
DJ – Quote:I don’t know that the Q15 (er Q12 since they’re a bit short at the moment) is divided on this actually.
Your probably right, but the first letter out the gate presented a very different picture. And from listening to GC talks, press conferences, and reading PR letters – I sense a tug of war in that consensus. And for me, I find comfort in that. It gives me hope that life, even at the top, isn’t black and white. I know regular members don’t see it, but I do, and that hope helps me.
Rob –
Quote:The BSA thing doesn’t work in most of my experience, as implemented by the LDS church. I don’t know what the future holds, but I don’t have high prospects.
I don’t know that the BSA thing works either. I’ve seen lots of flaws in the program long before SSA came along. What I appreciate about the present take is from the standpoint of the churches grappling with people who are same gender attracted. In our rush to respond to politics we have continually run over people, families, and friends who needed our love not our dismissal. For me, even if the BSA thing only holds out one more year or so, it validates same gender attracted people. If the church wants to leave BSA because of some other reason, by all means do it. If they have a more religious plan such as personal progress, great, (Not that I wouldn’t like to scrap Personal Progress and change Young Women’s, but that’s a different discussion entirely). If they want to have an LDS universal guy thing – great. Just don’t leave because of the “Gay-issue”.
mom3 wrote:I don’t know that the BSA thing works either. I’ve seen lots of flaws in the program long before SSA came along. What I appreciate about the present take is from the standpoint of the churches grappling with people who are same gender attracted. In our rush to respond to politics we have continually run over people, families, and friends who needed our love not our dismissal. For me, even if the BSA thing only holds out one more year or so, it validates same gender attracted people. If the church wants to leave BSA because of some other reason, by all means do it. If they have a more religious plan such as personal progress, great, (Not that I wouldn’t like to scrap Personal Progress and change Young Women’s, but that’s a different discussion entirely). If they want to have an LDS universal guy thing – great. Just don’t leave because of the “Gay-issue”.
The gay thing is quite confusing.
I have a friends who is a “Dragon Mama”, has several LGBT children, and is right into this topic. She has explained to me that the basic idea is if you are GAY, you are naturally
prone to pedophilia, unable to control yourself in other ways, and are just plain dangerous for these boys in BSA. The church doesn’t come right out and say that, but you can bet that if someone comes out as GAY, even if they live the LOC and hold a recommend, they sure are NOT going to receive a call to the BSA. If I am in error about this, I would be happy to be corrected.
Quote:It gives me hope that life, even at the top, isn’t black and white.
It isn’t. There is no doubt about that – and it is less black and white now than it has been for quite some time.
:clap: Old-Timer wrote:Quote:It gives me hope that life, even at the top, isn’t black and white.
It isn’t. There is no doubt about that – and it is less black and white now than it has been for quite some time.
:clap: I do agree with both of you. I think they can have reached a consensus while holding varying points of view – and I believe Otterson did not fully express that idea (for whatever reason).
DarkJedi wrote:Old-Timer wrote:Quote:It gives me hope that life, even at the top, isn’t black and white.
It isn’t. There is no doubt about that – and it is less black and white now than it has been for quite some time.
:clap: I do agree with both of you. I think they can have reached a consensus while holding varying points of view – and I believe Otterson did not fully express that idea (for whatever reason).
I guess they have not reached a consensus on how they should be expressing that they can have varying points of view.That may well be true, LH, and I think that’s part of the problem. A couple have talked about it every now and again but I think the average member believes it’s a mutual admiration love fest every time they meet. I don’t doubt they respect each other and listen to each other. I also don’t doubt they have very strong disagreements on any number of subjects. They are, after all, as human as the rest of us (something else I’m not sure the average member believes). DarkJedi wrote:That may well be true, LH, and I think that’s part of the problem. A couple have talked about it every now and again but I think the average member believes it’s a mutual admiration love fest every time they meet. I don’t doubt they respect each other and listen to each other. I also don’t doubt they have very strong disagreements on any number of subjects. They are, after all, as human as the rest of us (something else I’m not sure the average member believes).
I can imaging that that could be hard to deal with. Take Elder Christopherson. I suspect he has a view on homosexuality that was quite different from Elder Packard’s view. So they have some “vigorous” discussions (in the temple??) where they realize they are in an impasse. Then Elder Christopherson has to leave and tow the company line – even while he undoubtedly gets some heartbreaking stories where the current stance of the church is hurting people. I am sure he is glad on some of the tiny baby steps being made, but realizes that does not help when a family has a gay son commit suicide.I agree that the BSA as a secular organization was facing a losing battle on the gay front. If a charter organization wanted to appoint a gay leader they were prohibited. If an accomplished scout leader came out as gay he was summarily dumped in disgrace. It was discrimination and is illegal (in varying degrees based upon the state). What does the BSA stand for and what does it accomplish? Is all of that compromised by no longer discriminating based on sexual orientation? mom3 wrote:If the church wants to leave BSA because of some other reason, by all means do it. If they have a more religious plan such as personal progress, great, (Not that I wouldn’t like to scrap Personal Progress and change Young Women’s, but that’s a different discussion entirely). If they want to have an LDS universal guy thing – great. Just don’t leave because of the “Gay-issue”.
I agree with this too. I actually do not mind if the church leaves the BSA. Take a year or so to quietly develop your program and then announce that the change is to standardize the LDS program for every young LDS man in the world.
What did the first press release accomplish if we are actually staying with the BSA after all.
It more firmly paints us as a homophobic church without gaining anything.
It gives homophobic LDS members one more thing to talk about and one more reason to believe that we are persecuted for our beliefs. I understand that people have different beliefs and comfort levels with gay issues but when people feel that it is acceptable to let their homophobic flag fly in church settings – what does that say about our church community? I sometimes feel that talking negatively about the gay issue is seen as a test of loyalty. Do I join in or make some neutral comments to be seen as part of the group? Or do I call out unfair generalizations or assumptions and reveal myself as an outsider?
Quote:They are, after all, as human as the rest of us
Except for Dieter, no man who has a golden tan like his, all year round, can be human like the rest of us.
mom3 wrote:Quote:They are, after all, as human as the rest of us
Except for Dieter, no man who has a golden tan like his, all year round, can be human like the rest of us.
I thought that was the spirit. Thanks for popping my bubble today mom!LookingHard wrote:mom3 wrote:Quote:They are, after all, as human as the rest of us
Except for Dieter, no man who has a golden tan like his, all year round, can be human like the rest of us.
I thought that was the spirit. Thanks for popping my bubble today mom!I have a reliable source that says he “fake bakes”
Quote:I have a reliable source that says he “fake bakes”
With no tan line.
Definitely something to aspire to.
There were mixed reactions here in the Mormon corridor. Some of the comments on the KSL article were hilarious, but they always are. I do think the church just couldn’t suddenly step away from scouting so they decided to continue until they can come up with a different program for the boys. Hopefully it will be a good change. I don’t have a problem with scouts, but I’ve never been involved in it before.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.