Navybone

I think there has been some spirited discussion, but I do not think anyone has called or implied anyone is racist.

I saw all that. But I have not seen anything since then to suggest the MB is a joint BLM BSA badge or that BLM was involved in its development

Depends - I had not seen that they used BLM as the basis of the badge. The BLM provide information for the requirements or the instruction booklet? Does what they provided expand beyond understanding and recognizing racism? I don’t know. I am not a fan of everything BLM stands for, but I do know that the accepting people, regardless of skin color, race, sexuality, sociology-economic status, education, etc, is basic human kindness and professionalism when one is an adult in the work force. There is nothing political about that. And I have seen youth come into the work force totally un

So your issue is with BLM, got it. But again, BLM does not equal diversity and the concepts behind it. Even if BLM did not exist, there would still be a need to discuss diversity in this world. BLM did not create the word or the idea of excluding people due to race, sex, sexual persuasion, socio-economic status, etc.

This is an example of what I was trying to address: Let’s say your faith does not support the concept of homosexuality and finds it immoral. Homosexuality exists and is not illegal. The scouts will experience someone who is homosexual, if they have not already. The point I am trying to make is that these scouts will find themselves with a challenge, how do they reconcile this as they grow older? What will they do if they end up working with a homosexual? Sent from my iPad

Diversity does not equal Black Lives Matter. One can discuss diversity, equity, and inclusion without discussing black lives matter. The definition I used is from the dictionary. my point is that diversity and the idea that people of different races, religion, socio-economic backgrounds, etc, have value and should be included is not in of itself political.

I would only add that when discussing something that is legal, that while you can consider it immoral, it does not mean you can ostracize or otherwise exclude someone who does not agree with your assessment of that something being immoral.

“the practice or quality of including or involving people from a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds and of different genders, sexual orientations, etc.” this is political? Really, that is what you think? If you do, then this is a waste of time even trying to discuss it.

This is the reason this forum is so useful, good solid experience and advice on how the Boy Scout program is run.

Well this is a wasted opportunity to have a non-political discussion about how some people are disadvantaged because racism exist in this country. It’s an opportunity on how to recognize racism and step up and live up to the values of the Scout Law. my biggest concern is that the approach you are mention will make some scouts think the issue is a blue lives matter vs diversity and racism. And it’s not. There is a part of the population of this country who are disenfranchised based on they way they are engaged based on skin color, religion or maybe their sexual leanings. This is an oppo

i watched the video, did it seem ominous?

maybe because some leaders intend to pencil whip (aka fake) the merit badge and disregard what BSA is trying to do.

Wow. I guess civil discourse has truest gone the way of the dodo. Please let me know what your preferred agreements are in favor of your position so I can just feed them to you.

To state that this merit badge will kill of scouts is quite dramatic. If scouts survives the child abuse, admitting homosexuals, and girls, this should not be the last chapter. However, Jordan Peterson is only one voice in this discussion, and one with a very limited and pointed perspective. He is the darling of of the conservatives in the media when discussing diversity. And if we welcome his point of view, should we also then not include the opposite side of the conversation?

Without knowing what the definitions are of diversity, equity, inclusion, and bigotry, you call this offensive. Why? Why are these principles offensive? or are there other specific parts of the draft requirements that are offensive?