ghjim

I have a vivid memory of one of my days at summer camp staff. I was having a conversation with our District Executive. He was a former WWII fighter pilot, a well-known and pretty powerful personality, known throughout several southwest states. The conversation took place 1970 or 1971, I can't remember. He told me that National had sent all DE's a 10 page memo detailing how to "handle" any women who applied for an SE position (how to turn her down in a correct manner). He was laughing about it and I remember he told me that if a women applied for the job and was qualified he would "handle" the situation by hiring her. I never saw this event happen so I don't know what National would have done if he had hired a woman. But he clearly believed he could do whatever he thought was best for the District/Council. Based only upon what I hear from those of you active in the BSA, I can't imagine any Professional Scouter daring to defy National today.

As I have stated in previous posts, my grievance with the BSA (like many others) concerns the membership policies. As I have been out a long time I am not familiar with the other issues concerning the professional side of the BSA. From the many posts complaining about that I can see it is a big issue. Clearly the BSA has become more conservative and National much more autocratic than in my days in scouting. Any solution gets back to my earlier post in this thread. National is setting policies and doing things that the adult volunteers and parents (the people who should be making the major decisions in the BSA) don't like. What do you do about that? Especially in an institution that has declared itself to be a private religious organization. The executives do not allow decisions to be made by a vote of the volunteers and parents. The more conservative BSA members insist that is the way it should be. If you don't like it you can leave, voluntarily or not. What percentage of adult BSA members agree with that? If a majority of BSA members don't like what National is doing and they won't listen to you, it seems the only solution is some kind of legal action. Is that possible or even desirable?

Beavah: "Yep, that quietly includes gay youth and kids who don't have any clear belief in God". ?? Whereas this statement was certainly true when I was a scout in the 1960s it most definitely is not now.

As a former scout and adult scouter who is now ineligible for membership (not religious)it seems to me that the far right wing in America has gained control of the BSA due to its non-democratic structure. The national executive board imposes regulations regardless of the opinion of the adult volunteers. Former chief executive Robert Mazzuca was fond of stating that the vast majority of scouter members were in favor of the exclusive membership policies. I am not so sure. Nearly all of my friends still active in scouting are opposed. Since I and my friends are liberal-leaning this data could be skewed. It is hard to tell watching the posts on boards like this one. There are strong opinions both ways. It seems clear to me that some of the hard right wing posters would rather see the BSA continue to decline as long as it continues to support their "values". They don't seem to care that the BSA has largely lost its position as a national icon. If this is true, then as long as a minority of ultra-conservatives control the executive board then the BSA will never change its now exclusive nature. If a majority of moderate to liberal members are unwilling to challenge this in order to maintain their existence then this view will prevail ("God save and keep the czar, far away from us"). I will be very interested in the coming year to see what happens to Randall Stephenson when he takes the reins of the executive board. Will his stated objective to end the current membership policies prevail or will he be slapped down?

what a tirade. nonsense

Brewmeister, I have no objection to religious public displays. Does it have to be on government property? Property owned by the people for all the people? Can it be done on church lawns, or businesses that choose to display religious symbols?

Think I will weigh in here. The rumor that B-P was gay comes from the extensive biography "Baden-Powell" by Tim Jeal. In the chapter "Men's Man" he comes to the conclusion that B-P was a repressed homosexual. The biographer is highly respected and produced the most thoroughly documented information about B-P ever written. In the end there is no way to prove either way.

This is an issue I have always wondered about? Does the EC have some special purpose to balance the vote? I always though that it existed only as an artifact of earlier times when the United States had no mass communication. The EC was invented as a simple way of organizing the voting across the country when our "electors" counted up the local votes and then hopped on a horse to ride to Washington to represent their state and what the state majority voted for. If that is the case I am in favor of eliminating it (even though my candidate won this election by a large margin in the EC).

nldscout: I often seen the statement in other forums that those opposing the BSA policies should look for or start another program. As it is now clear and decided that the BSA has the right to employ exclusive membership we forget that the BSA also wants to reap and enjoy its heritage as a national icon with a congressional charter. I have mentioned in another thread the BSA has used this charter to block competing organizations from forming. This is one of the reasons the BSA is continually criticized from without (and within).

I was a scout in the 1960s and we had unmarried ASMs. We also had several unmarried Scout Executives who acted as summer camp Camp Directors.

Sentinels position on voting for Obama after being a self-described right-leaning independent supports my assertion in another thread that this election is the Republican's to lose. If the Republicans hadn't thrown out several of their moderate candidates early in their primary they would have swept the independent vote. The party is clinging to extremists.

President Obama appointed a bi-partisan committee to come up with a plan to balance the budget. Republicans and Democrats together came up with a plan to: 1. cut spending 2. raise taxes. Both party leaders rejected the plan. I don't know what more a president can do.

I am a Democrat and a big Obama fan. But I am very aware that a majority of Americans do not share my views. This entire election has been the Republican's to lose. The party rejected some candidates early on that would have swept the independent vote. But the Republicans keep nominating extremists.

As I stated in my earlier post, the Congressional Charter has great legal weight and is being used by the BSA to block the introduction of any competing organizations.

It sure looks to me like National cracked down on them. I notice Clark Green's website no longer allows any discussion on BSA membership policies. Looks like they got to him also.

The congressional charter is not fluff and has been used by the BSA to block other scouting organizations from forming: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Judge-scouts-answer-to-infringement-case-3266074.php

I just joined this forum. I was active in scouting from 1963 until 1977. As I am nearing retirement and was planning on getting involved in scouting again I find I am ineligible for membership due to my religious beliefs (agnostic). I went through a period of a lot of anger against the BSA and after a while I calmed down. I realized the BSA doesn't have to remain the organization I remembered. All I am really trying to do now is figure out the history of how all of this changed. It seems that the executive council (whose new members are chosen by the council itself, so not a democratic organization) began filling with more conservative members until these membership restrictions came into effect in the 1980s. Yes, it seems to me that the BSA membership is way down, however I find my old scout camp in Oklahoma is still doing fine (reports from my friends still in scouting) and that Philmont (I was a staff member in 1975) is having record attendance.

This is what I am confused about. Wasn't it the executive board that reaffirmed the ban against gays and athiests? Isn't it the executive board that is making that policy in the first place?

What I would like to know is how will Randall Stephenson change the membership rules if the rest of the executive board are against him? How did he get on the board in the first place with those kind of views?

namu, I'm new to scouting as well, but I am an avid river rat. Not sure exactly what kind of trip you're planning, but more info might help folks point you in the right direction. Are you planning a multi day float trip? Or ,is this going to be a car camping type trip with day float trips on a popular white water section of river - that is, will you return to the same "base camp" at the end of each day? Is this a self guided float or are you hiring a guide/outfitter? Are the boys going to be passengers in a raft that has a rowing frame and one person on the sticks, or is it going to be a paddle boat setup with each boy holding a paddle and contributing to the movement and control of the raft. Each has its merits depending on what you want to do. On a multi day float trip with the potential for good fishing you probably want to set the boys up in rafts with rowing frames and a guide on the sticks. Then, they can sit back, enjoy the scenary and fish. If its a splash and giggle, crazy whitewater trip then a paddle boat setup will get the boys into the action and give them the chance to be a part of guiding the boat. Or, you can have both and the boys can take turns in the "fishing" raft and the "fun" raft. Does the river your floating require any special permits? Rivers that see a lot of use in the summer may limit the number of boaters on the water using a limited entry permit system. Just some stuff to think about, there's nothing better than a camping trip on the river, I hope your boys have a blast. Nate