eagle77

Those of you that don't think that this is a fatal blow need to look back on the LGBT's past actions.

 

A baker that wouldn't put 2 brides on top of a cake lost their business and has to pay $135,000.00.  They were not mean or demeaning, they just wouldn't disrespect their God.  $135,000.00.

A pizza parlor that wouldn't cater a hypothetical gay wedding (not even a real service request!) suffered death threats, protests, and had to shutter their doors.

 

So you can bet that somewhere some LGBT activist is going to apply for SM or ASM or CBW and be refused, because of the CO's beliefs.  (It won't matter that the applicant hasn't camped in 20 years and doesn't own a pair of boots - it will only matter that he is gay and was turned down...)

 

There will be protests that the CO doesn't need.  Amid a flood of negative media attention, the CO will shut down the troop.

And other CO's will take heed and choose not to re-charter when their option is up.

 

Trail Life should be gleeful.  

  Yeah I heard about bakery and pizza parlor thing. Don't know all the specifics.

  CO's have always been able to approve or disapprove of any adult application. They could require that you be a member of their church or group. The new rule isn't going to change any of that. LGBT or not the troop, pack or crew belong to the CO and they have any and all rights to who they will allow to lead their units.

 The old Explorer shirt. I remember seeing them on many camp staffs. I think at one time some councils had Explorer Posts that actually met and staffed their council camps. Today you find some Venture crews there. In my troop you wore the Explorer shirt if you were a member of the Leadership Corps. It was snappy. Liked that shirt more then the regular shirt. Instead of a necker Leadership scouts wore a bolo in my troop. Could never get the PLC to okay the beret though. Some of the guys said it looked to French and we were Americans.

  For inspection I was always told that you rolled the necker tight, and then pulled up the slide. You would then with one hand hold on to the bottom to tails and lift the necker up. If the slide hit the tip of your nose you knew it was at the right height. Then you grabbed each tail and spread them to the side.

 Jefferson wanted to do away with slavery but also wanted to get the blacks out of the U.S. too. He saw a good amount of the prejudice between whites and blacks, even in the northern states. He new that freeing them would bring civil unrest in the country. I think he had also come up with an idea of giving them their own land outside our borders. I guess it would be something like what we did to the Indians and put them on reservations.

I don't really want to be part of this discussion but, walk in the woods, I really dont think Benjamin Franklin was ever a slave-owner. Washington and Jefferson, sure, but not Franklin. As far as I know he was an abolitionist. If you have any evidence to the contrary, I'd sure like to know what it is.

NJCubScouter yes all three were at one time slave owners. What walk in the woods omitted to say is that although they owned slaves at one time or another all three also fought in there own ways to eliminate slavery. Not long after the Revolution Franklin got rid of all his slaves and became president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society. In fact Franklin presented to the First Federal Congress a petition to abolish slavery and the slave trade. I have heard these types of statements before but once you look and see any African American would look pretty bad trying to make these founding fathers look bad. Cosidering all three at least wanted to do away with it.

 

.  We've got to find a way to work together otherwise our own irrationality will dam a great youth organization to hell. 

 

 Fred I think any of us who really believe in and support this program could argue with that.

Eagle77, I agree, we were taught the same and always had a neckerchief.   I first heard about the full square ones on this forum several years ago, and when I had the chance to get one cheap, I said "what the heck."   Glad I did.

 

Not sure when neckerchiefs started falling into disuse, but I don't see them much any more.   Maybe with the new uniform in the early '80s...they all had collars, and it just wasn't the same.

  I've seen the square ones but never actually seen them being worn by a troop of scouts. My SM told us when wearing the necker you had to tuck in your collar that made it way more comfortable. I still have a few of the collarless olive shirts that National once made. A friend of my dads gave them to him back when HQ was still in New Brunswick, NJ. Now those shirts were comforable. I was going to a troop COH as SM and I put on our troop necker, couldn't understand why everyone was looking so funny at me. Then one of the scouts said what did you do to your shirt? Force of habit I had tucked the collar under just as I had done as a scout.

It might catch on here in The Colonies if we go back to a functional neckerchief--a full square when unfolded, made of a natural, absorbant, comfortable material, and dispense with the parade-ground obsession of rolling it up perfectly.   

 

I caught an old BSA full-square neckerchief on the auction site a few years ago, for just a few bucks.   It is really nice.  

  I didn't have one of the fully square neckers, but always had to wear the one we had because it was part of your personal first aid kit. Almost all the differsnt areas hands, arms, legs, feet, and even used as sling. The necker was your personal triangular bandage.

That's not an accurate summary of SB277; medical reasons, plus homeschooling/special education/independent study can get exemptions (basically, if your child isn't attending school with other children).

 Agreed I am wrong on that, but they will not be able to use religious convictions or belief as a reason. Which is wrong.

Of course, if you read the document detailing why the decision now, the excessive cost of litigation is high list of reasons.  So, if it's too expensive to defend the current policy now, why should a chartering organization believe the BSA won't decide it's too expensive to defend the new policy later?  As Mary Poppins once said, it's a pie-crust promise, easily made, easily broken.

  Let's see right now (today) ALL CO's have to abide by the policy and IF the new option comes to be only some CO's will still be functioning by the old policy. That I think will bring down the amount of units that may have some sort of litigation brought against them. BSA has always stood behind this promise I see no reason why they would change that. But maybe Mary Poppins has better insight on that then I do.

 Now you know why it takes so long for our government to come out with some of its laws and also why there is so much paperwork too. I side with the sisters here. Courts here are wrong and need to find some way for this to happen without stepping on anyones religious beliefs or convictions. Courts are going to be busy. Just wait till the poop hits the fan in CA with the vaccine law that their governor signed into law mandating that ALL children must be vaccinated no excuse.

Sorry, but when trust is broken to the extent demonstrated by this woman, I would no longer want her to be anywhere near any of the boys in the troop.  It is my responsibility to keep the boys safe and this woman has demonstrated she cannot control herself around the boys in the troop.  I wouldn't tolerate the first time she did it, and I would do everything in my power to make sure she never had an opportunity to do it again.  Take it out on some soccer or baseball coach's watch, just don't do it on mine.

   Totally agree with this. She crossed the line that you can not come back from. No excuse for it whatsoever.

Other than sleep depravation, hello up at 5 for something or another, camp shouldn't be stressful at all. And yeah, Momma Bear hadn't stayed at camp. She just arrived family night and had been up for "ice cream night."

 

- Like Stosh said just have to sneak in and get a little cat nap in the afternoon.

 

Eagle77, I don't blame anyone for not being sensitive to Grumpysaurus' needs because nobody has a crystal ball. Sensitivity is what adults that KNOW and care about him are for. And we were correcting, sitting out with and guiding him all along.

 

-  I'm sorry if I came on a little too strong about this. After reading one of your later posts stating that the boy was having some problems at home as well I think mom or dad need to take a hit on this too. Sometimes parents like to dump their problems on to someone else to fix. If dad said he wasn't in a good state of mind to begin with maybe the boy would have been better off staying home. I've had to deal with homesickness, illness, and hard headedness just never lost or had to send anybody home from camp for these. Maybe I'm just lucky. We always need to remember that each and every case is different because each scout is different too.

 

  Let me share this with you. A few years back I had a scout who's grandfather had died a week or so before camp. Mom told me when we left she asked him if he wanted to stay home and told her no. He wasn't being a pain but I could tell he was just there and not enjoying himself. Well one evening he and his buddy came up to the SPL who was talking to me and let him know they were going to the TP, I then reached in my pocket for some money and asked him to get me two bags of M & M with peanuts. He said sure and they headed off. They came back a little later and he gave me the candy and turned to walk away. I said thank you and handed one of the bags to him, he didn't say anything but he did smile. From that night on till the end of camp never saw him frown and he was having a great time. Well two years later I had to step down as SM because of a shift change at work, not long after that he and his family moved down to VA. Well a few months ago I received an e-mail from his mom telling me that he was getting his Eagle and I would be getting an invite to it. He and two of his cousins who lived up here, were all going to be presented Eagle together. Well last month I went to the ECOH walked in the door and there was this big guy, he had really grown since I saw him last. Walked over to him and shook his hand. I then reached into my pocket and pulled out two bags of M & M with peanuts. Tears came to his eyes and he just reached over and gave me a big bear hug. HE then told me you remembered. I told him I couldn;t forget. Well he went to meet some of the other guests that had arrived and I asked his mom what was that all about? She said when her dad was alive he liked them too and her son would sit on his lap and eat them with him. You just never know what might kick start something.

 

She may not have known his situation any more than the good folk here. But all the more reason to leave discipline to the SM & ASMs that do know him.

 

I really tried to be as objective as possible and tried to see/present him from her (limited) perspective. But honestly, I'm just getting more disgusted. No child deserves her attack and completely innocent boys suffered to witness it as adults were as impotent to stop her as they were.

 

 

 

- This is the one main reason that I cannot stand family nights. For the most part I'm trying to keep an eye on the parents more then I spend watching the scouts.

I'm with @@Rick_in_CA on this issue.  I took a nap every afternoon at summer camp and my ASM got an entire book read.  The rest of the time the 4 leaders (two troops together) played dominoes.  Except for the problem with the staff and camp director, we had a nice quiet week.

 I agree with you. Only thing of any stress that I've had to expierence were from outside my gtroup not within it.

I agree, I'm not sure what is so stressful about summer camp. When I was a scout, summer camp was simply fun! Take a merit badge class or two, wander over to the rifle range or archery range when we feel like it. Drop by the swimming hole for a dip. Meet up with some friends and go for a hike. Take a nap if you are tired. If you want some quite time, climb up the hill, sit on a log or stump and read a book for a bit. If you loose track of time and miss lunch, so be it. Dinner is in a few hours. Where is the stress?

 

If camp is stressful, something is going wrong.

 I remember going in my tent to lay down for a little bit. Looked right out the back and there was a spider that just started building his web, before i knew it almost two hours had gone by and he was just finishing off what he had worked so hard at building. It was fantastic!!  

In my opinion,  the biggest challenge of Scout Camp is the simple act of getting along with other people for a solid week.  That often is a challenge.

 

- Never found it challenging to get along with the people within my own troop. Now other troops in camp is a different ballgame sometimes.

 

I would say it was a challenge for the boy who was chronically misbehaving,  and it was a challenge for the parent who lost control on the last day.

 

- Definetaly I think this was a major problem.

 

 

In my opinion,  the SM was delinquent by not dealing with the Scout earlier in the week.

 

- Big time - poor adult leadership as far as this was concerned.

 

The parent ran out of patience on the last day of camp.  I don't find that too surprising,  although it's not acceptable behavior.

 

- I may be wrong here but I read that the mother had just gotten there at camp for family night.

 

The CC or Scoutmaster can have a conversation with the parent about how to deal with such issues.  Personally,  I wouldn't prevent them from going on Scout outings unkless the behavior were repeated.

 

- I disagree with you here, CC or SM need to discuss with her why what she did will keep her from attending activities. NO WAY would I even give her a chance to possibly repeat it. More importantly SM needs to have a good talk with the other boys parents and see how the troop can help their son deal with the on going chaqnges at home.

 

I haven't had that kind of melt down  ----not yet,  anyway. 

 

Keep in mind that this was at the end of a stressful week of summer camp.

 

- You are not the only one I have heard this remark from. What is so stressful? Rushing the boys to get as many MBs done as possible, sit down at the table and spend your free time writing instead of exploring and hiking? Maybe your right, but I think the better answer is to go back to what summer camp was a little advancement (not school type badges) and whole lot of fun. No stress there. One summer work was really slow and before they made layoffs they asked for volunteers, I jumped at that and wound up spend 3 weeks with 3 different troops at their summer camps. WHAT A BLAST.

It happened, and we all knew it was coming. I have wanted local control ever since I learned how this all worked from the inside (i.e. once I went from a unit only volunteer to volunteering at higher levels). My church is open, I just wanted my faith respected.

 

Now I would like to request that those of you who think that you need to leave - reconsider. I will fight just as hard for your right to choose your own leaders as I did to let my unit choose its leaders. It is your right.

 

I also treasure and need your input. Please stay, please contribute, please assist. We need you, and the boys need you. This difference should not keep your from the campfire, and there is a space for you.

 Couldn't agree with you more.

Fair enough.  Substitute "Traditional and Progressive" or "Inclusive and Exclusive" or whatever words you like in my previous thought.  Regardless of the words the BSA has created two classes of units now.  The argument still holds.  For example, the FAQ said an American Legion post could still require SMs to be vets.  Well, there are straight vets, gay vets, and atheist vets.  Only two-thirds can be Scoutmasters?

  You do know that there are religions out there that do not view homosexuality as a sin? Well now these units, if they desire can allow gays to lead their units, those that still believe it shouldn't be are welcome to not allow it. To me its more a point of respect then of creating different"classes". Not to be smart here but where I come from two thirds is more inclusive then just one third. Now as I have said in an earllier post I have no problem with what value system you choose to live by, but please don't tell me that your system is the only "right" system either. I am just couriious as to the points of view by other scouters who feel differently. There is no "right" or "wrong" simply one opinion versus another. Like I said my value system is based on the scout oath and law that learned as a Boy Scout, and nowhere in that does it say that only people that are believers or even believe as I do deserve to be treated any different then the other.

Gay SM Richard Halverson, 49 yrs old (17-yr-old son) http://documents.latimes.com/richard-stanley-halvorsen/

Gay ASM Harry Cramer, 19 yrs old http://documents.latimes.com/harry-cramer/

Gay ASM Ray Woodall, 30 yrs old http://documents.latimes.com/raymond-woodall/

 

A Perfect Place

New Orleans, Louisiana

October 1974

Boyle, Patrick (2013-07-22). Scout's Honor: Sexual Abuse in America's Most Trusted Institution (Kindle Locations 1134-1138).  Kindle Edition.

 

Fittingly enough, this all happened at a Presbyterian church, whose leadership had been warned by the council that not enough was known about the prospective leaders. 

 

No fittingly enough this happened over 30 years ago before BSA had the Guide to Safe Scouting and background checks.

 

Check out this Showtime series called "Queer as Folk" which is celebrated for its groundbreaking portrayal of the real lives of gay men and as a touchstone in media depictions of gay people, in which a main plot line is a gay man's relationship with a 15-yr-old. 

 

 

The sex will begin soon.  The boys who are affected are as victimized by the activists as by the men who have sex with them; they're the sacrifice the activists were eager to make.

 

I won't be quitting BSA—someone who knows what he's doing will need to keep an eye on things more than ever

 

Queer as Folk has not been produced since 2005, that was its last season. Besides that it is fiction something writers came up with. On the other hand "Vice" is current and up to date. It is also a documentary type show like 60 Minutes based on more fact then writers sitting and making up.

 

 

Now that the BSA has created, or is about to create, a religious and non-religious class of units, it will create the crack Athiests need.  Along with the abandonment of that G as a requirement in the rest of the scouting world.

 

 

  Now this I totally disagree with. There are some religions out there that do not exclude gays and in fact welcome them to even serve within their group. Unless you are only willing to recognize those religions that believe only as you do.

As my friends on the left are so fond of saying, your values are your values and you shouldn't try to force them on anybody else.  The fact that you chose to stay in spite of disagreeing with the policy has no bearing on the value systems and/or decisions of others.  Your understanding isn't required, just your tolerance for those with a different opinion.  Unless of course you are trying to force people to change their value systems.

 

See above. 

 

Plus, both of your arguments suffer from the assumptions that service to the BSA is the only way to serve boys and that the BSA's program is the only way to develop young men.  Both are false.

 

The forces of change have won the day and on July 28th those forces will need to stand and deliver.  Revolution is a funny thing. Once won, the hard work of leading begins.  Time will tell how that works out.

 I make no assumption as to BSA service as the only way to develop young men. Young men have have been developed for a long time without BSA, I just believe it is a good way to do it not the only way. I was only quoting the phrase "its all about the boys" that I have seen used on this forum by members on both side of the line. I was in scouting when the big issue was whether women could or should be part of Boy Scout program in positions as SM and ASM and many of those that insisted that we would be "feminizing" our young men or "women don't have the ability to help young boys become men".  I have no problem with one having their own type of value system in life, mine just keys more around "include" rather then "exclude"' A value that I credit to my time as Boy Scout and learning to live and lead my life by the scout oath and law. One thing for sure is I do respect anyone for having their own set of values whether they agree with mine is totally irrelevant.

  Revolution is a funny thing, and I'm sure there were colonists here that were loyal to England that said the same thing you did in 1776, well 239 years and counting. Not bad. Am I proud or do I agree with all that has gotten our nation to where we are today, not 100% that's for sure.

In the years prior to the membership change people who heard me speak enthusiastically about my own and my sons’ involvement in scouting would occasionally ask me how I could be a part of an organization that discriminated in the way BSA did.  My response was always that I thought the policy was mistaken and I hoped it would change.  I would then add that I have never been a member of any organization, including my own marriage and family, with which I always 100% agreed, and that although this was a policy it had so little to do with what actually happened in scouting that the benefits of being involved in the program for myself and the young people I served far outweighed any negative consequences.  I don’t know why folks who used to agree with the policy can’t have the same approach now that I did then.

 

If the parent of one of my scouts wants to come huddle around a campfire with me next January when the snow is howling and the temps are in the single digits they're welcome to, gay or straight.  It puzzles me why anyone wouldn’t want to be there serving the scouts with us.

 Good point. I was always under the belief that it was all about the boys. I couldn't understand either why so many complained and walked away when BSA finally allowed women to be SM and ASM.

Local option is best, it ensures that the boys who get seduced are the sons of the people who wanted gay leaders there.

  Check out this HBO series called "Vice" I think you could really relate to what is happening there on episode 10 season 3. They are definately your kind of people.

A long overdue change, IMO.

 

What does upset me is terrible outpouring of hateful comments left on some of these news articles.  While sometimes these are from both sides of the issue, the most unScoutlike things are being said against the BSA and those who support this change.  

 

Many are quick to cry "morally straight" and "A Scout is Reverent" when making these vicious comments, completely forgetting that these are part of the reason the change is occurring.  Not every religious organization shares the same beliefs.  For the BSA to remain reverent towards the many different religious organizations that sponsor Scouting, it can't pick sides.  By leaving leader selection up to the Chartered Organization, they are free to exercise their faith and uphold their own principles.  In my area a number of churches are very open and welcoming, and took issue with the BSA's adult standards as it imposed another religious organization's beliefs on them.  

 

The way some folks are reacting, you would think they received a notice that all uniforms must have a rainbow flag, Units must have at least 1 gay leader, and Pride in the Gay Community has been announced as the newest Eagle-required merit badge.  Come on, people.  The only agenda a gay leader has is to spend time with his or her son and to help other adult volunteers provide a great program for all of the boys- the same as the rest of us!

 

Bottom line- find a Unit chartered to an organization in line with your beliefs.  Can't find such a Unit?  Start a new one!   

  Yeah problem with many of them is that "their" religion and "their" beliefs are the only ones that count or mean anything.

I guess any leniency given the boy is due to a long custody situation that just had a dramatic ruling. Again, no major act on his part, just generalized grumpiness and an uncooperative nature. But it seems all the boys know he has "stuff going on at home."

 

I was away one night for an OA event but parent has approached me that it was "parent ice cream night" - geeze - Mom had a run in with the boy over her precious snowflake. Not nearly on this scale but she (reportedly) was unfair and inappropriate then too. Had it been mentioned sooner, her butt wouldn't have been near camp. She was waiting to snap on him.

  Have any of you guys read what is here? This poor kid is having his whole world come in on him. We all know how great parents are when it comes to divorce and custody battles.You could have most likely taken him to Disney World and he still would have not enjoyed it. It looks like it was known througout the troop too. Now along comes this other boys mom, who already has him in the cross hairs ready to finish him off.

  Yeah I feel bad about the son and dad, but not as much as I do the actual victim. He most likely needs some serious help and more then anything understanding on how to deal with the world that seems to be falling apart around him. Talk about somebody who could really use scouting now. All everyone seems concerned with though is the poor son and dad. Geez!

Darn it.  Just ran 3 inches of water in the tub, and couldn't walk across it.  I guess I have nothing to say.

 Neither could I. But that doesn't keep me from knowing what is right or wrong. Walking on water or not this mother was WRONG.