News-Record.com

Hi, Nancy. This is one of my favorite topics. I remember when the Girl Scouts changed their oath, to allow their Scouts to insert the name of any chosen deity they preferred to use, or none at all, in place of "God." I was a leader of a pair of local units of the BSA at the time (Cubmaster and Scoutmaster), and I received a council newsletter, in which the head of the Old North State Council blasted the Girl Scouts, saying that setting aside such an important tradition as keeping out atheists would lead to dire consequences.

Even though I was still a believer at the time, I thought that his attitude was horrendous. Having had long experience in relating to atheists, I knew better than to accept the myth that they are evil creatures. The current BSA has apparently not yet seen the light that the Girl Scouts have. It's their loss, IMO.

What's wrong with this:
On my honor, I will do my best,
to do my duty to my higher power/moral compass (replacing to God)and my country,
to obey the Scout Law,
to help other people at all times;
to keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake and morally straight.

I can't see how anyone would find that hard to live with. At least, it wouldn't be a problem for those who aren't awash in prejudice.

"On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to (my higher power-moral compass) . . ." Altering this wording, Nancy is no samll matter; it is a further eroding of our historic Judeo-Christain consensus, which honors and exalts the true and living God. Eliminating His name does just the opposite.

Just as Israel suffered dire consequenses when she turned her back on God and went after false beliefs and gods, so this culture and nation will continue its downward slide if it continues to reject and dishonor the one true God. "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Heb. 10:31

The bilge that is welling up in the secular entertainment industry reflects the moral and philosophical belief system of atheistic humanism. Inevitably, whenever the moral and social norms of Scripture are abandoned, the a-morality of secularism seeks to take its place. Such a key vacuum must be filled with some kind of ordering system; which is the source of destructive ideologies such as perversion, radical feminism, "free" sex, drug use, child pornography - ad nauseam. It is the blindness of spiritual rebellion that eventuates in these espressions, no matter what facile and sophisticated intellectual garb it may seek to hide behind.

Changing a few words may seem innocent on the surface, but it is indicative of a shift downward in every sense. I applaud the Boy Scouts for all their stands to oppose this tendency. If they succomb to the pressure groups,(as many have) they will have done both their organization and the nation a horrendous disservice.

When our major media jump on the God/ Scripture-bashing bandwagon we can bet we are in trouble. The ethical and moral evidence and the testimony of millions across the ages attests to the truth of the Scritpures and of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The Egyptians, the Babyonians, the Romans and the Nazi's all thought they could extinguish the light (=orthodox Faith and Scriptures) of the people of God, but all met the tragic end of all who dishonor the God of Scirpture. Apparently they couldn't see; and obviously we can't either - that it not man, but God Himself, who brings about these judgments as the Lord of history. How myopic we have become.
Again Heb. 10:31!
May God bless the BSA - may they have the intestinal fortitude to resist the pressure!

"Altering this wording, Nancy is no samll matter; it is a further eroding of our historic Judeo-Christain consensus, which honors and exalts the true and living God."

Nikos apparently has no clear notion of the values that are supposed to be espoused by the Boy Scouts. Hint: The Scouting Movement isn't exclusively for "Judeo-Christian" youths. It's long past time that they stopped promoting harmful myths, such as "you have to believe in God in order to be a good citizen."

Eric, expecting Nikos to be sympathetic to anything other than Nikos is futile.

I for one am thankful that a Court has chosen to abide by the law. Providing public funds for exclusive groups IS discriminatory! That is not what was desired when the nation was founded. Sadly, as the nation evolved inclusitivity did not. Maybe there is still hope.

I applaud the Courts have begun upholding the law and keeping groups in check. The sad part is that it has taken the Court to show this indifference to the differing groups.

Shalom

"Eric, expecting Nikos to be sympathetic to anything other than Nikos is futile."

Well, yes. I know this. You may note that in my response, I didn't actually in fact address him... I only provided my reaction to his statements. I already told him in another thread that I don't consider it worthwhile to speak with him. No doubt he's learned that I was serious.

This is “him” – you know, that third party who has the far-out ideas. I know I’m the odd man out here and I fully accept that. I understand your bias (we all have them, whether we admit it or not). I have stated my case for the abnormality of deviant practices, both from a biblical and from a social viewpoint; whereby they are essentially harmful to a society. That is, God has designed every facet of man’s social ecology to function optimally according to His great creative plan, to which no sinful practice belongs

Yes, I understand that the BSA is not a “Judeo-Christian” organization, per se. But there is a long history of its close alliance with churches and other institutions. And there is the insertion of “God” in the scout pledge, which I recited in my church-sponsored troop many times. My statement that this heavy-handed attempt to secularize and de-Christianize every public expression in American life is nothing short of an inquisitorial effort to promote the establishment of humanism in the country: a country that was undeniably established on a clear, culture-wide Christian consensus, which went LARGELY unchallenged, supported by the government, courts and public, for the greater part of the country’s existence.

My statement was to infer that, although the BSA is not, nor ever was, an expressly “Christian” organization, the VALUES and spiritual aura that has pervaded much of it, iss clearly biblical in moral character. My intent was that this attempt to strip the organization of any Christian or religious orientation is a further eroding of the general Judeo-Christian (OT and NT values tradition) consensus . The goal of atheistic humanism is to enthrone itself as the dominant religious and philosophical Magisterium, to the displacement and suppression of Christian thought and practice, so that it’s own agendas may go forward (socialism, free and deviant sex, social realignment, drug use, etc.)

The forcing upon the populace, through the liberalized court system, of such unbiblical ideas and practices as abortion and homosexuality are prime examples of this humanistic “purge.” It is not surprising that this case against the Sea Scouts occurred in San Francisco. These two practices are key to undermining any remaining Christian consensus. Abortion on demand proclaims that pre-birth human life is just so much disposable, evolved tissue and not of supreme value as a person created in the image of God. Legalizing and normalizing of homosexuality says that we can do anything we wish without God’s approbation, including debunking the sacredness and exclusivity of heterosexual marriage and sex.. It is a rebellion-generated thumbing of the nose at God and His moral absolutes.

This is why I say that this case is just a further erosion of the general biblical moral and social consensus of historic American society. My contention is that this portends misery and ultimate disaster for the nation, as it continues to enthrone, case after case, the sinful human ego as the guiding arbiter of morality and social norms. It LOOKS and FEELS so trendy, liberating and with-it; but is pure illusion, already playing itself out in the steady decline of the social fabric of the country and the grunging of music and entertainment.

In saying these things I am not defending the lamentable state of much of pop and media Christianity. It is, for the most part, a low-grade, often insipid, emotionalistic parody of dynamic, grace-oriented Christianity. There is probably more work to do in the Christian backyard than in the culture at large. Nevertheless, there is still a need to defend and promote biblical values and social structure, regardless of the condition of the Church, which has lost ground more because of its liberal apostasy and fundy emotionalism than the strength and rectitude of atheism and humanism. I DO NOT support those who have an attitude of hate or violence against any person or group. However, I do believe that it is wrong to publicly PROMOTE, legally or otherwise, anything that is expressly forbidden by the Creator; because it leads, in the long run, to the disintegration and demise of any national entity. Hence the importance of organizations like the BSA NOT approving sinful behavior.

Describe to me the uplifting and ennobling effects on marriage and family, now and historically, of abortion and flagrant perversion - in our own society, or those of antiquity. Debate can proceed on this level, even though the ultimate issue is spiritual authority- about which we cannot seem to come to terms as yet. Sorry for the lengthy diatribe.

I am surprised but very glad to hear the Scouts are considering this change.

Let's just boil this down to its essence: Do we funnel taxpayer money in the way of tax breaks or direct subsidies to a group which, if it doesn't adopt this change, dictates which particular brand of faith to which the CHILDREN participating must kowtow?

Should public money support a required oath to any god at all? (See your Constitution, where Article 6 plainly prohibits ANY required oath of office; what we have had is simply a non-binding, non-official tradition, when Presidents and others say "so help me God". The Constitution explicitly says this is NOT the law of the land.)

If privately funded, non-publicly-supported groups wish to make oaths to Hermes or Jesus, I care not. If public taxpayer dollars are used to try and pressure youngsters to make such oaths simply because "all their friends" are in the scouts or other group, I'm aginnit.

It is easy to say, "If an agnostic parent doesn't want their child to feel pressured to make such an oath, they should not enroll them in the group." The Boy Scouts have a near monopoly on this kind of youth group stuff. Should the government give its imprimatur to religiously-biased pressure of this kind? Should we allow taxpayers' dollars via government to effectively make children feel like pariahs for not conforming to monotheism?

Freddy, it’s just another imperious, in-your-face attempt by the atheist/humanist community to eliminate all Christian wording or references in any group larger than 5 - no matter how long a tradition has been in place and no matter that the majority (democracy doesn’t apply here) approves of the traditional format and policy. The antipathy and bias is no longer subtle or veiled, but blatant and unmistakable.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to discern that if you call “God” higher power, or nothing at all, that mental construct becomes the accepted norm. Or – you end up with the tuti fruti chaos that is making American over into a standardless, relativistic moral and ethical wasteland.

You folks don’t seem to see that your attempts to force and coerce the majority Christian populace to give up all “public” references and traditions is doing exactly what you say THEY are doing in those things. You seem to be hell-bent on this insatiable religious cleansing rampage. You’d better start going after the Muslims now, because you can bet your bottom dollar they’ll not pamper you like the indolent Christian community has. Try your God-cleansing attacks in Iran.

There are, in fact, only two options: God’s ways or man’s ways; as much for a nation as an individual. We in the West are rapidly exchanging our Biblical inheritance for a humanist mess of pottage. The prodigal son was mesmerized by the allure of the world’s ways and pleasures until he ended up wanting the hog slop – which is where all those who leave the Father’s household end up, in one form or another. All this heady schlock about multi-religionism and sexual freedom is just a smoke screen for people wanting to be free to feed their compulsive lust patterns without opposition or restraint. All the intellectual verbiage is just window dressing. Abortions so girls can sleep around without consequences, or gay marriage so that the perverse can become “respectable.” You just can’t stand it that a group like the BSA would uphold that which is honorable, manly and godly (not that they all do of course). They MUST heel and kowtow to your standards and preferences, or the great juggernaut of neutral secularism is threatened.

Well, I’ve probably stirred your ire enough for one entry.

Freddy,

I didn't realize that the BSA had "a near monopoly on this kind of youth group stuff." Ever hear of The Boy & Girls Club of America; 4-H; DeMolay (the youth organization of the Masons); the Future Farmers of America; City Sports Leagues; Little League; all of the clubs sponsored by Junior and Senior High Schools? What about the CYO or any other church youth groups ... oops, I forgot, that's church-related!

No one is compelled to join Boy Scouts. No one has to join Boy Scouts in order to go camping. There are lots of opportunities for young men to stay active and out of trouble outside of the BSA. The fact that atheists have a problem with the BSA pledge is _their_ problem; they can establish their own organization if they feel so strongly about it.

"No one is compelled to join Boy Scouts. No one has to join Boy Scouts in order to go camping."

Very true. But the government has no business being associated with or supporting either tacily or materially a group that violates national standards of religious or sexual discrimination... which is the point of the current spate of court battles.

"But the government has no business being associated with . . . a group that violates national standards of relgious or sexual discrimination."

National standards! Only liberal court decrees. The large majority of Americans, Christain and non, would not vote to do anything to the BSA for thier standards. You may cite court decisions, but don't go talking about "national standards" - which do not equal limited legal precedents. It is nothing less than special interest bullying, pure and simple. Christains will NEVER roll over and accept godless and immoral decisions by civil courts. I'm not talking force, but continuing electoral and political action.

The Scouts or any group that wishes to have a religious or even watered-down pseudo-religious oath, should be able to...just without taxpayers' dollars.

Nancy's admirabel attempt at a compromise oath is certain to offend the Christian faction, I fear. I also think asking a child to take an oath to any "higher power" is potentialy demeaning. Making a promise to one's parents is one thing; I have no intent to ask my child to bow their minds and conscience to what I shall teach them are imaginary beings or forces.

As for "moral compass": that sounds much better. It more easily allows for an interpretation as "personal conscience". Of course, if someone has a strong conscience, oaths are superfluous.

And thank you for reminding me of those other fine youth groups. I had forgotten. Now I can refer interested parties to them in lieu of Boy Scouts if the oath goes unchanged. But I still see no reason public tax dollars should go to any "faith-based" group which makes its participants take a religious oath. I also would be pleased as punch to see a genuinely religious man or woman of conscience who thoroughly understands Article 6 take office without invoking God. That would show the true power of human conscience, and build trust with the non-monotheist population.

The free-thinker and non-deist citizenry is the last bastion betwixt our beloved republic and an unconstitutional march towards increasing theocracy. There are, happily, also many deists and even Christians who agree.