It's kind of interesting, These posts pop up all of the time with these very issues and nothing is ever done about them. They only serve to get people very upset in one way or another. The Christian example here is non-existant in my opinion because SOMEone will be upset with what is said on either side of the camp. I have no peace in my house over these issues nor do I believe that I will ever. These issues are so frustrating that they ultimately end up defeating the very reasons why I wanted to press on in this ministry in the first place. The messages that are being conveyed are are crossed messages. THERE IS SOMETING WRONG SOMWHERE!. If there weren't then why do these issues always come up? My wife is repulsed by my involvement in the church, she wants me to leave the Assemblies of God because she has labled these policies as sexist and degrading and a joke. She won't attend the church for these reasons because she sees no one being encouraged or loved. All she sees is that the men are trying to domineer over the women and have the women be in total submission to the men in a subservient manner. Quite frankly, She's right. I'm personally very embarrassed to have to admit to that. For a large number of years I have enjoyed working with the Royal Rangers. I still plan on doing so because working with the boys they represent an element that I have only wanted in my life that I will not likely have and that's kids. I'm someone who would never seek to hold a position in the church such as Deacon or some other political position like that. I don't even ask to be usher because I have these unresolvable issues that never get dealt with. They never get dealt with because nobody wants to touch them. These issues have been a major stopping block in the witness to my wife and if there was any witness in these issues, they were not apparent or made themselves evident in which would point my wife toward Christ. All people do is get mad at me when I bring this up. Nobody does anything to actually help the situation except pour gasoline on thes flames. No one ever seems to understand the delemma that I have and they just either want me to dispense with it or just go away so they don't have to deal with it. If I don't go away with it I get condemed to the abyss. Yes it hurts. I will always support a woman who wants to be involved in Royal Rangers regardless of National's anti-women in Rangers policy (the unwritten rule & behavior) If God can make the rocks cry out and sing praises to His name, those rocks served His purpose. Most women like to do this on their own to serve God's purpose. Please take a look at all of this racket, the issues go a lot further than my problems, but look at the damage it is doing. Please Pray. Not just for me, but this whole issue.
Iron Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Trower" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 11:42 PM Subject: Re: [RR] The Ranger Kids Commanders uniform > > >The gender issue has never been a "problem" at the local level.. > >and it is not a problem for the boys... > > Actually, it has been a large problem in some churches, but that's not the > issue here, as I understand it. National policy is the issue here, right? > > > >Women freely come to serve boys as leaders. Allways at the local > >level they are welcome, and given full respect. They often are the > >helpmates of a Commander, and have sons in the program. > > And they do a wonderful job as leaders. I don't think you would find much > disagreement here with your statement -- and certainly not from me. I'll > come back to this statement at the end of my comments. This is also not the > issue here. > > > >So called "National Policy" a fabrication of upper management being > >stuck between a rock and a "Hard" place, of their own makeing. > > Not so. This may be a poor analogy, but in our denomination, we have never > allowed boys and girls to go swimming together, right? Why? That's the same > reason boys, men, and women don't go camping together in Royal Rangers. > Simply put, we have a higher standard than the world does. It may be O.K. > for secular buckskinning groups, or Boy Scouts, but it's not O.K. for the > Assemblies of God ministry to boys. > > It's easy to say that we can easily have separate camping areas and > restroom and shower facilities for ladies on camp-outs, but that's not > always true, especially in areas that Rangers have to camp in. Having women > on camp-outs introduces all sorts of complexities that distract from the > main purpose of the camp . . . ministering to the boys. And THAT's what > it's all about. > > Let the leadership of the camps focus on the boys, and not on the details > of where the women will be camping, or where their restroom will be, or > worse, having to deal with the occasional woman who intends to spend the > night in the camp with the boys (I've been on staff at more than one > sectional, divisional, and district camp where that has happened, even > though it was well known that they were not to do so). > > We also have to worry about the safety of the women -- I was on staff at > one district camp where someone did disturb the women in their camper > during the night. By putting them away from the camp for their privacy (and > that of the men and boys) we exposed them to danger. Those are the types of > situations that begin to expose Rangers to legal liability. What if those > women had been harmed? The lawyers would have started circling like a bunch > of vultures! > > > >As with any diplomatic solution, "official policy" is debated behind > >closed doors, and perhaps run up the "flag pole" on occasion, to test > >it's effects to draw *Fire.. > > Are you implying something with your "closed doors" statement? <G> > Obviously national policy can't be hashed out in an open forum with > everyone involved . . . you would never reach any kind of consensus. > National policy is developed by the national executive committee and > approved by Brother Trask and Brother Crabtree. Every region has a > representative on that committee. Thus, everyone is represented in the > discussion. If you don't like the current national policy on some issue, > talk with your regional coordinator. He's your voice in the executive > committee, and thus your voice in the debates on national policy. > > But there is nothing sinister about the fact that the executive committee > meetings are closed. Attendance has to be limited, or as I stated above it > would be impossible to reach any kind of consensus. As it was, there were > about 20 folks at the last several meetings of the exec committee. Women at > Camporama was discussed at the last two meetings, and consensus was reached > on all issues. > > Keep in mind that each district also sends up to six members of your > executive district staff to National Council each year. This year, the > issue of women in leadership positions above the local level came up for > discussion on the Council floor. Two people spoke to the issue from the > floor. . . just two. If people in the field feel strongly about this issue, > you should also discuss your feelings with your district commander. At this > point in time, there was 700-800 people at national council last month who > nothing about the current policy. That was an open forum, and an > opportunity for folks to speak up. They didn't. > > > >I don't beleve this has anything to do with effective Leadership, > >and has everything to do with man made *Domination, as it just seems > >contrived. > > Domination? I don't see it. > > > >The test for effective leadership is the resultant High "Morale" that > >follows success and freedom, as in Victory over obsticals.. > >since "morale" is the emotional force that gives drive to group action. > > > >You can convince yourself that the sticking point is the uniform or > >some other consideration, but the real issue is justice/ fairness > >and respect to all, by includeing every "Adult leader" in all training > >and positions of service to the Lord, and the boys. > > Since national policy is that women do not camp in Royal Rangers (for > reasons stated above), it would be contrary to national policy to include > them in training that involves camping. They are welcome to any training > Royal Rangers have to offer that is not camping-based. > > > >*If there are reasons for gender policies, I sincerly hope they are > >clearly published and each individual given resources to have them > >explained to their full satisfaction. > > They have been published, and explained. They have also been hashed over > and over here on RangerNet. > > There is no way that the national office staff is going to be able to > convince everyone that the standards are just and fair, so you may never > have things explained to your full satisfaction. But the current national > Royal Rangers policies regarding women in Rangers were developed and > endorsed by our own national executive committee, with, as I understand it, > the full agreement of Brothers Crabtree and Trask. > > I agree with Duane that women are valuable assets in Royal Rangers. I had a > lady on my sectional staff as SA/B coordinator the whole time I was > sectional commander (five years) -- she did a great job. For a while, she > was even my senior commander (I know, I know, totally contrary to national > policy <G> but she was the person who held that outpost together before, > during, and after the time my family was involved in that church). I was > senior commander when Straight Arrows was brand new, and I actively > recruited one of the young ladies in our church to be the leader of that > group . . . she ended up as my sister-in-law. She did a great job. My first > exposure to leadership in Rangers was as a junior commander in the > Buckaroos group. I worked under a husband/wife team. Both of them did a > great job. I've seen many women over the years doing a great job > ministering to the boys. But I support the current national policy on women > in Rangers . . . I feel that it's the right policy for this day and age in > which we live. > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > > "Jose F. Rodriguez" wrote: > > > > > > > > Yesterday I went to the Official RR website and saw a glimps of the > > > uniform > > > > that the female (and probably the male) Ranger Kids commanders are > > > going to > > > > wear. For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about go to > > > this page: > > > > http://www.royalrangers.ag.org/royal-rangers/applications.cfm and > > > click on > > > > "Page 1: General Information" (you of course need an Acrobat Reader to > > > view > > > > them). Once your one the first page of the All New Transition > > > Brochure look > > > > closely at the picture on the lower left which should show a group of > > > Five > > > > male commanders and two female commanders in the front. The female > > > commander > > > > on the left is apparently wearing the new uniforms that Ranger Kids > > > commanders > > > > will wear. Apparently the women and men will be wearing uni-sex > > > uniforms > > > > instead of a separate female and male uniform. As you can see in the > > > picture > > > > female commanders in that age group will be able to wear pants also. > > > I have > > > > nothing against women wearing pants but that uniform looks so > > > "unfeminine" on > > > > the lady in that picture. When I first saw the picture I thought to > > > myself > > > > "is that a boy or woman?" I'm not trying to make fun of the lady in > > > the > > > > photograph by the way, but just something doesn't look right about the > > > > uniform. I was wondering if anybody else sees what I'm trying to say. > > > _______ > > > Let the Golden Rule be your daily rule. > > > > > > Please pray for your list sponsor: http://eBible.org/mpj/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm > > > http://rangernet.org > > > > > >===== > >*High MORALE is the Index of effective Leadership. > >--------------********+********-------------------- > >Morale raises belief of the Leader in the follower, > >of the follower in the Leader, of each in themself, > >and both in the .....cause! > > > >__________________________________________________ > >Do You Yahoo!? > >Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax > >http://taxes.yahoo.com/ > >_______ > > Let the Golden Rule be your daily rule. > > > > Please pray for your list sponsor: http://eBible.org/mpj/ > > > > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm > > http://rangernet.org > > > ------------------------------------------- > Jonathan Trower > South Central Regional Training Coordinator > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Phone: 254-420-1941 > Fax: 254-710-1091 > Home Page: http://mis.baylor.edu/trower > > _______ > Let the Golden Rule be your daily rule. > > Please pray for your list sponsor: http://eBible.org/mpj/ > > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm > http://rangernet.org > _______ Let the Golden Rule be your daily rule. Please pray for your list sponsor: http://eBible.org/mpj/ To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm http://rangernet.org
