Huzzar

@Rick in CA: You cannot seriously think that the people who don't want gays in Scouting are on an all out crusade to get ride of the non-Christians too.

 

An all out crusade? No, though there is a small minority (as you pointed out) that would like that. What I have seen, is that there is a large group of people that would like to see the BSA become (or in their opinion, remain) a de facto Christian organization that allows others, but follows Christian beliefs (sort of like the AHG). In discussions of the membership question, when people are asked about "what about other faiths?" I heard a lot of "I don't care about the others, they have to conform to Christian beliefs if they want to be here." (or something to that effect). And of course, just about all these people define "Christian" as "conservative Christian".

 

Basically I saw that a lot of the people (though not all) in the anti-membership change camp were very dismissive of different beliefs ("Don't talk to me about nonsectarian! That's just PC b# s# they had to put in to keep funding from the United Way!").

 

Yes, they are a minority (at least I hope they are - they are in my council), but there are a lot of them. My fear is that if they win the vote, it will empower them to push their point-of-view in more areas. I have already met one scouter that said he was effectively made unwelcome (at council and district events) in his old council simply because he was a Muslim and offered to lead an opening prayer at a round table.

 

Think about it, arguing against inclusion of gays based on religious belief is incompatible with nonsectarian. How many of the people making that argument know that but just don't care? For many scouters, nonsectarian is something to be ignored. For some, it's something to be gotten rid of.

 

Already there are districts where if you are a non-Christian scout or scouter, you will have your face rubbed in that fact at every event. And for some scouters, that is the point.

 

Maybe I'm overreacting to things said in heat. But I was surprised how little respect some people have for faiths other than their own.

What I found interesting after watching the video conference on National's website is that allowing gay scouts will be all inclusive and not be at the discretion of any CO. That means that if if gay boy wants to join an LDS troop, a Catholic troop or any other conservative groups troop the CO will be unable to deny him membership with the current wording of the proposal. IMHO I do not see the LDS and many other CO's with an anti gay position remaining in scouting. I think the BSA shot themselves in the foot once again by not giving the CO the option based on their religious principles. If this passes on May 23rd we all may be witnessing the beginning of the demise of boy scouting. Yet another case of National trying to mandate to the CO's an unenforceable policy. Maybe it is time to bring back Woodcraft Rangers, Sons of Daniel Boone, etc.

The change, if it goes through, means the Scout can't be kicked out of Scouting in its entirety solely based on sexual preference.

I think it will be a narrow defeat. BSA has come up with the motion based on one question in the poll that they sent out and assumed it would get a yes vote. I'm in a left-leaning part of the country and here it is 50/50 among adult leaders for a change. In more conservative parts of the country it's overwhelmingly against.

If it passes my FOS contributions cease but I won't walk away from BSA as a volunteer. That occurs if they ever decide that homosexual adults are appropriate leaders to take 16 year old boys into the woods for 10 days.

If the decision was made by National, or at least orchestrated by National, I'd think you will have a tough time with an appeal. Good luck with it.

I agree with Basementdweller; if gay Scouts are allowed to remain in Scouting anything vaguely sexual on a campout will likely result in expulsion. It won't matter if the boys are gay or straight or goofing, BSA will take action to "prove" gays aren't a danger to other boys.

I don't recall the time I realized my sexual orientation but I do remember watching television with my four year old. The most censoring that I did with my son was during the news. I really didn't want him to see explicit "real" violence. One day, they were starting to show something about a bombing or something in Israel and I decided to turn the channel (I didn't have cable at the time). I came upon Entertainment Tonight or some such drivel and they showed some starlet in a bikini. I changed the channel about ten seconds later andall of sudden my son asked me to go back to Entertainment Tonight. His exact words to me were, "I like that but I don't know why."

 

 

Most respected psychologists believe that we are all on a sexual spectrum. No one is 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual. Certain environments will influence our behavior - sexual and other. For example, usually in single sex environments (prisons, castaways, etc.) sexual activity does not cease.

This just will tick off everyone, and will fix nothing. While I agree that youth shouldn't be kicked out, and the majority of us have up to now considered this to be their stance already, so basically this proposal is proposing what they are already doing.. Even with this some SM will deny signing eagle rank to gay youth (they will need to appeal to council & national) or kick gay youth out of their unit based on their units rules..

 

My DE was talking to it yesterday.. He just recently tried to get some jewish churches to sponser a BSA they read him the rite act on their exclusive ways, and as long as we have it they will not support a BSA program.. He also has very little corporate donations for FOS but 2 lists one group that will donate if policy is left alone, the other which will donate if it is changed to be inclusive.. As he says this solution will mean he will get no donations from either group..

 

National may think they are done for a few years, but the in-fighting has escalated over their latest muck-up, and it will not die down because they proclaim this as a solution and tell everyone to cut-it-out.. Sorry, both sides are now up in arms and will not lay down their weapons over this wimp-out solution.

The infighting will only continue if the minority voices like yours keep the fight going.

I tend to side more with the "splitting the baby" line of thought, which worked for Solomon, but usually not for these kinds of issues. If the resolution doesn't pass, they'll be in bigger pudu than they already are. I recall that Wayne Brock said at the All Hands meeting something to the effect that, regardless of the decision made, we'll be revisiting it in a few years. I'm glad that youth members won't have to worry about not getting Eagle, but sad they'll be kicked out at 18 (or 21 in Venturing and Sea Scouts, they are still considered youth). That should be interesting. How will they handle the issue of openly gay Venturers who are youth over 18 on camp staffs, Philmont and other high adventure staffs? Hmmmmmmmmmmm . . . They also can continue to work on awards like Quartermaster.

I also have to agree with others... How can the majority of scouts & scouters under 50 be for inclusion of homosexuals, yet the poll of All scouts & scouters are anti-inclusiveness, if we have THAT many scouters over 50 then the BSA program has more problems then just this!.. We are a youth organization who the majority of members are 50 and over.. I am in this group of old geezers, but in my area don't see my age group as the majority.. And I will also say, we are the last group that our opinion should matter.. We no longer have kids in the program, or are the parents who have the kids in grade school and under who we need to recruit, in fact if all us old geezers walked out tommorrow, scouting would continue just fine without us. The scouting program is #1 for the youth, #2 for the parents who wish scouting to help them teach their kids the values they wish them to learn.. Us old geezers, should have the least impact on this decision.

As far as youth and their opinions go, who do you think has the greatest say in membership decisions, the youth or the parent that pays the dues, drops the kid off and signs the permission slips? There are very few moms out there that would knowingly send their teenage boys into the wilderness for ten days with 2 gay guys as the leaders. That ain't bigotry it's common sense.

Latest rumor, from CNN, The Boy Scouts of America would no longer deny membership to youths on the basis of sexual orientation alone, but would maintain its ban on openly gay adult leaders, under a proposal it is considering, the group said Friday.

The organization's executive committee made the proposal, which is expected to be presented to the Boy Scouts' voting members in May.

"If approved, the resolution would mean that 'no youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.' The BSA will maintain the current membership policy for all adults," Boy Scouts public relations director Deron Smith said.

The 70% in favor of a local option here matches that of the polled number from the councils. With 70 samples here and 294 council samples (364 total), and 1,039,825 adults in the bsa (from wikipedia), the margin of error is just over 5%. This assumes the poll is random. Still, this is a surprising number to me.

 

Maybe the silver lining of the way this has been handled is that it will start the conversation within the boy scouts. That could make 16 weeks waiting a good thing in the long term.

You can do what ever you want in an organization that you set the rules for, Moosetracker. You can't do it in the BSA and I applaud the BSA for their stance.

You and I both joined an organization that we knew barred gay adults from registering as leaders. The difference is you now want to inflict YOUR views on me. YOU are the aggressor in this dispute.

Why should the BSA or GSUSA go through those hoops when the simplest course of action is to say "no" up front? Venturing already has issues trying to get female leaders on trips. Are we now expected to take a head count of the sex and sexuality of every adult and youth so we can plan accordingly? Have two or more adults joined at the hip on every trip?

For you who pooh pooh the notion that adult gays can't corrupt straight boys, I give you Gerry Studds. Note in the deposition from the 17 year old boy he says he is heterosexual and didn't engage in any homosexual behavior before Gerry's caring instruction. Gerry ain't a pedophile he's just a gay guy that abused a position of power.

sweetness-light.com/archive/excerpts-from-the-congressional-report-on-gerry-studds#.UMoRt6xCOSo

Note also that Gerry said sex with an of-age kid was nobody else's business and the Honorable Congressman was cheered by the left for his stand.

>> The girl scouts might not allow 18 and 21 year old boys off with young girls on a camping trip, but I would be surprised if they allowed two 40 year old men off with young girls on a camping trip either. Boy scouts woule not allow that in a venturing crew, neither would they allow two females off camping with a bunch of boys. You have to have one adult of the same gender along, or one adult of each gender in a mix group of boys and girls. Doesn't have anything to do with age.

>>Huzza is absolutely 100% wrong. Disallowing avowed homosexuals to be members of the Boy Scouts of America does not reduce the opportunity for, nor the actual occurance of, inappropriate behavior in any way or at any time.

>> It is commonly documented that most men who molest boys identify as heterosexual, and have relationships/sex with adult women not adult men.

>> Obviously MB are most often written by an person outside of the field, in my honest opinion.

One of our recent Eagles approached a store owner for a weekend job. Owner says "tell me about yourself." Scout responds "My name is xxxx and I'm an Eagle Scout." Store owner asks when he can start.

I've told my son to put his Scouting accomplishments on apps for college and I'll say the same to my daughter re Venturing when the time comes.

The positives of Scouting far outweigh the perceived (by the left) negatives of Scouting by the employers and reruiters I've talked to.

I agree with WasE61. The "shortage" of skills in this country is a myth. In my little sub-section of IT big companies want to pay less in salary and benefits than they did 5 years ago.

I haven't seen an intern or trainee in years because big companies don't want to train anyone in the field when they can get an allegedly fully trained H-1B visa holder for less outlay.

Exactly. These are 16 and 17 year olds that have received the state's recommended training in watercraft plus the camp's additional instruction.

>>Boats, yes! Motorboats, yes! PWCs seem pretty doubtful to me. But I'd like to see the program described in detail --- perhaps I'd be surprised.

My son signed up for the PWC sessions at summer camp and had a blast. Before he was allowed anywhere near one he had to complete the state boater safety course. The camp also worked in the Motorboating MB.

The reviews from all the boys that signed up was "awesome." The PWCs had a novice mode that limited the maximum speed and also prevented overly aggressive acceleration.

The minimum age was 16 so it was a wonderful program for older boys.

Even if the parties involved were to post every piece of documentation that National saw there would probably be a split on this board about whether or not the Scout should have been awarded Eagle. That's just the nature of human interaction, we think differently.

Can we end this all now that we know the outcome? Please, no more bickering.

That's a bit of a stretch, but nice try...

So imperialism is good? We need to teach these damn natives what a good law looks like?

Has WOSM said anything to the heads of Muslim Scout Associations that believe the death penalty is an appropriate remedy for conversion to Christianity?

Sorry, this one gets another ZZZZzzzzZZZZZzzzz

1) Why would the BSA have anything to say about it.

2) I think the Ugandan bill specifies the death penalty for homosexual acts against minors. We'd call that paedophilia, not homosexuality. (Or do you think that they are one and the same?)