shortridge

Pere, Ok, thanks! SP, That's the biggest load of hooey I've heard here yet. "The left continues to wage cultural political struggle against BSA and Scouting. Just as an example, local United Way campaigns often exclude Scouting from funding for political reasons." So the Right cannot possibly wage cultural political war against GSUSA and Scouting? I can't comprehend how in your world the people who complained about Planned Parenthood are just fighting for their values, while equality supporters are waging war. Please do not wrap your discriminatory values in the banner of Scouting. That is not my interpretation of the Oath and Law.

That was supposed to say "if so inclined," not "inclones."

Pere, What rights are the bishops defending? They're expressing their opinions. That's not defending a right. They certainly have the right to say that good Catholics should not be Girl Scouts, if that's what they end up concluding. But under the Dale case won by the Boy Scouts, the Girl Scouts have the right of free association. They can partner with the Church of Satan if so inclones, and tell the bishops to take a hike without any bugspray. SP, Still waiting to learn how the Gay Left is using the gummint to force the BSA to do anything.

Not acceptable among regular Scouts, but with a hardier crew ... A few years before I joined summer camp staff, during staff week a group picked up the soundest sleeper / loudest snorer on staff in his cot and verrrry carefully and quietly carried him to the waterfront, and tied him and his bunk securely to the boat dock. I was told his waking shouts were very memorable and not at all suitable for mixed company. In my time on staff, we had a huge water war that included people climbing on the roof of the staff lounge with hoses and drenching passers-by. I myself had peanut butter smeared on the wall of my cabin one year. If you don't damage property and if the recipient has a good sense of humor, you can get away with a lot.

Stripes should be quoted far more often in national policy discussions.

In my pack, we had a giant potluck and cake/dessert auction at the fire hall. Dens made table centerpieces and nut cups decorated by the boys. Each den did a song or skit. Advancement was recognized. Webelos got their AOLs in an OA ceremony (it was cool when the chief set his headdress on fire!). Webelos heading to a troop crossed over. Everyone helped clean up.

It's a geek thing. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/banninate

What "government power"? Insisting that a government which bans discrimination should not support a private organization that discriminates?

Calico - that sounds awesome.

"By virtue of the fact that the GSUSA has young Catholic women in its care, it asserts the right to understand (and potentially counter) any cultural influences that may be contrary to its teachings." Let's rephrase. "By virtue of the fact that the BSA has young men and women of GLBT parents in its care, they assert the right to understand (and potentially counter) any cultural influences that may be contrary to their teachings." Only a few minor changes. Yet certain folks here who are celebrating the bishops' investigation are also crying foul over any criticism of BSA's policies by supporters of equality, even parents with their kids in the program. The notion "love it or leave it" has come up more than once, as has the sentiment that they can always start a new group. So what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Either accept that outsiders can lobby a group to change its ways, or condemn the bishops' actions just like you (a general you) have condemned "gay activists."

Peregrinator, You must not have read this thread well, because the point has been made repeatedly that GSUSA does not have COs. The bishops thus have the same standing to GSUSA as the equality advocates have to BSA. Many people here have argued that the equality types should shut the bleep up and go start their own group if they dislike BSA's policies. I could thus say the same about the bishops were I so inclined. Of course, those who make those arguments here won't ever acknowledge this point, because they're too busy getting themselves in a twist over Planned Parenthood. And getting back to something else ... One of the criticisms of GSUSA is that it referred Scouts to the Sierra Club, which apparently supports family planning. The BSA also refers Scouts to the Sierra Club. I fully expect all the bishops' cheerleaders here to thus immediately write Irving and demand a rewrite of all offensive program materials. It's the only intellectually honest thing to do, after all. Assuming y'all are being intellectually honest and not just ideologically blind.

Oh, of course they're able to investigate, even to lobby the GSUSA to change its positions. But if you think that the GSUSA should change because of what the bishops think, then you should also open your mind to accepting that the BSA should change because of what GLBT equality advocates think. If equality advocates are an outside pressure group, than the bishops are equally so.

The comments and touching are a far bigger deal than the awards. As others have said, complain to the CO, and if you get no immediate satisfaction, bump it up the chain. If I were in your shoes, I'd copy the Scout Executive, but others may disagree with going right to the top. That is utterly unacceptable.

And what's the current split on Trails End?

Just presenting the information, not endorsing it in the least: "The exact number of gay priests worldwide is unknown. A study conducted in 2000 by Father Donald Cozzens for his book The Changing Face of Priesthood suggests that as many as 60 percent of all American Catholic priests were gay, but those numbers varied greatly depending on geographical location. At issue at the beginning of the 21st century is the growing perception that the priesthood is, or is becoming, a gay profession, Cozzens wrote in his book. Heterosexual seminarians are made uncomfortable by the number of gays around them. " http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/07/27/the-vatican-s-gay-priests.html "VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - The Vatican has for the first time appeared on the State Department's list of money-laundering centers but the tiny city-state is not rated as a high-risk country." http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE82710J20120308?irpc=932 (This message has been edited by Shortridge)

Fascinating that the same people who oppose "outsiders' " attempts to influence the internal workings of a private organization when the subject is gays and the BSA are welcoming the bishops' attempts to influence the GSUSA.

I wasn't jumping on SP, and I apologize to anyone who thought I was. I thought it was pretty clear that I was calling the bishops and other parties involved hypocritical, whiny and ignorant of modern technology as it pertains to this topic. The article was remarkably devoid of any specifics, and the few that were given were ridiculous. As I said, an anti-PP campaign by proxy. Because condoms and Plan B are scarier than child rape ...

To the Girl Scouts, some of the attacks seem to be a form of guilt by association. Critics contend that Girl Scouts materials shouldn't contain links to groups such as Doctors without Borders, the Sierra Club and Oxfam because they support family planning or emergency contraception. One repeated complaint, revived in February by the Catholic broadcasting network EWTN, involves an International Planned Parenthood brochure made available to girls attending a Girl Scout workshop at a 2010 United Nations event. The brochure "Healthy, Happy and Hot" advised young people with HIV on how to safely lead active sex lives. The Girl Scouts say they had had no advance knowledge of the brochure and played no role in distributing it. Another complaint involved a Girl Scout blog suggesting that girls read an article about Chavez who is Catholic in Marie Claire magazine. Critics said the blog's link led to a Marie Claire home page promoting, among other items, a sex advice article. The BSA refers Scouts to the Sierra Club. Investigate, bishops, investigate! (Hopefully better than you investigated your pedophiles.) The other complaints sound like a bunch of whining, in part by people who don't understand how the Internet works. This has the stench of an anti-Planned Parenthood campaign by proxy. What nonsense.

"lifestyle choice" / bangs head repeatedly against wall /

Packsaddle - What on earth provoked the going-to-hell line at the c-store?

There's nothing stopping us from running our operations like that now. A pack, troop and crew all with the same CO can run things jointly and work closely together, sharing resources, leaders and expertise. But it does require some coordination, and most COs are too weak or too uninterested to get involved at that level. It's unfortunate that BSA doesn't do more structurally to strengthen the CO model - but I guess it's in the SE's interest to have uninvolved CORs.

The problem with the states deciding the issue - and the prob with DOMA - is that sticky wicket called the Constitution. Article IV, Section 1, says states shall give full faith and credit to acts of other states. So if you're married in Massachusetts, you don't have to get married again when you move to Georgia. I'm still not sure how DOMA got past that hurdle.

Ha! In all the coverage of this today, that was one angle that slipped my mind. Thanks, Merlyn.

The time might be problematic for younger Scouts, though they'll never admit it. If it ends at 9pm, then they're not getting home and to bed until 930 at the earliest, most likely. That can be late. I've never met a troop that gets out that late.

The PL should be running the show. No need even for a TG. Definitely not an SPL. Who would he lead?