Dictatorship or "Democracy"

[Bob White 20]

The difference PS is accusing someone of public crime or a private offense.

 

If you are a member of our bridge club and the rest of us are tired of you always being late or worse yet making bad coffee, we can kick you out, we don't have to prove to a court that you make bad coffee because we are not accusing you of a crime. And if you want to take us to court we will tell the jusge that we are a private group and you make lousy coffee. The judge will then tell you he has no juristicttion over a private organizations freedom of association, so everyone go home.

 

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal condition, being removed from a private organization is not.

 

If a leader wants to take the BSA to court over losing their membership as Dale it they will find that it is the BSA who is protected by 'innocent until proven guilty' not the member. It's been tried and the Supreme Court says the BSAcan determine membership at will.

 

I do not understand the difficulty in understanding this.

 

[Kudu 186]

> Kleenex has a trademark on their name are they the only tissue

> company that exists? Pepsi has a trademark on their name, are they

> the only soda that exists.

 

The brand name "Boy Scouts of America" should have the protection of a trademark. "Boy" or "Scout" are the equivalents to "tissue" and "soda."

 

Fortunately, through a lack of foresight, James West neglected to trademark the word "boy."

 

In England the WOSM Scouts Association does not have an exclusive right to "Scout." In America the BSA was not successful in preventing the Girl Scouts from using it either.

 

But not to worry, Bob, the liberals are sleeping.

 

> What is preventing anyone from starting up a youth organization

> competing with Boy Scouts?

 

Theoretically the Congressional Charter, although nobody has put any real effort into it since Randolph Hearst established the "American Boy Scout," the American branch of Baden-Powell's arch rival, the British Boy Scouts. For the BSA's side of the story, see:

 

http://www.inquiry.net/traditional/b-p/deposition.htm

 

> The Scouting trademark is being challenged? Tell us about that.

 

The case is in a San Francisco court right now. If YouthScouts gets a favorable ruling, then it is off to the Ninth Circuit, which is no friend of the BSA. From there it is on to Bush's new Supreme Court. Say "Thank you, Ralph Nader!

 

See:

 

http://youthscouts.org/news.html

 

As the Chinese curse says, "May you live in interesting times!"

 

 

[Bob White 20]

Indian Guides, 4-H, Civil Air Patrol, Royal Rangers, Campfire Boys and Girls.....

 

ever think that mabe the reason some aren't as large as the BSA is simply because they aren't as appealing to the youth as the BSA programs. Maybe it has nothing to do with whether its a monopoly or not meaybe its just becaues its a good program?

[Kudu 186]

If that were true, then we would return to William Hillcourt's BSA program before it was gutted in 1972 and the numbers went down.

 

On that we apparently agree :-/

 

Numbers aren't everything. Most of the organizations that you cite would rather embody certain values, than to be the most popular youth organization in America.

 

Even the BSA is willing to sacrifice numbers to hold to its "deeply held beliefs," like the idea that kicking little agnostic children out of Scouting makes Jesus happy.

[Bob White 20]

So then you are changing your statement and agreeing that there have been other youth organizations that have developed successfully despite the BSa trademarking the name Scouting?

[Kudu 186]

Apples and Oranges.

 

Indian Guides, 4-H, Civil Air Patrol, and Campfire Boys and Girls are NOT Scouting.

 

The point is that the BSA is only one brand of Scouting, in the same way that McDonald's is only one brand of burgers. People who do not like the BSA's corporate product should be able to practice Scouting as it is done in other countries.

 

There are many advantages to a free market economy, Bob. Competition benefits everyone, including those who choose to stay in the BSA.

 

The first benefit you will see is one of the largest outdoor youth programs in the world offer an outdoor uniform.

 

[Bob White 20]

How many other Red Cross-like programs are there in the USA with the word Cross in them? How many Civil Air Patrols are there with the name Air Patrol in them? How many other Royal Ranger-like programs are there with the name Ranger in them? Can you think of any other 4-H organizations that have the phrase 4-H in their name?

 

What is the this thing some people have for wanting the BSA to be like like other programs? Just because England does it do we really have to? My apologies to Eamonn but I refuse to drink beer at room temperature just because our British friends do. There are well over a hundred different Scouting programs in the world and very few are structured like England, or like us, or like Chile.

 

Why do we have to be like anybody else? Trademarking the scouting name benefits us as members by certifying our identity in the community. Why do you suppose that other group wants the word Scout in their name? For the instant identification. Whose history and identification are they looking to benefit from? Ours. It's not the word they want, it's the instant community recognition factor that we as members have developed over nearly one hundred years. It is the assumption of program quality based on the BSA program that they want people to identify with when they hear their name. They want people to think they they are us.

 

This is not the first time this has been tried. This kind of thing pops up every few years. Every time the court has upheld the BSA trademark, it will in this case also.

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[evmori 11]

OK the BSA can kick me out if I complain the SE is padding membership numbers so he/she can get that big bonus. Would I still do it? In a heartbeat. Why? Because I have ethics & morals. In addition, if I were to teach the Scouts in my Troop & the children in my family to make ethical & moral decisions not doing anything would be wrong.

 

In addition, if the BSA did kick me out because I complained the SE is padding membership numbers so he/she can get that big bonus would I fight to get my membership back? Yes, I would. Moreover, if the ONLY reason I was kicked out was that I blew the whistle, I will bet I would get my membership back.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Kudu 186]

> How many other Red Cross-like programs are there in the USA with

> the word Cross in them?

 

Does the Red Cross deny blood to children who are agnostic about the existence of God? If it did, you would see Congress grant charters to alternatives.

 

> How many other Royal Ranger-like programs are there with the

> name Ranger in them?

 

"Royal Rangers" is protected, "Ranger" is not.

 

> What is the this thing some people have for wanting the BSA to be

> like like other programs? Just because England does it do we really

> have to? My apologies to Eamonn but I refuse to drink beer at room

> temperature just because our British friends do.

 

That is the whole point, Bob. In a free market the BSA can be the BSA, and those who don't like their brand of Scouting can go elsewhere. Just because you don't like warm beer, doesn't give you the right to define "beer" for everyone else.

 

> Why do we have to be like anybody else?

 

In a free country you don't have to be like everyone else, but more importantly we don't have to be like you :-/

 

> Trademarking the scouting name benefits us as members by certifying

> our identity in the community. Why do you suppose that other group

> wants the word Scout in their name? For the instant identification.

 

Scouting is instantly recognizable anywhere in the world. It is not something that the BSA invented. Scouting is Camping, Outdoor Uniforms, Patrol System, Advancement, Role Models, and the Scout Promise & Law. That's what Scouting is. Scouting is not the Eleven Skills of Leadership, the One Minute Manager, or the values of the religious right.

 

> Whose history and identification are they looking to benefit from?

> Ours. It's not the word they want, it's the instant community

> recognition factor that we as members have developed over

> nearly one hundred years.

 

Most of the people who worked to build Scouting over the last hundred years, including myself and most of the Scouter.Com community, were people of good will who were in it for benefit of the Scouts. It is the religious fundamentalists who want the "instant community recognition" that comes from promoting their values as the "traditional values" of Scouting.

 

> It is the assumption of program quality based on the BSA

> program that they want people to identify with when they

> hear their name. They want people to think they are us.

 

That is a two-edged sword because lots of people associate the BSA with hate politics. But the BSA is not Scouting, the BSA is just a religious corporation that seeks to identify Scouting with right wing politics.

 

> This is not the first time this has been tried. This kind of thing

> pops up every few years. Every time the court has upheld the

> BSA trademark, it will in this case also.

 

Maybe. But if the case gets out of the San Francisco court, to the Ninth Circuit, and on to the Supreme Court, it might raise enough attention that Americans start to think the unthinkable: that the problem with Scouting is not its right wing politics, the problem with Scouting is the Boy Scouts of America's monopoly on Scouting.

 

In the end, after many years of litigation, the success of an alternative Scouting movement in the United States will depend not on liberals, but on the interests of moderate Republicans. If an alternative Scouting association fills some practical need in the market, then it will succeed as a small niche organization. This may come from some currently unexpected direction, for instance the desire for a form of Scouting with a spiritual rather than a literalist approach to Duty to God, or the need of girls for a rigorous outdoor alternative to the Girl Scouts.

 

Those who truly love Scouting are interested in Scouting in ALL its different forms. For them Scouting is a movement, not the monopoly product of one multi-million dollar corporation.

 

 

 

[Bob White 20]

WOW how many different topics can you discuss in one post? I thought this was about the BSA trademark not the membership regulations. Trademarks are a tool of the freemarket not a hinderance to it.

 

The BSA trademark and the BSA congressional charter are two different things.

 

The BSA showed enough evidence that the word "scout" in relationship to a youth movement, was significantly identifiable to the members of the BSA. and that at the time it was granted no other youth movement had that strong of identity. The same rules are applied today for trademark applications. Its a long process, over a years time for the name to be researched and challenged. But once you have the trademark it's yours until you abandon it.

 

Other youth groups have managed to do just fine without the name "scout" in them so whats the problem?

 

Why the need to ride on the coat tails of the 95 year history of the BSA?

 

So far in EVERY case that has challenged the trademark, a judge has found sufficient evidence that to do so would impede on the legal rights of the BSA.

 

What legal grounds are you aware of that no lawyer has every thought of that would give any credibibility to your opinion?

 

"But the BSA is not Scouting, the BSA is just a religious corporation that seeks to identify Scouting with right wing politics.

 

And there is the crux of the matter. You personally do not like the parent organization and you have no idea who "they" are or what "they" do. And so you feed that lack of information with emotion rather than fact.

 

I watched a windmill at work once that had no grain, but when the wind blew the arms started spinning and the mill wheels started grinding but nothing got produced. Complaining is no different.

 

 

 

[fgoodwin 23]

I'm no Moderator, but I knew when this thread opened that it had the potential to slip into an OT shouting match. It has now done so.

 

The Mods should consider moving this thread to the "Issues & Politics" sound-off folder.

 

Please.

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

I don't think that BSA is a "religious corporation", but one could make a case that elements within BSA have made an effort to align the organization with the conservative religious movement. Whether you see that as good or bad depends on what side of the ideological fence you happen to be sitting on.

 

I've seen windmills fall into disuse because no one was keeping an eye on the mechanisms that keep the mill working. Without regular maintenance and replacing parts where needed, the mill becomes less useful and less likely to be used. Complaining can be seen as someone standing outside simply yelling that the windmill isn't working right, but it can also be seen as the first effort towards making someone aware that the windmill may need some repairs.

[ronvo 10]

BW - you just don't seem to understand that scouting is not BSA Scouting. Scouting is a game.

 

Major League Baseball is not japanese baseball nor is it Little League Baseball.

 

BUT the name Little League Baseball is protected as is MLB; however baseball is not. So why can't there be another scouting "league".

 

I know that you will say that the word baseball was around before the Leagues and that scouting was started in this country with BSA.

 

It's the chicken or the egg.

 

You will also say that if peopel don't like it they can go to another program. Well Campfire USA while in someways similar is NOT scouting.

 

Also if not following the BSA way isn't scouting, then no other country does scouting. Many people just want to do scouting a little diffrent form the BSA way, in the USA.

 

I really beleive if the consevatives were the ones one the outside, they would be screaming free market competition and how un-American it is for BSA to deinie the rights of others.

 

JMO,

 

ronvo

[Kudu 186]

> WOW how many different topics can you discuss in one post? I

> thought this was about the BSA trademark not the membership

> regulations.

 

Membership regulations are only one symptom of what happens when the government grants one religious corporation a "dictatorship" over Scouting in the United States. Most, if not all, of the problems that people have with the BSA are caused by the BSA's monopoly on Scouting. The whistle-blower thread of this discussion is a result of the assumption that Scouting has be run as a multi-million dollar corporation. Alternatives to the BSA will probably all follow the volunteer model advocated by Baden-Powell in his last message to Scouters, and is the practice in the local neighborhood branches of Scouting associations in most of the world.

 

> Other youth groups have managed to do just fine without the name

> "scout" in them so whats the problem?

 

See my previous posts.

 

> Why the need to ride on the coat tails of the 95 year history of the BSA?

 

Likewise, why do religious fundamentalists and people earning $200,000 have to ride on the coat tails of Scouting as a movement?

 

> What legal grounds are you aware of that no lawyer has every thought

> of that would give any credibibility to your opinion?

 

I simply don't know what the legal strategy will be, and if I did I would not broadcast it. However, the YouthScouts are conducting an extensive discovery process, and I believe that this information about the history of the trademark on "Scouts" will be available to others at some point.

 

> And there is the crux of the matter. You personally do not like the parent

>organization and you have no idea who "they" are or what "they" do.

 

I have a pretty good idea of who they are and what they do.

 

> And so you feed that lack of information with emotion rather than fact.

 

You should read up on the psychological term "projection" :-/

 

> I watched a windmill at work once that had no grain, but when the

> wind blew the arms started spinning and the mill wheels started

> grinding but nothing got produced. Complaining is no different.

 

I'm not complaining, I'm working to build an alternative to the BSA.

 

There is some truth in what you say because this discussion is a distraction from this week's work to research the historical names of Baden-Powell's Proficiency Badges :-/

 

> The Mods should consider moving this thread to the "Issues & Politics"

> sound-off folder.

 

Given the title, I hadn't noticed that it was not in that category.

 

> I don't think that BSA is a "religious corporation", but one could make

> a case that elements within BSA have made an effort to align the

> organization with the conservative religious movement.

 

Prairie, the BSA is currently positioning itself as a religious corporation. The following was complied from BSA sources by Stephen Hansen, Ph.D. in another forum:

 

Yes. I think it is appropriate to provide references to some legal cases in

which the BSA has said that it is a religious organization....

 

In case no. 92C-140, Riley County District Court, Bradford W. Seabourn vs.

Coronado Area Council, December 16, 1992, the BSA filed a "Separate

Answer" with the following as its "Sixth Affirmative Defense:

 

"Boy Scouts of America is a religious organization, association or

society, or nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised

or controlled by or in conjunction with religious organizations,

associations or societies within the meaning of the Kansas Act

Against Discrimination, expressly permitted by the Act to limit the

occupancy of its real property, which it owns or operates for

other than a commercial purpose, to persons who believe in God or to

give preference to persons who believe in God."

 

Recently, in the Balboa Park case, U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones

Jr. ruled that "The Boy Scouts are a religious organization"

http://www.bsalegal.org/downloads/1DE211_July_2003_Order.pdf pp.11.

 

The judge based that finding on assertions made by BSA in pleadings of

that case. That finding was not disputed in the BSA appeal of that case.

Indeed, in the appeal brief, the BSA compares itself to a number of

specific religious organizations, and argues that such leases may be

extended to religious organizations

http://www.bsalegal.org/downloads/Ninth_Circuit_Brief.pdf

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

Hi Kudu,

 

And thanks for the info. I thought part of the issue with BSA in some quarters was that sometimes it says it's a non-secular non-profit, sometimes it says it's a religious non-profit. So, as far as you know, are they now saying, more or less, unequivically, that they are a religious organization? I suppose, you could be a religious organization that is non-secular as well, but BSA does seem to be leaning towards conservative religious views, so that would seem to lean away from being non-secular.