red21 Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Very said - how/why does this kind of crap ever get to print - from today's Record... Boy faces boot from Cubs after refusing Queen's oath on religious grounds Jun 12 2008 By Stephen Stewart AN EIGHT-YEAR-OLD boy faces being barred from the Cubs for refusing to swear allegiance to the Queen. Matthew McVeigh objected to the Cub Scout Promise - which includes the line "I promise to do my duty to God and to the Queen" - on religious grounds. And his mum Tracy Anne was outraged after he was told he couldn't become a fully-fledged Cub without taking the oath. Matthew and his mum wanted to change the line to "I promise to do my duty to God and my country". But his mum said the leader of the 1st Neilston Scout Group in Renfrewshire told them that was unacceptable and he could not be afull Cub Scout. Mum-of-three Tracy Anne, 29, said: "It's a disgrace in this day and age. We are supposed to live in a multi-cultural age but this flies in the face of that. "The 1701 Act of Settlement specifically discriminates against Catholic people and only allows for Protestants to take the throne - so why should we make an oath to the monarchy? "The monarchy actively discriminates against Catholics. Matthew is an intelligent boy and did not want to say the promise to the Queen just for the sake of saying it. "I was gobsmacked that the Cub Scout commissioner said that if Matthew didn't say the promise then he would effectively be out the door. "He said he could still go along to trips but he would not be insured or anything. "The Cub Scout Promise was worded way back in 1907 and, let's face it, times have moved on. "It is high time the Cub Scouts updated themselves and their Promise. "Matthew absolutely adores the Cub Scouts. "I am not asking for special treatment. I would just like him to be a Cub Scout without compromising on what he believes in." Matthew, whose Cub Scout group meet at Neilston Parish Church hall, said: "It's not fair. I don't want to say a promise that I don't believe in. "I really enjoy the Cubs and don't want to feel left out or different to everybody else." Father Jim Byers, Scouting chaplain of the Paisley Catholic diocese, said last night he had never heard of a case of religious objection in the Cubs before. He said: "I have been involved in Scouting and the Catholic Scouting Association for more than 20 years and I have never heard of anyone refusing to make the Promise on religious grounds. "But it is definitely something that the Scouting authorities should look into. "If this is, as it appears to be, an objection on principle, I just do not know what the Scouting authorities will say. "It is uncharted territory." Would-be Cubs have to recite the Promise, which reads: "I promise that I will do my best, to do my duty to God and the Queen, to help other people and to keep the Cub Scout Law" at their formal installation. After saying the Promise, they receive a badge, woggle and neckerchief and become a fully fledged Cub Scout The Scout Association's rules allow for people to replace the word God in the Promise with other named deities according to their religion. But Chris Foster, spokesman for The Scout Association, said the guidelines were strict when it came to the section regarding the Queen. He said: "For people of other nationalities resident in the UK making the Cub Scout Promise, the phrase may be replaced by 'duty to the country in which I am now living'. "However, British subjects must promise to do their duty to the Queen. It is simply UK Scout Association policy that all British subjects must promise that." THE SCOUT PROMISE On my honour, I promise that I will do my best To do my duty to God and to the Queen, To help other people And to keep the Scout Law 'I don't want to say a promise that I don't believe in' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makween Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Loser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambojohn72 Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Unbelievable. That is a very politically aware 8 year old!! Brainwashing from a early age Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 If he was muslim they wouldn't dare do it Its quite worrying that the boy is so brainwashed but then why should he be discriminated against on what is his staunch religous believes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Very said - how/why does this kind of crap ever get to print - from today's Record... 'I don't want to say a promise that I don't believe in' So don't become a cub. It's like wanting to play football but being allowed to pick up the ball and run with it. find something else to do. What with it being the off-season, the ****** must be struggling to come up with religious bigotry stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cigaro Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 If he was muslim they wouldn't dare do it Its quite worrying that the boy is so brainwashed but then why should he be discriminated against on what is his staunch religous believes You dont have "staunch religious beliefs" when you are 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boab Mugabe Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Very sad. Feel sorry for the boys but regards the 'mother', **** is as **** does. No doubt inspired by the 'all-inclusive' garbage a certain vhile club spin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydug Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Rules about swearing allegiance to the Queen and god are probobly a big reason why no one joins the scouts or simmilar organizations nowadaws.They should modernise to welcome all sections of the community. The days when children could be bullied into conforming are long gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makween Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Rules about swearing allegiance to the Queen and god are probobly a big reason why no one joins the scouts or simmilar organizations nowadaws. Are they **** The reason why people don't join the Scouts or Cubs is because they don't want to wear a gay uniform and be ordered around by fat, middle aged weirdos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eckauskas Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 What a laugh. Yet more 'everyone's oot tae git us cafflix' bull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 His mum - Tracy Anne. What a scuzzy name. The cubs were quite right to boot him out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 If he was muslim they wouldn't dare do it Its quite worrying that the boy is so brainwashed but then why should he be discriminated against on what is his staunch religous believes But it's not his beliefs on which he is being discriminated. His Mother is basically coming up with a way of having a pop at the Monarchy using her, and her son's, religion as an excuse. As far as I am aware there is no mantra in the RC faith about swearing allegiance to monarchs. Any MP who is a Catholic will have to have sworn an oath of allegiance to the Queen. No problem for them. Any RC in the armed forces will have to have sworn allegiance to the Queen (even those from the Rep of Ireland too!) This merely highlights the "different sides of the same coin" mentality that exists in the West of Scotland regarding the Protestant/Catholic schism. In other words it's all utter bollocks but these plebs feel they have to go on and on about it ad nauseum as it gives them the excuse that they need to feel hard done by in their tawdry, shallow, schemie, little lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Whilst Tracy Anne should be brought to task for using her son as a political / religous football, IMO in todays society, it is a little dated to force wee laddies to swear an allegiance to a gin-soaked auld trout just so he can have a laugh with his mates and sing ging-gang-goolie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bean counter Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I have to agree with Boris on this. Further down in the article is this bit Father Jim Byers, Scouting chaplain of the Paisley Catholic diocese, said last night he had never heard of a case of religious objection in the Cubs before. He said: "I have been involved in Scouting and the Catholic Scouting Association for more than 20 years and I have never heard of anyone refusing to make the Promise on religious grounds. So it is another non story put in the paper because it suits someones agenda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Macaroons Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 But it's not his beliefs on which he is being discriminated. His Mother is basically coming up with a way of having a pop at the Monarchy using her, and her son's, religion as an excuse. As far as I am aware there is no mantra in the RC faith about swearing allegiance to monarchs. Any MP who is a Catholic will have to have sworn an oath of allegiance to the Queen. No problem for them. Any RC in the armed forces will have to have sworn allegiance to the Queen (even those from the Rep of Ireland too!) This merely highlights the "different sides of the same coin" mentality that exists in the West of Scotland regarding the Protestant/Catholic schism. In other words it's all utter bollocks but these plebs feel they have to go on and on about it ad nauseum as it gives them the excuse that they need to feel hard done by in their tawdry, shallow, schemie, little lives. well said that man...i agree The cubs dont need his sort....try sending him to BBs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Lyon Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 He is obviously not earmarked for the famous Paras then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djf Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Wish i'd thought of that excuse to save me going Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_HMFC Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Pathetic attention seeking...no doubt some of the PC brigade in this country will be supporting and feeling sorry for the pair :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambopompey Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Pathetic attention seeking...no doubt some of the PC brigade in this country will be supporting and feeling sorry for the pair :mad: think there making a massive banner down kerrydale street, cause we all know they feel the pain and how to share in it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Pathetic attention seeking...no doubt some of the PC brigade in this country will be supporting and feeling sorry for the pair :mad: Do you ghost write the editorials for the Daily Mail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzmaster Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 How does everyone feel about, in this day and age, the question of Catholics in the Royal family. I say this due to the recent case of Peter Phillips' new wife leaving the Catholic faith so he could keep his succession to the throne in tact. Do people feel there is more of an issue with Catholicism than Islam or maybe Scientology:p. Do people on here really believe that every church going Catholic is a threat to Queen and Country, I'm not talking about knuckle dragging bigots on the Huddleboard here (who I would be very surprised to find at church practising a faith). If so then paranoia abounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Lyon Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Get rid of the monarchy and we won't have the problem. Alternatively get rid of all religions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzmaster Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Get rid of the monarchy and we won't have the problem. Alternatively get rid of all religions. I'd go along with that, I'm sure that is what Boris has been pushing for all these years too, why else would he be living in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Pathetic attention seeking...no doubt some of the PC brigade in this country will be supporting and feeling sorry for the pair :mad: He's not going to cut it in the Cubs. I presume the BB's beyond his grasp. That leaves only the PC Brigade. Dib, dib, dib! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Get rid of the monarchy and we won't have the problem. Alternatively get rid of all religions. Exactly. Should the question ever arise then the debate should not be about RC's and the Royal family, but rather about the very constitutional existance of the Monarchy in general. An unelected heriditary head of state? Unbelievable. I do think that elected representatives should make their religious affiliations public record though. I think individuals have the right to follow whichever religion the choose, however if that religion affects they way that they would vote on certain issues then i think that is wrong as it is their job to represent their constituents, not their religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I'd go along with that, I'm sure that is what Boris has been pushing for all these years too, why else would he be living in the past. Says the man with Ogden's Nutgone Flake as an avatar! Great album btw. Anyway, Back to the Future! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brow Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I do think that elected representatives should make their religious affiliations public record though. I think individuals have the right to follow whichever religion the choose, however if that religion affects they way that they would vote on certain issues then i think that is wrong as it is their job to represent their constituents, not their religion. I would go further an not allow persons with religious beliefs to preside over a country. That way their religious beliefs cant affect their judgement (see abortion, euthenasia, death penalty etc). Problem solved. As far as this non-story "oh woe is me and ma bairn" type of ***** the Record spew out all the time. Its a paper for idiots and bigots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 ...the [Daily] Record...Its a paper for idiots and bigots. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Unbelievable. That is a very politically aware 8 year old!! Brainwashing from a early age Nonsense. I was left to make my own decisions regarding religion & politics as a youngster and wasn't particularly happy about the oath myself when I was in Cubs & Scouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadbill Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 You've got to ask what the Daily Record's motives are. Is highlighting this sort of thing really helpful? In view of the alternative front page stories they could have had today, it does make you wonder about the whole mentality of that side of the country. Don't they want it to stop? Or is selling newspapers more important? Pass me a bucket and while you are doing it I'll make up my mind how to fill it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bean counter Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Nonsense. I was left to make my own decisions regarding religion & politics as a youngster and wasn't particularly happy about the oath myself when I was in Cubs & Scouts. At the age of 7/8 when children join the cubs what were your concerns about the oath ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 At the age of 7/8 when children join the cubs what were your concerns about the oath ? was probably a year or two older, but didn't believe in God & had no allegiance to the Queen... i've always seen the monarchy as extremely outdated. being asked to swear obedience to a sky fairy & an historical hang-over seemed (and seems) daft. but i wanted to be in so i swore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 How does everyone feel about, in this day and age, the question of Catholics in the Royal family. Personally, I agree with the current rules. Being Head of State is obviously a very important position, and the catholic faith is at odds with much of what goes on in modern Britain - abortion for example. Personally, I think it'd be unfair on the country and the (catholic) Head of State to suffer the moral pain and anguish of being caught between such polar opposites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pants Shaton Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Personally, I agree with the current rules. Being Head of State is obviously a very important position, and the catholic faith is at odds with much of what goes on in modern Britain - abortion for example. Personally, I think it'd be unfair on the country and the (catholic) Head of State to suffer the moral pain and anguish of being caught between such polar opposites. Would that be in any way similar to the Church of England's position on homosexuality and the current laws of the land? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Personally, I agree with the current rules. Being Head of State is obviously a very important position, and the catholic faith is at odds with much of what goes on in modern Britain - abortion for example. Personally, I think it'd be unfair on the country and the (catholic) Head of State to suffer the moral pain and anguish of being caught between such polar opposites. Theres a surprise To me whether I agree is irrelevent, everyone in this country is allowed free speech within the laws, there is nothing illegal about this boys/his mothers believes and as pathetic as I think it is there allowed to follow/support their religion in there own way I guarentee you if he was the muslim, the second religion was mentioned they would have backed down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 But it's not his beliefs on which he is being discriminated. His Mother is basically coming up with a way of having a pop at the Monarchy using her, and her son's, religion as an excuse. As far as I am aware there is no mantra in the RC faith about swearing allegiance to monarchs. Any MP who is a Catholic will have to have sworn an oath of allegiance to the Queen. No problem for them. Any RC in the armed forces will have to have sworn allegiance to the Queen (even those from the Rep of Ireland too!) This merely highlights the "different sides of the same coin" mentality that exists in the West of Scotland regarding the Protestant/Catholic schism. In other words it's all utter bollocks but these plebs feel they have to go on and on about it ad nauseum as it gives them the excuse that they need to feel hard done by in their tawdry, shallow, schemie, little lives. Exactly, god i find myself agreeing with you more and more, worrying times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Would that be in any way similar to the Church of England's position on homosexuality and the current laws of the land? I recognise your point, but there is a significant difference. The CoE/Archbishop of Canterbury state their position but do not put serious pressure on their adherents. The catholic church/Bishop of Rome demands that their doctrine takes precedence over everything else, otherwise the sinner will (for example) burn in eternal damnation. Personally, I wouldn't want the Head of State to be subject to such pressure. If it didn't cause the country problems, it would certainly mess up the individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheriff Fatman Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I defiantly wouldn't get in then, as I would refuse to swear an oath to either the Queen or God. Neither of them have the slightest relevance or meaning to my life, apart from the Queen actually existing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosanostra Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 If she does not want her son to pledge allegiance to the queen she should **** off and go start her own version of republic cubs. It annoys me when people joing something, go somewhere or take a job under their own free will and then complain about it not suiting their needs. If you disagree with what the cubs (chortle) stands for, don't let your kids go, simple as that. Get off your lazy arse and start your own version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheriff Fatman Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 The catholic church/Bishop of Rome demands that their doctrine takes precedence over everything else. In this case it looks like it's the Cubs that are demanding that their 'doctrine' take precedence over anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosanostra Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 In this case it looks like it's the Cubs that are demanding that their 'doctrine' take precedence over anything else. No-one is forcing the kid to attend. If his parents don't like it, they should not send him. I give less than a toss about the queen but i wouldn't tell the cubs they should change their procedures because of my own views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Whilst Tracy Anne should be brought to task for using her son as a political / religous football, IMO in todays society, it is a little dated to force wee laddies to swear an allegiance to a gin-soaked auld trout just so he can have a laugh with his mates and sing ging-gang-goolie. Why do you think i'm trolling? Ur description of the Queen, imo is a poor attempt to get a reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Ur description of the Queen, imo is a poor attempt to get a reaction. That's simply my opinion of her. I couldn't care less if anyone agrees or not, it's simply my opinion. Similarly, your opinion of Alex Salmond is not exactly complimentary to him, your avatar is an example of this. Do you consider your posted opinion of him to be trolling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheriff Fatman Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 No-one is forcing the kid to attend. If his parents don't like it, they should not send him. I give less than a toss about the queen but i wouldn't tell the cubs they should change their procedures because of my own views. I was being slightly sarcastic. But as far as I remember from my time as a cub in the 70's the Queen never once came into anything to do with being a cub after the oath, so I really don't see the point of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 That's simply my opinion of her. I couldn't care less if anyone agrees or not, it's simply my opinion. Similarly, your opinion of Alex Salmond is not exactly complimentary to him, your avatar is an example of this. Do you consider your posted opinion of him to be trolling? All my posts are trolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 All my posts are trolls. Ha, fair enough. Only some of mine are. That wasn't one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydug Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Ur description of the Queen, imo is a poor attempt to get a reaction. Its a description that many people agree with and not just the Celtic minded. It summed up the situation perfectly IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosanostra Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I was being slightly sarcastic. But as far as I remember from my time as a cub in the 70's the Queen never once came into anything to do with being a cub after the oath, so I really don't see the point of it. I was a cub too and i do seem to remember the "i will do my best for god and the queen" part at the start of each meeting. It's more tradition than ideology of the organisation but my point is the same - if you don't agree, don't send your kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southcapital Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 people seem to forget that the Queen is also the leader of a protestant church its like saying should a protestant be the pope:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Its a description that many people agree with and not just the Celtic minded.It summed up the situation perfectly IMO. Who rattled her cage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.