Philly raises scouts rent $199,999/year

[evmori 11]

Now wouldn't it be a hoot if someone leased the building then sub-let it back to the Scouts for $1.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

onehouraweekmy writes:

leave BSA alone and unchanged. It's just common courtesy.

 

That's what Philadelphia is doing. Charging them the same rates as anyone else is leaving them alone; subsidising their HQ expenses is not. And having gays and atheists subsidise their expenses is not "courtesy".

[Lisabob 13]

When one has a philosophical difference with an organization that otherwise does so much good, one is placed into a difficult position. One has to weigh how much the problem impinges on the everyday workings of the group, to what extent the problem is causing harm to others, and whether change is more likely to come from within or from without, or from a combination of the two. In weighing these matters, some will choose to leave - or, not join to start with. Some will choose to enroll their kids, but not be active themselves, as adult scouters in support of the program their kids are in (which I find the most problematic of all possible positions, personally). Some will choose to be active but with a mind toward at least raising the issues in question where the opportunity is appropriate and fruitful to do so. And still others will just bite their tongue.

 

We all have to make those choices for ourselves, onehouraweekmy.

 

Personally, I will not defend the BSA's exclusionary policies because I think they're both morally wrong and short sighted. When my child came home from school with a flyer advertizing cub scouts, I was hesitant to let him join because of these policies. I envisioned a bunch of adults foaming at the mouth against gays (I didn't know, at the time, about the atheist issue) and passing on their homophobic intolerance to my elementary school aged son through lessons of indoctrination at every turn. In that, I don't think I'm too different from a lot of parents these days, who have a pretty negative image of scouting even if they know little about the bigger picture of the BSA program.

 

In fact, the main reason I was willing to give it a try was because my husband had been a scout and my dad was a scout and my godfather was a scout, and they all turned out to be pretty decent people in no small part because of their scouting experiences. When my husband started regaling me with stories of the fun he'd had as a boy scout (in an otherwise somewhat troubled childhood) I thought, ok, we'll see. And when I discovered that individual units are run by local parents and NOT (mostly) people with any kind of political agenda except to raise healthy, happy, well-adjusted young men of character, then I had to weigh my response on the basis of everything I mentioned above. Not to mention that practically every little boy in my son's class was joining, that we had just moved here and my son was having a hard time adjusting and getting to know kids, and that there weren't any other options in town for little boys.

 

There is no perfect group that meets every member's every need. I find more good than not good about BSA, and frankly, most of the "not good" has practically no bearing on how any of the packs, troops, crews, ships, or teams I've met function. No one asked whether my son was gay (or atheist) when he joined cub scouts. It never once came up in the pack we were in and it is a rare thing to have even a philosophical discussion of these issues in the troop he's part of, either. To the extent that happens at all, it is generally late at night around a camp fire with a cup of coffee in hand, talking about would-could-should kinds of things. The same is true of the many other units I've become familiar with over the last several years.

 

While I wish BSA National would screw its head on straight and realize what a major negative their membership policies are (IMO), in the meantime I prefer to work within the system. Others can choose otherwise, and I respect those choices. But please don't tell me what I have to do. It isn't going to work anyway.

 

And so - if BSA wants to qualify for the cheap non-profit rate, great. Let it meet the legal criteria as set forth by the city of Philadelphia. If it is unwilling to do so, fine, that's the BSA's choice and one of the great things about freedom - the BSA has the ability to decide for itself what its membership criteria will be (however misguided I personally think those criteria are). But then quit whining about having to pay more because of those choices. You can't have it both ways.

 

 

 

 

[GernBlansten 10]

Ditto Lisa, your experience and attitudes towards BSA mirror mine and most of my fellow unit leaders.

[FScouter 24]

I haven't heard of any whining from BSA about this.

[Lisabob 13]

FScouter, you're right (as far as I can tell) that the folks in Irving are not whining about the situation in Philadelphia - at least, not in public. Rather, I should have said that some BSA members are. I stand corrected, and thank you. So then, to take the logic of at least one poster, if National is ok with it, then we should all be lock-step behind National's view on this issue, right?

[packsaddle 753]

Let's see, I'm trying to find "freedom of association" in the Constitution, also "Right to Privacy". Can anyone help me out here?

 

Lisabob, years ago when I was CM, the DE invited himself to our B&G and he DID 'foam at the mouth' about gays and atheists. Our enrollment declined a week later during rechartering. Some of the families confided even later to me that the DE's 'foaming' was the reason. These were regular people with no agenda other than to avoid that kind of environment for their boys. The DE was never invited to speak again as long as I was there. We went on to thrive as a pack. I suspect that, as mentioned a while back, BSA knows it is in a lose-lose situation with respect to this policy and, things being all about money, BSA decided to finesse these issues to try to avoid the bad publicity without jeopardizing support of some of their largest denominations. I could be wrong but this makes sense in light of the jumble of actions, lack of actions, and realities as applied in the field.

 

Moreover, Lisa, your logic is impeccable regarding the lack of BSA whining. If we are good scouters we should all be in lock-step behind the apparent decision by BSA to conform to the Philly decision.

In the improbable event that we find ourselves on a lifeboat and Lisa is voted off...1) I will defend her and then 2) I will volunteer in her place.

 

I note here that there are plenty of drunks and con-men (con-persons) out there who, upon getting caught breaking the law, feel sorry for themselves as victims of people out to get them. The victim stance is a pathetic self-deception.

If anyone doesn't want to be sued because of their illegal discrimination, they should STOP BREAKING THE LAW! Philly stopped and they're not getting sued as a result. Good for them!

BSA is free to continue to legally discriminate on the basis of religion and sexual orientation, or any other basis they choose (race, eye color, national origin, anything). But if a government entity helps subsidize BSA, that entity can expect to be sued for breaking the law. And rightfully so.

[onehouraweekmy 10]

Yet again, if Philly, instead of supporting the BSA's mission as it has for many years, wants to attack it under the guise of non-discrimination, it's a democracy and the people of Philly can pass on the wisdom of that judgment at the next City council election. The local council will survive this attack. My only point is that it is obvious that Philly is politically attacking BSA because of BSA's long-held policy, and in the process, separating itself from all the good the BSA does, which is why the city supported them in the first place.

 

I'm delighted that so many Scouters are willing to contribute to scouting despite their belief that active homosexuals should be allowed to be leaders and to camp with young boys in close quarters. Again, all are entitled to their views. Like y'all, this topic never comes up in the nitty-gritty of local scouting, but that may be because the policy itself keeps problems from arising that would cause disruption and controversy at the local unit level.

 

Lastly, if people want to change the BSA into something it never was, I suppose they have the legal right to try to do so. I can fairly guarantee that should this policy ever change, however, the BSA will lose a lot of charters, starting with my Troop's, if I have anything to do about it. Mormons, Catholics, many Evangelical COs will be gone. But you'll have your politically correct BSA in return. And you'll start floundering like the GSUSA.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

The BSA has already lost a lot of charters; their discrimination made it impossible for their single largest chartering partner (public schools) to continue. And if the GSUSA is "floundering", how do you characterize the BSA, which has lost more members?

 

And why would a change in national policy affect your troop? Each troop would still be able to exclude anyone they wanted for any reason. The CoL council says they have gay members NOW; about all the national policy is doing is preventing them from making it official and signing a statement that says they don't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. So what is being accomplished here?

[Ohio_Scouter 10]

I'd still like to see the missing post so that I can decide for myself whether or not there was an "attack". Feel free to send by PM if it's too un-Scoutlike to post in public.

 

Thanks

[Hunt 11]

"And why would a change in national policy affect your troop? Each troop would still be able to exclude anyone they wanted for any reason."

 

To follow up on this, this is the current situation with respect to female leaders in units--Chartering organizations are free to decide to exclude female leaders if they wish. Presumably, this would be the likely policy change with respect to gay leaders if that were to occur. As a result, I have never been convinced that such a change would have the cataclysmic effect that some fear. But didn't I read in another thread that in Britain, units are no longer free to remain single sex?

[evmori 11]

The BSA might have lost public schools as a CO but most were replaced by PTA's so the net effect was minimal. And if I recall correctly, the membership numbers are up over the same time last year.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[erickelly65 10]

I actually don't believe that, if the BSA were to changes its policy on Homosexuality, the Catholic Church in America would necessarily change its support of scouting in a significant way. I base this belief on two things:

 

One: Currently, the Church actively sponsors Girl Scouting, which folks here at this forum seem to think is the end-all-be-all of inclusivity, as one of its youth ministries and takes no issue with their stances on sexuality or faith.

 

Second the teachings of the Church are not in conflict with allowing homosexuals (youth or adult) to be involved in parish ministries. The Church does not condone homosexuality but neither does it seek to persecute those of that inclination. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: #2358 "The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. .... They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided."

[Ohio_Scouter 10]

Well, it's nice to see that the proposed rent hike hasn't affected some Cradle of Liberty scout units (see below). Bravo, Philly Scouts!

 

 

Pennsylvania Boy Scouts Build Stretcher, Carry Injured Hiker 3 Miles

Monday, October 22, 2007

 

 

READING, Pa. A Boy Scout troop came to the rescue of a hiker who had fallen and hit her head on the Appalachian Trail, building a stretcher from scratch and carrying her 3 miles to help.

 

Jane B. Scholl of Mohnton was hiking on Blue Mountain in northern Berks County with a friend Saturday. As the two reached the Pinnacle, a popular overlook, Scholl was looking for a good spot to take pictures when she fell about 5 feet.

 

"I landed right on my eye," she said Sunday. "I was cut and bleeding and felt really woozy."

 

Scholl, 41, and the friend started down the mountain, but Scholl began to feel worse. That's when they ran into Boy Scout Troop 226 from Rockledge in Montgomery County.

 

"As we were hiking back down we caught up to her and that's when we saw that she was bleeding," scoutmaster Christopher J. Gallagher said.

 

The eight Scouts built a stretcher from tree branches and their sweat shirts.

 

"We took sticks, shoved them into each sleeve and made it long enough for her body to fit on. We carried her three miles," Eagle Scout Andrew Swartz Jr. said.

 

Gallagher had called for help on his cell phone and the troop was met by medics who began treatment. Scholl was then taken to a helicopter waiting to fly her to Reading Hospital, where she was treated for a concussion and cuts and bruises and released Sunday.

 

When Troop 226 returned Sunday, members were met by a cheering crowd and a band featuring drummers and bagpipes.

 

"I feel really good. It's nice to know I helped someone out in their time of need," scout Bill Bowman said.

 

 

[Pint 23]

Reading through these forums, it appears that some city/Local Governments in the US seem to have an Anti Scouting stance.

Its all very well going on and on about equal oportunities and non discrimination, but how many of these local governmental authorities operate something called positive discrimination?

 

Fortunatly there hasnt been any ( that i know of) instances like that in the UK, although we do let homosexuals join ( as part of the equal oportunities policy) although "the avowed absence of religious belief is a bar to appointment to a Leadership position"

 

 

These links may be of interest:

http://www.scoutbase.org.uk/library/hqdocs/facts/pdfs/fs185082.pdf

http://www.scoutbase.org.uk/library/hqdocs/facts/pdfs/fs185083.pdf

 

and the equal oportunites policy

http://www.scoutbase.org.uk/library/hqdocs/por/2006/2_2.htm

 

 

As for the religious side of things, from what i understand the duty to God ( or any variation on the word God) bit isnt just a UK (or US) requirement, but its also a requirement for each national organisation, such as Boy Scouts of America, The Scout Association (UK) etc to belong to the World Organisation of the Scout Movement (W.O.S.M) and as far as I know, there is only one National Scout organisation in one country that doesnt have the religious requirements, due to historical reasons.