R.I.P.: The Boy Scouts of America

[Blotan Hunka]

If you want to change the face of scouting, then volunteer. If you want to destroy it, then judge it, condemn it and complain about it.

Excellent.

 

[michaeledward]

I have lived most of my adolescent and adult life just ignoring the Boy Scouts of America. I don't judge, condemn or complain, normally. But, it would seem, that were I too attempt to volunteer, some would question my motives.

I wonder how much of that is the culture of fear propagated by the 'If it Bleeds, It Leads' news stories of contemporary media.

 

[shesulsa]

But, it would seem, that were I too attempt to volunteer, some would question my motives.

Who, do you think, would question your motives?

 

[Blotan Hunka]

If your "motive" was to "subvert" the organization vs. giving of yourself to the boy's and in the process sharing your beliefs, then I WOULD question your motives. What I believe Shesulsas point is, is that if more people volunteered then more kids would be exposed to different people and learn to accept them...not "join the Boy Scouts to change them".

 

[heretic888]

I was a member of both the Cub Scouts and the Boy Scouts during my youth. . .

Now, I can honestly say that from my best recollection, religion was never discussed in any of our meetings or functions. There is the brief line of "duty to God" in the Scout Oath, but that's about as far as it went, and even that is nothing short of cursory lip service.

Values were discussed and practiced, sure, but these were never placed within a religious context. Not once, to the best of my memory.

Come to think of it, I don't recall sexuality or sexual behavior once being discussed in the Scouts, either. I really don't see how it means a damn one way or the other since a person's sexuality has nothing to do with what we did.

Truthbetold, we spent most of our time learning to do stuff like tie square nots, shoot a bow and arrow, and identify the tracks of different animals. You don't need to be a friggin' straight Christian to do that stuff.

Laterz.

 

[shesulsa]

Indeed.

If you think you are a valuable person with valuable things to share with youngsters such that you may guide them effectively through a certain program, then by all means, volunteer. Motive should only be about making an excellent experience for the youngsters.

If people are concerned about where the youth in America is headed, get involved.

However, it is undeniable that if volunteers in such an organization balk at certain tenets of said organization and make it known and present alternatives and rational, impassioned arguments that someone must receive these comments and suggestions.

I am lucky enough to be on the CEO cabinet in our council for GSUSA, so I have a piece of the ear of the CEO. She listens and goes to bat for our girls and for the volunteers. Change is effected slowly, as is expected, but this can work.

If your motives are to get into the organization and tear it apart and rebuild it from the ground up ... well, there are places for people who do such a thing ... though proving yourself through your service to the target of the organization lends bigger credence to your efforts.

 

[michaeledward]

Who, do you think, would question your motives?

Well, bushi jon said this ..

As a parent of a scout should I not have a say weather another human that does not have a child in scouts be apart of my childs life.

I think this attitude is relatively common. Oh, well. As I said, I have managed most of the last 30 years of my life indifferent to the Boy Scouts of America.

My younger step daughter is attending the first year, of the two-year 'Councilor in Training' program, beginning next week. For six years, she has been a camper at Camp Farnsworth in Vermont. She was a member of the Girl Scouts for two of those six years, if I recall. This year, and next, she will participate in the CIT program, and I am certain she will end up working at a camp for many years to come.

 

[Carol]

I think this attitude is relatively common.

I'd have to unfortunately agree. I've seen this attitude in other community organizations outside of scouting as well. Parents either want to see some sort of ownership...that a leader is affecting the leader's own family as much as someone elses family. Or worse, the parents may even assume that an adult's intentions for being around kids are...quite improper.

 

[shesulsa]

From someone inside a scouting organization, it's actually quite simple: convenience.

It's convenient to be a scout leader if your child is interested in scouting and having a child is an excuse to get involved in organizations which lead youth. Most childless folk are less apt to give their time and energies to youth on a volunteer basis. Work with kids and not get paid? P-shaw. Others the thought just doesn't occur to them.

And when these kids get tired, embarrassed or too busy for and bored with scouting, it's equally as convenient for their parents to leave the organization as well, often leaving scores of youth abandonded by people who once harped to teach them responsibility, loyalty, etcetera.

There are other important ways to lead youth which will have almost as strong effect on children and their lives than parenthood. If we want to make a difference in the lives of growing people, we must remember that.

 

[bushi jon]

First off I said I was playing devil advocate. I have been involved with youth programs most of my adult life with my children or without them. I believe I know what is best for my children as a parent so I get involved. I also am president of a not for profit youth sport(free of charge). I have for the better part of 20 years been questioned why I wanted to be involved. I have always accepted that people(parents)will and should question why people are involved(and if they do not like it volunteer). I have the right as a parent to send or not to send a child to any person,place or thing I deem as does not meet my standard(my standard may change).I believe the boys scout also have that right if the person does not have a child involved if there is a child involved then they have to put the childs needs first.

 

[michaeledward]

bushi jon, while I quoted you specifically, I do not mean to single you out, in any way. My father was an assistant scout master, and he had three sons involved throughout his tenure. As I recall, there was, at that time (early - mid 70's), a single male person involved with the local troop.

I do believe that the thought you placed on the board (devil's advocate or not) is fairly prominent in society today.

 

[elder999]

The Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts of the USA are volunteer organizations. The core of their existence is their mass of volunteer scout leaders. If change is to be affected in these organizations, it must come from the volunteers.

If you want to change the face of scouting, then volunteer. If you want to destroy it, then judge it, condemn it and complain about it.

That's a fair statement, in part anyway-and what I'd be inclined to do.

Of course, my kids are grown, now, and I don't have any time to volunteer-though it might just wind up as part of my retirement/second (third?fourth?) career phase of life.

Just to play devil's advocate again, though, let's substitute another NFP for the Boys Scouts of America:

Planned Parenthood.

WOuld you be advocating, then, that the so-called right to life movement should volunteer for Planned Parenthood in order to change it from within?

Naturally, they're both structured quite differently, but I have to point out again that the BSA's policies in regard to sexuality and faith are being promulgated by a few old men in Texas-it wasn't put to a vote, or anything resembling one by the volunteer membership/leadership.

In the meantime, gay and atheist (and I'm neither) scouts (as in boys) have been excluded, both in practice and as a matter of policy.

And I still don't see (at all) where any conflict between being gay and being morally straight-as defined by BSA-exists at all.

 

[shesulsa]

Just to play devil's advocate again, though, let's substitute another NFP for the Boys Scouts of America:

Planned Parenthood.

WOuld you be advocating, then, that the so-called right to life movement should volunteer for Planned Parenthood in order to change it from within?

Planned Parenthood is not about guiding and shaping youth nor the politics of such, and that's what this thread is all about.

Think about it - the people who have contact with the youth are the volunteers. If a few GOB's (Good Old Boys) in TX are calling all the shots, then would it not be of the utmost importance for the volunteers to make their voices heard to these men? And if refused, what does one do? Abandon the boys? Stand up for what they believe in? Or keep on teaching those boys the values of civil acceptance, hard work, service and naturalism?

How many of those boys, do you think, even KNOW what the BSA stance on homosexuality and atheism is? I'm betting that population consists of a minority which subcategories are:

1. gay kids/kids of gays,
2. ultraliberal kids/kids of ultraliberals,
3. right wing kids/kids of right wingers,
4. kids in troops where the leaders and scoutmasters make no bones about it,
5. kids who read the newspaper. I'm betting the rest are camping, sharpening their pocketknives, and earning merit badges.

Truthfully, most volunteers work their butts off for those boys and are likely hard-pressed to discuss these issues with the boys. They're also likely a bit lazy to find alternative organizations and go to the press.

I wonder what BSA would do if all the volunteers and employees who work for the organization who disagree with these anti-gay and anti-atheist tenets left BSA in one fell swoop? What's that? Flounder you say? Heresy! As long as BSA is idolized as it is by our government and our people, it will live a long, prosperous life.

In the meantime, gay and atheist (and I'm neither) scouts (as in boys) have been excluded, both in practice and as a matter of policy.

Yes, sadly, they have ... until (and if, of course) they find a tolerant leader.

And I still don't see (at all) where any conflict between being gay and being morally straight-as defined by BSA-exists at all.

I concur. I have known my share of homosexual people who were what a GOB would call "decent, upstanding citizens who care about this country." For whatever reason, more than half of them (unfortunately) have voted Republican, though I suspect it's more about gun rights (bashing prevention) than any kind of progressive idealism.

I think this political issue of whether gays and atheists can be "morally straight" is going to be like the abortion debate - polarized and unsolvable except to allow people the freedoms they SHOULD BE granted to them just by nature of being, in this case, American Citizens ... or in other cases, human beings under the grand connected universe.

Peace

 

[Makalakumu]

If you look at what the the scout law actually says, the left and the right cannot lay claim to all of it. BSA at its most fundamental level, is independent...and this is coming from an eagle scout.

 

[Kane]

While I disagree strongly with the discrimination against gays, atheists, and agnostics that the BSA practices, I still think it is their right. Therefore the government should not force the BSA to change their policies because it violates the first amendment of our nation. But I do think people should "boycott" BSA and not join until they change their discriminatory stance.

 

[elder999]

Seen here.

Philadelphia may evict Boy Scouts council

PHILADELPHIA - The city said it will evict a Boy Scout council from its publicly owned headquarters or make the group pay a fair rent price unless it changes its policy on gays.


The Boy Scouts' Cradle of Liberty Council, the country's third-largest, has been battling with the city for more than three years over the policy, which like the national Scouts organization forbids gays from being leaders.

City Solicitor Romulo L. Diaz Jr. wrote a letter to William T. Dwyer III, president of the Cradle of Liberty Council, stating that the council's "discriminatory policies" violate city policy and law, and that city officials have not been assured the group will not discriminate.