Troop75Eagle

there are some indications that unconscious bias are at work, but it is equal opportunity.  I'll not do the researchers justice but let me explain why this bears some scrutiny.  Statistics can matter.  Why?  It demonstrates recorded patters and when they are presented to the public, that becomes their impression. 

The press and internet bear a lot of the blame on this particular issue because they report the sensational and selectively based on what keeps their ratings up.  Humans go for the wild and sensational, always have.  But we get pounded and bombarded with the stories that are tailor made for consumption and ratings.  Humans, as a rule, also don't like complexity and are so hurried that details are compressed down to a simple short story that will basically evoke an emotional response.  How statistics are presented can be highly misleading as we all can appreciate and sometimes the publicly presented statistics do not include the disclaimers that go along with it.  I won't get into examples, too much, because I will seem too partisan but the Michigan study recently published is one such instance.  

But with unconscious bias, there are patterns, but I would argue they are quite normal patterns for humans.  If, for example, we acknowledge the fact that high crime areas require more police interaction, the statistics correctly show that there are disproportionate contacts among police and minorities. Surprise surprise that's where the crime is.  If anyone deals in circumstances where consistent types of behaviors, such as crime, are present with specific groups, its perfectly natural that the human mind begins to associate such groups with crime.  With regard to policing, this has been found to be true among black police officers as well.  The idea of profiling is the more recent infamous example.  Since middle eastern terrorism is reported showing olive skinned Muslim over and over, the human mind associates the two.  One of the problems with such reporting is that, predictably, anyone with olive skin or a funny sounding name from that part of the world raises a red flag in the human mind.  These can be conscious of course, but they are unconscious biases as well.  If the only news one gets is one type of person constantly committing the crime, its natural for human instinct to want to preserve itself by categorizing the potential threat, This is especially true given that humans are largely a sight oriented species and our unconscious recognition systems are constantly on the lookout for danger. 

In this description, I am demonstrating how the process can work on an unconscious level.  Certainly, there is conscious bias that one must recognize and work on.  That gets into mindfulness that cognitive therapy teaches (and no I'm no therapist or educator).  There is also confusion about culture, language and expressiveness that are so varied that it is easier to categorize in a general way than think one's way through it.  Again, people don't like to think, time is always short, instinct is always at work and we use the information we have to identify and go from there.  None of these processes are wrong, they are processes.  We may get the wrong information, inaccurate information, misleading information or disinformation, but that gets back, in part, to statistics and the sources of information we get and experience.  There are certainly more components to this and my understanding is about as simplistic as it comes.  But, I would agree that the idea of racism as a deliberate and conscious effort in police departments is less likely than its made out to be. 

The use of force is even more complex.  If the application of force were statistically and accurately charted across the board for all ethnicities (excluding shootings) and the circumstances involved, I wonder what they would be.  I don't know.  In terms of absolute numbers, one would never say there was bias, but absolute numbers are never really included.  In terms of ratio, I wonder how much of a difference (including shooting) would be attributed to the frequency of police interaction in crime filled areas as I mentioned above.  One thing is certain.  The statistical data across the breadth of the United States is not anywhere near comprehensive or complete at any level.  That is a separate problem. (one statistic that isn't tracked at all are the instances of security guards shooting intruders). 

So unconscious bias due to frequency of interaction, I suggest, is a key factor here rather than conscious and deliberate intentions to perpetuate some sort of apartheid, Jim Crow state.  Do I in any way suggest that there is nothing to be done?  Of course not.  But its sort of like police officers who are also in the guard and reserves who went over to Iraq.  They were subject to life and death situations every day and had the local population that couldn't be distinguished friend from enemy.  One wrong move or assumption could get you and others maimed or killed.  Then, when they return home, they are expected to psychologically flip a switch and turn off the instinct and training - conscious or not.  One might as well ask a doctor not to look at everyday events from a medical stand point or botanist from a biological view. 

I have yet to hear of that many productive solutions other than not pursuing certain types of crime, not enforcing regulatory violations of vehicles, refunding and disbanding police.  Its true that the recruiting and training in the last decade has emphasized a sort of warrior mentality that pits police against civilians in a sort of paramilitary manner.  That does attract a certain type of kill them all and god will know his own mentality.  But that is not the officers fault.  Its true that unemployment, chronic poverty, homelessness and mental illness (especially mental illness) are perpetual generators of criminal activity.  But its naive to think that such programs will remove unconscious bias or somehow eliminate crime.  Those topics go far beyond the racism question.

On 6/15/2020 at 8:27 PM, Jameson76 said:

So...

BSA has decided to change the Eagle requirements AND add a new merit badge with little or no input from volunteers.  Sort of on a whim.  Great move.  This falls into the "let's do something even if it's not well thought out" category

BSA has decided to add to the required training for volunteers with little or no input.  Another great move

Not saying these are necessarily poor initiatives.  They wreak of knee jerk reaction and a lack of actual leadership

I got my Eagle 33 years ago and OA Brotherhood.  I’ve commented a lot lately on decentralization and focus in various ways.  I was a little taken aback at this new diversity merit badge, let alone its requirement. For my part, I don’t like having to inject high octane gas politics into the enjoyment and development of youth.  As I’ve written elsewhere, that was not my experience in Memphis, TN...not always viewed in a particularly progressive light.  Diversity is certainly a fact of life.  I was under the impression that Boy Scouts, being a global enterprise with just about every ethnic group and major culture under the sun included, was diversified.  I thought that Jamborees were indicative of that.  I thought the God and Country award  allowed almost all main religious belief systems on Earth to have their system represented.  I also was under the impression that most of the values and principles taught in Scouts were fairly universal across the globe.  
 

Citizenship merit badges are of course required as tgey should be.  I could easily see the need for making sure that diversity,  as the current culture climate wants it to be, was fully represented.  I was under the impression that Citizenship fully means the citizenry of the US and each of the community,  Nation and World badges not only introduces a youth to the history and fundamental institutions of government but politics.  Youth need the introduction to all of the matters in those badges AND the guidance and input from parents and leaders on the local level.  I have a great deal of difficulty, very great in fact, understanding how a separate merit badge and it’s requirement is anything than a forced peace cow to a hot potato issue.  
 

Do not mistake me, I do not belittle diversity or the importance of it.  As a nation and world of mixed people, cultures and traditions we interact with others.  But we have no less that at least 3 required merit badges and national and international programs that squarely deal with this.  I’m aware merit badges come and go (I wish they’d bring martial arts back from 1911) but most of these changes do not appear to me to have been the subject of political and legal difficulties.  At some point, the national organization is going to render itself obsolete for district and local groups.  They will have so angered and disaffected entire swathes of the country that they will simply be ignored.  Scouting cannot be repossessed or taken away from the people but the people can do without the national umbrella in their own way, even if it means reforming under a slightly different entity.  
 

The Indian culture is another matter.  That is a slippery slope.  First you do away with representations, then you strike district names, the you gut  content so as not to offend.  Then camps and parts of camps are re named and so it goes till all the possible content that might offend is expunged.  Im not advocating offending anyone, far to the contrary, being ugly and rude to individuals is not for me.  But the last time I checked, there was no guarantee in the US Constitution of the right not to be offended.  Someone will always be offended.  The native tribes near Mt. Rushmore hate it it because the land was stolen from them.  So how will Scouts deal with that reality?  By all that’s consistent, we should condemn it, and not refer to it at all or at least remark that there are offended people (If we are talking about Indian and Indian culture). Some may remark that the examples are absurd.  They absolutely are.  ALL of them.  I have never known anyone to use Order of the Arrow regalia or anything other than a respectful manner.  But, I suppose that this doesn’t matter.  There is a risk in doing this sort of thing.  A desire to be correct may lead to an entire culture being excluded and ignored because no one will risk dealing with them.  The drivers of such a correcting force also risks being ignored.  That takes me back to the first part of what I said about the national organization.  
 

The LDS broke away with hundreds of thousands to preserve its understanding of tradition.  It appears that more legions of youth and adults may likewise part company and renew themselves under a different but similar fashion.  That’s a shame really.  Traditional scouting isn’t about creating a new unrecognizable creature out of a Frankensteinian lab.  There are alternatives and many may choose to take them.  It won’t make them lesser or ugly people.  It doesn't make them ingrates, backwards or hateful.  It means they have particular communal visions for how scouting was, is, and should be for the development of their youth in what is foremost a fun environment with particular features. 

7 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

NRA medals are still offered at camp. Our girl troop LOVED earning them last summer. The Scouts are looking to move up one level this summer. 

Religious awards still are ONLY offered by local religious communities. This hasn’t changed for at least 30 years. 
 

Neither of these have changed. Are they being done differently in your unit?

Not that I’m aware.  I Obtained my eagle and a palm 33 years ago then went to college and really have had much involvement since. I’m glad to hear it.  I pointed those out to add fodder to the idea of worthy avenues for scouts that are provided by companies and others.  Looking at an uncertain big picture of change can be intimidating but being reminded of features that are and have been present and don’t depend on national can bring reassurance and perspective. In this day and time, I bet there are even more outside groups willing to step up to the plate.  

On 2/21/2013 at 3:45 PM, ghst said:

I have been a long time lurker here and following many of the discussions here about many different issues. It is a great place to read opposing views and look at other scouters points of view.

 

Does anyone else see the possibility of the local option as a lack of leadership on the national level of BSA?

I'm all for the BSA ending this ban on gays which will change (it’s just a matter of time). But I cannot see this local option as nothing but trouble. What happens when we go to camporee's or scout camp? Some troops allow gays....some don't..... doesn't anyone see this as a problem? If the BSA goes with the local option it's only a matter of time until someone with a gay son or gay parent who would like to be involved wants to join a troop which is the only one in that area that excludes gays and there we are all over the news having to fight this battle over and over again. When the US Military changed their policy I knew that BSA policy on this would not stand for long.

 

BSA stands for Boy Scouts of America right? Not Boy Scouts of this town or this church or this group each one making their own rules. What happens if we start changing the Youth Protection Policy to fit each troop adding or leaving out things as we chose on a local level?

 

I thought one of items we as scouters and adult leaders try to instill in our scouts is leadership. Leadership is something that looks like we are lacking on a national level. This local option looks like a very lame attempt to make everyone happy which in the end will not work anyway. I think BSA at the national level is more interested in protecting their jobs then leading this organization anyway.

 

Just allow the gays in and let the chips fall where they may. If these different charter organizations. threaten to drop out of BSA then let them. How would that affect our local unit anyway? We raise all of our money for our unit events; purchase all our own gear, etc. We sell popcorn and anything else the BSA leadership wants (and they get their cut). In turn we get scout camps that are understaffed and underfunded, insurance which we pay for through our recharter fees, nice websites for doing our youth protection training.

I hear what you are saying.  I’m new but have been pushing the idea of local control for a couple of days and made numerous  posts on it.  Local control, I think, is the way to go.  There are a lot of possibilities.  Now local control is a word that can mean a number of things.  Local could mean each troop at each location, Troops under a community, district or region.  There is truth to what you say regarding each group becoming a law unto themselves.  But I don’t believe that would be the case.  There are too many common features and accepted norms to be a complete jumble of people and ideas.  At the core of every troop is the scout book.  At each level of scouting there are common guides of merit badges, skill awards, organization and activities.  All of these activities are, in practice, interpreted and executed at the troop level and passed on up through admin.  
 

Let me give a couple of examples why it can work.  If you look at AA, (as I understand it) there are chapters world wide that are pretty much the same but without national or international control (“Starfish and Spider” a book that explains this concept.)  Masons have local lodges, state and national offices but you could lose those and still have masons carry on as they are not dependent on super-structures for them to work. Faiths and Churches can be the same way, though it’s obvious that faith systems can and do vary in many ways.  Still, even they have core principles which they follow within each denomination and generally get along with each other.  
 

Scouts does not have to be wedded to an artificial superstructure.  If, in some weird unimaginable scenario, someone said, ‘ok BSA, you can’t exist anymore’, or the national organization simply dissolved, the public would laugh in the antagonist’s face.  Americans resent being told what to do, how to define themselves, conduct their lives or raise their children.  BSA has come to a point where it more or less belongs to the public at home and abroad.

We might have to agree that local chapters couldn’t have merit badges for murder, arson, money laundering or mailbox bashing (I would hope) but they would not truly be in scouting.   Using the dated figures of 2017 that doesn’t include LDS withdrawal, almost 100,000 troops are in the US. With so many groups having common understanding and objectives, it’s highly unlikely the differences would be that great.  People are wedded to the ideals and activity for the young people.  I think local people everywhere have their wits and dedication about them to where it would work almost as a club.  Look at gymnastics Shattered by scandal and bankruptcy.  But gymnastics programs will continue on everywhere because the parents, athletes and coaches follow a common idea and blueprint.

11 minutes ago, Mrjeff said:

I believe that is the answer.  In fact it is happening now.  Troops have decided not to worry about the national level views and are doing what they want to do.  As long as the leaders, kids, and parents are good with it then it's fine.  I just wonder how many troops go on camping trips and invite dads along, registered or not.  I wonder how many units plan high adventure activities that dont exactly follow national policies.  Has anyone gone to a local gun club and had a shooting event without jumping through BSA hoops? I have always said that people on some national committee have no business trying to dictate how the Scouting program should be delivered in a community they know nothing about.  Scouting is not the same everywhere.  Scouts in the north east don't do the same things as those in the south west, and that's fine as long as the units are meeting the needs of their community.  Who better to make decisions then the dads and parents of the kids involved.  I applaud your logic in suggesting a very viable solution to a very convoluted situation.

Thank you for the endorsement.  I relieved others are doing that.  It used to be that the NRA had marksmanship awards/ medals you could earn at summer camp.  Shiloh Battlefield has medals for Historic, military and 20 mile hikes.  
 

Not sure what happened to these or if they are still around.  But I am willing to believe there are other organizations that would leap at the chance to craft activities to challenge and reward effort and accomplishment.  

The God and Country award was handled through each church, synagog or other belief structure albeit with the simplest forms from national to give some measure of guidance.  It was up to the local religious leaders of the scout to guide in their traditions.

I’d like to see the outside group that dared try to invalidate a boys accomplishments in his own troop, district  and community simply because it wasn’t according to National or because such a group was not within PC guidelines.  The only response should be, ‘who cares.  We are doing what is right by the effort, spirit and dedication of our young men.’

I have read a lot of the posts and am glad to see the scope and depth of passion and dedication to keeping scouting to its core missions (albeit even that isn’t entirely agreed upon).  Naive or not, I want to advance the idea of what must be done.  It may be self evident but I haven’t seen it expressed as such.

it seems to me, the most reasonable choice of action is to revert to community control and NOT ask for permission to do anything.  A national organization embroiled in its own legal trouble will more than likely just say no, wait till things are settled.  It’s the safest route.  
 

Instead, local leaders in the community just do what is best for the boys and focus on the standards of the community avoiding conflict.  There are certainly some practical things to do like background checks and maybe liability coverage but local fathers (at least) often can know each other and have certain ethical codes and common standards that are unspoken.  I can’t imagine a troop that actively courts controversy or wants to expose boys to conflict.  
 

I recognize that certain legal realities demand change, I don’t know how to fix that.   A court order is the final required fix. It seems that local leaders should not have to wait for approval to be fathers and mentors to young boys.  I also know that problems don’t generally arise among like thinking people until someone forces the issue.  Conflict resolution, quietly and locally, has often has been the the most beneficial approach.  If, unfortunately as probably will be the case, the main issues of the day don’t allow for resolution, then the local fathers simply NEED to start something on their own.  

The term ‘courageous’ comes to mind.  That is something Powell and other founders and leaders would definitely agree with.  One might reasonably say you have to have courage to change...but that isn’t the only valid use of the word.  Courage to create and preserve system that meets the needs of young men on the local level that fits ethics, values and fundamentals like Powell’s Traditional Scouting.  The LDS has a system that apparently withstands scrutiny.  They are teaching their sons and young men that it takes courage to break from a system that no longer represents what it once did.  One need not be a member of the LDS to accomplish this.  But it takes courage on the local level among like minded men and leaders to solve the problem themselves.  If one truly wants the fundamentals of a system and mission to remain, then the Name alone need not be a barrier.  What an epic tale and example for young men where adults and scouts re-claimed and renewed a central idea.  Let the world challenge each troop and each community, but I bet they won’t. 
 

26 minutes ago, AltadenaCraig said:

I like the idea of Rovers and I like the idea of proficiency for Rovers.  I even like the idea of a Scout proficiency award (perhaps mandatory for the "Instructor" position), requiring some form of re-testing to maintain currency.

Yet I'm hesitant to require currency of all scouts.  The reason is Baden-Powell's attitude toward proficiency as described in his "Aids to Scoutmastership":

That's from The Boss, himself.

That is a very good post I think.  It’s amazing how things change slowly over time.  Ideas often move little by little and take on a whole new character.  People do like recognition and awards with a sense of accomplishment.  
 

This mindset has changed a lot of things and a lot of activities.  One only has to look at baseball, soccer, gymnastics etc and see how expensive equipment, camps, training and so forth have made activities just about too expensive for many people.  That could be competition run amok.  Scouts, as I have always seen it, has been a competition for ones self to betterment.

Frankly, I’m not sure what the environment has changed to but it’s almost certain the founder and founders in the states would be appalled.  The boys are certainly the victims of circumstance and should never be caught up in culture wars to this scope and degree.  I read about Braden Powell’s Traditional Scouting that may still be around.  That seems like a winner.  I like your idea of proficiency.  I would hasten to add that it seems we need a merit badge that included and an adult knot for conflict resolution.  That could lead to a lot of cooling of temps.  It ought to be part of citizenship but maybe it needs its own category.  It’s a skill set and does not have to wrap itself in destructive politics.

1 hour ago, elitts said:

I'm sure there are plenty of people who would find me absolutely intolerable to be around. 

But I want to clarify, I don't simply avoid anyone who thinks homosexuality is immoral.  If someone thinks it's wrong and decides they need to pray for the person's immortal soul, I can respect that.  We are probably too far apart culturally for us to be great pals, but that doesn't mean I'm going to treat them like a foul odor and turn up my nose and leave the area.  Where I start running into a problem with being around someone is when they follow up "I think homosexuality is immoral" with some statement about which aspects of life that person should or shouldn't be allowed to participate in.

I’m long winded...
 

I hear what you are saying and understand the distinction you are drawing.  When it comes to matters of ethics, morality and reverence, they are indeed stated objectives of scouting.  This certainly is a slippery slope.  I had the honor of being chaplain as a scout and was very conscious of various denominations.  The leaders were conscious of behaviors such as any tobacco use and drinking which were not allowed and one scout who drank on a campout  was suspended. Things of a sexual nature were simply not brought up much though when I was fairly new I told another youth about a partial nudity scene I’d seen in a movie and got reprimanded for it.  I think appropriately.  Having said all this, at the time there seems to have been a generational and social understanding in Memphis, TN where controversial moral issues just weren’t discussed.  I’ve no doubt that if atheism arose, if gay conduct were discovered...there would have been consequences.  frankly, I think the atheist conduct would have been the more severe simply because it was a public and conscious rebuke of the tenants of the organization.  I’m not sure how the gay issue would have played out at the time but quietly dismissing us a reasonable guess.  

The adults were the WW2 and silent generation.  Morality and patriotism was high with wars and the Cold War having been the defining motivators.  Children of those households in the south, it seems to me, would have reflected a lot of those attitudes and quiet discretions.  Moral guidance was soft power but with firm borders.  
 

with the changing generations, the acceptance of those moral limits are obviously no longer accepted as truisms or tolerated.  In many cases, they are not acknowledged as humane or soundly based. they have, in many cases, been weaponized and applied to human beings and their conduct.  Responsible adults do try to give moral and ethical guidance to the young.  Who would doubt that it would be wrong to teach a youth that theft is wrong, pushing down an elderly person for giggles is wrong or wantonly destroying property is wrong?  One of the problems now is defining the limits of ‘educating another’ for moral and ethical behavior when the traditional norms no longer hold (good or bad).  
 

Because scouting is traditionally community based, the fact that so much weight has been shifted to a national headquarters has been a mixed bag. Institutions on a national level can clearly have benefits in many ways local and districts can’t compete with.  But as we clearly see, there are disastrous drawbacks too.  When it comes to morals and moral behaviors, the landscape is nothing short of a minefield for all...regrettably.  
 

I happen not to agree with your position on homosexuality on a theological level, but that’s ok.   Our convictions are what guide us and make us good people. You clearly go further in your explanation to distinguish your position from that of someone’ who actively wants to discriminate.  You appear to want the best for someone and that is a good thing.l, one would hope everyone is that way.

here I am simply acknowledging what you are saying and the distinction you are making.  With the range of opinions expressed here, one quickly sees how complicated the circumstances have become.  I tend to want to believe most parents and leaders are good people wanting the best for youth and that does require guidance in morals and ethics.  They sign up for it.  At some points, local people will again come together with a common understanding of community morals as a starting point.  Most of us are not backwoods stump preachers and wouldn’t want them in troops.  But there are foundations for common ethics and I think adults do have the job to safeguard while they grow, but not dictate.

1 hour ago, Mrjeff said:

Here's another question.  Who mandates anything in the present BSA.  The national organization has disavowed ownership and control of the local councils.  I don't care about charters, permission to use a brand, or anything else about what "National" can and cannot do.  In reality, and according to the mysterious "National" all they own is 4 campgrounds, which are mortgaged to the top of the pine trees, and a brand.  If a parent finds out that their little boy spent the weekend being supervised by a gay man, get really pissed off, and through a fit, they are not going to "National"......they are heading right to the unit leader,  not assistant leaders or committee members, the one and only unit leader.  Then they will probably see the head of the organization that sponsors the unit.  It's that simple, mandate what you will, there are no scout police or scout courts.  This whole pile of s%:t has blown up into one big mess.  What started as a couple of dads taking some boys on a campouts and teaching them how to build a fire has turned into one of the biggest, most controversial,  politically minded, and self serving institutions in the country, and now that house of cards is falling down.  I just hope that the dedicated unit leaders have enough pieces to pick up.

It’s been a long time since I’ve noses around about scouts but I see there is a program called Traditional Scouting that harkens back to Braden Powell’s day.  It seems to really be the fundamentals upon which the entire program started and isn’t burdened by the modern culture wars.  It’s easy to see how it could be though antagonists have the BSA to pick on.  It’s quite fascinating to look back at all the tradition, discontinued merit badges (Master-at Arms and Blacksmithing are my favorites).  I can only imagine the reaction if scouting brought back master at arms and made it a required badge for eagle.  Considering what the organization has been put through, it would almost be worth doing just to poke a stick in the eye. The next step of twisting the organization will be content of merit badges.  Once these things start, they never seem to stop.  There are some good satires to be written about all this.

33 minutes ago, Mrjeff said:

Perhaps its because when we were young we were left to our own devices.  Members of a Boy Scout troop went to school together, played in the neighborhood together,  road bikes together, and just hung out together.  Scouting taught us that we were all equal and had the same oppertunity as everyone else.  We joined scouts to have fun and we did.  We enjoyed each others company and we worked together rain or shine.  We had respect for all adults and followed the rules.  We didn't get involved in major social issues and had no idea what racism was because we wernt mature enough to understand an invisible concept that we didn't care about anyway. Like you said, we were too busy having fun to worry about grand social experiments and learning wonderful lessons.  The lessons came disguised as fun.

Now here is a thought.  That’s spot on as far as I see it.  I guess many don’t think that’s a good thing. Pity isn’t it.

53 minutes ago, Mrjeff said:

Ok, let's look at it from another angle.   In the US girls dont tent with boys,  because.........boys can't be more then two years apart in age to tent together, because........men dont tent with women because...............a gay boy or girl tents with who?  We are mandated to have both male and female leadership if boys and girls are participating so if we have LGBTQ members present, by reason there must be LGBTQ adult leadership, so should it be male, female, or transgender?  Do the parents of the Scouts approve of their youth renting with a LGBTQ Scout, or going on a camping trip with LGBTQ adult leadership.  These are questions that must be answered by the sponsor.  It is totaly up to the sponsor who can participate and rather than fight a battle or risk a law suit many sponsors simply decided that participating in the Scouting program is no longer acceptable.  Jeezzzz the National Executive Board managed to alienate the whole body of LDS Churches.  But, some of the past sponsors have embraced other youth programs and are being quite successful.  I didn't cause the mass exodus from the Scouts, but I don't keep my eyes closed and pretend that the reasons the Boy Scouts of America is failing, don't exist.  

It seems the LDS has a system that survives scrutiny.  From what little I have read (and it is little) They have Decided to focus a little more on the religious angle and less on camping or out doors.  That is good for them but certainly takes on a more sectarian character but with 400,000 scouts and a existing template of scouts, it’s ready made for tweaking to their needs.  The country has excelled in faction building  so why not. I guess maybe that’s the future of scouts.  Sectarian offshoots with a rump organization that is open to traditional cross sections.  

1 hour ago, David CO said:

As are all of the anti-Catholic comments I hear in scouting.

That surprises me too.  I guess I just liveD in a privilege world.  We had a broad cross section of people in my troop in Memphis and none of these things or issues did I Ever hear of.  Of course the big issues I recall were Reagan, war in Lebanon, Cold War the birth of CNN and the just say no movement.  Maybe I have selective memory.  The big desks to us were rarely winning the blue ribbons slim knots at camporee, working on advancement and planning for next campout.  I’m sure adult leaders sat around campfires and discussed things but we were too busy having fun to get swept up in that.

47 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

I gotta say this is one of the more bigoted and ignorant post I've read here in a while. Too much misunderstanding to even start bring balance, but in context of morality and character,  just because the culture accepts bad behavior doesn't mean it isn't bad for the culture.

Barry

This entire discussion line on homosexuality baffles me.  I understand the social context, the cultural values, forced changes and all but when I went through, such matters never once surfaced that I could tell.  As it turns out, two people in my troop did later in life come out as gay but such notions and concerns never surfaced.  The worst we had was one scout that got suspended for apparently drinking wine.  That was indeed a scandal at the time in the mid 80’s.  I suppose I was either blind or the matter was just not an issue.  I suppose the difference is that the current generation feels they have a right to trumpet the fact and put others in the very awkward position of having to become political and ask questions.  
 

politics certainly is reflected in many of the merit badges but more from a skill or civic awareness rather than advocacy and debate standpoint.  These cultural things seem to be geared towards encouraging people to risk infighting.  That is horribly destructive.  It’s one thing to introduce a youth to Disability awareness or environmental science, they certainly can lead to larger discussions of personal civic responsibility.  It’s entirely another to want to bring explosive issues within a troop to force parents and youth to circle the wagons against each other and the community.  That is a point all Scouts and supporters ought to remember.  

As an example of how Scouts have adapted, I know there is the Disabilities Awareness merit badge badge.  That was not available at the time of my Eagle.  I doubt anyone would dispute the need and desirability of disabled boys and youth to bring great value and opportunity.  Clearly that was a response to social pressure and legal requirements.  
it may be that trying to understand how the changes of those forces changed scouting can be useful to the future.  I accept they are not apples to apples in comparison but the process of handling new forces can be.  

I agree about the religious angle.  It has god and country award that is available to just about every denomination and belief system (maybe not paganism) that one can conceive of.  I wish I had done it.  The discussion about oath and law, while personal and meaningful to the sense of values each member has, can begin to look like the council of Nicaea when early church authorities had to sit down and hammer out a creed.  Or, in alternate, the Anglican Lambeth conference  or Protestant denominational National  conventions that periodically meet to review and discuss doctrine. 
 

As I see it, this particular stage of scouting history is an opportunity to confirm its beliefs with a great emphasis on tradition. The challenge is clearly like many Conservative vs progressive conflicts in a give no quarter culture war and that is unfortunate.  Not every institution and organization has to be shattered and twisted beyond its solid roots.  The reality is that forcing change on one group suggests cultural superiority and an expectation of a complete unconditional acceptance of the ideas being forced from others.  
 

Paradoxically, while the new changes are expected, the traditionalist seem to not only be vilified but denied their own traditions.  I honestly don’t understand how this is being allowed to play out.  ‘Traditional Boy Scouts’ may need to be a new trademark name with clearly defined expectations.  it will take smarter people than me to figure this out but there are ways to find paths forward. 

The real test of character would be the people.  As we all know, Scouting is an idea with form and tradition that cannot be destroyed.  It’s shape and appearance could and it could require rebuilding but there is merit (in a tough sort of way) of putting an idea through a test.  It can emerge stronger and more pure in its followers and substance.  This is putting a great spin on a shitty deal but it’s a reality in many situations.  

People set up scholarships and volunteer assets like they do churches and parks.  There are many many people with assets and who believe in the mission who would step up and buy new property or donate.  That would be the mission.  It would tie people together and energize in a new way and give a lot of people focus.  I would be moved to contribute time and resources for that.  Masons had to do this after a terrible time in the 1840s.  Gymnastics and other sports, like other activities can’t be destroyed only reforged.

Like a lot of things, society changes and associations, groups and organizations are forced to change or shrivel up.  So many alternatives now exist for young people that zeroing in on a few can be difficult.  It seems that as the generations move forward, the shift in values makes tradition much more difficult.  The work place reflects this as anti-discrimination laws of all types demonstrate.  Growing up into those new workplace realities inevitably shifts to how kids are raised and how peers react to each other. This, of course, is only one dynamic.  The peer groups and internet life goes far beyond anything I could have ever imagined and is a staggering force and influence.  

Civic groups in general have faced a decline and the lack of example by parents and adults must reflect directly on the desire of children to do or not do the same.  These, among other, forces already have put Boy Scouts on the back foot. 
 

Sacred Cows?  A good mental exercise may be looking back in history to basic functions and objectives.  Looking back on activities when it started and establish a consensus on the district level.  One doesn’t have to jettison things but rather re-confirm the core and get a lot of clever people to market and advertise those focal points.  There is a good book called “The Starfish and the Spider”.  Don’t be mislead by the title but it demonstrates how local chapters of an organization differ from Centrally Run.  It is quite insightful and may be worth examining for scouts.

There are several  of silver linings...no lawsuit can strip scouting out of existence...It’s traditions, history, culture, uniforms, awards, names, etc.  People would flat reject that and fight against it even if the name was bought and tried to be suppressed.  

The real test of character would be the people.  As we all know, Scouting is an idea with form and tradition that cannot be destroyed.  It’s shape and appearance could and it could require rebuilding but there is merit (in a tough sort of way) of putting an idea through a test.  It can emerge stronger and more pure in its followers and substance.  This is putting a great spin on a shitty deal but it’s a reality in many situations.  

People set up scholarships and volunteer assets like they do churches and parks.  There are many many people with assets and who believe in the mission who would step up and buy new property or donate.  That would be the mission.  It would tie people together and energize in a new way and give a lot of people focus.  I would be moved to contribute time and resources for that.  Masons had to do this after a terrible time in the 1840s.  Gymnastics and other sports, like other activities can’t be destroyed only reforged. 

I’ve recently paid more attention to what has been going on and finally wanted to find a way to at least weigh in.  It can be difficult to reach a larger audience.  
 

There are those individuals who would torch it all and I get that.  No payment will erase the pain and the crime and justice won’t be done on most of the perpetrators or their abettors.  I don’t have a good solution for them because I would want severe retribution for a lifetime of scarring too.  

But as we know there is a lot of good to be had.  I suppose that scouts was originally local and limited.  Maybe there is value to returning to local/ district control without destroying traditions.  Much of my personal growth is tied to scouts and I’d just assume a ‘reborn’ organization exist with the same traditions. 

But like a lot of things, society changes and associations, groups and organizations are forced to change or shrivel up.  So many alternatives now exist for young people that zeroing in on a few can be difficult.  It seems that as the generations move forward, the shift in values makes tradition much more difficult.  The work place reflects this as anti-discrimination laws of all types demonstrate.  Growing up into those new workplace realities inevitably shifts to how kids are raised and how peers react to each other. This, of course, is only one dynamic.  The peer groups and internet life goes far beyond anything I could have ever imagined and is a staggering force and influence.  
Civic groups in general have faced a decline and the lack of example by parents and adults must reflect directly on the desire of children to do or not do the same.  These, among other, forces already have put Boy Scouts on the back foot. 

It may be that the organization has to contract for a while to preserve its core.  In this case, local/council control might well be the avenue to take.  It may be that focusing on achievements like Eagle, God and Country, civic pride, specific values and patriotism at all levels will be the best standards to embrace.  All organizations are in a hurricane of advertising, marketing and information overload.  At this point, keeping a healthy core alive at local levels seems the best solution. 

it may mean getting investors together to buy and put camps in trusts so they will be around.  I’m not sure but the proverbial gauntlets have been thrown down.