Jump to content

ghjim

Members
  • Content Count

    122
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ghjim

  1. Maybe. We would have to see. I was a teenage Explorer when the program opened up to teenage girls. I have a vivid memory of the types of girls that immediately signed up. They weren't the demure type. I am betting that the girls and their parents that get involved in the gritty BSA activities are not going to be interested in any kind of highly conservative CO dictating values.
  2. This is most definitely a political subject. Which means I doubt any of us on either side of the aisle can agree on this one. I would love to see girls included in the BSA. I have posted before that you can have separate girls troops and boys troops who can meet and compete at Camporees, etc. This way you can provide adult leadership suited for adolescent girls or for adolescent boys. There is nothing in the BSA program that could not benefit growing girls. On the somewhat mean-spirited side I am of the belief that the far right wing has had too much influence over the BSA since my day
  3. This is slightly off-topic relative to the last several posts but I found it interesting. This is a quote from a (fictional) rabbi from the latest Millennium novel: ".... what matters is not that we believe in God. God is not small-minded. What matters is for us to understand that life is serious and rich. We should appreciate it and also try to make the word a better place. Whoever finds a balance between the two is close to God".
  4. Why is your God a better behavioral source of reference than Merlyn's empathy with fellow human beings?
  5. I have always been amazed by the number of people who claim only theists can be moral. What drove me out of religion is a life-long observation that more like the opposite is true. I saw a great post on Facebook recently featuring a boy on a bicycle holding his hands up and shouting for joy.... "I asked God for a bike but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and then asked for forgiveness" Jim
  6. I think that is what the Baden-Powell scouts are trying to do. I am thinking that from 11-14 troops would be segregated, thus allowing "boys to be boys" and "girls to be girls" . They would merge at the Venturing level (what we used to call "Explorers"). Girls troops and Boys troops could intermix at summer camp, maybe OA events. No need for a "sister" program, all the same program. I remember when girls were allowed into Explorers (around 1972 I think). It seems to me that it was an incredible boost to the Explorer program at the time.
  7. Why would girls and boys have to be together at the unit level? Why not have girls troops and boys troops, and they can intermix at Jamborees, etc. I have a vivid memory of a TR (Training Ranger) I knew at Philmont when I was on staff in 1975. I remember her complaining about not having been able to be an Eagle scout.... Girls should have access to the grittier program that BSA offers.
  8. http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html My main point is that the recent changes in the BSA were driven from within. The BSA has resisted any outside pressure now for over a generation. I don't believe the majority of councils ever wanted an exclusive membership.
  9. When I was a scout in the 1960s there was no DRP and no ban on gays. This came about starting in the late 1970s or early 1980s when conservative Christians gained control of the Executive Board. The ban on gays and atheists was then put in place until the recent changes this year and in 2013. From my perspective these changes came about from an internal revolt from councils who notified National they were no longer going to abide by these rules (and to be fair many of these mutineers where devout Christians). Several bloggers have argued that the BSA is now forced to change it's long-
  10. "This issue does not belong in scouting, and as long as National upholds the rights of the chartered organizations, all will clunk forward. Politics and scouts are not suppose to mix, so as long as the LBGT movement doesn't use scouting to advertize their policies, and national upholds the ban on using the uniform for political activities, we'll make it through" I agree, although from my perspective LGBT was made an issue by the conservative members of the Executive Council, not by the LBGT community, or any of the rest of us.
  11. I have to admit I was hoping they would leave, but I also admit that is un-scoutlike
  12. I am glad to see this day coming. Its the only way this is going to get resolved. Sometimes divorce is the only way.
  13. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/us/north-dakota-bismarck-diocese-cuts-ties-to-boy-scouts.html
  14. Not sure I would mind, but to repeat my earlier question, how exactly is this change going to come about? Is there going to be another vote (seems like there should be). Or is national going to mandate this change on everybody? Or does nobody know at this point?
  15. Pack, Just curious what you mean by "de-emphasize" Jim
  16. So I wonder if this is going to be voted on, like last time. Then we will really see if the majority is opposed to gay leaders. Or is Gates going to try to mandate this? Seems like Randall Stephenson was talking like that and he got the boot?
  17. The change to allow gay scouts to remain was forced onto the board by a revolt in the membership. Two thirds wanted the policies to change. I don't believe there was ever a majority of members who wanted to exclude gays and athiests.
  18. As for half the membership leaving, don't think so. I have said this so many times but I don't think the majority of BSA members ever agreed with the membership policies. It was forced on the organization by a conservative executive board.
  19. As much as I applaud this move, I am confused. Hasn't SCOTUS already ruled on this? How can any further court decisions change the BSA membership policies?
  20. As much as I applaud this move am I missing something here.... How can any court affect the BSA membership policies after SCOTUS has already ruled?
  21. Except that the ability to amend the constitution was designed into our government by the founders and the amendments are voted upon by the elected members of congress. The independent interpretation of our constitution by the right-wing (or any other group) is indeed revisionist and the authority to do so is self appointed. Huge difference. Not the pot calling the kettle black.
  22. I will weigh in only because I have been absent on this forum for so long. I like Rick's answer best. Jim
  23. I was certainly in favor of the local option. But it was my understanding that the survey the BSA finally did indicated that the majority of the membership was against it.
  24. I was a scout in the 1960s and an adult program director in the late 1970s. I knew several gay scouts, however they were not really out in the open then. I don't recall anybody ever being kicked out for not being religious.
  25. So after 39% voted against the membership changes, we see only a 6% drop in membership? Sounds encouraging to me.
×
×
  • Create New...