Jump to content
robert12

Update On Adult Leadership Standards

Recommended Posts

You could be right.  But, it also says the BSA will only indemnify "bona fide religious chartered organizations." 

 

So now BSA is taking over and deciding who's a bona fide religious organization before the charter them?  BSA seems to be becoming less and less trustworthy as time goes on.  

 

At least with the Lutheran Pioneers, Royal Rangers and Trail life, one knows where they stand whether you belive in it or not..  BSA has gotten a bit vague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a professional wordsmith but apparently neither are the people who wrote this PDF. :)

Well, I am, and the wording leaves a lot to be desired. That does not necessarily mean the writers were not professional wordsmiths. It was probably written or at least approved by the BSA's attorneys. I think they were trying to be clever and avoid saying certain things for BSA-internal political reasons. It may also have been "written by committee" which is often a recipe for poor and unclear wording because the final product ends up being a compromise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither of you has attempted to explain why Scouts should participate in activities like those photos, but those photos shouldn't be in view of Scouts.  If you find the behavior of these people in their cultural showcase to be wholly inappropriate, why do you want them to register in your unit so badly?

 

Thinking error lesson: I have not (and I'm fairly certain that NJ hasn't either) made any such assertion in the first place. You falsely claimed that we did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither of you has attempted to explain why Scouts should participate in activities like those photos, but those photos shouldn't be in view of Scouts.

I have already answered that. I said that I am not responsible for any Scouts participating in "activities like those photos", but I am one of the people with some responsibility for what people see in this forum. I can't explain what other people do. I don't necessarily agree with what another particular person may do, even though I might agree with him or her on one or many issues. I can only explain what I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're both in earnest: No pro-inclusion person here can give any explanation as to why Scouts should be at gay pride parades. 

And that's just about all I need to know about the pro-inclusion element.

Edited by packsaddle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now BSA is taking over and deciding who's a bona fide religious organization before the charter them?

 

How is this different from the BSA not allowing Wiccans to charter units, or changing the religious award rules to prevent a Wiccan award, which they've been doing for years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're both in earnest: No pro-inclusion person here can give any explanation as to why Scouts should be at gay pride parades. 

And that's just about all I need to know about the pro-inclusion element.

 

I am pro-inclusion, and I do not think that Scouts should be at the types of gay pride parades you are posting photos from. In fact, I mentioned this thread to the lesbian staying with us for the summer, as she headed out the door to the San Diego Pride. Her response? "NOBODY should be bringing children to a Pride parade. Anyone who does is an idiot." So you will find that there is at least one person in the LGBT community that agrees with me - kids don't belong at Pride parades.

 

I also do not think that Scouts should be at Hooters, Tilted Kilt, or any other Breastaurant franchise either if that helps.

Edited by packsaddle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you will find that there is at least one person in the LGBT community that agrees with me - kids don't belong at Pride parades.

I am sure there are many more than that. Some of the gay people I have known would never be seen at a gay pride parade themselves. Two couples I can think of (one male couple, one female couple) were just people living quiet suburban lives with the person of their choice. One of the couples I would have to call pretty conservative. I don't think any of them ever got involved in any sort of activism. And then other gay people I have known (mostly younger than the two couples I am talking about) were very "activist", and others were at various places in between. Kind of a spectrum of people - almost as if they were real people and not stereotypes. Imagine that.

Edited by NJCubScouter
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this different from the BSA not allowing Wiccans to charter units, or changing the religious award rules to prevent a Wiccan award, which they've been doing for years?

That really gets under my skin.

 

I am pro-inclusion, and I do not think that Scouts should be at the types of gay pride parades you are posting photos from. In fact, I mentioned this thread to the lesbian staying with us for the summer, as she headed out the door to the San Diego Pride. Her response? "NOBODY should be bringing children to a Pride parade. Anyone who does is an idiot." So you will find that there is at least one person in the LGBT community that agrees with me - kids don't belong at Pride parades.

 

I also do not think that Scouts should be at Hooters, Tilted Kilt, or any other Breastaurant franchise either if that helps.

I think anyone who is honest agrees, which is why it is baffling that Scouts UK and Canada are so enthusiastic about it.  It's too bad I hurt CambridgeSkip's feelings via reductio ad absurdum by pointing out that Scouts UK's enthusiasm for these events is disgusting, I'm sure he could have explained it.

Nevertheless, American Scouters (who should be cashiered) have already been taking Scouts to pride parades against all good judgement (because they are of poor character) and against BSA regulations, and next year you will see Scouts at pride parades in droves. 

Again, the fortunate side of local option is that the only Scouts who will be exposed to the nudity, public sex, public bondage, etc. that goes on at these parades will be the sons of the people who want all that in the first place.

Edited by Scouter99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That really gets under my skin.

 

I think anyone who is honest agrees, which is why it is baffling that Scouts UK and Canada are so enthusiastic about it.  It's too bad I hurt CambridgeSkip's feelings via reductio ad absurdum by pointing out that Scouts UK's enthusiasm for these events is disgusting, I'm sure he could have explained it.

Nevertheless, American Scouters (who should be cashiered) have already been taking Scouts to pride parades against all good judgement (because they are of poor character) and against BSA regulations, and next year you will see Scouts at pride parades in droves. 

Again, the fortunate side of local option is that the only Scouts who will be exposed to the nudity, public sex, public bondage, etc. that goes on at these parades will be the sons of the people who want all that in the first place.

 

Your  reductio ad absurdum  was delivered in an insulting manner, and you know it. The equivolent would be me saying that I assume that all who are anti-inclusion would rather just tie all the gays to fence, torture and and kill them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard), or bludgeon and kill them (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/dad-killed-daughter-lesbian-lover-gay-mom-article-1.1722103)or some other means of showing your displeasure at their lifestyle.

 

That is the problem with reductio ad absurdum  used in an online forum - it overlays with Poe's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law).

Edited by Horizon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, the fortunate side of local option is that the only Scouts who will be exposed to the nudity, public sex, public bondage, etc. that goes on at these parades will be the sons of the people who want all that in the first place.

The problem is you are assuming that all gay pride parades are the same, they are not. It's like saying all Mardi Gras parades are the same (some are family friendly, some are not so much). You continue to cherry pick the most extreme parts of the culture, and then say that defines gay culture, it doesn't.

 

You can find family-friendly gay pride events in many cities. Here is an article about one that is in my area: Oakland takes pride in family-friendly gay parade. True, there is the issue that different people and different cultures have different ideas of what is "family friendly". The fact that the Japanese consider the various Shinto phallic festivals as good family fun illustrates this.

Edited by Rick_in_CA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In many discussion on this forum and with other scouters I hear that sexuality is not even discussed or an issue in the BSA and never has been part of the program in the past so why should it be an issue with allowing gay leaders or gay scouts. WHAT!!! How does anyone even reason with that thought or come to that conclusion? The whole thing about being gay is sexual attraction. Gay males are attracted to the male figure. We hear that gay adults will not be attracted to 17 year old and younger scouts. Just look at the perversion files which were recently released. Why do we have youth protection policies? Why don't we allow straight adult leaders, female leaders or girl scouts to tent with boys?

 

Now I don't have a problem with gay marriage and what 2 consenting adults choose to do in their bedroom is their business, but the Boy Scouts is no place for males who are attracted to males. By allowing it we are putting our scouts in danger. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I don't have a problem with gay marriage and what 2 consenting adults choose to do in their bedroom is their business, but the Boy Scouts is no place for males who are attracted to males. By allowing it we are putting our scouts in danger. 

 

By that logic, the BSA should ban straight females leaders and have no issue with lesbian leaders.  The straight females are attracted to males- do they too put our boys in danger?  Lesbians aren't attracted to males, so by this logic the BSA shouldn't have an issue with them.

 

How on earth would this be applied to a coed Venturing Crew?  Gay leaders would be banned for posing a threat to youth of their respective sex, and straight leaders would be out for posing a threat to the opposite sex.  Who will lead our Crews?

 

This line of thinking unravels pretty quickly when you follow it through.  It's well intended, I'm sure.  Keeping Scouts out of danger?  Count me in.  In this case however, the perceived danger is based on the concept that gay men are somehow less able to control themselves around young men than anyone else when interacting with members of the sex they find attractive. 

 

Are there adults looking to take advantage of youth in our program?  Unfortunately yes, and this is why we have youth protection principles in place.  Notice there's not a word about the sex of predators or their orientation in YPT.  It recognizes that predators come in all sexes and orientations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×