CynicalScouter

The Explorers program had to issue a "we didn't really mean it" email to LEO Explorer posts after BSA National's Black Lives Matter letter.

Every single one of these are between a) the scout and their parent b) the scout and their religious leader c) both. The checkoff/approval is by the parent or the religious leader (OR for the religious awards, a mentor/instructor approved by that faith/denomination). This however allows a Lutheran MBC to instruct and sign off on the Catholic scout and his/her's views on inclusive as they relate to gender identity and sexual orientation. And if the Lutheran thinks the Catholic Church's teachings on women priests and and sexual orientation are stupid? No sign off. Putting aside that these conversations should be happening parent to scout (or parent to religious leader), many religious denominations provide that only those ordained or under the supervision of someone ordained my offer moral instruction. This is BEYOND driving a wedge between the scout and parent, this is now a wedge between the scout and their religion. When is enough, enough?

There's a reason why at the Cub Scout level the Duty to God related adventures and at Scouts, BSA the Family Life merit badge explicitly provide for the PARENTS to certify/sign off. Because while I would be hard pressed to find a religious or moral objection to using two half hitches vs. a taut line hitch, I absolutely know and can identify families and major religious denominations in the U.S. that religious or moral objections to how "inclusive" we as a national are regarding sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Case in point: I honestly have no idea how a unit with a Catholic CO can work with this merit badge given that the MBC will have to condemn the Church's views on same sex marriage and the role of women in the Church as not being "inclusive".

They locked, archived, and unlisted that thread to hide it.

Isn't that exactly what happens with Family Life Requirement #6 anyway and the required family meeting (I am not a MBC for that)?

I am going to bet this rule.

The plan is that by March 2021 Scoutbook will automatically update with whatever is approved by your Council (or within a few hours) in terms of applications. The problem is that Scoutbook was designed to be a unit level tool. MBCs are technically district positions. That has required a good amount of overhauling. Where the MBC is in the same unit as the scout, that was easy. But of the MBC is from the troop next door (or with virtual merit badges) a state away, that was a problem. The other problem was units were putting in MBCs and not sending applications/paperwork to Council OR keeping those items up to date. The power of units to add MBCs was taken away; from now on only the Council approved list will be in scoutbook. This was the announcement and details https://discussions.scouting.org/t/september-21-2020-scoutbook-updates-merit-badge-counselors/184960

Got it. Ok, that makes sense.

OK, but the scouts are going to be forced to take this MB (well, at least those seeking Eagle). And that's in addition to the forthcoming rank requirements concerning DE&I which national has said are coming. If you are worried, why not try and lessen it? Or pencilwhip the scouts through?

The massive, massive backpedaling from National continues. Since the leak of the documents on Facebook, National is getting the FB and Reddit groups to lock down and/or delete posts and denying that the requirements are real.

Why? In all seriousness, this merit badge will happen. If you are concerned, then why not become your unit's MBC for it so you can approve it in a way you are comfortable with, including that video? Or if you truly object to the merit badge, pencilwhip the scouts through it and be done with it?

You realize you'd immediately be bounced as a MBC, right?

So much for the "it's just a draft".

This is what happens when you only circulate for comment to SEs for input. They are backtracking as fast as they can. This for me is the biggest shock (although I shouldn't be shocked). 10 days to launch. Middle of the Christmas/New Year weeks. And nothing is out yet? And they think they can ram and jam something fast enough? I'm sure they can, but it will be a mess.

A scout is kind. A scout is courteous. A scout is friendly. If diversity and inclusion = being kind, courteous, and friendly to all peoples (and conversely holding no bigotry against them) then why the need for a merit badge? That is why some people (not me) find offensive. It implies that scouts/scouters and/or the entirety of Boy Scout of America (and/or specifically Scouts, BSA) is chock full of bigots, herein defined as white men who need to be re-educated in the gospel of critical race theory, gender identity, intersectionality, etc. Now I don't personally hold this view, but I can tell you already that's the push-back. That this is just code and cover for Scouts (and especially their adult leaders) are evil. Scouts (and especially their adult leaders) are bigots. Scouts (and especially their adult leaders) are not "woke" enough. Moreover, as noted, some of these topics (sexual orientation and gender identity in particular) are some that parents feel BSA have no business discussing with their children. Additionally, there are adults who are offended by the assumptions: that institutional racism exists (they don't believe it does), that systemic racism exists (they don't believe it does) and that Scouts, BSA is just rolling in racism and bigotry. Finally, and this is something where I honestly would like the view of @David CO is that chartered organizations that do NOT embrace these concepts and/or engage in "bigoted" behaviors (no women priests, no openly homosexual adult leaders) are being told they are intolerant bigots. Are scouts going to be required to openly and publicly denounce their own COs?

Welcome. Without knowing what Council we are talking about, it is hard to say if $165k is or is not "excessive". As I noted here, the non-profit standard is 1%-10% of all expenditures = CEO salary. Thus if you Council's annual expenditures are $1.65 million or greater, then $165k for the a SE is within the realm of standard.

It circulated as an email. I found it here from a Council website https://etac.ihubapp.org/posts/54906/important-message-from-the-national-director-of-exploring

I recall that after that BSA National statement came out that the Exploring program had to come out with a "we didn't really mean it" statement or else lose their LEO Explorer posts. https://etac.ihubapp.org/posts/54906/important-message-from-the-national-director-of-exploring

Yes. And I am also saying that you are going to get SM and parent push back on the idea that this is a merit badge that teaches sex ed. I'm not saying it is right. I am saying WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE PUSH BACK.

Because they view issues related to sexual morals as being entirely in the discretion of the parents? And that even MENTIONING the words "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" crosses that line.

I agree. But as noted elsewhere in this thread, there are at least two units (and I know my own committee chair, so there's a third possibly) who are looking at this as sex ed and therefore will be requesting a) waivers or b) that these portions get parental approval/instruction.

Careful please. Don't mistake my views vs. those of others. As I said, I believe as a MBC I could work with this MB. I can also very much see/know/observe in the Reddit and Facebook groups and even here that there's a HUGE pushback growing and an anticipation that people are NOT going to just embrace the change and move forward (as for example they did when Cooking became Eagle required). Given that it is adults who are going be parents, SMs, and MBCs, and that it is adults who are creating this merit badge, asking adults to keep their hands off this merit badge is literally impossible. This STARTED with an agenda. The entire REASON we have this as a merit badge in general and an Eagle required in particular started with an agenda. Now you can argue if this was a good agenda or a bad one. You can argue what the "real" agenda is (or isn't). But this did not just spring forth from the ground ex nihilo. Every part of this has been agenda laden. To now say let's not have adults and their agendas is again, impossible.

It depends. First, these laws apply to public schools. Private organizations (like BSA, see Dale case) can require or not require sex ed. Second, this all depends on whether you consider even MENTION of sexual orientation or gender identity as "sex education". Someone people will and will then insist that no MBC talk to their kids about sex education.

This is a list of states that allow for parents to opt in/opt out their children from sex education in public schools. I suspect there will be a push to have a similar opt-in/opt-out for scouts. https://siecus.org/resources/opt-in-vs-opt-out-state-sex-ed-parental-consent-policies •34 states + DC: Opt-Out •4 states: Opt-In •2 states: Both Opt-In & Opt-Out •10 states: No Opt-In or Opt-Out

That is never going to happen for three reasons: 1) There mere statement of these terms is a political statement. There's no neutral. There is no "personal politics". If you use the term, you've endorsed that it is a debatable point. To many, that's not true (they don't believe gender identity exists or the institutional racism exists). 2) It is going to raise a giant conflict with COs. Imaging being a unit chartered with a Catholic Church. "Sure, we have to be inclusive, but women will never be priests." "Sure, we shouldn't discriminate, but this Catholic-chartered unit will never, ever have an openly gay leader, ever.") And that's "Easy". Again, the mere MENTION of sexual orientation and/or gender identity runs count to tenets of some CO's. 3) The parents are going to rebel on this. I can absolutely assure you they will. And they won't charge the parapets at national or even at council. They will simply let it be known to the SM or the MBC (or both) that they are no happy and the MBC will be sure to skip that part of the merit badge. This is designed to fail