WoodBadger

I have a couple of thoughts on what we do and do not end up discussing with scouts and parents. On the gay issue our sponsoring church brought it up. We are in an urban area, and a significant number of the churches disagree with even their own national organizations on the subject of homosexuality and full inclusion of gays in the life of the church. Our sponsoring church includes gays and lesbians fully in membership and leadership. The Vestry was concerned enough with the BSA stance to consider not renewing the charters of our Troop, Pack and Venture Crew. We talked it over and assured them that the leadership of the units did not preach or support discrimination against gays and that some of us were actively questioning the council on the implementation of that policy. We had a Troop Committee meeting on the same and agreed to disagree with National and work within for change. That satisfied the church.

Only the older boys (16-17) really asked any questions about the policy (it's pretty much over the heads of the younger guys) and I stated for them, informally on a camping trip, what the policy was, how I felt about it, and why it wasn't going to change any time soon. The older boys then went on to make sure the younger guys stopped calling each other "queer" and "fag" and "gay". All in all a pretty healthy result.

Now I want to talk to the boys, probably all of them, about gun violence in their schools. I haven't opened the topic yet but hope to do so soon, beginning with my next Scoutmaster's Minute. This issue concerns me more than the gay issue (and may be one we can actually unite on) Has anyone discussed this in Troop meetings yet?

Uncle Bob...you are right on! I'm especially annoyed with the lack of praticality of the pants and socks. Also even with a uniform swap program you can't outfit a boy for a reasonable price. At one time uniforms helped erase "class" differences between kids (that's one reason schools use them). Does anyone know if school uniforms are as expensive as Scout uniforms? I don't know. I know the French Toast company has an extensive side business in school uniforms. I wonder what they could do for Scouting?

As readers of some other forums know, I'm against the BSA policy excluding gays. HOWEVER I am totally FOR the BSA and what it does for our sons. I don't like the way everyone is feeling pressure to choose sides and yank good program away from the boys. I don't even know how to talk to the boys about this...so I don't... but I know they and their friends talk about it amongst themselves.

Can't we figure out a way to amend the policy so it targets what may be really "tearing down society"? Instead of focusing on gays, how about focusing on behaviors? No leaders should be involved in, advocates of, or tolerant of: sexual harassment, abuse, hatemongering, racism, promiscuity, taking advantage of the disabled, drugs/alcohol/tobacco.... that kind of thing.

If a particular chartering organization wants to set leadership requirements consistent with their mission statement then that's where a group should be able to "discriminate" if you will. Kosher only? Non-military? Non-smoker? Regular attender at Mass? Gun enthusiast? Able bodied (in the sense of able to handle the rigors of an outdoor program)? Born again? Not female?

I think we should consider a compromise for the sake of the boys' program. Parents will thank us for setting an example of how to handle disagreements without being disagreeable.

I know that I don't have all the answers.

As a Scouter who feels strongly that the BSA policy is too restrictive and narrowly focused I would be interested in such a list for the opposite reason from jamessnow. However I hope America in general and the BSA in particular can avoid an "US" vs "THEM" mentality. More open and honest communication is needed to see why some people identify a person's influence as "immoral" while other equally well educated, equally well meaning, equally committed, and equally faithful people disagree. We need to come to some national policy that recognizes the legitimacy of different viewpoints. Not easy at all.

I have thoroughly enjoyed the give and take in this forum even though it is so hard to come to an agreement when the issue is deeply felt on both sides. Here's an interesting thing that recently happened. A national chain store in our area sells Christmas trees then takes them back in Jan. for recycling. Our troop asked permission to raise money by cleaning out cars after customers return the trees. We got a prompt and polite response that the national store administration has removed its support for Boy Scouting because of the BSA policy restricting the membership/leadership of gays. I wish someone in Irving Texas would realize that it's not just a bunch of cranks who think the gay policy is wrong. The fall out from this is negatively affecting the local troops. BTW our troop is asking the store for reconsideration because our chartering organization does not stand with the BSA policy and we also have it on good authority that our council has never yet removed a scout or scouter for being openly gay. Has anyone had similar or opposite experiences?

Oh my God! (and I mean that literally). What OldGreyEagle just posted prompted me to check out the fundraising forum. Stormfront's web addresses, especially if you lop off everything past the first slash represent a point of view (regardless of how one feels about gays) that scares me deeply.

If you're new to this forum check out

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=303

which is the fundraising forum....scroll down.

OldGreyEagle, do the "christian identity" groups have strong ties with the BSA or is Stormfront's solicitation just a fluke?

Talk about moral values....yikes!

I wonder if it would work better to give local chartering organizations some say in their standards for leadership? Instead of focusing on "tiny group of homosexuals who want to be Scout leaders" (as if there's some kind of agenda that gays have to infiltrate Scouting....I trust that's not what frankj meant) I think troops and their sponsors could credibly focus on behaviors and attitudes that they felt were harmful influences. Several of our volunteers smoke cigarettes. They do it out of the sight of the boys, don't brag about their habits, don't involve the boys in their habits. Yeah, they ocasionally smell like smoke and most of the older boys know what's going on but they understand that these men do not intend to influence the boys to become smokers. Certainly it bothers me that a leader can't go a weekend without a smoke, but not enough to ask them not to be leaders. However, let's say the chartering organization was involved with anti-cancer programs...they might object that nicotine addicted leaders were not appropriate leaders FOR THEIR TROOP. Likewise a Jewish troop might insist on leaders who observe the Sabbath or keep Kosher. These are all moral decisions in some respects. I don't think the Supreme Court decision changes anything, it doesn't validate anti-gay sentiment, nor does it repudiate it. It says the BSA has the right to set it's own leadership and membership criteria. I just wish the BSA would trust local groups to set the criteria that match their constituents instead of declaring from Headquarters which individual traits all troops need to exclude. After all, if you go to a World Jamboree you are sure to meet brother Scouts whose leadership criteria are very different from BSA rules. They're still Scouts in good standing at home and abroad. Can we agree to disagree?

I recently wrote a letter to my local council asking them to look into an open and honest dialog on the "gay issue". As a result of that letter I was invited to sit in on a council meeting on the subject. Several interesting points came up including the question "Why is National insisting that we exclude one group of people?"

There are probably strong regional differences in tolerance and abhorrence of homosexual people (not the practice...the people themselves). Here in eastern urban areas too many of us know and work with openly gay people of very good character for us to feel comfortable with a BSA exclusion policy. Our kids know and respect gay adults from church, from school, from sports teams, and even from scouting so many of our boys think this is nonsense. Our kids have friends who have two moms, and relatives who are openly gay. If you travel to other kinds of communities gay people may be much more "in the closet". There will not be a national agreement on this issue any time soon.

So how about national BSA policy focusing on behavioral standards and even requiring criminal background checks as many other youth serving organizations do? Our troop removed a scoutmaster years back because he was a mean guy....that's not the moral compass we wanted for our kids. How about letting the individual units and their chartering organizations decide the qualities they want in a leader? Lots of units would still not allow gays to serve, which would suit their constituents. Others would, which would fit them too.

On this emotional issue (just like on gun control) the matter cannot be settled in court, nor by hollering and screaming. Let's have more conversation and more facts.