Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sentinel947

"Boy Scouts thrive after lifting of gay ban."

Recommended Posts

There is nothing hypocritical about finding non-incendiary terms for broad movements.

 

YOU don't get to decide what OTHER people find "incendiary".  Your terminology was clearly used as an insult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christian pastor reading from scripture about such things as sin, will soon be held accountable for promoting hate speech and be arrested.

 

Hate speech isn't a crime in the US, and can't be as long as the first amendment means anything.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, on this particular issue, as far as I know nobody has filed a lawsuit yet, after a year.

 

Or maybe this wasn't an ISSUE to begin with!  The gays aren't knocking our door down to Join.

 

EDIT meant to say "AREN'T"

Edited by JasonG172

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe this wasn't an ISSUE to begin with!  The gays are knocking our door down to Join.

Well that's good, a lot of families left because of this non-issue.

 

Barry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was an issue.  Nobody had to knock down any doors for it to be an issue.

 

I am sure that in some small number of units across the country - any number would just be a guess - openly gay people have indeed joined or remained, either as Scouts or Scouters.  Nobody has made a huge deal out of it.  There is no sign that any media have been following these people around to do stories on the "gay leader."  That is as it should be.  I am not interested in the "activists" and those who made a lot of noise on either side of this issue.  I am concerned for the average everyday folks who just want to be Scouters and Scouts.  Somewhere, people who never should have been excluded in the first place are quietly joining, and Scouting is better for it.

 

If some people have left Scouting because of this - and I have seen no statistics on that - it is regrettable.  There was no reason for them to leave.

 

(Added) There also doesn't seem to be any indication that those units that wish to exclude openly gay people have encountered any difficulty in doing so.  As far as I know, nobody has sued anybody.  Some of those units have left the BSA, but the vast majority have not.  Every indication is that local option is working, both for those who were previously excluded and for those who qualify to retain their exclusionary policies and wish to do so.

Edited by NJCubScouter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YOU don't get to decide what OTHER people find "incendiary".  Your terminology was clearly used as an insult.

What, pray tell, do I get to do? Read a dictionary? From Webster's ...

  1. 1 archaic :  granted on sufferance :  tolerated

  2. 2 a :  granting or tending to grant permission :  tolerant b :  deficient in firmness or control :  indulgent, lax

What one person sees as 2a, another sees as 2b. Seems like an adequate description of how certain contemporary movements are viewed by themselves or by others around them.

 

I understand that it is far more convenient to demonize someone's language on the path to do dismissing his/her observations.

However, that behavior (as opposed to, say, suggesting more accurate adjective) is exemplary of what leaders of some public organizations weigh in regards to forging partnerships with BSA.

 

Thank you again for making my point.

Edited by qwazse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I understand that it is far more convenient to demonize someone's language on the path to do dismissing his/her observations.

 

Or to just dismissing people as "the permissive".

 

Regardless, you don't get to decide what other people find "incendiary" or not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the path of least resistance is to ignore those who are intolerant.  One doesn't need free speech to ignore someone.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the path of least resistance is to ignore those who are intolerant.  One doesn't need free speech to ignore someone.

 

Much like the Grinch's heart, my ignore list grew three sizes this day.   :)

Edited by MrBob
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am speaking as an interested outsider to scouting, so I am speaking out of ignorance and about to make a fool of myself.

I have read the other comments and agreed and disagree with parts all of them.  When my nephew got interested in scouting I did a great deal of research on the organization.  Obviously I did not look on things as a scouter or even an ex-boy scout – having never been one.  I look at it from an organizational level, and as someone deeply concerned about the way boys are treated in our society. 

First the treatment of boys:  In my impression boys today are all treated like criminals who have not yet been caught.  An episode of “The Simpsons†titled “Girls Just Want to Have Sums†satirized this attitude.  When the elementary schools is split between boys and girls.  The girl’s side is all unicorns and flowers, and the boy’s side looks like “Mad Maxâ€:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vpiMo4FEAA

Oddly, Lisa when she pretends to be a boy uses the last name “Boymanâ€, and boy man was a term used to describe Baden-Powell in some of the literature I read about scouting.

I think that the problem that most people have with the Boy Scouts is not so much the issues of gay scouts, but with boy scouts.  I noticed that in all the discussion on BSA’s gay issues, was that what was best for the boys themselves was seldom if ever discussed.

I think the issues is not opposition to boy scouts, but opposition to boys.  Unfortunately, the BSA can do little if anything on this issue.

Organizationally:  BSA faces one of the greatest challenges an organization can face.  To adapt with times, without losing its core mission.  Doing either one is hard, but doing both is almost impossible.  As an example of an organization that adapted, but loses its core, look at the store “Abercrombie & Fitchâ€.  A&F started out selling outdoors clothing and equipment to professional outdoorsmen.  The store was the outdoors goods store.  It was used by Teddy Roosevelt, Admiral Peary, Charles Lindberg, and Admiral Byrd.  Today it exists and is profitable, but is basically associated with anything but the outdoors:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Abercrombie_%26_Fitch

The BSA from my research maybe making a similar decision.  I recently read about the STEM Scouts.  The article cited as its big selling point that the program would be co-ed and would help eliminate the gap in women’s employment in STEM fields.  Boy Scouts main goal is to help girls?  What about helping boys?

How the BSA can resolve this issue without either becoming extinct or changing beyond all recognition, I do not know.  I would be interested in what others think.  I know that a continued commitment to a strong outdoors program has been mentioned in previous discussions.  How this can be done in a world of over-scheduled boys with decreasing familiarity with the outdoors I do not know.

Finally, to get back to the original issue – is boy scouts thriving.  I hope so, but think it is too soon to say if the change in policy will have any effect.  I think ending the controversy increases the potential that scouting will thrive, but not make that happen all by itself.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How the BSA can resolve this issue without either becoming extinct or changing beyond all recognition, I do not know.  I would be interested in what others think.  I know that a continued commitment to a strong outdoors program has been mentioned in previous discussions.  How this can be done in a world of over-scheduled boys with decreasing familiarity with the outdoors I do not know.

 

 

There really are two optons - to expand the program in the STEM area (which most likely will work as well as the expanding Explorer Scouts to include career exploration did in the 1970s) or to double down on the essential parts of the BSA brand.  If you ask people what the makes a boy a Boy Scout they will most likely mention camping, integrity and leadership.  A pretty good brand if you ask me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 If you ask people what the makes a boy a Boy Scout they will most likely mention camping, integrity and leadership.  A pretty good brand if you ask me. 

 

As important to our future as strong education is Mathematics and Engineering is, I don't believe I have ever met a youth (or a parent) who joined Scouting for its STEM presence, or for the sedentary pencil-twiddling that is the first four requirements of just about every merit badge now.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As important to our future as strong education is Mathematics and Engineering is, I don't believe I have ever met a youth (or a parent) who joined Scouting for its STEM presence, or for the sedentary pencil-twiddling that is the first four requirements of just about every merit badge now.

 

Right on the money, Mr. Bob....

 

STEM is vital but there is a point when a scout needs to dump the book bag, pack a sandwich and an apple, fill the canteen, and hit the trail.  

 

Going back to the classroom on the weekends for more academics will not be an appealing thought for many scouts--even those with STEM interests.  

 

At best, BSA STEM will always be a side show, and not the big recruiting draw National thinks it will be.

 

The most positive thing I can say about BSA STEM:   check out the STEM treks at Philmont.   STEM in action!

 

http://www.philmontscoutranch.org/stemtrek.aspx

Edited by desertrat77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was in the ministry every fall I would get this annual complaint that they don't have enough Sunday School teachers.  They "asked everybody!!!" Even the regular school teachers won't step up and teach! 

 

So, we have a person doing teaching 5 days of the week and doing extra work on the weekend to do the next five days.  So now the church wants them to add another on their "day of rest?"  I don't think so! 

 

Boys sit 5 days a week in school, and with any religious instruction maybe Saturday confirmation and Sunday school, and now BSA wants to put them in a classroom..... Yeah, right.  I don't blame the boys one bit for balking at such nonsense.  Tables and chairs should be outlawed in Scouting!  A stump and a stick to poke in the fire is all a boy needs.

Edited by Stosh

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
Sign in to follow this  

×