Evil Corporate Chicken vs. Bigoted Character Education? With both stories hitting the press this week, it seems like we've decided to fight the fryer.
My first thought about this was, "Wow! We are some materialistic fatties if the moral ambiguity of buying fast food chicken is more upsetting than the depraved policies of an organization that is shaping tomorrow's leaders."
Now I think the reason for our preferring to hate on Chick-fil-A is not that we're really all that materialistic and obese - although I won't entirely rule it out. ;) But the reason folks love to hate on Chick-fil-A more than the Boy Scouts is that it's far easier to boycott fast food than it is to negotiate the moral trade-offs of an otherwise outstanding youth organization.
...and Chick-fil-A's cows makes better Facebook memes.
Still, I would argue that we should overcome our inclination to hate the easy haters and gather the moral courage to change the Boy Scouts of America's policies. It definitely will not be an easy boycott. In fact, a boycott probably is not the right answer. Whereas America is ripe with a plethora of fast food alternatives, there are no alternatives to the Boy Scouts. Fighting the Boy Scouts most likely requires dedicated dissent from within. Years and years of dedicated dissent and persistent moral outrage. Not exactly the stuff of popular Facebook memes.
So this week, I hope we can resist the urge to waste all our emotional energy on the corporate fat


What would need to be changed about the Boy Scouts policies so that they would be moral? Why are they immoral now?
ReplyDeleteThey would need to not exclude gay scouts and scout leaders. It is immoral, in my opinion, to discriminate someone based upon their sexual orientation.
DeleteYou think it is okay for them to discriminate based on gender?
ReplyDeleteYes. As a society we have determined that gender specific organizations are not inherently unjust. But the exclusion of boys who are gay serves purposes that are only punitive.
DeleteWhy is the exclusion of girls not also deemed punitive? Do you think society should change its position on gender specific organizations in the same vein you are advocating for change within the BSA or is morality/immorality simply relative to a society's will?
ReplyDeleteSome would argue that the exclusion of girls is punitive. I don't think it is because in my opinion there is significant evidence that allowing boys and girls distinct opportunities to learn and socialize independently improves those learning and socializing outcomes. There is absolutely no evidence that removing gay boys and girls from programs is beneficial to anyone. Therefore, it is only punitive in nature.
DeleteThe question below is ignorant of what would qualify as evidence. How have you exhausted a complete search of evidence regarding hetero/homo relationships in children's programming in order to make a definitive judgement against the BSA? If a study asserted otherwise would you take back your judgement?
ReplyDeleteHow would you access a young boy's concern about participating in certain BSA programs with another boy or man that is likely to be physically attracted to him? Is the BSA's customer's concern not substantial evidence?
Matt, there is no evidence that gay folks have any impact on children's programming. If you have concern about what impact gay members have on group morale, I suggest you look at the rationale and evidence around the military's recent decision to overturn "don't ask, don't tell." If a young boy was concerned about participating BSA programs with gay scouts or leaders, I would see that as an opportunity to educate the boy on how to get along with people who are different than him. Also - FYI men that are "physically attracted" to "young boys" are not gay, they are pedophiles.
DeleteI hear you. I can't reconcile it, but I hear you.
ReplyDeleteHow do you know this so confidently? The research produced in the few years following "don't ask. don't tell"? Please tell me there is more substantial evidence if that is the basis of your sentiment.
Actually the basis of my sentiment is direct experience: my sister is gay, my pastor is gay, my childhood best friend is gay, half of my church is gay, I've had gay teachers, I have gay coworkers, my dentist is gay.... all of these people will without a doubt help me raise my children - and that is a blessing.
DeleteThere must be something more to our worldviews. Although homosexual persons are a very small percentage of the population I have had several homosexual friends as well, but my experience has not led me to criticize organizations like BSA or Chick-Fil-A in the same way. What about your personal experience has led to your different conclusion about gender?
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate your answering my questions in response to your judgement of two organizations I greatly respect.
I don't think that my gay friends and family should be treated like second class citizens. What about your relationship with your gay friends leads you to think it is fair or at least morally tolerable that they not be able to marry or join the Boy Scouts?
DeleteI try not to criticize people based on my relationships to certain other people. I don't think I could sleep at night having to decide which interests of relationships to elevate over the others.
ReplyDeleteHow about you?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Are you saying you stay completely agnostic on all issues so as not to offend friends who disagree with you?
DeleteNo at all, I try not to depend on relationships with certain people or certain friends regarding issues like these. In doing so I would have to prefer one friend over another unless all my friends were in agreement, which I rarely find to be true.
ReplyDeleteI would like to hear more about how you distinguish between sexual orientation and gender in this case. Could you understand how people find similarities in the two as it relates to BSA programming?
OK, I see what you are saying. Well I'm also not "polling the audience" when it comes to my opinions about gay rights. That would be atrocious moral reasoning!
DeleteOne thing we seem to be disagreeing on is where the burden of proof lies for this issue.
You appear to think that the burden of proof rest upon society to determine that gay people are worthy of equal rights and protections. But that's bad logic. Just as in American law, where we are innocent until proven guilty, when it comes to standards of ethics and human rights - all people are eligible for equal treatment unless there is significant evidence that in certain cases equal treatment need not apply (such as in how most people see that gender discrimination can be beneficial in certain educational institutions. The burden of proof is thus to prove the validity of discrimination based upon gender for educational purposes, not to prove the invalidity of co-ed education.)
My own experience with my gay friends and family is enough to make me comfortable with assuming there is no ethical basis for any discrimination. Just as I need not prove that left-handed people are worthy of Boy Scouting, I need not prove that gay people are worhty of scouting. It is up to discriminating bodies to prove their cause for discrimination.
Since you think that there may be cause for discrimination, the burden of proof rests with you to provide evidence for that discrimination.
So I ask you again, what about gay people, or gay people engaging in the Boy Scouts, makes you comfortable with NOT awarding them equal rights?
I'm not sure I'm tracking with burden of proof. Could you use it to answer my question to you about the distinction with gender?
ReplyDeleteOK, let me try again:
Delete"The burden of proof is thus to prove the validity of discrimination based upon gender for educational purposes, not to prove the invalidity of co-ed education."
So let's look at the Boy Scouts. Most people do not think that the Boy Scouts needs to allow girls to join because there is significant evidence that the full benefit of Boy Scouts is only reached when gender discrimination is allowed. In other words, while our default stance is to support equal opportunity (burden of proof rests with those showing why discrimination is OK), it has been proven that there is a benefit to discriminating in this rare case. Public restrooms, some athletic programs, certain educational environments, etc. are all ethically and, when public funding is involved, legally, required to prove the validity of their gender discrimination. Most of us are convinced that there is enough of a benefit to warrant the gender discrimination in Boy Scouts.
We require the same burden of proof for sexual orientation discrimination. Our default stance is to not discriminate based upon sexual orientation (burden of proof requires significant evidence that there is benefit to excluding gay people). This is what the Boy Scouts went into a 2 year meeting to analyze. They reported on Tuesday that they would not allow gays to join their group. We are calling "FOUL! Show us the evidence that gay scouts and leaders would undermine scouting." To us, the evidence just isn't there and ethically, the Boy Scouts must prove that it is beneficial to discriminate if they are going to discriminate.
So what is the evidence that supports that gay folks should NOT be allowed the same opportunity to scouting as straight folks?
That is where the burden of proof lies.
I think I see what you are saying. To change your mind about the level of bigotry you are willing to tolerate would require them to share the research they have used to make their decision? If they did you would take back your criticism of the organization and open call for infiltration unless the research was based on the concerns of their clients? In the meantime bigotry is assumed because of the lack of burden of proof. Burden of proof is not needed for gender discrimination because you are satisfied with general consensus or what you perceive as evidence in that case.
ReplyDeleteI respect your opinion, but can't determine with any confidence the basis for accusing these organizations and people behind them in the way you have. I guess that is the deep river trust in something this blog has been named.
I've enjoyed the discussion and perhaps it helps me understand the reasoning used by people that share your worldview and reinforce my own. Cheers!
"Burden of proof is not needed for gender discrimination" - that is not at all what I am saying. There is ALWAYS a burden of proof. Just in the case of gender discrimination in the Boy Scouts, to me, that burden has been substantiated. Does that make sense?
DeleteHere is some background on philosophical and legal reasoning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof
Grеetіngs! Very uѕeful advice in this
ReplyDeletepartіculаr poѕt! It's the little changes that will make the greatest changes. Many thanks for sharing!
Also visit my homepage; payday loans
Also see my web site :: payday loans
Thanks foг уour personal marνеlous pοsting!
ReplyDeleteΙ quitе enјoyed reading it, yοu mіght be a great authοr.
I ωill аlwаys bоokmаrk youг blog аnd will come
baсκ from now on. I ωant to encouragе you to defіnitеly continue уοur grеat ϳob, have a nice afternοοn!
Feel frеe tο visit my wеb blоg; instant payday loans
Plеaѕe let me knοw if уou're looking for a author for your weblog. You have some really good articles and I think I would be a good asset. If you ever want to take some of the load off, I'ԁ absolutely
ReplyDeletelove to wrіtе some matеrіаl for your blog in exchangе for a link baсk to mine.
Ρlease blast me an emаil if interested. Тhanκѕ!
Here is my site ... instant loans
Hello mates, pleasant paragraph and fastidious argumentѕ commented at this plаce, I am in fаct enjoуіng by theѕе.
ReplyDeletemу sitе: private loans
Excellent ωay of deѕcribing, аnd
ReplyDeletepleasant aгticle to tаke ԁata on the topic оf my presentatіοn focus, ωhich i am goіng to dеliver in аcademу.
Also visit mу sitе - payday loans
I eνегy tіme sρent mу half an
ReplyDeletehour tο reаԁ thiѕ ωebsitе's articles daily along with a mug of coffee.
My page :: Instant Payday Loans
Can you tell us more аbоut thiѕ?
ReplyDeleteI'd care to find out some additional information.
My blog post; Payday Loans
Heya i'm for the first time here. I found this board and I to find It truly useful & it helped me out a lot. I am hoping to offer something back and aid others like you helped me.
ReplyDeleteTake a look at my website ... Same Day Payday Loans
Νіce post. I was cheсkіng continuouѕly this weblog аnd I'm inspired! Very useful information specially the closing part :) I maintain such information a lot. I was seeking this particular info for a very long time. Thank you and best of luck.
ReplyDeleteFeel free to surf to my page :: New Bingo Sites
Why people stіll maκe use оf to
ReplyDeleteread nеws papеrs whеn іn thіs technolоgical globe evеrything is avаilable on web?
Also visit my wеblog - New Bingo Sites
wonderful ѕubmit, very informatіvе.
ReplyDeleteI pοnder why the oppoѕite ѕpесialists of this sector ԁon't realize this. You must continue your writing. I'm suге, you've a huge readers' base аlrеady!
Feel free to surf to my web page ... payday loans no credit check