Transgender policy change

[Stosh 3452]

The program we pay for is administered at the local level. The less we let National's politics enter into our every day Scouting activities the better. I can understand someone wanting to make a statement about National's policies, but I doubt these two individuals would EVER be affected by this membership change. How many TG kids do you think there are? Let's get real.

 

The Big Mac we pay for is administered at the local McDonalds.  The less we let Courtesy Corporation enter into our every day fast food activities the better.  I can understand somehow wanting to make a statement about Courtesy Corporations menu, but I doubt these two customers affected by this menu change. 

 

 

The BSA owns the brand, it down the logo, it owns the program and contracts with the various CO to provide it to the public.  If a boy looks at the national BSA website and it says this is the way the program is administered, wouldn't it be reasonable that the boy could go to the local CO and get the program promised.  A bit of honesty in the PR of the program would be nice.

 

Just sayin'

[David CO 1783]

Fred,

 

I agree with you that it is better to be involved in society than to be separate, and that it is not healthy to be stuck in the past and isolate ourselves.  That is very true.

 

I know that there are many liberals out there (and on this forum) who feel that conservatives like myself are isolating ourselves from today's society by clinging to the outmoded and obsolete ideas/ideals of the past.  

 

This notion presupposes that liberals and liberal ideas/ideals are currently the dominant force in our society, and they are destined to grow and become even more dominant in the future.  I don't think this is true.  Even a casual observer might note that the results of our recent national election would seem to contradict this sort of thinking. 

 

If we conservatives are isolating ourselves, then we are doing so in great numbers.  I don't think we are stuck in the past.  I think we are working for a future that has not yet fully arrived.

 

I think BSA has made a terrible mistake.  I think it has turned left, just as the country has turned right.  I think it is BSA that is seeking to isolate itself by rejecting the values of half the country.

 

Sure, BSA can survive as a much smaller organization serving only the liberal Democrats living in the coastal states. But would that be a good thing?

Edited February 1, 2017 by David CO

[ianwilkins 366]

I think BSA has made a terrible mistake.  I think it has turned left, just as the country has turned right.  I think it is BSA that is seeking to isolate itself by rejecting the values of half the country.

 

Sure, BSA can survive as a much smaller organization serving only the liberal Democrats living in the coastal states. But would that be a good thing?

 

As far as I can see, from across the pond, the USA turns left or right either once every 4 years or 8 years. Actually I guess in reality there's vast swathes of people that are either left or right at any given time, and it's only a much smaller percentage that vacillate between sides that decide the outcome (to be fair, that's undoubtedly the same in the UK) of elections.

 

I guess somehow, for scouting to thrive across all of the USA, it needs to be all things to all people. It needs to be liberal where the "market" are liberal, and conservative where the the locals are so. Yet without losing what makes scouting scouting. Which is tricky, as scouting means different things to different people.

 

When such large changes are made, there is always fallout, there will always be people who disagree. For some, a given change is a cue to reflect, and it's the straw that breaks the camel's back. In the UK, some walked away when we went co-ed. Some walked away when we changed the age ranges. No doubt some walked away when an alternative promise that didn't mention god was even offered (but there's still the main god one). Some walk away because "the kids are all impolite monsters these days" or "we're just a babysitting service" or any number of other reasons. But change is a catalyst for reflection.

 

It's a common complaint of those leaving "it's not the movement I joined".

 

Quite how you walk the tightrope of on one hand "this transgender thing is an abomination" and "this transgender thing is ok and normal"....pass. Whether you even should? Can any organisation/movement be that pluralist? Or do you get to the point that one part of the organisation thinks another part "aren't really scouts"?

 

Good luck with it though. I can't say I envy you.

[Sentinel947 1205]

I've been thinking about this issue for a while. I figured it would come quickly and I imagine co ed is coming soon.

 

I will stay involved in the BSA under the condition that including transgender Scouts or girls doesn't fundamentally change the role of adults and the patrol method. I'm cautiously optimistic that things won't have to change much.

 

Ultimately I think this year is my last on the Troop level. Has very little to do with the transgender decision or girls, but more the opportunity cost of all the time involved.

 

Sentinel947

[Back Pack 431]

The program we pay for is administered at the local level. The less we let National's politics enter into our every day Scouting activities the better. I can understand someone wanting to make a statement about National's policies, but I doubt these two individuals would EVER be affected by this membership change. How many TG kids do you think there are? Let's get real.

Well the one family get they could no longer be a part of an organization that allowed their founding principles (a "safe place" for boys) to be eroded. From a religious perspective it did conflicted with their beliefs. If someone objects to something on these grounds, say supporting illegal aliens, they have every right to do so. Would you tell them to "get real" and live with the law rather than their deeply held beliefs?

 

Odd how the SJWs are building "safe spaces" all over the nation in colleges but won't allow heterosexual boys their own safe space.

 

As for it not affecting them, how about summer camp? Council camps? High adventure base? Does the probability of running to this situation matter?

[Back Pack 431]

Scouting has not thrived since these changes. They are no receiving the ground swell if new members many suggested might join after gays were let in. The corporate donations have not increased as many suggested would. In fact, Scouting continues to lose members and charter orgs at an increased rate. Donations are flat. In my Council many units have told their FOS teams to stay home and not bother to reach out. Units simply don't want to donate anymore. They are keeping their own money and doing their own thing. So the "change" in BSA culture has not had a positive membership or financial benefit yet. Still waiting to see this benefit happen. Doubt it will.

 

@@Sentinel947, I have spoken with several scouted and parents that will do the same; pull back from national, council and district and do their own thing. We had two leaders step back from the unit. I am personally stopping any work with anyone above the unit level.

[krypton_son 32]

Scouting has not thrived since these changes. They are no receiving the ground swell if new members many suggested might join after gays were let in. The corporate donations have not increased as many suggested would. In fact, Scouting continues to lose members and charter orgs at an increased rate. Donations are flat. In my Council many units have told their FOS teams to stay home and not bother to reach out. Units simply don't want to donate anymore. They are keeping their own money and doing their own thing. So the "change" in BSA culture has not had a positive membership or financial benefit yet. Still waiting to see this benefit happen. Doubt it will.

 

@@Sentinel947, I have spoken with several scouted and parents that will do the same; pull back from national, council and district and do their own thing. We had two leaders step back from the unit. I am personally stopping any work with anyone above the unit level.

 

I've seen the same thing happen.  When they announced that gays would be accepted we hade a severe drop in membership in my Council.  Donations have been cut almost in half.  Last night after this new announcement we had 3 boys pulled out of my troop and I know of several other troops in my district that have lost members.  I can't say that I blame them.  The Boy Scouts that we grew up with are now long gone.

[Tampa Turtle 1011]

After the meeting I overheard a couple boys say they were opposed to at scouts though it was no big deal at school. Oddly enough these were the Gay scouts!

[Stosh 3452]

PRINCETON, N.J. -- The American public estimates on average that 23% of Americans are gay or lesbian, little changed from Americans' 25% estimate in 2011, and only slightly higher than separate 2002 estimates of the gay and lesbian population. These estimates are many times higher than the 3.8% of the adult population who identified themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender in Gallup Daily tracking in the first four months of this year.

 

An earlier report published in April 2011 by the Williams Institute estimated that 3.8 percent of Americans identified as gay/lesbian, bisexual, or transgender: 1.7 percent as lesbian or gay, 1.8 percent as bisexual, and 0.3 percent as transgender.

 

Sometimes statistics lie, sometimes they don't, but one must at least consider them as part of the conversation.  My numbers are not accurate but arbitrary.  Is it worth it to the BSA to lose 5%, 10%, 15%, 30%, 50% (Pick one that you can live with) of it's members to accommodate 3.8% of the people? and in light of this transgender issue, .03%?

 

So it begs the question, will BSA destroy itself trying to become "socially acceptable"?  I guess they are going to find out.  With the decline indicated with the homosexual youth issue, and decline indicated with the homosexual adult issue, is this yet another nail in the coffin?

[LanceEagle 19]

Someone mentioned this in a previous post but I don't think the link was shared. Really hits the nail on the head without any semantics.

 

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/matt-walsh-goodbye-boy-scouts-of-america-you-spineless-cowards/

[Eagledad 2777]

How many TG kids do you think there are? Let's get real.

Get real! When I was a scout and a Scoutmaster, patrols could camp without adults. They can't anymore. That is huge!

 

Watching the Canadian Scouts go through their changes and listening and participating in discussions on scouting forums the past years, I am convinced that liberals view scouting as nothing more than a "camping club".  The mission and vision statement are just noble words of distant dreams. Liberals believe in equality over personal ambition through the path of mediocrity. 

 

Changing the program so that boys can no longer have the independence to experiment with their decisions takes away the advantage that Boy Scouting has over all other youth programs. I kind of saw it when I joined as a scouter in the early 90s. New Scout Patrols (NSP) and First Class in the First Year (FCFY) forces scouts through a process of growth controlled outside of the their patrol. I can't think National did it intentionally (maybe they did, mediocrity), but they turned the growth process 180 degrees. Instead pushing scouts to act out toward their ambitions using the tools of leadership, patrol method, adventure and advancement, they are now expected to react to the tasks given them. The process of growing by making decisions was taken away. The more National makes little changes that force boys out of the arena of making personal decisions, the more the process of growth is reduced.

 

As a result, after school camping clubs.

 

My passion for the program is guiding boys to become citizens of character and leaders of integrity. Those aren't just words to me, I live it. I'll not waste my time just teaching kids how to set up a tent. 

 

Barry

[krypton_son 32]

I am convinced that liberals view scouting as nothing more than a "camping club".  The mission and vision statement are just noble words of distant dreams. Liberals believe in equality over personal ambition through the path of mediocrity. 

 

That right there is exactly right.  The direction the BSA has been moving in the last 10+ years is the complete antithesis of what it was created for.  It's almost like it's an intentional dismantling of the founding principles it was based on.

[Col. Flagg 909]

Sometimes statistics lie, sometimes they don't, but one must at least consider them as part of the conversation.  My numbers are not accurate but arbitrary.  Is it worth it to the BSA to lose 5%, 10%, 15%, 30%, 50% (Pick one that you can live with) of it's members to accommodate 3.8% of the people? and in light of this transgender issue, .03%?

 

So it begs the question, will BSA destroy itself trying to become "socially acceptable"?  I guess they are going to find out.  With the decline indicated with the homosexual youth issue, and decline indicated with the homosexual adult issue, is this yet another nail in the coffin?

 

In the short-term this has already happened with the loss of membership, COs and corporate donations. Each year BSA has made a policy change they have experienced a decline in membership. Wasn't the average membership loss around 3% per year for a while, then jumped to 6% in 2013 after that membership change? There's certainly been no increase as other have pointed out. In looking around on my own I can find no statistics that show the membership or donations increasing.

 

Only time will tell what the long-term impact is on the organization, both membership-wise and financially, but it does not look good. The left is not stampeding to sign up to volunteer, become COs, registering new Scouts or increasing personal or corporate donations. Why is that? All the walls have fallen haven't they? Or are there other issues they want torn out of BSA until there's nothing left of the organization but an empty husk of SJW enmity?

[fred johnson 936]

I think it is BSA that is seeking to isolate itself by rejecting the values of half the country.

 

BSA has not said it's right or wrong.  It's about positioning BSA so that it can continue to provide great experiences and developing character, citizenship and physical fitness.  The 1999 "Dale V. BSA" decision (right or wrong) did horrible damage to BSA because of the marketing and perception result.  This is about trying to get away from a hot button, modern era issue so that BSA can focus on mission.  Largely it's a non-issue that we will not deal with day-to-day beyond maybe attending camps that have to upgrade their bathroom and shower facilities.  

 

I can respect you if you think it's bad.  I have personal opinions on this situation too.  I'd just rather focus on BSA's core mission.   

[fred johnson 936]

Someone mentioned this in a previous post but I don't think the link was shared. Really hits the nail on the head without any semantics.

 

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/matt-walsh-goodbye-boy-scouts-of-america-you-spineless-cowards/

 

It's a rant.  Yes, many will get so so so caught up in their own rightfulness that they will cut off their own arm because it offends them.  But Christian's won't flea any more than the amount of Christians we'd lose by not changing the policy.  The key is there is no such thing as a single Christian church with a single set of opinions.  Denominations vary greatly.  Individuals of faith vary greatly.   

 

The only right issue is to get BSA out of the debate.  Let the charter orgs choose their membership such that it reflects their own values.  BSA provides a program and structure.  Charter orgs that are churches provide the faith.  

 

Perhaps the best thing scouts could do right now is double down on the coming Scout Sunday and get their scouts in-church-in-uniform.

Edited February 1, 2017 by fred johnson