Jump to content
Hawkwin

National, Religion, Membership, Oath and Law

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

Living today, I expect BP would have realized the same thing.

In that case, the man you claim to know is nothing like the man I have come to know and love. I have read everything there is on Lord Baden-Powell, and if he was anything, it was a man of principle and integrity. You can throw his name around in an attempt to add weight to your argument if you like, but don't expect those of us who have read his literature and studied his ideas to agree with your assumptions about what he would or wouldn't do or believe if he were still alive today. If anything, I assume he is grateful not to be around today as the organization he was inspired to create buckles under the whims of public opinion. It's certainly not something he would have done.

Edited by The Latin Scot
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

A couple of years ago Verizon had a commercial.  I can't remember if I can post links, so I won't.  But to find it, search Google for "verizon inspire her mind".  It's about the subtle things that maybe we don't even realize we're doing to girls that discourages them from science.

I've got a son and two daughters.  Watching it, I realized just how much I'd been playing into the sterotypes of boys and girls.  It made me question how I'd treated my own kids.  I found that my kids were not nearly as different as I'd thought them to be.

There is very little that will be any different in my troop once the girls show up.  Sure, the interpersonal dynamics may be a little different.  But, like any troop, there will be groups that hang out together.  In our troop of 80 boys, they don't all just hang out together all the time.  It will be no different in a coed troop in a few years once the newness wears off.

Living today, I expect BP would have realized the same thing.

I'm surmising that the executive board of the BSA did the same.  Further, I'm sure they realized that it's just a matter of time.  If they said no now, it would have come up again and again.  So they could have said "no girls allowed" or instead make the gutsy decision to take a step forward.

 

This was one video that was brought up frequently.  That said I’m not sure this decision was based on altruism.  I’ll definitely take advantage of the decision for my daughter.  

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LegacyLost said:

The LDS decision appears to have been made long before the co-ed option appeared regardless of what was publicly said.

Agreed. I personally believe that BSA's girl decision was formulated in desperation after the LDS church gave BSA internal notice of their planned departure. BSA brass had an "oh crap" moment when faced with the prospect of paying the bills with 425K fewer Scouts on the rolls. That explains the manipulative surveys to elicit coerced support for an unpopular decision, followed by a rushed announcement of a half-baked idea with few program details available (i.e. "we don't know yet what it will look like, but trust us - it will be awesome"). 

 

1 hour ago, LegacyLost said:

For my family, the scouts died in 2013. The decision this last week was just the final nail in the coffin.

For the LDS leadership, BSA's decision back in July 2015 to admit gay adult leaders seems to have been the turning point. There was no nuance or restraint in the official LDS reaction after BSA's vote.

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is deeply troubled by today’s vote by the Boy Scouts of America National Executive Board. In spite of a request to delay the vote, it was scheduled at a time in July when members of the Church’s governing councils are out of their offices and do not meet. When the leadership of the Church resumes its regular schedule of meetings in August, the century-long association with Scouting will need to be examined. The Church has always welcomed all boys to its Scouting units regardless of sexual orientation. However, the admission of openly gay leaders is inconsistent with the doctrines of the Church and what have traditionally been the values of the Boy Scouts of America."

LDS Scouting died in July 2015. There was just a delayed funeral due to the time required to formulate a replacement youth program.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be that as it may, I will ensure that the boys in my Webelos den get every ounce of benefit I can squeeze out of Scouting until the minute we switch to the new program - including preparing them to cross over into the Boy Scout program. Even if they don't ever go into Boy Scouts after this, I feel it would be cheating them out of essential and valuable lessons if I watered down my program just because we won't be continuing with Scouting in the future. So in my den, Scouting will live on at least for another year and a half - and for boys this age, that can still be a mightly long time to make a mighty big difference. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, David CO said:

It's hard to understand their motivations. It was a unanimous vote. In an open and honest system, you never get a unanimous vote. 

For the LDS voting members, I'm sure their attitude was "do whatever you think is best for the future of your movement because we're out of here anyway".

For other voting members, I'm sure they faced the question "if we don't admit girls, then what is the alternate plan to address financial insolvency from the loss of 425K Scouts".

They, of course, knew that the decision would be hugely controversial (but I'm not sure they appreciated how vitriolic the commentary would be from conservative sources). A unanimous vote was their way of launching girls into BSA with the best chance for success. However, I believe the effort is doomed. Mike Surbaugh will go down in history as the CSE who drove BSA off the cliff.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The Latin Scot said:

In that case, the man you claim to know is nothing like the man I have come to know and love. I have read everything there is on Lord Baden-Powell, and if he was anything, it was a man of principle and integrity. You can throw his name around in an attempt to add weight to your argument if you like, but don't expect those of us who have read his literature and studied his ideas to agree with your assumptions about what he would or wouldn't do or believe if he were still alive today. If anything, I assume he is grateful not to be around today as the organization he was inspired to create buckles under the whims of public opinion. It's certainly not something he would have done.

BP was a visionary and a leader.  He'd have been disappointed to see those who want to exclude girls from Scouting trying to do so in his name.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Latin Scot said:

Be that as it may, I will ensure that the boys in my Webelos den get every ounce of benefit I can squeeze out of Scouting until the minute we switch to the new program - including preparing them to cross over into the Boy Scout program. Even if they don't ever go into Boy Scouts after this, I feel it would be cheating them out of essential and valuable lessons if I watered down my program just because we won't be continuing with Scouting in the future. So in my den, Scouting will live on at least for another year and a half - and for boys this age, that can still be a mightly long time to make a mighty big difference. 

1

Absolutely agree.

In our first troop meeting after the church's announcement, discussion with the boys resulted in a decision to work with the program we have today and not worry about changes that are still distant. Over the next 18 months, we will take advantage of the very best adventures that Scouting has to offer. We have a full activity calendar with 10 months of camping annually (taking a break only in November and December for the holidays). This summer we will be attending two premier BSA summer camps on the west coast (Camp Emerald Bay on Catalina Island and Camp Meriwether on the Oregon Coast). Next summer we are looking at a high adventure outing (Philmont or The Summit) plus another BSA summer camp plus even a 50-miler in the Sierras. I expect as many as 10 new Eagles will emerge from our troop (only some on an accelerated schedule).

We will go out with a bang - not a whimper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

BP was a visionary and a leader.  He'd have been disappointed to see those who want to exclude girls from Scouting trying to do so in his name.

Twisting the conversation disingenuously. GSUSA would remind you that girls are far from excluded from Scouting in the United States.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, gblotter said:

Absolutely agree.

In our first troop meeting after the church's announcement, discussion with the boys resulted in a decision to work with the program we have today and not worry about changes that are still distant. Over the next 18 months, we will take advantage of the very best adventures that Scouting has to offer. We have a full activity calendar with 10 months of camping annually (taking a break only in November and December for the holidays). This summer we will be attending two premier BSA summer camps on the west coast (Camp Emerald Bay on Catalina Island and Camp Meriwether on the Oregon Coast). Next summer we are looking at a high adventure outing (Philmont or The Summit) plus another BSA summer camp plus even a 50-miler in the Sierras. I expect as many as 10 new Eagles will emerge from our troop (only some on an accelerated schedule).

We will go out with a bang - not a whimper.

I'm generally opposed to 13 year old Eagles, but I'm going to find myself mentoring a few next year. These boys won't get the chance to lollygag through Star and Life like their brothers did. I'm not going to push anyone through an Eagle mill, but if the boys want it, we're going to have to attack this thing fiercely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

BP was a visionary and a leader.  He'd have been disappointed to see those who want to exclude girls from Scouting trying to do so in his name.

It's cute that you pretend to know him so well, but unfortunately for your position I have read too much of his words to believe this. And you make it sound like all visionaries and leaders would have supported this, when of course there are many visionaries and leaders who oppose it. Being either one of them, and supporting girls in Scouting, are of course entirely unrelated. You can try again though if you like. :)

19 minutes ago, gblotter said:

We will go out with a bang - not a whimper.

Amen to that!

Edited by The Latin Scot
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Saltface said:

I'm generally opposed to 13 year old Eagles, but I'm going to find myself mentoring a few next year. These boys won't get the chance to lollygag through Star and Life like their brothers did. I'm not going to push anyone through an Eagle mill, but if the boys want it, we're going to have to attack this thing fiercely.

Changing and shifting requirements can inspire.  There were many that hustled up at the end of 1973 to get Eagle before a great new scouting mode was fully rolled out, suspect it will be similar with LDS departure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Saltface said:

I'm generally opposed to 13 year old Eagles, but I'm going to find myself mentoring a few next year. These boys won't get the chance to lollygag through Star and Life like their brothers did. I'm not going to push anyone through an Eagle mill, but if the boys want it, we're going to have to attack this thing fiercely.

Same here.

I make opportunities available and offer my support, but the boy must have internal motivations for anything to happen. I sit down with each of our Scouts to formulate an advancement plan according to their individual Scouting goals (some are not focused on Eagle and that's entirely fine). How they execute on their advancement plan is entirely up to them. 10 new Eagles is a best-case scenario. In reality, I know that some will falter along the way, and that's ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Changing and shifting requirements can inspire.  There were many that hustled up at the end of 1973 to get Eagle before a great new scouting mode was fully rolled out, suspect it will be similar with LDS departure

Do I detect sarcasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

There were many that hustled up at the end of 1973 to get Eagle before a great new scouting mode was fully rolled out, suspect it will be similar with LDS departure

Ironic comparison, because I was one who finished off my last Eagle-required merit badge at the end of December 1973 and had my EBOR and ECOH in early 1974.

Never expected that I'd be reliving that experience in such a literal way.

Edited by gblotter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, gblotter said:

Twisting the conversation disingenuously. GSUSA would remind you that girls are far from excluded from Scouting in the United States.

Not at all.  The GSUSA (or really Girl Scouts/Girl Guiding in general) didn't start until after the Boy Scouts were started.  Why would BP have said "I'm going to start a group for boys, but not one for girls."

6 minutes ago, The Latin Scot said:

It's cute that you pretend to know him so well, but unfortunately for your position I have read too much of his words to believe this. And you make it sound like all visionaries and leaders would have supported this, when of course there are many visionaries and leaders who oppose it. Being either one of them, and supporting girls in Scouting, are of course entirely unrelated. You can try again though if you like. :)

Amen to that!

Not cute at all.  I get that you're trying to dismiss my point, but it's not working.

Again - Scouting was started at a different point in time when the way men and women interacted was different.  You can replace the "in scouting" part of this with whatever other transformation in gender norms occurred in the last 200 years and make the same arguments.

I merely make the assertion that the man who founded the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts would have likely created a single gender organization if he were starting it in 2018.  100 years ago things were different.  Many organizations 100 years ago were single gender.  Today they are not.  It seems a far fetched conclusion to think he would have said "you know what, just about everything else is co-ed, but scouting - nope."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×