MattR

JoeBob, the Formin, Stormin, Formin, comment brought back a memory of WoodBadge. All the people are arrows and they're pointing every which way (formin), and they slowly align till they're pointing the same way (performin). So I asked, what do you do with 15 year olds when rather than arrows you have BBs (that aren't going in any direction)? Never did get an answer.

 

What you're asking is a common question among those trying to turn around a program: "I kind of know what it should look like but how do I get there? What has worked for people before me?" That's not in Woodbadge. Woodbadge is: "I have a good idea, how do I implement it?"

 

For people that come from a unit with a good culture, be it boy-led or a great Pack, Woodbadge is great because you can already learn how a unit should run by looking at your own unit. If you're trying to turn things around then Woodbadge doesn't give you the "vision" that they talk about. Once you get the vision you can use Woodbadge skills to implement it.

 

Based on what you've written, I've been there. So I came here looking for ideas and started asking questions. I tried a lot of ideas, and what I found is while a lot of ideas are really good, they make assumptions that you might not know about. For example, the first time I tried Kudu's 300' thing it failed (boy not led, adult not led, Lord of the Flies!), but now that I have the leadership and teamwork at a minimum level, 300' (separate the patrols) is working well. Regarding training, I tried ILST and my scouts slept through it and had no take home skills to handle the exact problem you mention (younger scouts that don't want to do dishes). So I took the ILST syllabus and compressed it down to 30 minutes without any exercises and then added a few hours of 15 minute exercises. Every exercise requires a team to solve a problem in 5 minutes. Members take turns being the leader for each exercise. There's time up front to let them know what the problem is and for them to plan for it, 5 minutes to do the exercise, and time to reflect on what happened. The idea is to give each scout several chances to lead. One example is make a cake batter and get it into the oven, if it's not in the oven within 5 minutes then I'd toss what they made and nobody would get the cake. About a half hour later was the problem of cleaning up. If they didn't get it done in 5 minutes then I got the cake. Talk about incentive. I found paper airplane projects on line. I had a big domino set and did some stuff with that. I took the communication exercise out of the ILST manual. I had them teach the sheep shank. I asked them to identify and call a scout that's not advancing. If the problem didn't seem too hard to do then I'd coach a scout, before hand, to be a pain in the neck. This is where scouts that don't want to clean come in. It got to the point where the scouts wanted a problem scout. Sometimes the scouts would have so much fun being the pain that I'd let it go and let them enjoy it. They had fun with it. The other thing I noticed is that it was a challenge and they were up for it. When it was your turn to be the leader everyone was watching to see how you did. This is so much better than something like the telephone game. The first time I tried this was a month ago so I'm still playing with it. I just need a lot more ideas.

 

As for SM time management, my first impression is that the committee, the PLC, and the ASMs should take some of the load off of you. Until I got the committee to do its job I didn't have time to do mine, which was work with the boys. I had a bullying type of issue and I talked to the PLC and asked them to handle it while respecting the Scout Law. They did a great job. I also have a PLC ranging in ages of 13 to 17. I also ask all of the scouts to nominate patrol leaders, so that's how we get the hooligans out of those positions. One subtle benefit is that it's not me telling a scout he can't be a PL, it's his peers. They're a lot harsher than I am and quite fair. That also makes me the good guy so when I suggest they work with the new scouts to gain some confidence and let everyone know they're serious, they listen.

 

Maybe this is another topic, but I wonder if Scouter-Terry could put a wiki on this website and get some people to start editing some of the knowledge that's here and make it easier for people like you to get to. That would help Woodbadge as a resource.

 

Sorry for stealing your thread, Packsaddle.

 

It's not so much that the course wasn't good. It was really good at what it did. Great enthusiasm. But it didn't have what I was looking for. I had a Troop-method troop with a couple of scouts doing everything and I wanted a patrol method troop where everyone had a job to do. Culture in a troop is really hard to change and getting from one to the other is a common problem that in hind sight is not so hard, but is really hard to figure out the first time. I guess my point is there's need for something that complements the course. Something you can take before you write your ticket so your ticket items are useful. 4 of my 5 items were a bust. The last was good.

FrugalProf, have you tried volunteering to run it? Maybe the SM just doesn't have the time or isn't quite sure about part of it. If that isn't accepted and nobody likes the SM then maybe it's time for the CC to have a talk with him and see if he can let loose some of the reins.

 

I wouldn't get too hung up on running ILST exactly as it's in the manual, especially if you have a young troop that has little experience with leading. For a 12 year old I wouldn't expect much more than to get the troop to line up and be quiet. That would be a good start.

 

I used to do the standard ILST and it didn't seem to help the scouts at all. I tried some other things but that was only slightly better. For a year or two I just never did anything but after talking to the scouts I came up with a modification of the standard ILST. I added a lot of exercises to the ILST syllabus after asking the scouts what their biggest concerns were. We talked for half an hour and then spent the rest of the time doing exercises. So, less talking and more doing. The exercises were all of the form of a problem that had to be solved in five minutes. Scouts took turns being PL. Sometimes I coached the other scouts to do something that would cause another problem. The scouts had fun. They even wouldn't let me stop a few minutes early. This is the second time I've done this and both times were right around the time of the elections. I like the idea of a lock in. I'd really like to do it on a campout so I'd have more opportunity for more realistic exercises. That was the biggest complaint about the standard course, if one thing they need to do is make a duty roster, then have an exercise about making a duty roster - and throw in a kid that doesn't want to clean dishes

Join my troop! I'd never turn down an offer for help.

 

Sorry to say, but I'd start asking the wise old guys around the district and on the committee on what it might take to replace the SM. That assumes someone is willing to step up. Best of luck

FrugalProf, have you tried volunteering to run it? Maybe the SM just doesn't have the time or isn't quite sure about part of it. If that isn't accepted and nobody likes the SM then maybe it's time for the CC to have a talk with him and see if he can let loose some of the reins.

 

I wouldn't get too hung up on running ILST exactly as it's in the manual, especially if you have a young troop that has little experience with leading. For a 12 year old I wouldn't expect much more than to get the troop to line up and be quiet. That would be a good start.

 

I used to do the standard ILST and it didn't seem to help the scouts at all. I tried some other things but that was only slightly better. For a year or two I just never did anything but after talking to the scouts I came up with a modification of the standard ILST. I added a lot of exercises to the ILST syllabus after asking the scouts what their biggest concerns were. We talked for half an hour and then spent the rest of the time doing exercises. So, less talking and more doing. The exercises were all of the form of a problem that had to be solved in five minutes. Scouts took turns being PL. Sometimes I coached the other scouts to do something that would cause another problem. The scouts had fun. They even wouldn't let me stop a few minutes early. This is the second time I've done this and both times were right around the time of the elections. I like the idea of a lock in. I'd really like to do it on a campout so I'd have more opportunity for more realistic exercises. That was the biggest complaint about the standard course, if one thing they need to do is make a duty roster, then have an exercise about making a duty roster - and throw in a kid that doesn't want to clean dishes

I wonder how many people actually leave. I hope not many. Those that do probably should, and those that stay will make us better.

AZmike, here's one cherry the religious right seems to have missed in this argument. One of the main points in the Torah is human dignity. A kid that's gay, that didn't choose to be gay, that can't be "cured" of being gay, that won't inherently harm anyone because he's gay, has no dignity in the boy scouts because he is shunned for something he has no control of. He is seen as inferior, immoral, and is an outcast. All of this because of something God gave him. I'm no religious scholar, but I know this type of humiliation is Wrong. Furthermore, human dignity can supersede commandments in the Torah. In this case my rabbis have allowed it.

 

You say these kids can go do 4H, or BPSA, or just do something else. You say they're a danger to the other kids and it would be safer if they went elsewhere. I can imagine lining up 10 kids and walking up to one and saying these things to him. That's humiliating.

 

It seems my religious beliefs don't seem to be good enough for you, that I'm "cherry picking" the "real" beliefs. People that complain about others beliefs not being good enough are the gatekeepers to the dark side of religion. I'm just asking you to respect my beliefs.

AZMike, I accept your apology, and I apologize for offending you. Yes, the cherry picking comment was over the line. No, it absolutely has nothing to do with me being Jewish. I'm not trying to argue and win you over. I apologize if I implied that. I'm trying to find common ground. After the vote there will be a lot of angry and smug people, neither of which will help the BSA. Machiavelli will rule.

 

Packsaddle, respect would be a good thing not just for me, but for everyone. If there were mutual respect then 20 years ago people could have sat down and worked out a solution to keep people reasonably happy. That's real respect and I'd be for that. Rather, it's a zero sum game, and an ugly one at that.

AZmike, here's one cherry the religious right seems to have missed in this argument. One of the main points in the Torah is human dignity. A kid that's gay, that didn't choose to be gay, that can't be "cured" of being gay, that won't inherently harm anyone because he's gay, has no dignity in the boy scouts because he is shunned for something he has no control of. He is seen as inferior, immoral, and is an outcast. All of this because of something God gave him. I'm no religious scholar, but I know this type of humiliation is Wrong. Furthermore, human dignity can supersede commandments in the Torah. In this case my rabbis have allowed it.

 

You say these kids can go do 4H, or BPSA, or just do something else. You say they're a danger to the other kids and it would be safer if they went elsewhere. I can imagine lining up 10 kids and walking up to one and saying these things to him. That's humiliating.

 

It seems my religious beliefs don't seem to be good enough for you, that I'm "cherry picking" the "real" beliefs. People that complain about others beliefs not being good enough are the gatekeepers to the dark side of religion. I'm just asking you to respect my beliefs.

AZMike, when do you have time to write so much? Anyway, we have until Thursday, so let's get back to it.

 

I'll pass on the natural law theory, but thanks for the offer.

 

Using Wikipedia is not what I did, but it is a great source just because it shows how much conflict there is in a topic. The bible has been interpreted and caused arguments for a very long time. The Mishnah and Midrash are explanations and commentary on the Torah. They were written from roughly 140 to 1750 AD. If you've ever heard the joke about 2 rabbis and 3 opinions in the same room, this is where it came from. The point is the Torah is surprisingly deep and people keep finding interesting ideas in it. They adapt to what we learn from nature. One such interpretation about homosexuality went something along the lines of: "2500 years ago, male sex was about power or simple gratification. Sex is about love, not power or gratification, so male sex was obviously wrong. Nobody ever thought two men could love each other, so now it isn't so black and white." I'm sure you don't agree, but this is from well educated rabbis.

 

Yep, the phrase "behavior is wrong if it is a choice" was a bad choice of words.It was late. I'll try again. First of all, we're talking about two different things when we talk about being gay. First is the fact that some guy says he's attracted to other guys sexually. The second is when he acts on that. I certainly do not want any scouts acting on any sexual urges, irregardless of gender or direction. So, the scout that did some sexual act with the younger boy was wrong. A 20 year old male venture scout that sexually does anything with a 14 year old girl is just as wrong. Given DADT and venture scouts, both scenarios are possible. An important question is how often does it happen? There are numerous gay Eagle scouts and it appears they didn't create problems. Just as there are many girl venture scouts without any problem. Do European scouts have an issue with boys being molested by other boys? I would think if there were then we'd be reading about it, given the upcoming vote.

 

You mention in several places that boys and girls have all sorts of problems if they have sex too early. I don't doubt it. I agree it shouldn't happen, it agrees with my stance that sexual acts should be kept out of scouting.

 

Another question is, would a scout be immoral if he's attracted to guys? If he doesn't act on it, it doesn't bother me. Acting is a choice. Being attracted to guys is not a choice. You asked if it's OK for some guy to hit on my wife because he can't control his urges. First of all, I'd sit back and enjoy watching my wife clock the guy, but to the point, he had the choice to open his mouth and say something stupid to my wife. So, no, it's not OK. Speaking is a choice, being attracted to the same sex is not a choice.

 

From what you've written, is it fair to say you feel that a scout that is attracted to guys is likely to not be able to control his urges, and that's why you don't want to make it easier for a gay scout to be in scouting? If that's the case, I think I understand where you're coming from. I don't necessarily agree with it, but maybe we at least understand each other.

 

For me, it keeps getting back to creating trust with a scout that has problems. I see lots of kids with lots of problems they have no choice over. Single parents, dead parents, bipolar, ADHD, you name it. You say that one bad act can completely mess up a kid, and I don't doubt it, but it's surprising how a few good acts can greatly help a kid. I'm just trying to create more opportunity to have good acts. If I keep a troubled kid in my troop and he does a bad act, I messed up. But if I keep a less troubled kid in my troop, and good things happen to him, then I've done a good thing for him and the other scouts. So I do want some kids in my troop that are a bit troubled. Not too much, but it wouldn't be worth anything to have a bunch of perfectly good kids.

AZMike, we're probably not going to get anywhere with this discussion, but it's interesting and I'm having fun arguing with you.

 

I'd never heard of Natural Law before, so I looked it up. In a nutshell, it seems vague at best. I have to agree with ThomasJefferson, the only natural law when it comes to human behavior is best described by Machiavelli. Morality is what keeps us above that muck.

 

Sexual slavery and debt was real, it was not just POWs that were slaves. Look at wikipedia under the bible and slavery to find a real great quote about selling your daughter as a slave. Comparing criminal incarceration with sexual slavery is not a reasonable comparison. The comment about keeping kosher was really just to point out that many religious leaders, over thousands of years, have been interpreting the rules and stories in the bible.

 

To answer some of your questions: The behavior is wrong if it's a choice. Just like being stupid is wrong if it's a choice. But what about a scout with Downs? It's not a choice for such a kid. Let me ask you this, do you think gays choose to have same sex attraction? Do you think a gay kid can encourage a straight kid to become gay? If so, then that's where our differences are and there's nothing left to say.

 

I can understand that some parents will be uncomfortable with gay kids in other troops. Unfortunately the same thing was said of blacks until 1975 when summer camps were finally desegregated in the South. Do you think a gay kid is likely to abuse another kid more than, say, kids with Aspergers, or PTSD (both of which I have in my troop)? Sure, different kids need to be watched differently, but there seems to be no evidence that gay kids are going to be any more dangerous to other kids than kids with other challenges that we already have in our troops. Is it that you don't want gay pride meetings in your troop? Trust me, nobody else wants that either.

 

"Every kid may come from God, but so do all bullies, racists, alcoholics, and drug addicts. We are allowed to discourage that kind of behavior as well." In all of these instances the kid chooses to do these things. It keeps getting back to choice. Character and morality come from the choices one makes. For a kid that can't make that choice, and isn't harming anyone else, I don't see a problem.

AZMike, I agree with some of what you say and disagree with some. First, there is not a consistent set of moral rules. Different religions believe different things about a few things, homosexuality in particular. I agree that "doing what he or she feels is subjectively right" is a bad idea. But my religious beliefs are different from yours. You might say that I'm not true to the bible, but I'm fairly certain you aren't either. Do you keep kosher? 2500 years ago slavery was fine. It was actually considered a good way to help slaves pay off debts. Nobody believes in that anymore, although it is in the bible. Over 2500 years society has evolved. So it's not that people are doing whatever is convenient, it's that slowly, over decades at the shortest, our definition of moral is changing.

 

Regarding your point that gay kids present a problem, you may be right. Most kids have problems because they haven't accepted who they are. Accepting that you're gay when your friends are everything has got to be hard on anyone. But is a gay kid any different than a kid that has Aspergers? I've had a few in my troop and one of them would fly off the handle and attack other kids because he couldn't read their signals. Another kid was fine, once you figured out how to talk to him. I know you don't want us to ban all kids with Aspergers. But you're right, it is a risk having a different kid around. I take a risk every time I go on a campout with the children of other parents. Climbing on rocks, throwing snowballs, starting the whole forest on fire, flying canoes from wind, tornadoes, I've been through plenty. Being prepared is important in mitigating that risk. I appreciate that you wouldn't want a gay kid in your troop. I'm willing to take that risk. I might completely screw up. But if I know that a kid is gay it's going to be a lot easier for me to deal with the risk. I'm willing to take that risk not because I think we should have gay appreciation meetings or any such crap, but because every kid comes from God, and that's why the phrase "love the stranger" is also in the bible.

Ou CO Executive Officer has already written our Council Scout Executive stating our CO may not renew their charter next year if the membership policy changes. It would require a vote of the CO membership to do this, but it is a very real possiblity. I'm carrying on as business-as-usual with the Pack as if nothing is happening. If the policy changes, my personal future in Scouting is uncertain.

 

I am in a conservative District with conservative CO's and I do believe that the CO's will practice local membership automomny

 

Scouts Canada may have better looking uniforms, but that's all they have. They have suffered massive losses in membership since they changed their membership policy years ago. The BSA does not need to be looking to them for enlightenment. A quick google search for Scouts Canada and you will find the stories and numbers.

 

http://www.scoutscan.com/issues/membershipstats.html

It's pretty easy to copy and paste tables into spread sheets and graph them. Canada changed their policy in 98. The drop in beavers and cubs (ages 5-10) from 1990 to 1998 was nearly a quarter of their membership (~20k, or 2.5k/year). From 98 to 05 they lost another 30k, or 4.3k/year. After 2005 it leveled off. All told, the younger scouts lost 3/4 of their membership from 1990 to 2005. Their venture scouts (ages 14-17) hasn't changed much from 90 to 12 (6800-6100). The age between the younger scouts and the older scouts was between those two extremes. While policy on gays may have had something to do with this, there's something else that's a lot bigger going on.

 

I found a similar chart for the bsa from 99 to 12. cub scouts has dropped from 2.2M to 1.5M (roughly 1/4 in 13 years. scouts has dropped from 1M to 900k (10%) and ventures went up from 202k to 220k. It's peak was at 293k in 02.

 

What all this says to me is the younger scout programs need help. Having been a den leader, I have to agree. I was clueless. I think these trends have more to do with parents being willing to volunteer more than anything else. Boy scouts have us old codgers around to hold things together while waiting for some enthusiastic blood. Cub scouts don't.

My plan is to keep working on the Patrol Method in my troop. We've made a lot of really great progress in the past year.

 

Irrespective of all the bloviating going on by adults far far away, my scouts are a bunch of great kids and are the reason I keep going. The people that say the country is going to hell don't know the scouts in my troop, or probably any other troop. Most of the scouts would be fine with gay scouts and some would be real uncomfortable. Either way, they know the right thing to do, they can be tougher critics than the adults, they can figure out how to get along with each other better than the adults, and they are our future. If sexuality were one of the methods of scouting I'd quit if this vote didn't go my way. But it has nothing to do with how my troop operates.

 

The only thing this whole issue has anything to do with is future membership. The BSA should reflect the USA. It's probably close right now. Part of the population is OK with gays, part is not. Whether they are good people has nothing to do with their views on homosexuality. If all those that are OK with gays leave the BSA then it will no longer reflect the country and a century old institution will go down the drain within a generation. That would be a shame.

 

There is no comparable organization to the BSA. I looked at the BPSA and my troop is roughly the size of their entire membership. I don't care what anyone says, religious youth groups are run by religious leaders and they don't have nearly as much fun as we do. That's not to say the BSA doesn't have challenges. They just don't have anything to do with the 3 G's.

So the question: would you be offended if an overtly Muslim' date=' Hindu, Zoroastrian, or other non-Christian prayer was used to open a district or council event (unit events are a different issue)? If yes, why? And if yes, are you also offended by overtly Christian prayers (and if no to that, why not)? Does your local district or council have a rule against non-Christian prayers at district or council events?[/quote']

 

It's kind of like deciding whether a scout did the work for a POR, or whether a person is moral in the eyes of his religious beliefs, or whether a man is truly sorry for a mistake he made. What are they really thinking? We talk about servant leadership as caring for the people in our group. Did the person leading the overtly Christian prayer consider the non-Christians in the room? When people berate me for not taking off my hat during their prayer I assume either ignorance of my religious beliefs or complete disregard for them. So, to answer your question, somewhere between annoyance and offended. Either way I don't feel like praying with them. The guy that told the Muslim to keep quiet so he wouldn't offend anyone was beyond belief. To paraphrase the Dalai Lama: "I like your Scout Oath and Scout Law, I just don't like your Scouters. They are so unlike each other."

 

Packsaddle, religious expression occurs as "part of a herd" because a big part of religion is developing a community. If it's done with the right intent and the right spirit, it's a very good thing. I go to services and it's a calming thing that brings us together. We sing prayers, we think about our relationship with God, we drink wine, we break bread together (literally), we commune. It makes us better as individuals and closer as a group. I'm also fairly sure Mormons would not approve of the wine. That's why I wouldn't suggest at a roundtable to say a prayer over wine. It's simply a matter of understanding who you're with and caring enough about them to do the right thing. Since that's a big part of what we're trying to teach the scouts, maybe we should do it ourselves.

Krampus, there's nothing that says gays can't be in scouting now, they just can't admit it. So they're already sleeping in close quarters. What does "not avowed" really mean anyway? So a kid knows he's gay, is part of the local gay organization, but denies he's gay. He's not avowed. What an ugly mess.

 

I talked to my DE and it looks like council's South of the Mason Dixon line and East of Texas (including Texas) are voting against, North and East of the Mississippi are voting for (not sure about Florida). The West coast is for. The center of the country is following the red/blue map.

Thanks for posting that link to the whole survey results, AZMike. I never knew it existed.

 

I read the whole thing and what a mish mash of numbers. Predicting what will happen based on these numbers is like predicting the Final Four. It's a Rorschach test, you can find anything you want in there. What struck me was that the parents and the scouts are fine with some sort of change and the scouters are not. Something about knowing your customers applies here. Maybe I picked up on that because I'm the one in my troop always defending the notion that the scouts do know the right thing to do and the adults need to back off and let them lead. The other surprise is that it's as close as it is. Before this whole thing came up I figured maybe 20% of members wanted a change.

 

I'm not so sure this thing is going to pass but I also know the genie is out of the bottle. If I predict anything it's that national will lose control of the situation. If it passes, those that don't like gay scouts will drive them out. If it fails, those that don't mind gays will be more vocal about it and turn a blind eye to the rules.

I can see both sides of this, but I think my kids, 10 year old girl and 11 year old boy, would choose single-sex at this point if offered the choice. My son had noticed that the girls tend to organize themselves to their own advantage when it comes to classroom voting, voting as a large block to thwart the unorganized plans of pairs of boys. And, my daughter is already picking out potential boyfriends according to how much they agree with her.

 

 

Have you ever noticed how little boys beat on things and little girls beat on emotions. Children beat on things to understand them. Boys are wired to understand things, girls are wired to understand people. Not always, but generally. We had an exchange student from Denmark stay with us and she was a scout. She, said, confirming what someone else said, that most scouts are boys. The bigger difference seems to be that in Europe parents aren't involved, it's mostly 20 somethings. She was very jealous of our calendar, though.

@MattR: I believe Islam also is very much against homosexual acts. Most mainstream religions do.

Yep, that's why I didn't put Islam in the list of religions that don't have a solid stand on the issue. By "most mainstream religions" I assume you mean Christians and Muslims, as they're the only two that take a consistent stand on homosexuality. Those two religions are, by membership, the largest.

Just a curiosity type question...let's say Tommy comes out at 15. He stays in and earns his Eagle Scout with palms. He's a respected leader in his troop and has been through NYLT. He's served on camp staff and is a member of the Order of the Arrow. He also maintains a membership in the camp staff venturing crew. He hits the magic 18 in Boy Scouts and is out, but maintains his membership in Venturing. Now he's 21 and has to kiss the whole thing good-bye. Just a question, BSA...you will not accept this man as a leader; will you solicit and accept his contributions through Friends of Scouting? If he hits the lotto, will his money be good enough for you when he isn't? Just being curious here.

That concern, while a great example of a confused bureaucracy, is probably less of a real problem. How many parents in your troop help out but aren't registered adults? So tell the scout not to register but ask him to help out. It won't work for the guy that wants to be SM or a camp director, but will work for everyone else. As packsaddle said, it will work itself out. It's not great, but I'd rather deal with that problem than splitting my troop in half, or splitting camporees, or ....

 

It's like the people that tell us scouts can't climb on rocks over shoulder height. That probably works fine in the Texas pan handle, but not where I live.

So Matt,

 

How is letting only gay youth to be members of the BSA standing up for what they believe in???????

 

 

Standing up for what they believe in is either an all or nothing proposition. Which ever direction you believe that lies????? Not this only gay youth......

 

I read the opinion on the link above....My summary of it is......Gay adults will be welcome but we need to wait till those over 50 die off or stop being involved in scouitng.

My point is that organizations sometimes need to figure out what they do well and what they should stay away from. What the BSA does well has little to do with gays and is more about creating troops and packs with a good program. By taking a stand on gay rights the BSA has become a focal point of the culture war. They've been that way for a long time, it has done them no good, and going all in or all out won't change that. They recognize that society is mixed on this and taking a position that reflects the middle ground is a position that reflects society. I can certainly see how you would not be happy with that stance. But to paraphrase what you said, as society changes and the scout membership reflects that change, the BSA will change its policy. I also understand your desire to just make the change and get it over with, but society really isn't there yet. It's split fairly evenly. i.e., let someone else fight that battle, punting is OK.

 

The core competencies of the BSA include things like developing leadership in teenagers, and doing community service. Nobody can come close to what we do right, so let's make that the focus of what people think when they see the Boy Scouts.

I must admit, I like the idea that there won't be two different types of troops. On May 25th I'll just be able to say this is the way it's going to be, take it or leave. I don't need to worry about splitting the troop, or split camporees, or split summer camp. There's some wisdom in that. If the program is good then scouts will stay.

 

Maybe the strategy isn't to appease the far left or far right, because they will still scream and oxygenate their blood no matter what the BSA does. They also have no qualms about destroying the BSA to make a point. Maybe the strategy is to appease the center and focus on the young parents that control the future. The survey said parents are overwhelmingly OK with gay scouts but they are split over gay leaders. That's what drove the resolution. That's where society is. All of those with strong opinions on this will disagree with society and not be happy with the resolution.

 

Just maybe the BSA is standing up for what they believe in, which is scouting. High adventure, service projects, self sufficiency, leadership. I could really go for that.

 

My take on this is that it started with the top 70 when they said they wanted a change. They did an informal poll of the councils and came up with the 2/3 want to change it number. They start talking about the change in Feb and the blow back is big, so they figure they'll do a real survey and things will go their way. As the results indicate, it's really a mixed bag. The future implies change is needed but the current membership is on the fence. A little risk analysis - they don't want to walk away with nothing - suggests change the scout policy now and the adult policy can wait.

 

It's interesting how they wrote the results page. In the summary of results, the first four items are "people's views are changing or have changed." The fifth and seventh item is that gay scouts would be tolerated now. The sixth item is all by itself stating that a local option is not favored by a majority. I'm not sure that the result details are really covered by the result survey. The result summary I would think would be closer to the details are that the future suggests change (young parents, kids, cubscouts donations) but that the old folks like it as it is. i.e., changing it all at once is too much.

Ok' date=' I'll go for the low-hanging fruit: the very policy we have been debating has been pro-Christian. The exclusion of avowed homosexuals from the program certainly was created (and specifically affirmed just last summer) to align with the teachings of many larger Christian denominations.[/quote']

 

I asked for a BSA policy that was SOLELY Christian. You telling me Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Buddists all embrace homosexuality and Christians are the only Visigoths? Please.

Only Orthodox Jews prohibit only homosexual acts. No Jews would likely prevent a gay scout or leader from being in a unit (Orthodox and conservative Jews would not be happy with married, gay parents). Reform, reconstructionist, and conservative Jews will ordain gay rabbis.

 

Buddhism is just as all over the map as Judaism. Hinduism is similar. In both cases homosexuality isn't mentioned very much so it seems like it's up to the individual.

I'm posting this here because someone erased my joke, the other threads seem to be messed up, and this one has plenty of room.

 

The reality of what I do as a Scoutmaster sort of hit me last weekend at a campout. It really got me thinking. I know I won't change anyone's opinion, but here's mine.

 

The biggest problem I have is with scouts that don't have a stable family. I have scouts whose fathers have died, a scout whose father held him and his mom at gun point, a scout raised by his grandmother because his parents are in jail, a scout suffering PTSD because of things his biological mother did around him, scouts with split families that fight in front of their kids. And to think that I live in a nice town, too - I can imagine my problems aren't that bad. These are the kids that need scouts, but I don't have the time to help them. I try my best, but sometimes I wonder if I'm helping that much. These kids need constant attention, a mix of tough love and someone that will just listen. I don't have that much time. At this point, I wouldn't turn down help from a gay parent, and neither would any of these kids.

 

The adults that help the most in my troop are religious. Religion is neither necessary nor sufficient, but these people help more often than not. I thought about it and it seems that character is like any skill, you have to practice to get good at it. Not only that, but you also need an instructor that knows what he's talking about. Anything that has a long history of practice and principles is ok by me. I have no idea how the Boy Scouts word it, but we all know a duck when we see one.

 

Many people say the wisdom from the bible is absolute and doesn't change. I beg to differ. Anyone that believes in one God and has no problem eating a bacon cheese burger, especially for the eight days starting with the first full moon after the Northern vernal equinox, can thank someone's interpretation of dietary laws explicitly written in Leviticus, to get them off the hook. There's a long history of such interpretations. After the 24 books of the Tanakh (Bible) were canonized sometime between 200 BCE and 200 CE, the Mishnah was completed in 220 CE. This was the first collection of rabbinic work interpreting the Bible. After the Mishnah was completed the Gemara was completed around 500 CE. This is a set of interpretations of the Mishnah. That's just the beginning of what is still going on to this day. Within Jewish law the death penalty hasn't been practiced in over 2000 years. Slavery ended in the 18th century. Attitudes towards the deaf changed in the 19th century. Attitudes about gays started changing in the 70's.

 

Finally, for all those that say they'll leave if the vote in May doesn't go their way, I'm wondering if that's not throwing out the baby with the bath water. Think about the kids without the fathers, with the parents in jail, with moms that are heroin addicts. Will you still be around these kids to show them good character? No matter what your view point, you have to live out in the muck if you're going to help those kids that need it most. If you leave where will you go to keep helping out? Will you start a new troop in some fledgling organization? The answer to both groups is the same, the BSA is the best there is. Sometimes you remind yourself that a scout is cheerful, and you keep going. I hope some day a scout thanks you.

I'm sure it was the ghost, there was nothing obnoxious about the joke. No offense was taken. At this point, we need a place to talk so I'll be thrifty and leave things alone.

I'm posting this here because someone erased my joke, the other threads seem to be messed up, and this one has plenty of room.

 

The reality of what I do as a Scoutmaster sort of hit me last weekend at a campout. It really got me thinking. I know I won't change anyone's opinion, but here's mine.

 

The biggest problem I have is with scouts that don't have a stable family. I have scouts whose fathers have died, a scout whose father held him and his mom at gun point, a scout raised by his grandmother because his parents are in jail, a scout suffering PTSD because of things his biological mother did around him, scouts with split families that fight in front of their kids. And to think that I live in a nice town, too - I can imagine my problems aren't that bad. These are the kids that need scouts, but I don't have the time to help them. I try my best, but sometimes I wonder if I'm helping that much. These kids need constant attention, a mix of tough love and someone that will just listen. I don't have that much time. At this point, I wouldn't turn down help from a gay parent, and neither would any of these kids.

 

The adults that help the most in my troop are religious. Religion is neither necessary nor sufficient, but these people help more often than not. I thought about it and it seems that character is like any skill, you have to practice to get good at it. Not only that, but you also need an instructor that knows what he's talking about. Anything that has a long history of practice and principles is ok by me. I have no idea how the Boy Scouts word it, but we all know a duck when we see one.

 

Many people say the wisdom from the bible is absolute and doesn't change. I beg to differ. Anyone that believes in one God and has no problem eating a bacon cheese burger, especially for the eight days starting with the first full moon after the Northern vernal equinox, can thank someone's interpretation of dietary laws explicitly written in Leviticus, to get them off the hook. There's a long history of such interpretations. After the 24 books of the Tanakh (Bible) were canonized sometime between 200 BCE and 200 CE, the Mishnah was completed in 220 CE. This was the first collection of rabbinic work interpreting the Bible. After the Mishnah was completed the Gemara was completed around 500 CE. This is a set of interpretations of the Mishnah. That's just the beginning of what is still going on to this day. Within Jewish law the death penalty hasn't been practiced in over 2000 years. Slavery ended in the 18th century. Attitudes towards the deaf changed in the 19th century. Attitudes about gays started changing in the 70's.

 

Finally, for all those that say they'll leave if the vote in May doesn't go their way, I'm wondering if that's not throwing out the baby with the bath water. Think about the kids without the fathers, with the parents in jail, with moms that are heroin addicts. Will you still be around these kids to show them good character? No matter what your view point, you have to live out in the muck if you're going to help those kids that need it most. If you leave where will you go to keep helping out? Will you start a new troop in some fledgling organization? The answer to both groups is the same, the BSA is the best there is. Sometimes you remind yourself that a scout is cheerful, and you keep going. I hope some day a scout thanks you.

 

I think Az is looking to join the american Heritage boys. WASPhood at it's finest.

 

 

I am good with local option.....But I am also concerned how the Anti gay units will treat the units tagged as welcoming gays.

How does the comment "wasphood at its finest" help the discussion? It comes across sounding like a personal dig or someone making fun of gays or any other minority. I doubt if that was your intent.