Quantcast

Comments about ‘Scouts greeting Romney violated policy against political participation’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Sept. 20 2012 8:10 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
dwayne
Provo, UT

Lone Eagle,

Your logic is flawed.

A city council or school board meeting isn't partisan political activity and allows Boy Scouts to learn about the importance of citizenship. It's not the same thing as a Scout troop meeting a single candidate or government official while wearing the Scout uniform.

Attending a council meeting to learn about how government works is different from a Scout troop attending a political event or meeting with a government official.

"Complaining about this non-event is absurd."

We are absurd and if our kids don't want to go to meet Romney they can out their personal or political dislike to their friends. Why don't you tell that to a child too. Maybe a 16 year old Matthew would like to tell a friend who doesn't agree with him that he finds him silly and so does his parents. It's not absurd. It's to keep a minority of one Scout from being forced to participate or face being an outcast or considered silly or absurd.

How willing is a single Scout to stand up and disagree with Matthew who is older then him?

Get real people.

Mr. Bean
Salt Lake City, UT

The scouts were merely working on their 'Citizenship in the Nation' merit badge, which requires meeting political leaders. And the adult scout leaders were there simply as drivers and to see to the boys were safe.

What's the big deal, anyway?

dwayne
Provo, UT

Blue AZ Cougar

"Our society is too easily offended -- we're WAY too concerned about being PC than we are about teaching our kids what is right and what is wrong."

We aren't talking about our society being offended instead we are talking about children. Matthew made one good point which is that the oldest Scout is 16. They don't sign up for the Boy Scouts to be involved in politics. They sign up for a fraternal organization and the one thing every fraternal organization including the Boy Scouts expects is that they don't talk about politics or otherwise use the organization for political purposes. This guarantees that members can remain friends afterwards but what this visit did was incite backlash. I suspect that the reason the Boy Scouts even took note of this was because one of the parents of one or more of the boys were upset but their family didn't want to be an outcast in the troop so they couldn't say anything so they complained privately.

There are other opportunities to see Romney if one or more of the boys wanted to meet him. Fraternal organizations rightly avoid political activity.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: " Those scout leaders . . . should be asked or required to resign. And, if this was an LDS sponored troop their bishop should release them . . . ."

Spoken like someone who takes partisan political trickery WAY too seriously. And who has never served as a bishop. Any bishop would LOVE to have a scout leader as proactive as the ones in question, and would probably release an enthusiastic nursery leader before these scouters.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Blue jeans?
No scarfs?
No Troop or National Flag Color Guards?

Yep - a political stunt, shame of their leaders.

Mike in Cedar City
Cedar City, Utah

Blue AZ Cougar. "If the Church wanted to endorse...." The problem is in the eye of the beholder. I did not say that the Church either did or wanted to endorse Romney, I said it could be viewed by some that way if this troop was sponsored by the LDS church. You need to keep in mind who Ronney is and how much money he contributes to the Church.

True nO sign, just a big picture of the scouts standing in fromt of Romneys campaign plan with big Romney letters plastered all over it. This was misuse of the instittion to make a political statement. And did those kids have any opportunity to opt out? Adn if any did what price would they have paid for that?

Blue AZ Cougar
,

@Mike in Cedar City
I see your point, but that's precisely my argument. Our society is WAY too sensitive about these types of things. People see these pictures and automatically assume the Church sponsors Romney. Whatever happened to common sense? You're right in what you said -- the problem IS in the eye of the beholder, because the beholder can't tell the difference between a political endorsement and a casual outing by a scout troop. The problem with our society is that people intentionally misconstrue things to fit their political or personal agendas.

@dwayne
I disagree, it shows how politically charged our society has become. Why can't the pictures just be about some scouts who got to meet a presidential nominee? Why does there have to be this debate about whether or not these pictures suggest the Church is no longer politically neutral? We hang on every political innuendo and are way too concerned about the "he said, she said" in politics. Why can't we be happy that these youth spent their time meeting a politician rather than playing video games or doing drugs?

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: " Those scout leaders . . . should be asked or required to resign. And, if this was an LDS sponored troop their bishop should release them . . . ."

Spoken like someone who takes partisan political trickery WAY too seriously. And who has never served as a bishop. Any bishop would LOVE to have a scout leader as proactive as the ones in question, and would probably release an enthusiastic nursery leader before these scouters.

Bebyebe
UUU, UT

"'Citizenship in the Nation' merit badge, which requires meeting political leaders"

Romney isn't a political leader. He's a candidate. The BS 'honor guard' is a tacit endorsement of Romney and is against the rules. The leaders should be dealt with accordingly.

funny_guy
Vacaville, CA

I have been involved in Scouting the past 50 years. It's beyond me why the Church continues to support Boy Scouts, other than if they were to pull out Scouting would no longer exist. Most Councils around the country would be hard pressed to replace leadership provided by Church members. I became disillusioned with Scouts some 10 years ago when we were told when our Scouts blessed a meal at Scout Camp the prayer needed to be generic as not to offend anyone. I informed them that I was not about to tell my troop how they should pray. Religious tolerance is a two-way street. When someone has been asked to pray, those in attendance should allow that person to pray as they would normally. Everyone else should be tolerant of that persons beliefs -- not the other way around.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments