erickelly65

Packsaddle wrote: I think it is good and proper for you to feel the way you do on behalf of yourself and your son. I think it is improper for you to think your view should apply to anyone else

All I am saying is I am happy with the way the program as is with regard to religious belief. I dont think anyone else needs to share my beliefs so I dont get were your absurd assertion that I think my view should apply to anyone else. My view to keep the faith elements of the Oath and Law in our program isnt anymore Improper then others suggesting we drop it.

Elements of faith are the status quo in the BSA program and its a major reason why my family has been so involved in Scouting over the decades. Agree with it or not but I prefer that it didnt change and I wont apologized for perusing this belief system. I dont believe the GSUSA model is an acceptable approach and will dilute the importance of faith (which I prize) to something optional.

There are a plethora of wholesome secular youth organizations for parents/youth to chose. My son and daughters participate in many of them. This is about being able to have one, just ONE, unique organization in scouting that combines elements of personal responsibility, duty to family, community and country, as well as a believe in a higher power. This mixture provides what I believe will help enable my son to become the best kind of person and citizen he can.

Further, I dont find the use of the phrase The best kind of citizen to be necessarily offensive to anyone. It doesnt say others cant be good citizens or even great citizens. We all as parents have to stand up and say I want x for my child and I believe y is the path to get there. Doing so isnt insulting to parents who dont believe in y. I chose to want to associate with and put programs on that support those views that will help my child achieve x. I am hearing people tell me there is no room in society for a group like this I find that unacceptable.

I find it frustrating that these simple ideas are so offensive and unacceptable to some.

As far as experiencing improper speech in scouting (and elsewhere) -

Life is full of immature and disrespectful people spanning the spectrum of socio-political beliefs.

(This message has been edited by erickelly65)

Gern, there is a distinct difference between not completely living up to the Oath and Law at all times and refusing to live up to it.

Merlyn, In my opinion, the GSUSA's approach takes away too much of the elements of faith from the program. Its just one more secular organization that lets people of faith add in a statement of such if they so chose.

Gern,

I disagree. The oath and law would have to change. If it didnt, as Merlyn mentioned in the thread on Philly, then only non-theists that were willing to LIE and swear an oath they didnt believe could be in Scouts. (I had suggested the option you propose here in that thread to be told by Meryln it was "Mighty White of me")

So you have to change the Oath and Law or have different ones for different group (Not really a workable option in my opinion)

Merlyn wrote -

You brought up being subject to "legal attack". Nearly all lawsuits concerning the BSA and their discriminatory policies involve the government in some way

My answer I was referring to Gerns earlier post referencing legal problems.

Gern - why cause the legal/funding/PR problems scouting faces by explicitly excluding non-thiests

Secondly, nearly all isnt the same thing as all

Merlyn also wrote: In the specific case of the BSA, they denegrate atheists.

I have been involved in Scouting for over 35 years (in one way or another) and never seen anyone denigrate atheists. If believing there is a God and that those that dont believe in one are mistaken is denigration then perhaps they are but that argument cuts both ways. One need not look very far to see atheists belittling those of faith as non-thinkers. http://www.ffrf.org/day/fotd_intro.php

Finally, I suggested you keep the government out of this thread not because it isnt an area worthy of discussion but because this thread is about another issue.

Perhaps you, as you claim so often of Ed, cant learn how to show common courtesy and not highjack every thread on here back to a discussion of separation of church and state.

No I do not agree 100% with BSA policies.

If the requirement to belong to an organization is 100% agreement, there is no organization on earth I could belong to. Heck, I couldnt even be married!

The question is to what degree do I disagree, how significant is the issue and to what extent can I effect change within versuse outside-of the organization.

Meryln, first lets keep, if only for this thread, the issue of governmental involvement/support out of this.

The discussion in this thread is about what level of importance in scouting does religion play and what level should it play.

I am promoting the notion that a belief in a higher power is an important element for my son to learn and embrace. What your saying,if I understand you correctly, is that its ok for me to be "criticized", "ostricized", and "harassed" because I want him in a program that supports that notion. That it is impossible to have a group that supports such a bleif system to be anything but "immoral" because, by the very nature of the beliefs it is promoting, it will exlude others not of that belief. Its never been about keeping anyone else out, its about participating in a program that supports the ideals I want conveyed to my child.(This message has been edited by erickelly65)(This message has been edited by erickelly65)(This message has been edited by erickelly65)

Gern would we then need to change our Oath and Law to be flexible to ones particular religious belief (or lack there of?) Much like the milquetoast approach the girlscouts took.

Why is it that me freely wanting to express my religious beliefs and belong to a group that will promote a belief system with elements of faith ingrained in it that I must somehow be subject to legal attack (not to mention personal attacks of being labeled an invidious discriminator etc.)

Cant an orginization stand for anything? Should we change the Scout Law to make the duty to Country optional as well?

Faith plays a big role in my units program (both Pack and Troop) We are chartered by a Catholic Church and I would estimate that 75% of the boys in my pack have earned thier religious emblem (Those of the Catholic faith as well as others)

Further, faith plays a large role in our entire council. We had a Council wide Catholic Cub Scouting event about a month ago at a Local Council camp that had close to 1,000 participants.

I would disagree that Faith is absent from advancement requirements - Example Req. # 8 for the Webelos Badge

Explain and agree to follow the Outdoor Code.

Faith

After completing the rest of requirement 8, do these (a, b, and c):

Know: Tell what you have learned about faith.

Commit: Tell how these faith experiences help you live your duty to God. Name one faith practice that you will continue to do in the future.

Practice: After doing these requirements, tell what you have learned about your beliefs.

And do one of these (d OR e):

Earn the religious emblem of your faith*

Do two of these:

*Attend the mosque, church, synagogue, temple, or other religious organization of your choice, talk with your religious leader about your beliefs. Tell your family and your Webelos den leader what you learned.

*Discuss with your family and Webelos den leader how your religious beliefs fit in with the Scout Oath and Scout Law, and what character-building traits your religious beliefs have in common with the Scout Oath and Scout Law.

*With your religious leader, discuss and make a plan to do two things you think will help you draw nearer to God. Do these things for a month.

*For at least a month, pray or meditate reverently each day as taught by your family, and by your church, temple, mosque, synagogue, or religious group.

*Under the direction of your religious leader, do an act of service for someone else. Talk about your service with your family and Webelos den leader. Tell them how it made you feel.

*List at least two ways you believe you have lived according to your religious beliefs.

As for Reverent being the last of the Scout Laws, I have never heard anyone promote the idea that are listed in order of priority. (An interesting sidebar - An Eagle BOR question I have heard given is to ask the boy which Laws is least important and why?)

OGE, So the Rules of Decorum arent really rules, just guidelines since such great latitude is afforded participants here.

Has anyone seen this "open letter" and what it stated with regard to governance?(This message has been edited by erickelly65)

To be honest, I have never understood Merlyn's stance that the Scouts must take an either/or stance from the Dale decision. (Either have your membership rules or benefit from government support but not both)

Secondly, its the school's duty to decide if it can sponsor a Scouting Unit, not the Scouts.

I have 5 knots and wear them all.

Arrow of Light

Eagle Scout

Tiger Den Leader Award

Cubmaster Award

District Award of Merit.

While I think people should wear as many earned knots as they feel comfortable with, I think 2-3 rows is the most one should wear for simple astetics.

SSScout

I think the issue isnt if there should be consequences but rather "what" consequences should there be. The secondary issue is who's responsibility is it to determine and implement the consequences.

Where was all the indignation and strong opposition to politicians politicizing the BSA when Gov. Richardson made his comments?

Gov. Richardson would not accept honorary BSA chair if elected

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=167813&p=1

First off, I dont think there is anything inherently bad about an Eagle Scout talking about his views on Scouting or writing a book etc. I have heard many such Eagle Scouts speak Astronauts, Military Officers, Doctors, Business People, Judges(but you think Politicians cant?) As far as Gov. Perry goes, I say let him speak. He is a fellow Eagle Scout, hes earned the right.

Secondly, Governor Perry made his comments on scouting AT a scouting function!! Of course hes going to talk about Scouting!

Thirdly, this entire issue IS political. Keeping politicians out of it wont change that. (Its all over the place from every point of view)

http://www.ffrf.org/timely/bsa.php

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/07/brownback-vs-ro.html

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5562

http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/bsa2.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a399d010a5083.htm

BrentAllen,

Thanks for the info. I am aware of the councils finanical aid programs. The challenge with our district is one of the scale of the issue. It is one thing to ask the council to help out in a one-off way but when you have dozens (if not more) boys needing help with uniform costs it becomes an issue. I have heard it stated about 85% of our target demographic in my distract qualify for a free lunch program.

BrentAllen

With your units full uniform emphasis, did you have any situations with families struggling to buy uniforms (money issues)? How did you handle this?

My unit, and our District in general, serves a large number of disadvantaged youth and uniform costs are an ongoing issue.

I am not a member of the "uniform police" by any stretch but, being an old school scouter, would rather seem more boys in uniform then less.

PeteM Wednesday, 10/31/2007: 10:16:19 AM

Since all was "supposedly" resolved, how do you know that the boy was NOT going to be withdrawn anyway?

Reply Because, PeteM, I believe it is fair to believe there is a correlation between the two events (Leader incident and boy withdrawing) because Scoutlady105 speaks of them together in the same thought. Also, if there was no relationship of these events, the comment about a boy withdrawing quietly would not be germane to the thread.

I dont know for a fact but only based on what is posted here as do I not know what transpired during this incident, its duration, the general quality of the two leaders or the parent/witness, etc.

Also, believing open and frequent communication with ones DE is important to putting on a good program, the bar for me discussing issues, successes, challenges and problems in my unit is pretty low. I know my DE would want to hear about an event like this.

scoutlady105 Wednesday, 10/31/2007: 7:10:57 AM

Well, for an update to all you concerned leaders.

Leader #1, the male who visited Leader #2's tent at 3 am, talked to the parent who saw him make his 3 am visit. This parent was "sleeping under the stars." All was supposedly resolved and they were going to quietly withdraw their son.

I think, at this point, since a boy will be withdrawing from the program over this, the DE should be informed.

The stance on Camo comes from the policy below. One could argue that, in this day and age of attire, Camo is not universally considered para-military. Having said that, it has been my experience that it is generally considered bad-form to wear camo in Scouting circles. Personally, I have bigger fish to fry.

According to the Rules and Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA No. 57-492), under "Insignia, Uniforms, and Badges," Clause 4(b) states: "Imitation of United States Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps uniforms is prohibited, in accordance with the provisions of the organization's Charter."

As a parent, it would certainly be your choice to stay with a particular unit or not FScouter.

I do think you jump to some conclusions about this particular situaion based you your inference these are adult leaders that place a "higher value on their personal pleasure and "free sex with anyone" than on their life partner and family."

You don't know that there was any sexual activity involved in this event, you don't know what specifics caused the one leader to be divorcing his spouse, (who is at fault in the marriage, if either or if both) All assumptions and interesting how easily we assume the worst and how hard it is for us to give any benefit of the doubt.

Let me put my District Hat on for a second. In a nutshell, the matter has been resolved. The issue was raised to the Troop (I assume meaning the Troop Committee and Chartering Organization) and a decision on how to proceed was made. There isnt anything in the Troop's decision that seems outside acceptable limits so even if a parent came to the district/council to complain my suspicion is they would do little more then to listen courteously and do nothing.

All other things being equal, and assuming both leaders continue to abide by the "extra" rules (not going to campouts together), I see no reason to remove either from Scouts.

Goldwing...don't forget "more humble"!!!

I really don't feel making BSA coed is necessarily a good thing. We have an excellent sister organization in GSUSA and I feel, especially at younger ages, boys are best served by a unique program focused on them and their needs. Much like the GSUSA thinks of its "girls only" program. (See below)

As for adult women in the Program, I think its just fine. I wish more men would get off their duff and step up and do their duty as father's and be more involved. (more of an inditment of men then women)

http://www.girlscoutslolc.org/New/girls_only_environment.htm

I think you could take the GSUSA info below and swap Boy and Girl...

Why is a girls-only environment good for girls?

Girl Scouts of the USA, the preeminent organization for girls, receives a number of inquiries about the benefits of girl-only program. Here are findings of reports by the Girl Scout Research Institute demonstrating the benefits of an all-girl environment. These are five reasons why an all-girls environment works well for many girls.

1. Girls are in co-educational environments most of the day. Most girls are enrolled in co-ed schools, are involved in co-ed religious groups, and live in families with both males and females. Even though girls are excelling academically (in some cases outpacing boys) and in sports, they still feel they need a safe place where they can just be girls without the pressures of boys.

The Ten Emerging Truths: New Directions for Girls 11-17, Girl Scout Research Institute, Girl Scouts of the USA (2002)

2. Girls desire emotional safety. Emotional safety is achieved when girls feel they can trust those around them. It is sometimes easier for girls to establish this trust with other girls and female adults.

Feeling Safe: What Girls Say, Girl Scout Research Institute, GSUSA (2003)

3. Many girls are over-scheduled. So many options are now available to girls that time is the new currency. With so many scheduling demands each day, girls want time to relax and have fun. They say they have fun being around other girls.

The Ten Emerging Truths: New Directions for Girls 11-17, Girl Scout Research Institute, Girl Scouts of the USA (2002)

4. Girls want to talk with adult women who understand them. Girl Scouts adult-girl partnership is a fantastic vehicle for this. Girls naturally aspire up in age. While girls enjoy being in groups with girls of other ages and also being role models for younger girls, they crave a safe place to talk about their lives in their own peer group or with those just beyond them in age.

The Ten Emerging Truths: New Directions for Girls 11-17, Girl Scout Research Institute, Girl Scouts of the USA (2002)

5. Girls want volunteers who can offer a glimpse of the near future. Volunteers just above these girls in age WANT to work with them too!

The Ten Emerging Truths: New Directions for Girls 11-17, Girl Scout Research Institute, Girl Scouts of the USA (2002)