BadenP

Bklyn So you understand my viewpoint, I am a former Catholic and Catholic youth minister, then I went to grad school at Notre Dame and Harvard Theology School and received my masters and doctorate degrees in Theology and Ministry. I am now an ordained minister and an associate pastor for a fairly large Christian denomination. I am very familiar with the inner workings of the RC Church and the internal scandals on both the Archdiocesan and Vatican levels from personal experiences which I can not discuss in this forum. I have studied the history of Christianity in great detail and am well informed as to the injustices committed by the RC Church over the centuries, as well as their many doctrines which directly conflict with Scriptures and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Since the average lay Catholic in the pew has not been involved with these scandals as I have directly I can not expect you to understand my passion in wanting to see RC hierarchy held more directly accountable for the suffering they have caused others, especially in recent times. But in no way am I anti religion, quite the opposite in fact. For the record Benedict has ended all dialogue with the Jewish religious leaders after they objected to the wording in the new Roman Missal stating that "the Jewish people were responsible for putting Jesus to death", which now will be part of the Eucharistic prayer at each mass. Does that sound like reconciliation to you? It is my hope for you that you have a happy and blessed New Year as well.

NJ Once again I will try to explain to you my position, the RC, LDS and Fundamentalist Christian Churches view homosexuality as an abomination against God, period. If the BSA allowed openly homosexual leaders or scouts into the program with a local option these same churches would still have leave the BSA because even though their units would be able to stay "gay free" the BSA would then be considered to be morally corrupt in allowing something that violates their own core religious beliefs. Why is that so hard for you to understand? With the present organization of the BSA today if all those groups pulled out and started their own group, ie:Royal Rangers, because of the "local option" it is doubtful the BSA could survive. The only way this local option could work would be if all religious groups were made ineligible to become chartering organizations, which we know will never happen. It makes no difference how tolerant public opinion of homosexuality becomes when those in power of most of our religious organizations are so vehemently oppossed to it and they sponsor most of the BSA units. I really think you and Eamonn are looking at this hotly contested issue through "rose colored glasses".

Eagle it is fairly obvious you know NOTHING about Vatican II, you are probably one of the fairly small minority of old fashioned and BIGOTED Catholics living in the glory of the Church of the pre 1950's however Benedict is old and won't last very much longer and when he is gone the post Vatican II church will return and people like you will leave once again. The intolerance towards any ecumenical dialogue or events by this pope will be the undoing of the RC Church and even more will be driven away until it becomes a small cult of corrupt clergy and ignorant naive laity who truly think they have an exclusive to heaven. That kind of bigotry not seen since the Inquistion will be Benedicts eventual undoing. Avignon, which apparently you never studied, was when the then duly elected French pope who feared for his life by the corrupt Italian cardinals threats against his life set up Avignon as a refuge of peace to run the RC Church outside the internal corruption Of the Vatican Italian cardinals. Brooklyn you ought to learn more about a topic before you totally misinterpret and twist it around to fit your ludicrous argument. You truly understand little about the history of your own religion and show your own intolerance and prejudice in your argument. The rest of your speech about gangs, etc is even more dribble than your understanding of your faith, lol.

Hilo I would love to see the new BSA without the religious strangle hold, if it ever happens. John in KC really overly exaggerates when he states the "the DRP is a major tenet for membership in the BSA." It is contained in the application but in reality those units not sponsored by churches, and some that are, it is basically given lip service more than anything else. I think the DRP will be dropped by the BSA long before they allow homosexuals into the organization, but only time will tell. A lot will depend on how much membership decreases or increases over the next decade. Until that decision is made by the National office all discussion is merely speculation and guesswork.

Hilo you are very wrong about the Catholic Church's viewpoint. The new pope is ultra conservative and wants to return the RC church to its elitist and prejudicial pre Vatican 2 status. The pill is not accepted by the clergy and if a girl admits to using any form of birth control they can be excommunicated. So its more of a don't ask don't tell situation, but the Church states very clearly that if birth control is used that person is banned from taking communion under the threat of "eternal damnation". I also disagree with Eamonn that the RC church will change its views on homosexuality anytime soon. As far as the BSA is concerned if the LDS and RC's and Fundamentalists pull out only a shell of an organization would be left. The reality is the BSA must make a choice as the local option would never wash, sorry Eamonn you are very wrong, because the churches would not stand for it and leave anyway. That is why I personally hate seeing the churches with such power over the BSA, but that is the reality of the situation. I would love to see the BSA have the guts to make a stand on their own without fear of reprisals from various religious groups, but I doubt that will ever happen given the state of things.

Ok NJ simply put so even you will understand, the BSA can not have its cake and eat it too, they have to be consistent across the board either homsexuality is against the principles of the scouts or it isn't. What kind of message does it send to have both hetero and homo sexual only units within the same organization. It either is allowable nationally or not allowed nationally, otherwise the BSA would be nothing more than hypocrites. With the majority of scouting units sponsored today by churchs or church groups I think it is a pretty safe prediction that if the BSA allowed homosexuals there would be a mass exodus by those units, it just makes common sense. Clear enough for you now NJ?

While the idea of a unit option makes some sense the LDS, Catholics and Fundamentalists would not stand for it and pull their units and that would be the end of the BSA as we know it. National can't afford to lose any more numbers, especially the LDS, so you aren't going to see it in our lifetimes unless Mazzuca wants to commit political suicide.

Come on Ed she is nothing more than a troll looking for attention, thats why she is doing the same thing on another site, she is a attention junkie, thats all she is.

vol scouter While you seem to possess a good scientific background, I think what all this comes down to is that even the scientists don't know the answer. An Hypothesis is nothing more than an educated guess which until it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt by empirical evidence remains nothing more than just a guess. Scientists are not gods, are not infallible, and are wrong more often than not. Who knows maybe the ancient Mayans got it right and in 2012 the world as we know it will end.

baschram That may be what your council wants but it is not what the BSA says or requires so you be the judge as to who is right.

I think by now most of you have realized that mdsummer45 has been pulling all your legs with this preposterous fable and has offered no concrete facts to support this fairy tale, so have fun trying to second guess each other. What a waste of time.

John Immaturity is not so much an issue of age or rank but of attitude. Many older scouts are just as immature as many younger ones. That is why the SM is the best judge as to who would best fit the needs of the pack, as well as the desire and willingness of the candidate. Oak, I don't know what you are quoting from but it is obviously a suggestion not a requirement. There is NO official rank requirement for a den chief. Ideally an older scout is the ideal, the reality is that most older scouts are not really interested in being a DC.

dg is correct and the den chief is open to all ranks. Older scouts really do not like den chief since being around little kids is "beneath them", in my experience the younger scouts usually worked harder and did the best job as DC. Heck when I was a boy scout, way back when, my scoutmaster selected me as a den chief as a tenderfoot right after I had joined the troop.

What do you think a potential SE candidate is going to say in an interview about living the oath and law? How naive are you guys that you believe this is anything that an executive selection committee would even be concerned about except in a very superficial way. If you don't pick the best qualified most experienced candidate the oath and law will be of little value when you find your council camp being sold or your council being merged due to severe financial problems. Wake up and smell the coffee, and get your priorities straight otherwise your council will pay the ultimate price.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

SR540 Usually a man who has chosen the BSA professional scouting program as his career path has and does know and follow the scout oath and law as well as any volunteer, usually he was a scout as a youth and many were volunteer scouters as well. Granted there are those pros who leave a lot to be desired, but that is true in every profession. Someone who wants to be a scouting pro does so in the belief they can contribute something of value to help make scouting even better. My point was that if you want your council to be a thriving one the man at the helm better have sharp business, finance and people skills or you will find yourselves in a whole lot of hot water, I know this from first hand experience. So your criticism is not valid and your point moot.

Ken As admirable as that sounds its like looking at the world through rose colored glasses and is not very realisitic, not to mention those traits would not necessarily make him a good or successful SE.

When Shakespere wrote "kill all the lawyers", he was really on to something a updated version would read, kill all the lawyers, politicians, and CEO's of all financial institutions and energy companies. Maybe then we could get something accomplished in this country with issues like global warming and the economy.

My wish for my crew and all other scout units is that National will get their heads out of the cloud fantasy world they have created for themselves and for Mazzuca and his staff to restore the BSA to its former strength and the solid program it once had. Eliminating some of these new "road to nowhere programs", and getting out into the field to see what support our units on the ground and their leaders REALLY NEED. Instead of trying to develop weak and poorly thought out programs aimed at one specific ethnic or target group to take the core of what true scouting is and making it even more appealing to all youth regardless of their ethnicity, by concentrating on the fun, the outings, outdoor skills, and the growth and leadership experiences that are the true essence and strength of the scouting program.

I can see all the little boy scout leaders in formal wear with a whole load of hardware on their chest, what a ridiculous sight and notion you guys need to grow up. What an insult to our military who really earned their medals through blood, personal sacrifice, or loss of a limb, you all ought to be ashamed.

Dead rats and birds your pet cat kills and brings home, lol

Interesting they chose to portray a female venturer under Boy Scouts of America, makes you kinda wonder about the future don't it. Nice coin though.

Unfortunately WAKWIB with all the worthwhile competiting charities out there in need that are providing help to people in desperate need just to be able to survive the BSA is towards the bottom of the list, if its even on the list at all. Why, because the BSA does not in any stretch of the imagination provide any essential services to help those who are down and out, second the BSA has had poor to no publicity for the past 20+ years, thirdly like the YMCA, Girl Scouts, Little League, etc, our society would be able to get along just fine if the BSA no longer exsisted. The days of the corporate dole out because an executive was a former scout are all but over as many of the new and upcoming corporate moguls were never scouts. The BSA needs to learn to be more self sufficent if it intends to survive, and it needs to prove to the rest of the world that the organization is much more than just a group of boys marching around in uniforms camping in the woods. That is a much taller order than most SE's or even National could ever fill.

WAKWIB All corporate and foundation giving is way down for the last two years in case you haven't heard we are in a full scale recession.

SR540 I never said anything different, Terry should make up the rules and the moderators enforce them equally. As far has heavy handed, in a couple of cases it did occur due to the fact IMHO that the moderators are free to use their own interpretation of what is inappropriate because there are no written rules for them to follow.

Issue 1- when is it necessary and how censorship is applied is open to a myriad of interpretations by the different moderators not on a standard set of rules set down in print and applied equally to everyone including the moderators. Many of you remember a while back certain members were indeed censored or threatened and the result was for the next six months the active users went from over 1500 like it is now to 300 the discussions became mundane to say the least,and the issues and politics threads were virtually non exsistant. The website Stosh is talking about currently only has 5 active contributors and the site is all but dead because these 5 go on the attack if anyone new comes in and disagrees with them. Is that the kind of site you want this one to become? Issue2- Personalities will always conflict on just about any topic or issue, it is basic human nature and if a person wants to present their viewpoint as "the only correct Viewpoint" they better be prepared to expect some flack from the other posters, and at the same time not take it so personally since few if any here knows anyone outside of this forum. For the most part we are all adults here and treat each other as such, when this on occassion does not happen the moderators can and should first pm the offender and offer some sage advice, next he can edit the posts, and failing all else censor, however a few moderators do have a hair trigger and leap before looking and analysing the situation so there again needs to be a standard set of procedures applied in the exact same manner by all moderators. Look IMHO this is one of the best scouting forums there is and it can continue to be so, or you can over regulate it to the point that people get fed up or bored by having to always watch their p's and q's and go elsewhere. It is very easy for any forum to diminish into a private social club of a handful of individuals and I would hate to see this forum turn into that. It is hard to keep that delicate balance between in depth discussion and complete anarchy but it can be done and has been done here pretty well as of late. Certainly some here are much more sensitive than others when a point they bring up is challenged, sometimes vigorously by others, but we all have to learn that is the nature of the FORUM beast and not take it so personally.