Catholics turn

[BetterWithCheddar 125]

On 8/7/2023 at 1:05 PM, yknot said:

As a kid, I never heard coach jokes or priest jokes, but I sure heard scoutmaster jokes. Abuse in scouting was pretty widely known and pretty much batted aside as just another humorous woodland hazard like wet socks or a nosy bear.

The Scoutmaster jokes were part of my youth experience, as well. As Scouts in the 1990s, we were hyper aware of youth protection pitfalls and took much of the organization's guidance seriously ... and, of course, mocked some of it since we were adolescents. 

Edited August 12, 2023 by BetterWithCheddar

[HICO_Eagle 93]

On 8/6/2023 at 10:50 PM, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Occam's Razor suggests that the lawsuit was the result of the BSA failing to take appropriate action on rape and other sexual abuse reports to protect scouts from further abuse, much like the Catholic Church's own pedophile shuffling scandal.

No, it really doesn't because the fact of the matter is that BSA did take steps to protect Scouts from sexual abuse.  There were some cases where troops or councils hid the abuse because they didn't want to deal with the public scandal but in many cases, the abuse was alleged and not proven.  BSA held files where the suspicion was strong (but not enough for legal prosecution) in order to keep the alleged abusers from having direct contact with Scouts -- and these secret files were ironically the evidence used in court in the claims that BSA should have done more.

The other problem Scouting faced then -- which is why the files were secret -- was that allegations of homosexuality could ruin people's lives.  That would have exposed BSA to liability to defamation.  No one considers that today because homosexuality is much more generally accepted (and therefore open) today.

All of that leads to the fact society today doesn't like the action BSA took to protect those Scouts because it's deemed to be homophobic today.  The fact of the matter is that while pedophiles are a very small percentage of the population -- homosexual or heterosexual -- the pedophiles Scouting had to worry about until about the late 1980s were men attracted to boys.  There were very few women working as adult leaders until then and no girls in the units to worry about.  It was easier for BSA to just have a blanket "no homosexuals" policy back then.  You can argue today that it was like using a sledgehammer to drive a picture-hanging nail  but BSA did take action to protect the Scouts.

 

Quote

Alleging the lawsuit is just a malicious attack by groups that include fellow scouts and scouters, but had nothing to do with the fact that 92,700 scouts were sexually abused under the auspices of the BSA, is dividing the scout "sangha" while also declining to accept the BSA's responsibility for allowing pedophiles to continue abusing. 

Those Scouts were not "sexually abused under the auspices of the BSA" and that's precisely the problem I have with the lawsuit.  First, while the miscreants used BSA to find their targets, the abuse frequently (usually? I haven't done a statistical analysis of the cases) occurred outside BSA-sanctioned activities.  Second, the lawyers for plaintiffs sought to expand the pool to include all forms of abuse, not just sexual.  This tactic worked for them because the list of plaintiffs got so large that there was no real prospect of interviewing all of them to determine what portion were in fact a result of pedophiles and what portion of them were erroneously covered over knowingly by units or councils.

The percentage of heterosexual pedophiles infiltrating school athletic teams or other youth groups is at least as high as it was for Scouting -- surprise, surprise, miscreants actively seek opportunities for their targets.

 

Quote

This just isn't complicated. Pedophilia is really bad. Covering for pedophiles is therefore also really bad. If you do it, expect people to be very angry when you get caught covering their crimes up, especially the victims. People don't really need any additional reasons to be mad at that point, pedophilia 105% covers it. Leftists definitely didn't make scouter pedophiles rape anyone, or prevent the BSA from filing police reports or proper banning all suspected pedophiles from the organization. Leftists didn't tell abused scouts not to tell their parents. You may be sincere in your belief in this attack, but the BSA was in full control of itself when it comes to dealing with pedophiles.

NO one is defending pedophilia (well, not in the BSA or on this forum -- there are some sickos who are still trying to normalize it even as they are trying to change the language from "pedophiles" to "minor-attracted persons".  While the pedophiles themselves likely came from a variety of political stripes, leftists were the ones attacking Scouting and other pillars of American society for decades and the ones using these incidents decades after the fact to deflect the blame and financial ruin from the miscreants themselves to BSA and charter organizations.

This switch from the fact of the crimes to claiming BSA had a "rape culture" (something I have heard personally from family members) or sponsored these activities is a typical example of the leftist tactics in this regard.

 

Quote

The BSA's karma has ripened. Looking to put the blame outside is just going to create more bad karma that's going to ripen in the future. Please don't sow more seeds of suffering.

The good news about karma ripening is that it becomes easier to move into a more meritorious direction, so let's take this opportunity to create bliss instead. The truth is out; we can do our best to help the victims and make sure that we handle any future pedophiles and their crimes right. We have no more reputation to lose. This is how we burn up any remainder of bad karma and prevent more of the same from accumulating. But it starts with not blaming others for the BSA's faults.

Sorry but I object to the blame-shifting and that's precisely what has gone on with this lawsuit and the resulting impacts.  Instead of blaming the criminals and their proclivities, these socio-political forces have tried for decades to (and succeeded in) shifting the blame to churches and organizations who they wanted to undermine anyway.  Blaming BSA or churches for the activities of these criminals and destroying the future is not (in my opinion) a more meritorious way at all.  It is the accepted way for a certain socio-political segment of modern society but that is a far cry from being more meritorious.

[SiouxRanger 491]

On 8/6/2023 at 10:27 PM, HICO_Eagle said:

My point was that Scouting in the US has been under attack by certain socio-political groups for decades -- since at least the 1980s in my experience.

Which socio-political groups?

[SiouxRanger 491]

On 8/5/2023 at 11:15 PM, HICO_Eagle said:

While I agree that Scouting as we knew it is likely done, I am not thankful for that condition. 

Meaning what? That a continuation of the failed IVF system continue?

[SiouxRanger 491]

On 8/5/2023 at 11:15 PM, HICO_Eagle said:

I also disagree with the societal trend to blame BSA for past ills rather than the miscreants themselves.

I don't think I've seen evidence of that. BSA is being held liable as a co-tortfeasor along with the miscreants. Miscreants have natural lives.  Corporations have infinite lives. At some point, only the corporation is left standing on the field as the miscreant is deceased.

In fact, other than in a legal context, most folks, at least in my realm, hold the BSA in high esteem. Despite all the legal turmoil.

[SiouxRanger 491]

On 8/5/2023 at 11:15 PM, HICO_Eagle said:

Lawyers went after BSA because it had resources that they could reach easily:  land.  Going after the actual perpetrators would have been fruitless from the lawyers' point of view because many of them are dead or don't have significant resources.

Precisely true.

However, the BSA is not unique in this respect.  EVERY (not some, not most,) lawsuit targets those legal entities against which liability can be established (that is, the law and facts make them liable), AND which has assets capable of paying an award of damages.

The legal principals which establish liability have long been established, without reference to the existence of the BSA.  (Theories of negligence, gross negligence, willful and wanton, intentional, products liability, vicarious liability, strict liability, and so on.)

So, if you really have a problem with BSA being caught up in this tangled web of legal liability, take it up BSA National, ITS lawyers and ITS administrators.  These principles of liability existed when BSA National made its decisions on how to handle abuse claims.

And, either:

1.  those folks failed to appreciate the risk and application of the rules (entirely understandable considering that many decades have passed and societal norms have changed significantly),

or,

2.  those folks were business and legal geniuses and decided to run the risk, nonetheless. (Leaving future BSA employees to deal with the consequences.) (The sentiment being:  "I'll have my pension in 2 years, and the guy I just hired will hire someone in 20 years, and that newly hired will have to deal with it 20 years after that, or if really lucky, pass the problem downstream to someone else.")

Regardless, "that day" has come to pass.

No matter, the future of the BSA is not a burden the survivors have any obligation to bear. 

If according some measure of justice (haven't seen it yet in the whole bankruptcy process to date) results in the dissolution of BSA National, so be it.

The Scouting Program has been my only activity outside work. From age 6 to 70. My Scouting resume is 4 pages long, single spaced, most positions held 10 to 15 years and 3 or 4 held simultaneously.  It is what I know, love, and I can participate with my children, all Eagles.

I am no BSA basher.

But the BSA cannot move forward until there is some closure regarding the damage done to the Survivors.

 

 

 

[SiouxRanger 491]

4 hours ago, HICO_Eagle said:

No, it really doesn't because the fact of the matter is that BSA did take steps to protect Scouts from sexual abuse.  There were some cases where troops or councils hid the abuse because they didn't want to deal with the public scandal but in many cases, the abuse was alleged and not proven.  BSA held files where the suspicion was strong (but not enough for legal prosecution) in order to keep the alleged abusers from having direct contact with Scouts -- and these secret files were ironically the evidence used in court in the claims that BSA should have done more.

Agree.

BSA appears to have done a lot to document issues and identify perpetrators.

BSA also appears to have mandated that all materials held by a council about incidents be sent to National.  The council retaining NO records.  Now, the conspiracy folks may see something evil in that, but that measure would tend to eliminate the inadvertent disclosure of potentially defamatory materials.

I am not sure of the meaning of "BSA held files" in the quoted text. "Held" how and from whom?

So, further clarification would help.

I will say that there is immense Truth in the concept that the aggressor needs only succeed ONCE whereas the defender has to be 100% perfect to mount a defense.

So, an abuser gets pushed out of Troop A and goes to Troop B.  And from Council A to Council B, if needed to pursue his abuse intentions.

Abuser changes name. Or name to nickname. Or uses middle name.

And they are off the radar until an arrest.

Most of this happened when records were kept on index cards. Not name searchable databases.

Statistics and the Bell Curve tell us that no matter what level of care we employ, regardless of diligence, something will always slip by.

And that there will always be incidents of abuse.

That being said, the Bell Curve tells us that though there will never be zero incidents of abuse, those incidents can be reduced to near zero.

And that is the goal of YPT.

 

[SiouxRanger 491]

5 hours ago, HICO_Eagle said:

First, while the miscreants used BSA to find their targets, the abuse frequently (usually? I haven't done a statistical analysis of the cases) occurred outside BSA-sanctioned activities

Well, a statistical analysis of where the assaults occurred is an essential element of your argument.

Edited August 16, 2023 by SiouxRanger
Spelling, correcting AI (Humans rule!) Well, for a bit.

[SiouxRanger 491]

On 8/7/2023 at 10:39 AM, Tired_Eagle_Feathers said:

Well what was the point of having the pervert files?!?!

I think, theoretically to identify the problematic and exclude them from future participation in the Program.

As near as I can tell, all done via paper and manual tallying.

But in that era it was a very limited and missed many "hits."

"Bill J. Smith" became "Jim Smith." Or "John Smith," or "Fred Gonzolabus."  Who would know?

Never saw anyone check an ID.  (Just 50 years in...And not my fault as I NEVER heard a word from the Council that abusers could be among us, nor have I ever seen nor heard of any claimed abuse. And NEVER instructed to be on the lookout-registration was my assignment.)

[SiouxRanger 491]

5 hours ago, HICO_Eagle said:

The percentage of heterosexual pedophiles infiltrating school athletic teams or other youth groups is at least as high as it was for Scouting -- surprise, surprise, miscreants actively seek opportunities for their targets.

I would really like to see sources and statistics for this.

From my experience, opportunities for abuse in children's sports seem to be much less than those in Scouting camping experiences.

Kids leave their parents' car, go to the field, play, return, and leave. Where is the time for things to go wrong?

Scouts are gone from Friday afternoon until Sunday morning.  Two nights. Lots of time window for abuse to happen.

[DeaconLance 35]

3 hours ago, SiouxRanger said:

I would really like to see sources and statistics for this.

From my experience, opportunities for abuse in children's sports seem to be much less than those in Scouting camping experiences.

Kids leave their parents' car, go to the field, play, return, and leave. Where is the time for things to go wrong?

Scouts are gone from Friday afternoon until Sunday morning.  Two nights. Lots of time window for abuse to happen.

You didn’t pay attention to the Penn State scandal?  Many youth sports have week long camps and weekend trips requiring overnight accommodations.  The opportunities were and are there.

[yknot 1338]

1 hour ago, DeaconLance said:

You didn’t pay attention to the Penn State scandal?  Many youth sports have week long camps and weekend trips requiring overnight accommodations.  The opportunities were and are there.

Most of the boys Sandusky abused he met through the organization he supported, called the Second Mile. He used it as a cover to reach boys. The circumstances were more similar to scouting than most youth sports. Things vary widely across the nation and by individual experience, but from what I've seen as a coach myself in a couple sports and having kids involved in multiple sports from rec to elite travel, random adults do not have the same access to athletes as they do in scouts. Most parents understand sports -- how it is coached, played, and scored -- unlike scouting, and they are avid participants and active observers.  The problem with youth sports is that sometimes parents are too involved, shouting from the sidelines and microscopically analyzing everything the coaching team does with their kid. The same does not happen in scouting. In fact, in many units it is considered helicopter parenting and is actively discouraged. 

[SiouxRanger 491]

10 hours ago, DeaconLance said:

You didn’t pay attention to the Penn State scandal?  Many youth sports have week long camps and weekend trips requiring overnight accommodations.  The opportunities were and are there.

Well, agreed, week-long sports camps provide similar opportunities, though scout unit campsites are intentionally wide-spread to enhance the wilderness experience. Never having any experience with sports camps-just scouting.

[SiouxRanger 491]

10 hours ago, DeaconLance said:

You didn’t pay attention to the Penn State scandal?  Many youth sports have week long camps and weekend trips requiring overnight accommodations.  The opportunities were and are there.

And yet, the statistics?

[SiouxRanger 491]

20 hours ago, HICO_Eagle said:

This switch from the fact of the crimes to claiming BSA had a "rape culture" (something I have heard personally from family members) or sponsored these activities is a typical example of the leftist tactics in this regard.

I just cannot understand this.

Until your post I don't recall anyone, anywhere claiming BSA has a "r...c...."

This smacks of a "straw man" argument where a false, inflammatory statement is made, then to dramatically knock it down.

My recollection of basic logic (Copi-look him up-took a university 3 credit hour course on logic) is that the logical structure of "If P then Q," if P is assumed to be true, then Q is always true.)

So, as applied to your post, if "family members' statements" are presumed to be true (when might they be available for deposition?), then any statement you post after that is TRUE (logically)-even if false.

And, who switched? Exactly, precisely WHO switched?

I am not trying to give you a (pointless) hard time.

But words matter. And the senses, tenses, innuendos, flavors, intimations...of those words.

There are many folks on this site whose lives have been tragically affected.

Every post here raises their hopes of lowers their hopes.

After all they have endured, they do not need a roller coaster ride.