I don't have much to say on the Eagle project topic since we don't have that in Sweden and haven't read up on the instructions, but reading this sparked a potential initial general view of the line between civic and political: civic is supporting building community in a liberal democracy. To the extent that parties promote policies (often implicitly because everyone in mainstream society agrees) that are consistent with liberal democracy, we count those as civic even though one could argue that technically they are political because a political party advocates for it. That remains true even when, like in this example, mainstream citizens in a liberal democracy actually start taking actions inconsistent with liberal democracy. (The non-mainstream I'm specifically thinking of here is the neonazis in the town I grew up in. They explicitly want to crush liberal democracy, but they are also persona non grata outside their own group and nobody in scouting in Sweden loses any sleep about not listening to them or taking action to prevent them from succeeding.) Uniformed scouts marching in an anti-Nazi march is not like uniformed scouts staffing an "election cabin" to campaign for a particular political party, even though technically being anti-Nazi is a political stand that is also proposed policy for multiple political parties. Being anti-Nazi is being pro-liberal democracy, and thus the scouting backing of what is technically also a policy stand of political parties counts as civic. Does that make sense? Anybody see any holes?

I actually thought that was very clear. That section of the book stuck with me immediately upon reading and I was literally thinking of it when I wrote the general reflection above. I knew right where to find it to expand on both the actual meaning but also to (hopefully) gently and skillfully deflect the attack on my character. Perhaps it isn't so immediately relatable to everyone, then. My apologies if that wasn't clear. My point is, I do not appreciate being called duplicitous, and I do not appreciate teachings that are very precious to me and considered a religion by the BSA being called duplicitous. You don't have to agree with the view, but attacking me for holding it is not cool.

Okay.  Interesting, though a bit deep or maybe confusing.  Discussions of the Eastern philosophies can be like that.  We likely do not want to confuse, but rather, with luck, enjoin them in actual use of their cerebral abilities, then share that with peers and others?  

I'm talking about karma and recognizing how it operates. That is very different from duplicity. Duplicity is changing moral view to suit oneself; recognizing how karma works is cultivating insight and allows you to at the very least accrue merit if not quite stop generating it entirely. Volume One of The Profound Treasury of The Ocean of Dharma: The Path of Individual Liberation by Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche, page 414: "The Six Types of Karmic Consequence The general notion of karma is that uncertainty, delusion, or ignorance begins to trigger the mechanisms of lust, or passion, and aggression, which then produce karmic consequences. These consequences are divided into six sections, which represent six ways of organizing our world very badly; (1) the power of volitional action, (2) experiencing what you have planted, (3) white karmic consequences, (4) changing the karmic flow by forceful action, (5) shared karmic situations, (6) interaction of intention and action. It is quite predictable: since our world is created from passion, aggression, and ignorance, we get back from it what we put in. Things are happening constantly in that way. It is very steady and very predictable. (...) 6. Interaction of Intention and Action The sixth and final karmic consequence is the interaction of intention and action. It is divided into four subcategories. WHITE INTENTION, WHITE ACTION. The first subcategory is called completely white. An example of completely white karma is respecting your teacher and having devotion. Because that whole approach is related with healthiness rather than revolutionary thinking, ill will, and resentment, a lot of goodness comes out of it. So perpetual whiteness is created. BLACK INTENTION, BLACK ACTION. The next subcategory is completely black. This is like taking someone's life without any particular excuse or motivation. You have murdered or destroyed something. That is completely black. WHITE INTENTION, BLACK ACTION. The third and fourth subcategories are mixtures of black and white. The third category is basically positive: with the good intention of protecting the whole, you perform a black action. For instance, with the good intention of protecting the lives of hundreds of people, you kill one person. [My personal note - surely you recognize this category from Western moral philosophical thought as well? The trolley, for example. Surely you have engaged with this category in a hypothetical series of situations yourself.]  That seems to be a good karmic situation. If somebody is going to press the button of the atomic bomb, you shoot that person. Here the intention is white, but the action itself is black, although it has a positive effect. BLACK INTENTION, WHITE ACTION. In the fourth subcategory, the intention is black and the action is white. This is like being very generous to your enemy while you are trying to poison him; it is a mixture of black and white." Your intention with your scouts was probably white, but if you honestly didn't realize that the action might have been black then you - and especially anyone reading who still can change the action for their scouts - ought to know that there was something more to know. Hopefully, your scouts were able to turn their suffering into wisdom and compassion and didn't have other karmic circumstances that being expected to take sexism on the chin amplified substantially. Speech is an act, you know. Four of the ten unmeritorious karmic acts are speech acts. Speech has causes, and is a cause to effects. (Unless, of course, the speaker has transcended karma, but that's not the case we're discussing.) You can hurt people quite well without any physical action. Also, certain kinds of harmful speech tends to precede harmful action, so waiting for predictable action is actively engaging in ignorance (here, meaning not knowing how the world works), which is also a karmic act. What makes knowing that someone wants you excluded so corrosive is that it means that black intention is on the table, and you need to figure out just how black and just how far that person is willing to go. It forces you into a defensive posture around them at all times. Notice that this is not a free speech issue; it's a social cohesion issue. The problem is not that the government is going to come arrest you and others in a way that undermines liberal democracy, or that you are being pressured with job loss and/or other severe personal consequences for saying unpopular or even revolting things. It's legal to be a neonazi but that doesn't mean that BSA is required to let them sieg heil at scout meetings. What's right in one context can absolutely be wrong in another by consistent moral principles.

From Facebook Commissioner page, asking for input for the upcoming 2024 Guide for Advancement.  Posted April 9, Deadline April 13!