Hunt

I just don't understand the double standard some posters have here. When BSA has a policy they agree with, we're told that BSA is a private organization that can set its own rules, and everybody else can be quiet or leave. But when BSA has a policy they don't like, such as allegedly dumbing down the program to make it easier to make First Class in the First Year, it's a different story. I just think all these issues can be discussed on their merits. Although the powers that be in BSA may not read forums like this, there may be somebody reading this who will one day be one of the powers tha

To draw this out of a thread that has become yet another about you-know-what...What do you think causes some boys to think Scouting is "geeky" or "lame," and what can be done about it? Is it the program, the uniform (in general or the specific configuration), or things like the Law and Promise? I think it's not the outdoor program--nobody would call a hiking, camping, and canoeing club geeky. What do you think?

If you were living in Israel or Saudi Arabia, you would find restrictions on your practice of Christianity that you probably would find pretty offensive. The U.S. is founded on a set of principles, some of which are drawn from Christianity, but the Founders set out to create a state that would have true religious freedome, and to do that they decided that the state couldn't establish religion. As that has played out, we enjoy religious freedom unmatched almost anywhere else in the world. It is a small price to pay that a minister can't come to the public school in a Santa suit and evangeliz

I've go to disagree with the last statement--that an organization's membership standards should be whatever that group wants them to be. I don't really think you believe that--in this case you strongly agree with the standards. But surely you don't think it's unreasonable to criticize the membership standards of even a private organization if they are manifestly unfair? I'm not even arguing about whether BSA's standards are fair or not--I just don't think they are immune from criticism just because they're private, or even because nothing I say can influence them. I have ideas about what's

Would everybody be comfortable if BSA said that "admitted sexual promiscuity" was a barrier to Scout leadership? I think it's worth noting that promiscuity is a different issue from homosexuality, or even bisexuality (a bisexual can be monogamous--it just doesn't matter to him or her what sex the partner is).

It seems to me that this is an easy case--heck, I'm an evangelical Christian, and I don't want a minister in a Santa suit coming into the school and referring my kids to "Christian resources." What "resources?" His church? And if you let him in, you can't keep out the guy who'd like to refer your kids to Islamic, Jewish, neo-pagan, or atheist "resources."

Maybe we need a new thread name, because the "geeky" topic is much more interesting. I think Big Dog has a good point--what is it that kids think is "geeky," the program, or the uniform? And if it's the uniform, is it the very idea of a uniform, or the way the current uniform looks? What my son's friends say is that Scouting is "lame." This suggests they know nothing about the program--but have a false impression based on some of its trappings.

If the Scarlet Knight carries a sword or a lance, he (or she) will still be the target of reformers--several mascots have had to give up their muskets, etc.

It's awfully hard to draw the line of when to be offended. I once went with a group to the LimeLight nightclub in New York--this was back in the 80's. LimeLight was a former church that had been turned into a disco--the church structure was still there, with memorials, plaques, carvings, etc., still on the walls. The activities going on were, to say the least, not appropriate for church. I felt my skin crawl, and left. I found it highly inappropriate and offensive--in a way I wouldn't have it it had been a former warehouse. I suppose an Indian might feel the same way if he saw sacred ritu

I did an Internet search to see if I could find any evidence that the Klan or the Black Panthers ever sponsored or sought to sponsor a Boy Scout troop. The closest hit was a record of cash donations by a Klan group to a troop fundraiser many years ago. I don't consider it inconceivable that in the past, especially in the South, that a troop might have been sponsored by some organization that was racist--but I certainly find it inconceivable that such a relationship would exist today.

From what I read, the criticism of the Indian Guides and Indian Princesses was not just that the regalia and ceremonies were unauthentic, but that they were being appropriated by non-Indians. Obviously, this would be a potential issue for OA as well, no matter how authentic it might be. I suppose the criticisms might be well-taken if what is being appropriated are the authentic ceremonies of a living religion--but I don't see it if it's primarily cultural or historic. Note: Apparently, YMCA has been toning down the Indian elements of the program for some time, but now the Indian elements ar

I just learned that the YMCA has decided to discontinue the "Indian" element of its Indian Guides/Indian Princesses programs, which will now be known as Adventurers and Explorers--no more Indian regalia, chants, etc. Indian groups complained that the misuse of Indian symbols, etc., was insulting or "traumatic." Many parents, some of whom grew up with the program, are ticked off. What do you think about this? And is this yet another issue that will be looming for BSA? If it is, what (if anything) should be done about it?

Actually, I think the argument is that if the BSA doesn't prohibit it, it's up to the CO to decide how to use the program--and I have no particular problem with that idea. My argument, though, is that it would be morally wrong for the CO to use uniformed scouts to evangelize, because it's misleading to the targets. (Note: there are some religious--in my book, cult--groups that allow and use deception in evangelization.) You'd think BSA would want to discourage this--you wouldn't want a uniformed scout telling a person of another religion that he's going to Hell if he doesn't convert. Mayb

OK, I'll belabor this point some more, but just because I find it interesting. I'm not too troubled by the idea that BSA is a religious organization--but if it is, it is an ecumenical one--about as ecumenical as you can get and still be religious. Thus it's my opinion that a particular CO shouldn't use uniformed scouts to evangelize for a specific religion--I'm not arguing that it's against BSA rules to do this, but that it would be a misleading practice for a church to use Scouts to get "a foot in the door" to evangelize people who wouldn't even answer the door if was clear that the visit

Not to belabor this point too much, but could evangelizing for a particular religion really be a Scouting activity? If it isn't, of course, the uniform shouldn't be worn. Line-drawing might be hard, because activities like Christmas caroling seem OK to me, for example (and I know some troops in fact do that, in uniform). Maybe to take the religious element out of it, imagine if the CO takes positions on political issues and candidates--it doesn't seem to me that it would appropriate to send out scouts in uniform for that purpose either.

silver-shark, your point might make some sense if BSA only removed leaders who "avowed" their homosexuality to the boys in the context of BSA activities. But that's not what BSA does--it removes them if the person publicly avows it in other contexts as well. You seem to suggest that all discussions of sexuality are inappropriate in front of the boys, and with that I agree. But you won't be banned from leadership in BSA if you "avow" heterosexuality by getting married, for example. But certain it seems that BSA would remove leaders who publicly engaged in gay marriage, even if they never s

Thanks for all the suggestions! We bought one of the Therm-A-Rest 3/4 pads. The whole family sat around gazing in wonder as it inflated itself.

One other point--the sin was sleeping with the girl--the pregnancy is the consequence. Would you ask any boy who admitted he was guilty of the same sin (but without the consequence) to withdraw? It's like punishing the drunk driver who kills somebody, but not the drunk driver who doesn't.

Well, OK...but do you mean that you think it would be OK for a church to use uniformed scouts in this way? Or you just think it's not worth talking about because nobody is doing it?

Could a church send out door-to-door evangelists in Scout uniforms? Even if it's not prohibited, does this seem appropriate to you? I must confess, I'd be surprised and somewhat disturbed if uniformed Scouts showed up at my door to evangelize for a specific religion. I'm not saying it's wrong for the scouts to evangelize--far from it--I just question if it's really right to use the Scout uniform as a "foot in the door" when the mission doesn't really relate to Scouting.

I had to go back and look at the first post--this boy is 15--in 9th or 10th grade. He's still a child, although obviously he's capable of getting involved in an adult-sized problem. He should withdraw from the troop...and join what? The Sinner's Club? He's too young to get married, and even too young to really work. He's still in dire need of what Scouting can provide--more than ever, in fact. Finally, would you like your "moral straightness" judged solely by the worst thing you've ever done, or by your life as a whole?

It seems to me that there a couple of different issues in this perennial debate, and the failure to distinguish them leads to problems and misunderstandings. Let's take as a given that there are certain kinds of immoral actions or lifestyles that are so bad that anybody who does them should not be a scout leader. If that's the case, the debate here breaks down into two separate issues: 1. Is homosexuality one of those very bad actions or lifestyles? 2. Who decides what actions and/or lifestyles are bad enough, and how do they decide? Now it seems to me that if your objectio

C'mon, silver-shark--what he means is that some religions, including some flavors of Christianity, don't believe that homosexuality is a sin, and thus they would not see the need for a ban on avowed homosexuals. Surely you understand this? It's debatable, I suppose, whether you can come to any sensible judgement about whether something is "moral" or not without a religious basis--but this particular issue is one that does not seem to be obvious to many people apart from religious teaching. Personally, I think divorce is a sin and that divorced people are lacking as role models. Some re

Nobody fully lives out the Scout Oath and Law in his daily life--the only difference is the degree of deviation, and the consequences. Without knowing more facts, we can't even tell how big a deviation this was for this particular boy--whether it was part of a pattern of behavior, etc. I think a person can do wrong things, and then turn his life around and become a role model again. I don't think the boy should be drummed out of the troop at all--but at his next Scoutmaster Conference and Board of Review, it will be important to look at how the Oath and Law have guided him in dealing with t

I'm trying to get my 12-year-old equipped for some backpacking later in the year, and am wondering how much he needs a pad for under his sleeping bag. My decrepit bones certainly would need one, but he often sleeps in a bag on a hard floor with no complaints. Do most boys backpack with these, or leave them home to save the weight and space in the pack? He's got an REI Sub Kilo down bag (on sale now).