STEPHEN FRY

I wholeheartedly agree with Tomzak.

The Scout Association is a private RELIGIOUS charity that has a specific rule that states 'The Atheistic Lack of a Religious Belief is a Bar to a Leadership Position'.

Thus, they operate the ridiculous rule that a grown adult cannot teach a six year old to tie their shoe laces unless they believe in god. As one official told me a few years ago, 'We ban atheists and pedophiles, because a pedophile corrupts a child's body, while an atheist corrupts a child's mind'. Or as one Welsh official recently told a group of parents wanting to start a Scout Group 'We don't admit atheists because we don't want them telling little kids that there is no god.

I have to say I am more than slightly amazed that Mr Fry accepted this award and I do feel he should have consulted the large list of complaints received annually about The Scouts by the British Humanist Association before before deciding to accept this award.

I would call upon him to hand it back.

I remember being a scout, and swearing to do my duty to God and to the Queen. I wonder if this is still done? However, I am surprised that in this day and age, that an atheist cannot be a scout or scout leader. Does it matter which god someone believes in, or is any god considered better than no god at all?

While a longstanding fan of Stephen's, I'm new to this forum and have arrived by following the title of this thread. The subject is a long and vexed one in the world of Scouting and some of your comments cut to the heart of the matter.

For 104 years the Scouts have inculcated moral values and behaviours in boys around the world and, since 1993, to girls in Britain as well. The value of this work, and play, has never been more evident than in the aftermath of Britain's riots.

As Nitro says, change takes time. Ingrained discrimination can be hard to remove and The Scout Association has long striven to progress its inclusivity without losing its core values and beliefs.

However, Martin Benson is wrong to describe the Association as a religious charity. It is, as Martin says, a private members' organisation and a charity but it is not a religious organisation. It does not seek to impose any specific beliefs on its members, only to ask that they develop and practice their beliefs. Unfortunately, they use the word "God" a lot, although Buddhists are permitted to substitute the word Dharma here.

What of the many adult volunteers who, in following their spiritual journey within Scouting, conclude that secular humanism is the most true and just philosophy of life? There are, undoubtedly, many thousands of freethinking adults in British Scouting and they do play by the rules, as Nitro says. The difficulty for them is how they can press their Association to drop its last institutional discrimination when, by asking the right questions, they are inviting the Association to expel them? You may be aware that trained adult volunteers are hard to come by in today's society. As one such volunteer, I see the great worth of what we do within Scouting. There is no alternative organisation in which secular adults can deliver fun, challenge and adventure for young people in every local community across the country. Like me, few are willing to abandon ship on a matter of principle.

It will take the likes of Stephen and the BHA to persuade The Scout Association to openly welcome adults of any philosophy and belief. Until then, secular adults in Scouting will remain firmly shut in their closet.

Thank you for pointing that out Delph. However, I do think there is the stipulation of male-to-male marriage not being acceptable. The irony is that you're right, you CAN be a gay man, and be married, but I'm pretty sure it has to be a woman the gay man is married to as Masons ideology puts forth that one of marriages purposes is biological reproduction of the male and female. Gets tricky!

Also, I don't think they quite address transgendered issues. For example, a woman becoming a man and then trying to join. Unless, I suppose, she/he were to keep the transition strictly to himself. But if it were discovered...I don't know how they'd feel...

Theres a book that you should read "Beyond the Light" by William Schnoebelen

of course there are gay masons, as there are gay cops.

however, in masonry, one is elected in by secret ballot.

if the 'political' culture of a particular lodge is made up of members who are, for example, primarily southern baptist, conservative then your odds of being voted
in are slim to none. and I mean, of course, if you are openly gay.

now, you may find a lodge that welcomes openly gay men. but remember, too, that the masons do NOT condone gay marriage
because their foundational tenents assert that one of the
purposes of marriage is procreation, and two gay are not
biologically capable of it. therefore, while you can be an open
gay may in some lodges, you cannot be an openly gay man who is
married to his male partner.

the other thing to remember is that the masonic order is run
primarily from the very top. I'm talking 33rd degree and over.
that's a near impossible climb for *most* initiates to achieve
in their own lifetime. those rings are often handed down father to son.

it is absolutely, diabolically almost, a patriarchal order. personally,
any orgaization that bans an entire gender has something to hide
under the hood. it's why many straight men will not join. it seems
an uncomftorable idea if you look under it. they're almost like
those baptist 'promise keepers'. yeah, they promise to keep women
in line and oppressed. oh, they'll *say* differently. it's bad p.r.
to do otherwise. but if read the books of former high ranking
ship-jumpers ( who, btw, in doing so are under immediate threat
of death..and that's according to masonic rules and the initiate
ceremony itself indicates this....sword tip, meet breast..the initiate
swears on his life to uphold and anything else is betrayal of the
brothers...).

it matters little to me that oscar wilde was any kind of mason. if anything, it only lends weight to the argument that he was as
capable of making assanine choices as anyone else.

btw, i know a couple of local masons. they openly detest homosexuals. so, while there's no specific tenent that i could
find banning gay men, there is an absolute influence when it comes
to joining the order and then finding a lodge with the political
climate one might enjoy.

also, they do discriminate not just against women, but the physically
disabled/handicapped *unless* the handicap occurs after being
initiated. nice huh?

this comes from a former freemason who is also a black man. here
are his personal experiences:
"As for the handicap, there is no accommodation, unless of course the physical handicap resulted after becoming a Mason." ( look
under "eighteenth landmark" for reference )

also: "Since there has been this racial divide in American Masonry from the very beginning, each state within the United States (plus DC) *now has two Grand Lodges; one black and one white.* Each Grand Lodge is led by a Grand Master who controls the "gavel of authority" and ultimately rules over all subordinate lodges within their respective jurisdictions. With nearly 2 million Masons in the U.S., and about a third of which are Prince Hall affiliated, coupled with the rich history and traditions of both sides, you can imagine why neither Grand Master is going to easily be willing to relinquish his gavel of authority in order to form one Grand Lodge within any particular state in the country, or in the nation as a whole, as is in the United Kingdom."

I would not be at all surprised if these gay/racial issues are not
as prominate in the UK as they are here in the states. however, i don't
personally believe the free masons teach anything particularly
'enlightened' to begin with anyway. certainly not anything one can't
here elsewhere in some other faith or philosophy. in other words, there's no 'ground breaking' trains of thought.

it reminds me of little boys building a 'secret tree house' and hanging
a sign that says,"no icky girls or [whatever we say] allowed." all the secrete handshakes and such strike me as unatural behavior for grown men.

Once again, I believe if an organization is listed as 'private' versus 'public', and this has to do with taxes and funds and such and so those types of laws prolly intrude, but I think the Scouts are NOT listed as 'public', in that they are funded via tax dollars like parks are, or sidewalks.

There are MANY private orgs that routinely restrict their membership, and some on biases you may find more repellant than atheist/believer biases.

Sorry to reopen this, but I have just found this and I have to correct this poster.

For his information. I am gay. I am a Freemason. I was a Scout Leader for over 20 years.

"Masons ideology puts forth that one of marriages purposes is biological reproduction of the male and female."

Masonry has no such ideology. Buy a book of Masonic ceremonies and check for yourself.

"For example, a woman becoming a man and then trying to join."

Not even an issue.

"however, in masonry, one is elected in by secret ballot."

As members are in other organisations.

"culture of a particular lodge is made up of members who are, for example, primarily southern baptist, conservative then your odds of being voted in are slim to none. and I mean, of course, if you are openly gay."

Discussions of religion are banned in masonic lodges, so this would hardly be an issue. Besides which, like the Cubs or Scouts, men tend to come to masonry via their friends and a gay man is hardly likely to be hanging out with a Southern Baptist is he?

"now, you may find a lodge that welcomes openly gay men. but remember, too, that the masons do NOT condone gay marriage because their foundational tenents assert that one of the purposes of marriage is procreation, and two gay are not biologically capable of it. therefore, while you can be an open gay may in some lodges, you cannot be an openly gay man who is married to his male partner."

This is nonsense on several levels. We have NO COMMENT on marriage or its purpose. The only promise is that a Mason will not have relationships with another Mason's wife or his daughter. that is in the ceremony book, which can be purchased on Amazon.

the other thing to remember is that the masonic order is run
primarily from the very top. I'm talking 33rd degree and over.
that's a near impossible climb for *most* initiates to achieve
in their own lifetime. those rings are often handed down father to son.

The HIGHEST degree in Freemasonry is the THIRD DEGREE, which is 'completed' by being in the Royal Arch or chapter.

The 33rd degree (which is a CHRISTIAN order) is a side or specialist order of Freemasonry. I am a 3rd degree mason. I have a 33rd in my Lodge, but while I was the Master, I was 'superior' to him.

"it is absolutely, diabolically almost, a patriarchal order. personally,
any orgaization that bans an entire gender has something to hide
under the hood."

Erm, women can be freemasons. There are two UK female groupings and one MIXED grouping. The mixed one is also open to atheists too.

" according to masonic rules and the initiate ceremony itself indicates this....sword tip, meet breast..the initiate swears on his life to uphold and anything else is betrayal of the brothers...)."

Not true. Read the ceremonies. We swear (several times in our career in fact) to be good citizens and uphold the laws of the land we live in.

"btw, i know a couple of local masons. they openly detest homosexuals. so, while there's no specific tenent that i could find banning gay men, there is an absolute influence when it comes to joining the order and then finding a lodge with the political climate one might enjoy."

I my lodge, there are at least three former masters who are gay and there are other openly gay members too. Like I said, one tends to join the things your pals join. I joined because a couple of my (gay) pals said it was a good thing. It is and I ended up a Master.

There are no secrets in Masonry, they are all out there to find. Our ceremonies can be bought in any bookshop and or premises are open as public museums. Oh and we raise money for public charities too. Hope you don't get cancer, but if you do, you might end up being treated at Barts with the Cyberknife. The £2m that revolutionary machine costs was paid for by ordinary masons putting their hands in their pockets at lodge meetings all over London. Some conspiracy theory huh!

"all the secrete handshakes and such strike me as unatural behavior for grown men"
They are a traditional form of recognition that were once used by the Cathedral builders in the middle ages to tell the qualified builders from the cowboys. These days of course, geniune builders have City and Guilds certificates and NVQ's, but they didn't have them back then. All we have done is keep them up. Oh, and they ain't that secret either.

Hi all, I believe that this is all a great shame, a lot of misunderstandings.
1 An atheist CAN teach a Beaver, Cub (or Scout) ‘how to tie his boot laces’; as Tomzak says ‘he is a helper with ...‘ He/she cannot, again as Tomzak correctly says, become a ‘leader’ – i.e. take total responsibility for the young persons' welfare, as leaders have to make the Promise, the first part of which is: ’On my honour, I promise, that I will do my best to do my duty to God …’ i.e. they have ‘a faith’, Muldanian a belief in God is NOT a condition of membership …… Martin please re-think your 3 and 4, as you are correcting the misunderstandings of masonry
2 BP had great foresight – he understood that his faith in a God had not suddenly appeared, he had gathered it on his road through life; at times he had ‘not known’ indeed he had ‘doubted’ maybe, even, for a period been certain that there was no God. He instigated a promise called ‘The Outlander Promise’ which was designed for people who were unable to say ‘I will do my duty to God’ as they were agnostic or indeed were unable to say ‘and to the Queen/my country’ as they were stateless. Unfortunately this has gone by the way side.
3 Please note that BP also only suggested that we can do our best – NONE of us is perfect
4 Also, unless things have changed, the Scout Association in the UK is not a religious charity; it is, again as far as I am aware, an educational charity. I am aware that in some countries, even in Europe, Scouting is split between religious sects. I know that BP viewed this as a great shame as he went to great efforts to encourage them to join together and allow all faiths to prosper together within Scouting. There are Scout (groups) in the UK who are outside the SA – not completely sure why, though it started in 1966 when my shorts went out
5 Finally as you can see from the above there is no dichotomy in Scouting awarding a badge to an atheist or, indeed, a humanist and there should be no dichotomy in Stephen accepting it; one of my best friends in Scouting had a humanist funeral I would welcome help from any humanist in running my sections – if they can put up their fears and worries about my faith