Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
of course it's me! I'm the parent - I'm the one who KNOWS what's normal (according to my culture/society) and I'm the one who's responsible for m son's upbringing, health, and adherence to social norms. IT IS MY JOB to worry - not his.
Yea but in your previous post you were casting it as if these were all things your KID would be worried about (Where can the KIDS go where they wont have to worry about... blah blah blah) which is dubious:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domitian
But I ask, is there anyplace these days - aside from the confines of my home - where a kid can be a kid? A place where they don't have to worry about their gender classification or their sexuality? Where they aren't taught or be faced with "alternative lifestyles"?
So do people think that these boys should be in Girl Scouts? Wouldn't a boy being in a Girl Scout troop bring up more questions and be obviously out of place?
Or are trangendered children just not allowed to be in any scouting organization, and that whole let kids be kifs only applies to other children?
Yea but in your previous post you were casting it as if these were all things your KID would be worried about (Where can the KIDS go where they wont have to worry about... blah blah blah) which is dubious:
you know what my point is/was - you're just trying to nitpick and I wont play the game.
I think this is the crux of the matter. BSA is a private organization, and they can set whatever policies they want. I don't like the fact that they appear to be caving to some noisy activists, but if they don't choose to exhibit some backbone, that's their problem. Parents need to decide what they are, and what they are not, comfortable with. Those who are not comfortable with BSA's policies can remove their children from the organization. There are other organizations who perform similar roles to BSA, and these other organizations may be a better fit for their children.
If enough people do this, BSA will have to re-evaluate their policies -- or they'll just fade away, and that will be that. And if enough don't, then they can assume that most people are OK with it, and proceed accordingly.
The BSA has been wrestling internally with these issues for several years, including surveying members in good standing. I participated in the discussion as did my husband. Characterizing this as caving to external pressure from activists does a disservice to the efforts of the BSA's constituent members to determine the organization's future course.
The BSA has been wrestling internally with these issues for several years, including surveying members in good standing. I participated in the discussion as did my husband. Characterizing this as caving to external pressure from activists does a disservice to the efforts of the BSA's constituent members to determine the organization's future course.
my assumption is that given the incredibly small number of troops this would affect, it was easier to simply say "yes, we accept transgender children" knowing it would rarely, if ever, happen.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,601,062 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundaydrive00
So do people think that these boys should be in Girl Scouts? Wouldn't a boy being in a Girl Scout troop bring up more questions and be obviously out of place?
Or are trangendered children just not allowed to be in any scouting organization, and that whole let kids be kifs only applies to other children?
My guess is the anti-transgender people want the world to be a simple black and white place, and want people who don't fit the "societal norms" to be loner recluses
you know what my point is/was - you're just trying to nitpick and I wont play the game.
my point is simple.
It is hardly a nitpick it changes the entire subject of the argument from something that is distressing to you AND to the children involved, to something that is only distressing to you.
That said, the BSA have a long history of making decisions on their principles and leaning on their psuedo-private status to justify them (they get quite a bit of indirect federal funding in the form of cheaply rented park space, among other things). It would appear that some of their principles on this matter have shifted, but all the arguments used in the past still apply.
I guess the Mormon influence must have been toned down in the last decade?
I would say if you can't deal with it your best decision would be to withdraw and see if you can find something similar elsewhere closer to your values.
I would say if you can't deal with it your best decision would be to withdraw and see if you can find something similar elsewhere closer to your values.
My stance is that we'll see how it affects the troop and play it by ear. I highly doubt more than a dozen troops will be affected by this decision.
My stance is that we'll see how it affects the troop and play it by ear. I highly doubt more than a dozen troops will be affected by this decision.
Honestly on a local level it will probably be EXACTLY the same. It is not like the people composing your local troop will suddenly morph into different people. You might see a transgender scout or two at the national jamboree.
In other words people will be fungible for sex. The male and female both have a hole and the male wont care what kind of hole it is as long as it is a hole. If there is no male around, the female will take on another female without a second thought.
Really, in a pangender society people wont be identified as male or female anymore. Who know where Obama's world will lead us?
Say no way?
Well in 2017 if a person has a penis and says they are a female...they are a female. If a person has a vagina and says they are a male...they are a male. That is the law that Obama left us it seems.
Obama bragged when he left office it wont be easy to change things with his homosexual agenda. The problem Obama didn't realize with destroying standards is; it is not just confined to one thing or one party. Obama's world made it possible to have Trump. Without Obama destroying standards, Trump would not have been able to be prez. When Obama promoted homosexual marriage defining 2 hairy guys as husband and wife he made it possible to sell a peach with no fuzz on it that rots before it ripens. If I say it is a peach...it is a peach!
That is your world in 2017!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
