DigitalScout

It would be cool if some local scouts loaned the President a Scout Handbook - electronic or otherwise.

Is there an electronic copy of the Scout Handbook?  That would be so 21st century if so.

The LDS decision to stay with the BSA is consistent with their recent conciliatory tone towards the gay community.  

The LDS church was really surprised by the backlash after supporting California's proposition 8 which created a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and woman. LDS spent $20 million and bussed in church members to canvass neighborhoods to support Prop 8. The backlash was not only from gay community but inside the LDS as well as many LDS members quit the church in protest.  The LDS church felt the turmoil that their efforts created among member families with gay children.

Since then the LDS has been trying to mend fences with the gay community by being more inclusive with their gay members, stopped supporting anti-gay marriage initiatives, and created an outreach website called http://mormonsandgays.org/.

I was talking about hard science, i.e., biology and not psychiatry. I was talking about learned versus innate behaviors. The APA thinks you are what you are born with. The hard evidence for that position is lacking and far from conclusive.

That's an interesting perspective.  I consider psychiatry to be a hard science since anatomical and biological study is part of their medical training.  Psychiatrists first earn their MD before completing a 4-year residency in mental health.  Since they have an MD, they can prescribe drugs for correcting chemical imbalances, for example.  Psychiatrists are fully certified medical doctors.

Psychologists can hold a PhD or PsyD and most of their training is academic in nature.  They aren't MDs and they can't prescribe drugs.

Really? Because there is evidence that abuse, alcoholism, etc., are also tied to inherited behavior as you suggest sexuality is. HOWEVER, the scholars mostly agree that it is also a learned set of behaviors.

 

I have seen nothing that definitively proves sexuality is an innate characteristic or behavior.

It's not as simple as this is learned behavior and that is genetic.  For alcoholism, data suggests that some people are genetically prone to be alcoholics but the chances of them developing alcoholism is greatly diminished if alcohol is not part of the home lifestyle.  If I recall correctly, alcoholism is 40% genetic and 60% learned behavioral.   Aggressive behavior is similar: partly genetic and partly environmental.  

The American Association of Psychiatrists agrees with your conclusion:

  "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation." (emphasis added by me) http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.aspx

It's entertaining to me that this role modeling stuff seems to go right over your heads. Studies have shown that kids who come from divorced homes are more likely to divorce when they become adults. Kids who are around smokers are more likely to smoke and kids who come from homes of drug users are more likely to use drugs. Is that so surprising? Roll models do have an effect on those who observe them in one way of the other. One can't prevent our kids from being exposed to all people who exhibit dangerous behaviors, but most parents try. Now I can understand that many believe homosexuality is normal by birth, but to many others homosexual acts are not normal by birth and are very dangerous behaviors.

 

Barry

Absolutely: Parents model behavior that their children typically adapt.  But sexuality is a characteristic like eye color and height, not an adapted behavior.  Studies have shown that children raised in gay parent homes are no more likely to become gay adults than children raised in heterosexual parent homes.  Sexuality is not a learned or adapted behavior like smoking.

Here's an interesting history of slavery in Great Britain, Europe and the Americas.  Note the difference between the banning of the slave trade and the abolition of slavery. 

1777 - State of Vermont, an independent Republic after the American Revolution, becomes first sovereign state to abolish slavery

1787 - The Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade founded in Britain by Granville Sharp and Thomas Clarkson

1792 - Denmark bans import of slaves to its West Indies colonies, although the law only took effect from 1803.

1807 - Britain passes Abolition of the Slave Trade Act, outlawing British Atlantic slave trade.

- United States passes legislation banning the slave trade, effective from start of 1808.

1811 - Spain abolishes slavery, including in its colonies, though Cuba rejects ban and continues to deal in slaves.

1813 - Sweden bans slave trading

1814 - Netherlands bans slave trading

1817 - France bans slave trading, but ban not effective until 1826

1833 - Britain passes Abolition of Slavery Act, ordering gradual abolition of slavery in all British colonies. Plantation owners in the West Indies receive 20 million pounds in compensation

- Great Britain and Spain sign a treaty prohibiting the slave trade

1819 - Portugal abolishes slave trade north of the equator

- Britain places a naval squadron off the West African coast to enforce the ban on slave trading

1823 - Britain's Anti-Slavery Society formed. Members include William Wilberforce

1846 - Danish governor proclaims emancipation of slaves in Danish West Indies, abolishing slavery

1848 - France abolishes slavery

1851 - Brazil abolishes slave trading

1858 - Portugal abolishes slavery in its colonies, although all slaves are subject to a 20-year apprenticeship

1861 - Netherlands abolishes slavery in Dutch Caribbean colonies

1862 - U.S. President Abraham Lincoln proclaims emancipation of slaves with effect from January 1, 1863; 13th Amendment of U.S. Constitution follows in 1865 banning slavery

1886 - Slavery is abolished in Cuba

1888 - Brazil abolishes slavery

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/03/22/uk-slavery-idUSL1561464920070322

So now it was a troop for everybody, in the early or mid 50's. I'm kind of proud of that.

That's a great story. Scouting should be about not what divides, but what unites us. Because regardless of skin color, spiritual beliefs, and sexual orientation, we all love the outdoors, desire our children to grow into amazing adults and to instill common values.

So you ARE saying only believers of the Abrahamic god are allowed as members.  Even though the BSA says differently.

Bad Wolf is just clowning around.

But I think it is an interesting discussion. He has a valid point except I think our scouting forefathers meant exclusively the Christian God.

Back then, the U.S. wasn't the multicultural paradise that it is now. Antisemitism was widely acceptable until WWII. Even today my Jewish friends are surprised that synagogues sponsor BSA troops; they always thought Boy Scouts was a Christian thing. As for Muslims, wouldn't the BSA have used the Allah if that's what they meant?

Language is very powerful. The BSA should consider that God be changed to "your god(s)", "divine spirit", or "the universe."

I'm not going to tell parents anything. That's not my decision. I serve at the pleasure of my CO. They own the charter. They set the standards. If they do or don't want gay leaders then that's THEIR decision, not mine. I am not going to get in to a political situation. I am paid to enforce the rules of the BSA, who now says my CO says who can/can't be members. Until that ruling comes down I have to tell parents that we currently do not allow gay leaders per BSA policy until as such a time as my CO tells me otherwise.

If the CO's policy is unclear, perhaps you can refer inquiries to the CO rep. Otherwise you may misstate the CO's policy and give parents inaccurate information.

Political Correctness is the un-legislated, un-written law of the land.  If one does not comply they are judged in the court of public opinion of the minority and demonized.  Legilslative law and the US Constitution have been usurped by this process.  If we are a people governed by law, which law is it that takes precident?

 

Tthe court of law and the court of public opinion are not mutually exclusion: the coexist. That's actually the wonderful feature of our First Amendment: the right to express an opinion and the right of others to express their opposition.

More "tolerant"? At some point those supporting the inclusion of gay leaders need to realize -- or should I say, be more tolerant -- of the religious beliefs of those against it. It's pretty hypocritical to call the conservative religious folks intolerant when doing so is being intolerant of their freedom of religion. 

In a pluralistic society there exists an expectation of a certain level of tolerance in order to maintain a peaceful coexistence with others.

Yet Americans have a long history of creating religious enclaves so they can embrace their religion easier without outside influences and temptations.  One such enclave is New Square, New York, whose inhabitants are "members of the Skverer Hasidic movement who seek to maintain a Hasidic lifestyle disconnected from the secular world."

I'm not suggesting that you go live on an island, I'm merely pointing out that others with strong religious convictions have found it necessary to create a closed community free from the offenses of pluralism.

I admit that I am baffled how the presence of a gay person at the grocery, at school or at a scouting event is an infringement of religious freedom.

No business worth their stock would make a decision about future direction without first having in-depth conversations with their largest member. This may just be the straw that breaks the came's back as far as LDS is concerned.

The BSA has been having this discussion about gay members for years, if not decades.  The BSA executive board is well aware of the LDS position that they don't want any gay leaders and the latest decision is a compromise to accommodate religious COs who don't want to disallow gay leaders, such as LDS.

Like the Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians and Anglicans/Episcopalians, the LDS members have been putting a lot of pressure on the LDS leadership to be more tolerant.  LDS has been running a big campaign to reach out to their gay members and the gay community at large.  It would seem that breaking from the BSA over the new gay leader policy would be a step backwards for the LDS.

We had a scout (my son) make a recruitment video based on Minecraft for Cub Scouts. It took place in Mincraft in a virtual summer camp complete with archery range, dinning hall, water front, trading post, etc. Blew their little minds. That video is good for 5-7 scouts a year without even trying to recruit.

That's brilliant.  Would you mind sharing the video?  It sounds like a fantastic recruitment tool.

I can't imagine the Methodist church would have any issues with the BSA allowing gay scout leaders.  They already fully support the GSUSA which has allowed gay leaders for several years.

The United Methodist church, like the BSA, have been struggling with the gay issue.  Currently, the UMC does not allow gay pastors nor same-sex marriage.  But many Methodists feel that this policy should change.

 

... The idea of "harm" as the test for whether the moderators are to shut people up is designed not to create a guideline for debate, but to stop all debate.  Is it "harmful" to point out these facts: Gay men use meth at a rate 20 times the general population, gay men contract HIV/AIDS at a rate 14 times their share of the population, a study of San Francisco gay men found that 20% had more than 1000 sexual partners, that the suicide rate for post-op transexuals is the same as pre-op transexuals. 

 

Can there even be a real space left for religious opposition?  After all, isn't it harmful to note that as far as homosexuals, the Torrah says "their blood is upon them"?

 

The off-the-cuff addition to Terry's restrictions that discussion of the issue must not discuss homosexuals as a group is also nothing more than a barrier to discusion at all. ...

I believe this is a good example of what Terry wants to moderate.  This kind of post uses improper debating techniques because it uses the fallacy of stereotyping.  Stereotyping is the generalization that some people of a group have a characteristic so all members of that group have that characteristic.

Since it is not valid in a debate, it must be assumed that statistics are meant to denigrate the group which, I agree with Terry, is very un-scoutlike.

On the second part, I can't see how I can say to another Scouter that his beliefs are intrinsically disordered and gravely sinful, but I respect them. What rank hypocrisy!

There is a whole list of grave sins including lying, divorce, contraception, blasphemy, cheating, missing worshop services, envy, hatred, masturbation, and pornography.

If you have any married friends with less than 10 children, then I will guarantee they are using contraception. You don't associate with any divorced people?  And none of your friends have ever lied or masturbated?

It seems that your are cherry picking what you think is gravely sinful.  To me that is hypocrisy.

Just put your finger in the hole where the number is that you want to call and spin clockwise until it stops, let go and do it for all the numbers and the next thing you know, you're talking to your buddy.

A comedian was talking about rotary phones and how you would hate people with 0s in their phone number,  You curse them as you had to spin dial nearly 360 degrees.  That really made me laugh.

I like the fresh, new look.  And it's much faster.  Thanks for the refresh.  I'm sure the migration was pretty time consuming.

The families are awfully generous with your money.

A scout is brave. I tell our scouts that they must do what is right in their heart and be true to themselves because there will be times when social pressure will conflict with their values. "Those that matter don't mind. Those that mind, don't matter."

Kudos to Bruce Jenner for being brave and being true to himself.

A blanket ban on technology contributes to very image of irrelevancy that scouting is trying to overcome.

It's actually pretty cool that the scouts can use smartphones to take nature photos, track their hiking progress on alltrails.com, or research exciting camp destinations and find dutch oven recipes. A GPS is a great tool while on an outing but can't replace the a map and compass because batteries could die.

We allow kids to play appropriate video games for a very limited time at night before lights-out at winter camp and they just love it.

Having a flexible technology policy will encourage more kids to join and stay with scouting.

We have a bugler. We actually had 3 scouts try out for the position and the scouts chose the best bugler. Our bugler, when he remembers to bring his trumpet, will play assembly at the troop meeting opening then retreat at the meeting close. Here's a great website with bugle calls: http://www.music.army.mil/music/buglecalls/default.asp

In California the election organizers did something different this election. They recruited high school kids to work the election. They got community service credit and can also get paid $65-$150. I think is a great experience for the youth and I'm going to encourage our scouts to volunteer during the next election.

We do a Bobcat ceremony where we paint the new scouts faces with dot and lines. This is a huge hit. You can find a ceremony on the Interwebs.

so you ignore that BSA National excludes Atheist's from being in the BSA?

I think I speak for most adult volunteers that it's not our job to be some kind of the BSA basiji.

Unit leaders should review the Declaration of Religious Principle before getting out the atheist litmus paper:

• The BSA does not define ... a belief in God or the practice of religion.
  
• The BSA does not require membership in a religious organization or association ...
  
• The BSA respects the convictions of those who exercise their constitutional freedom to
  practice religion as individuals ...
  
• Only people willing to subscribe to these declarations of principles shall be entitled to
  certificates of leadership ...
  

They way I read it, if you accept a leadership position, you can't define another person's religious practice or God and you must respect their constitutional religious freedom. Enforcing some amorphous religion requirement when the other person gets to define what religion and God means to them is an impossibility.