numbersnerd

Yes, that's the point and where a lot of disappointment comes from.

By definition, that's exactly what they are. And this article points out what many of us have been saying: by ceding to the demands of an admittedy very small population that has very little, if any, overlap with the main demographic of its base, the BSA has alienated many more current and future members than those it will gain through this change. Purely as a matter of ensuring ongoing operations, this was an ill-considered move. Surely they realize that more membership will abandon the organization as a result of this than they would if there were no change in policy. The "I'm going to q

Been asking those we thought would be willing, no dice. Announcements every Pack meeting and event for the last 6 months. Silly me for assuming there'd be SOME people (beyond the usual corps of den leaders) willing to step up out out 45 families. But I got my first whiff when I asked the Wolf parents who would be willing to run a leatherwork night for the boys to make their own neckerchief slides and all I got were shrugs and shakes. I agreed to 2 yrs as CM but have said I will stay on another year if we get a new CC so we can stagger filling these spots. After 5 yrs in and 3 more to go,

Back to the original question... Parents Sitting on their phones/hands/backsides Start helping out/interacting with their sons at events & meetings/fill some volunteer vacancies All this after asking, requesting, soliciting, begging for help for MONTHS

Seems to be a case of selective reading, which I have noticed is a common theme with some individuals here. He said, in response to the statement that the BSA should provide program and structure and that CO's provide the values, that we are in danger of losing that shared set of values if the choices are left to the indovidual CO's. IOW, some might choose to continue a value-centric program, others might turn it into a camping club, others might install an incongruent set of values from the ones most of us can agree upon. Fracturing of the program is a very real danger and introduces

I was referring to the "ignorance" part. Nice, respectable attitude towards a differing opinion.

Name calling. Nice.

When you decide to serve a very small minority and alienate a much larger population (not saying all of the existing membership, but one certainly much larger than the new desired target), how is that 'serving the nation'? How is alienating far more potential member families and failing to reach more of our youth a positive way to 'serve the nation'? How does declining membership, declining operating funds, new rounds of ridicule, and a diluted brand and message better 'serve the nation'? Seriously. These are not rhetorical questions. These are the issues the BSA now has to face. And be

Tolerance is only a guise used to disarm the target and paint them in a negative light. The sad thing is that for all these concessions, the BSA gets what? Nothing. Actually, less than nothing. Once this issue is behind us, i'ts forgotten by the SJW's and their mob of supporters. Will they suddenly be the new demographic for the BSA? Are their checkbooks now open? Ha! For all the changes in recent years, the BSA is still smeared in derogatory labels and continually pressured to concede even more. At the same time, their base is leaving at an accelerated pace with each policy reversal. So a

As mentioned previously, their presence is predicated on a violation of the Scout Law and thus should be invited to leave post haste.

Each decision by the BSA pushes me closer to opting out to avoid the hypocrisy of supporting an organization that is becoming less and less reflective of my values and strays further from what it says its mission is. I know there's a certain crowd that's gonna say "boo hoo, get over it, this is the way it is now" or "Goodbye bigot" or somesuch. I'm fine with you having your opinions, just recognize I'm entitled to mine as well. The primary problem I have with this is like others have stated, there are now very few opportunities for boys to be boys in this culture. I've had successful recru

Thinking of mixing scouts from different units in groups to play some simple games and start the mingling process? For some reason Turtle Soccer always seems popular. I don't know the etiquette for linking to other sites here yet, but there's a scout resource website we've all probably been to that has the rules and process. Just need a soccer ball for each group. This ones works well for larger groups and only takes one or two adults to assist with each group playing.

I really wish the BSA would move away from United Way and corporate funding, for more than the obvious reasons. For one, this would remove a lot of the financial leverage these organizations are exerting on the program. Secondly, it would also eliminate the ability to sustain the bureacracy, both in complexity and size, that is fumbling and stumbling its way though this mess. It's becoming obvious that there are a lot of players involved in influencing BSA policy and management that were never involved in Scouting as a youth nor in a volunteer capacity. Their interests are only for self-

How you reached that conclusion is beyond comprehension.

Personally, I tend to put the achievments and activities that are more suited to a group environment in our schedule. I always make sure that AT LEAST 50%, more like 75%, of the number of badge requirements (eg, 6 to 9 of 12 achievements) are covered in den meetings. The ones that entail a lot of conversation can get exasperating at times, but they are also illuminating as we hear more about what is on our scouts minds. The activity based ones engender a lot of competition, enthusiasm and create a shared experience that keeps them interested. I leave the remainder to do with the families.

Your comments on this issue indicate that you apparently have your head in the sand. The program doesn't have to handle it? It can ignore it? Not our problem? Is that really the response you expect to give people concerned about their sons being exposed to inappropriate content within the context of the program? Really? "Eh, if it happens, it'll just go away, no need to do anything about it. Little Johnny will get over it." You really have your finger on the pulse of parents, don't you? These changes are only in response to the vocal protests of a small number of activists pushing thei

Don't get all logical and fair on us now...

So you put "Change your policy or we won't give you money like we have been doing" on the same level of "Thank you for your interest, but you do not meet our stated membership policy". Got it.

You make some false assumptions about my opinions, disregarding my position at the beginning of my post. Some of those assumptions are more subtle than the one thinking I'm afraid of the flaming homosexual at unit meetings promulgating the benefits of their lifestyle. Talk about straw men...churches CHOOSE to become CO's. It's not an assignment. They make that choice knowing fully the policies in place. If they make that choice knowing the policies but don't agree with them, that is an integrity issue within that CO, not one of disallowing leaders of their choice. I don't have a problem w

Long-time lurker here, but also a long-time scouter (Cub Scout, Boy Scout, Eagle Scout, OA, Philmont, summer camp staff, adult leader). I find this development dismaying, but not because I have a fundamental problem with divergent sexual orientations. When confronted with over-bearing and nonsensical policies, we complain that we are not allowed to excersise our judgement and rely on our competence when dealing with our Scouts. But the opposite of these restrictive polices, opening up the program to disruptive topics and conflicts, I believe further encourages a LESSER standard of judgemen