Hunt

"There are words that are not acceptable to some people and we asked everyone (adults and youth) to respect that." I think this is why this can be an opportunity for education, both in sensitivity to others, and in how others perceive us. You never know what language will be taboo. For example, my wife was taught that one never refers to one's mother as "she" or father as "he." I never heard of such a thing, but I find myself telling my kids, "Don't refer to your mother as "she."" They are able to understand that although this kind of expression is OK for most people, it is not OK aro

I remember reading before that BSA had told Goodwill and Salvation Army to stop selling uniforms. I wonder if this was true, and if it's a policy that's being enforced. In the Jan-Feb issue of Scouting, there's an article about a guy who scours Goodwills, etc. for uniforms that he fixes up and gives away. http://www.scoutingmagazine.org/issues/0701/d-news.html Would they have printed this if this was to be discouraged? And have they done anything to try to stop ebay from carrying sales of scout uniforms?

I think this is a tough issue, because what constitutes "bad language" is a moving target. A prime example is "that sucks," which has different connotations depending on your age. Also, I'm not sure words like "frickin'" should be punished--maybe we really would prefer that bad words morph into more benign ones. After all, we're probably not concerned if somebody says "darn" or "doggone" or "dadburn." Maybe "frickin'" just isn't morphed enough, but "flippin'" is OK. Perhaps this is a situation in which bright-line rules are not the answer, but discussions of how language fits in with the

I would just say that if you give the PLC a voice in the process, you must listen carefully to what they say, and be prepared to explain to them your reasoning if you don't follow their advice.

"The only religious requirement to be in and advance in Boy Scouts is the DRP. After you sign the DRP (which isn't even spelled in complete text on the application), there are no other. A scout can advance to the highest honors of scouting and never complete a requirement that is religious based. The Duty to God in the oath is universally accepted to be too vague to measure for advancement. Didn't the chief scout state that believing in a rock was enough? Just imagine if Duty To Self had the same weight." As you intimate, in fact there is a religious element to all rank advancements in Bo

"Hunt, what value does the DRP provide BSA besides creating the membership barrier?" It, um, declares the religious principles of BSA. Really, that's what this thread is all about--if BSA believes that its religious principles are important, should they play more of a part in the program? In other words, the principle could shape what the program does, as opposed to who gets in. Right now, people who don't like camping or the outdoors typically do not become Boy Scouts--there is no need to make applicants sign a statement that they like camping and the outdoors. If exposure to religio

I'm not sure my idea would require that the DRP be dropped--what would be dropped is the requirement to assert belief in God in order to be a member. BSA would still be a religious organization, with religious principles, but it wouldn't have belief as a membership requirement. Look, for a model, at the mission statement of the University of Notre Dame: http://newsinfo.nd.edu/content.cfm?topicid=32. Notre Dame doesn't impose a religious belief requirement on students, and yet it remains a Catholic school, and that has implications for how it does certain things. If you choose to go there,

Just thought I'd add that there are apparently still some youth spots open in the BSA contingent. (BSA deposited our deposit check, so I guess my son is going, although we haven't gotten the confirmation letter yet.) As we learn more about it, it looks like a really great opportunity--although, yes, it is quite expensive.

"Since a unit is owned by its chartering organization, each unit takes its tax status from that organization. Units are NOT subordinate organizations of the Boy Scouts of America. So it seems to me that although the policies of BSA prohibit unit leaders from soliciting donations, the statement above means that if a person approaches a unit and wants to donate to the unit, that the proper thing to do would be to explain that the unit is part of the CO. This may seem like sophistry, but a person who is offering to donate to the unit is really offering to donate to the CO--wouldn't it be w

"Well Hunt, your last message would lead me to think that you would approve, not disapprove, of the town where Little League was disbanded and a Christian-only ballclub was started. After all, it's obviously 1) a private club, 2) started with the intent to only allow Christians, and 3) presumably all the non-Christian kids who are now excluded learn the same lesson that kids excluded from the BSA learn that you seem to think is so important - namely, that private organizations don't have to change their rules for your convenience. Or is that a useful message only if atheists are the only ones

Lisabob, I think while this thread has wandered, to me it shows that the "core component" question is really important: in fact, it is the apparent disconnect between BSA's statements that Duty to God is a core component of the program, and the perception that people have of the actual program, that is the problem. So, for example, Merlyn's question: "So religion is a core part of scouting, but not a core part of Little League, even though Little League ALSO has a pledge that includes 'god' (and thus excludes atheists and polytheists)? Why don't you support Little League's right to pract

"If membership requirements are crafted in a manner that actively excludes certain persons for specific reasons, there must be some perceived positive benefit for doing this (health, safety, profit, better crops?) or else perhaps the benefit is the good feeling of having excluded someone." I think you are too focused on the idea of excluding "certain persons." It is only the highly inclusive nature of BSA that makes you think this way. Again, if we were talking about the Elvis fan club, or a church's confirmation class, the benefit to the included of exclusivity would be obvious. The b

"I have asked the question many times and no one has supplied an effective answer: What is the benefit to a boy who is excluded because of his religious faith or worse, the faith of his parents? The absence of answers is, in fact, the answer: None." "Here's a new question since no one seems to have an answer for that one: What benefit is it to the boys who ARE in scouting for these other boys to be turned away for religious reasons? That one should be easy, right?" I answered both of these questions in another thread, but I guess didn't see or didn't like the answer. The answer is t

It is difficult to be totally non-sectarian, but also to claim that you have a defined set of values that are derived from religious beliefs. If you really want to claim that all religions (vs. non-religious ethical systems) share those values, they are going to be pretty general and vague values, and there won't be much to distinguish them form non-religious ethical schemes. The more I think about this, the more I think that BSA should decide on what religious elements should be part of the program, and leave belief out of it. It should let anybody join, but with the understanding that

I'm intrigued by the idea of what the "correct" definition of religion is. In general, dictionary definitions support my (and BSA's) understanding of what a relgion is--it involves belief in unseen, divine powers or forces. This is what the WORD "religion" means. Of course, courts have had to struggle with the legal meaning of "religion" when it is used in the Constitution and in laws, and they have come to a variety of decisions based on the context (see http://www.religiousfreedom.com/articles/casino.htm for an interesting article about this). In some cases, courts have held that the pro

"The US government can't require religions to have supreme being(s)." Well, maybe, but that's not what you asked me. You asked me about BSA's rule, which I interpret to require belief in some spiritual reality beyond the observable natural world. Without that, a belief system is a philosophy, not a religion. Besides, I thought you were insinuating that BSA was being inconsistent by not excluding atheist Buddhists, and I told you that if I had to enforce the rule, I would exclude them. Don't you like my answer? "Sorry, you'll have to include some unbelievable crap to be a real rel

While I, too, think boys can be deliberately cruel (particularly in a pack), I think more often the problem is a lack of empathy. While I don't want to add "A Scout is Empathetic" to the Scout Law, I do think that many of Scouting's ideals and program elements do help a boy develop empathy--an understanding of and concern for the feelings and needs of other people. Doing good turns, service projects, even Leave No Trace contribute to this idea, as does leadership of younger boys. I think most of us in Scouting have seen strong boys go out of their way to help smaller, weaker, or disabled Sc

I think there is a difference between "mooning" and simply being unclothed in front of others. I think it is perhaps like the difference between holding and "brandishing" a knife. I personally don't see mooning as particularly awful--certainly not a sex crime--but I agree that it's inappropriate as a Scout behavior, especially if it's known that others don't like it. As far as sensitivity about being seen with no clothes, or seeing others with no clothes, we have to remember that this may be a cultural or religious issue for some boys, and we should respect that. If it's just a particular

There was a former poster here who used to say that we didn't really need any rules beyond the Scout Law. I never really agreed with that, but in this case it seems to me to be about right. If we're serious about the values in the Scout Law, it's obvious that Scouts don't pull pranks that betray the trust of younger, weaker scouts or that unkindly humiliate them. If you're concerned about toughening up boys, Scouting does that in a positive way by giving them opportunities to face challenges together. I think they'll have plenty of opportunities to experience unkindness and untrustworthine

"Hunt, would you exclude Rev. Dr. Michael Newdow for being an atheist, even though he's founded a religion? Would you exclude an atheist Buddhist?" If I had the obligation to enforce the current membership requirement, yes, I would exclude both of them. I don't think membership in an organized religion is necessarily relevant to whether a person believes in a spiritual reality or not. I would also exclude a Methodist who was an atheist, for that matter. Also, I think that words have meanings, and as a result Newdow has not founded a "religion" at all. It is a philosophy, certainly, bu

"Shouldn't BSA help support our country by having the uniforms made here? I am sure that there is some clothing manufacturer that would be willing to support scouting by lowering their prices...or is BSA running up the cost?" Unfortunately, the desire to have lower costs and to have US-made clothing are in opposition to each other. If you really want US-made clothing, the costs will almost certainly have to be higher.

Merlyn, you seem to think that there is no "theological" significance to having religious beliefs vs. having no religious beliefs. I suppose it is difficult for an atheist to understand what a Buddhist and a Baptist have in common, but there is a shared outlook and sense of what is important. Rather than "playing dumb," I am pointing out the absurdity of your attempt to make BSA's virtue--its nonsectarian position--into a vice. I suppose it is the case that the highly inclusive nature of BSA's religion requirement makes it that much tougher for the small minority of people who don't qualify

I have to say that I don't fully understand the point of the annual rechartering process. What does it accomplish beside updating the roster and collecting annual fees? If, as I suspect, 95% of CO signatures are strictly pro forma, and people aren't really meeting with commissioners, or setting up rechartering teams, etc., etc., why not simplify the process?

"If Ollie's such a loser, what does that make the 320 people who showed up and donated $160K to hear him?" Forgetful? Unclear on the concept of "trustworthy?" North essentially admitted to lying under oath to Congress, and only had three felony convictions overturned because the appeals court felt that his later public, immunized testimony may have prevented him from getting a fair trial. To my mind, he's in the same category as Bill Clinton in terms of serving as a role model to youth.

I'd like to try to separate three ideas that seem to be mixed up a bit here. One is tolerance of risk, another is what I would call "toughness," and the last one is the place of pranks. As far as risk goes, I agree that many parents have gotten far too risk-averse, and a certain level of risk is inherent in the kind of outdoor activities involved in Scouting. While good Scouting includes understanding and managing risk, it wouldn't be worth much if it avoided all risks. So on this, I agree with most of the posters. With respect to "toughness," I think Scouting does help develop a