Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
srisom

Sleeping Arrangements

Recommended Posts

I appreciate all of the responses. I knew that some would see no problem (This is the 21st Century, That's how the world is, etc.) and some would have a problem (Bad moral example, Broken Rules, etc.).

I am not on a witch hunt. A do not agree with what transpired, either morally or breaking the rules, but I am not out to get the DE fired. He will do that himself given time.

He has no background in Scouting and though he is somewhat eager, he has grated most of the long time volunteers. A few have quit all together, but some have stepped away from District jobs.

Will the incident be broached to the SE? Probably, at least by someone. Will it be me? I haven't decided yet, but I have raised issues in the past.

Some times someone has to say something. It's when no one says anything that many wrongs are allowed to happen.

Thanks for all the input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) *Engaged Party shares a Cabin

2) *Scouts most likely don't know their martial status.

The two previous events have no impact on the scouts, or the program.

 

Ah, but you miss some possible outcomes:

 

3) Other leaders see that the DE has a disregard for the rules or at least the one that he doesnt want to follow and decide that they too can pick and choose the rules they want to follow. Next month outings occur with total disregard to the G2SS Negatively impacting the program

-or-

3) Parents see that the DE is violating Scouting rules that they believe in and 12 families leave Scouting forever Negatively impacting the program

 

Remember, as was pointed out, this is not a volunteer Scouter, he is a paid professional. When he took this job, he should have known the program and I am sure that he said he would support the programs offered by the BSA, which means supporting the rules as well.

 

Just as boys have to learn the ways of Scouting, so do our young DE's. That's where those of us volunteers who do "get it" can help them. Don't run to his boss complaining. Buy him a cup of coffee and sit down with the Scout Handbook and explain things. If he's smart and the right guy for your District, he'll thank you. If not, he'll hopefully be moving on soon enough.

 

This is wrong, well maybe not totally wrong. As pointed out, this professional should have been informed and agree to the type of rules, regulations, and programs offered by the BSA. If he did not agree, then he should not have been given the job. Now the part of this that I do agree with is that it is always best to confront the person directly, instead of going over his head.

 

If Id have known this was going on at one of our Council events, I would have pulled him aside and explained that he is in direct violation of the rules. Hopefully, then he would comply after simply being confronted. If not, then more persuasive arguments could have been given up to and including informing his boss. If there were any CORs present at the event, that would have been a good person to confront him as well if he wouldnt listen to reason.

 

This is not a politically correct statement these days, but it is one that I try to teach and live by:

Right is Right even if no one wants to do it and Wrong is Wrong even if everyone is doing it.

 

ASM59

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, I reckon we've caused a lot of confusion for srisom here, eh?

 

If da issue is "following the rules," then the issue isn't with the DE. The DE, by all reports, had permission to do what he did, eh? So if that's what yeh are worried about, stop talkin' about the DE. Yeh have to approach the Council President about da performance of the SE.

 

If the issue is all yeh people with dirty minds think the man is havin' sex before marriage, my thoughts are you'd be better off bein' good Christian souls and not judging what you really don't know. Shame on you! I know a whole parcel of folks of different genders who live in the same house (as renters). Sharin' a dwelling, especially in these tough economic times, does not mean being unchaste. More often than not, it means bein' Helpful and Thrifty.

 

Now, if yeh really have evidence that the man is behavin' sinfully or scandalously, then

 

If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. - Matthew 18:15

 

All in all, I submit that there's a profound difference between bein' selfRighteous and bein' Right.

 

Beavah

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the fiancee, what did she do while she was there?

 

This was my first question, too. Was she working on staff as well? Or just hanging out?

 

I worked on a resident camp staff once where a 21+ y/o girlfriend-boyfriend couple both worked together and lived together in a staff cabin. It devolved into a bad situation, for a variety of reasons. (Including little privacy + thin cabin walls + arguments = camp gossip.)

 

Neither that situation nor the one srisom described is appropriate. The rules are clear, and you either work and live by them or you don't. That DE is going to have a hard time explaining/enforcing the rules in the future.

 

This is off-topic, but I do think this points to a growing potential problem. If councils want to recruit and retain qualified, mature, experienced staff members, they're going to have to make some major accomodations or changes, in areas ranging from scheduling to family arrangements.

 

Sooner or later, the pool of available 21+ y/o applicants is going to shrink to a non-sustainable level, especially as the economy tanks and people want full-time, year-round work.

 

A BSA camp seeking to offer the best, most varied program possible needs nine 21-year-olds to meet national standards: camp director, program director, aquatics director, horsemanship instructor, camp chaplain, COPE director, and rifle, shotgun and muzzleloading range officers. (Of course, all but CD and PD are technically optional, but how many camps these days lack a pool, rifle range or COPE course?)

 

College students can't fill the ranks forever - as they move up and out, you're going to put a tremendous amount of time constantly training the new young Turks. And for some jobs, it's very desirable to have someone older than 21 in charge (aquatics, shooting sports, COPE). Eight-to-five hours, living spaces for families, half-session work schedules, even on-site child care for single parents - toss all those ideas into the mix and stir rapidly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some of these things I cant believe are actually issues in the 21st century.

 

There are lots of people who are together for years and never marry yet have kids. Have you gone up to the friends of all your children and asked "so are you married or not". I also know married people who keep their maiden name.

 

I would bet that there are a lot more unmarried folks at your campouts than you realize. We have parents who have multiple siblings from multiple fathers who I cant keep straight and dont care to.

 

What if it was a married Gay couple in california? What if they have kids?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand this is not the image that BSA wants to portray and if violates a policy. So why is everyone riled up, are we assuming they had sex in the cabin. Did they even share a bed? I am not sure about the cabins at your camps but the ones I have stayed in do not set a romantic back drop. Of course as a young man, setting was much less of an issue.

 

How many of these boys live with a single mom or dad and they have the occasional or live in overnight guest? Same or opposite sex????????

 

Right, wrong or otherwise are we making a mountain out of a mole hill. The boys are not as naive as most of us were at their age.

 

I am not sure about how remote this camp is but a better solution would have been for the couple to go and get a motel room or not stay at the camp at all and simply arrive together at the camp.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beavah,

 

I'm shocked. I cannot believe that you'd dare say that expecting people to follow the rules is being judgemental and unchristian.

 

I'd also suggest that if you quote scripture to make your point that you look at it in context. The rest of the scripture that you quote says that if the person will not listen to you, then take another person or two to confront him. If he still will not listen, take him in front of the whole church. If he still doesn't listen, treat him like he's a heathen and publican; in other words treat him as though he is no longer a part of the church.

 

Matthew 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

 

Since you bring the Bible into it, we as Christians are called to live righteous lives (not for our salvation, but because of it). If you doubt this, well it's all over scripture, but one place to look is at the qualifications for Elders & Deacons (leaders of the Church) who are called to be "above reproach"; Titus 1 and 1Timothy 3. Above reproach meaning that they conduct themselves in such a way that they cannot be accused (rightly or falsely) of wrong doing. In truth all Christians are called to this, but it is an absolute for leaders of the Church. And indeed we are called to let our brothers know when they are out of line as per Matthew 18 that you pointed out.

 

The Scout rule that man & woman are not to share sleeping quarters unless they are married is a rule that if followed is a protection against even the appearance of impropriety. Certainly we don't have to worry if any Cub Scouts know if the couple is married or not if they obey the rule, do we?

 

ASM59

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beavah,

 

In re-reading things, you are correct in your point that the critisism here, if there is any, should be directed at whoever gave the DE permission to sleep in the same cabin with his fianc.

 

Also, my point in my last post is only that Christians are called to a certain lifestyle which includes what many here view as an old fashioned view of marriage and living together (sex before marriage).

 

If BSA is adopting these same values, and has rules to follow in line with these values, people who are a part of the organization should comply with those rules.

 

If people want to see the rules changed, then try to change them. But until changed we should abide by them. There are some rules that I would hate to see people want to change that are in place for youth protection.

 

ASM59

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beavah wrote: "If the issue is all yeh people with dirty minds think the man is havin' sex before marriage, "

 

For me, I don't care whether they had sex in that cabin, or anyplace else, or not. (Unless, of course, they were noisy and the kids heard it, which would be a whole other discussion, I think).

 

But, as ASM59 put it, my problem is with "even the appearance of impropriety" among BSA staff.

 

As for the example of chaste co-ed roommates, I don't think that applies to this situation at all because we're talking about an engaged couple. I don't make assumptions about every engaged couple, but if they can't stand to follow the rules and sleep apart on a Boy Scout event, then does anybody really believe that they're just being "thrifty?" By, what, not having to buy two sleeping bags?

 

And as long as we're talking about assumptions, why are so many assuming that all the boys are assuming the couple is married? The OP obviously knew that they weren't, or we wouldn't be talking about it. Srisom -- was it common knowledge or not? That might effect how much this incident may or not have impacted the program; although the issue of whether our Boy Scout Staff should be expected to follow, at a minimum, Boy Scout Rules still applies.

 

-Liz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liz....It depends on where the boys are from economically that is.....

 

The poor probably assume they are not married and are doing the deed and could care less.

 

The working poor wondering if they are married.

 

The middle class hope they are married.

 

The upper class assume they are married and are working on babys.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cub Scout campout eh? Maybe the Cubs might not have realized what was happening, but I'll bet some of the Den Chiefs picked up on it, or other older Scouts helping out that weekend.

 

Liz,

Two sleeping bags? I'm sure they both had sleeping bags. Then again some sleeping bags can be zipped together to make a real big one. Maybe two tents would have been more appropriate. Oh! To costly on staff wages. Scratch that, I forgot, he's mow a DE with a 4 year degree and should be able to afford two bags and two tents.

 

MichaelOA,

DO you condone letting 16 or 17 year old Scouts driving other Scout friends out to a campout? How about the 18 1/2 year old ASM sleeping in the same tent as some Scouts? No? Why??? Because it is a rule??? What is the difference here??? It is a rule. Period!

 

ASM59,

You beat me to the punch on the rest of the scripture. At least I know you made it to Mass a few weeks ago if you're Catholic.

 

Beavah, Beavah, Beavah,

Let's bend the rules? Whose business is it anyways?

You have a case come up on your docket for grand theft auto. The accused states he needed a ride to make a delivery, sees a car with the keys in it, and decides to use it. "I didn't steal it. I borrowed it. I was going to return it when I was finished. The keys were in it, right?" What is your Judge going to do? Let him off the, eh? NOT!! Or his boss says, "I don't care how you get the item delivered. Steal a car if you have to." Who is the Judge going to send to the big house? Not the boss. Well maybe as an accomplish if you have a zealous DA.

Talk with the DE? Won't work. There is already a history.

Talk with the SE? Probably will fall on a deaf ear, especially if he was condoning it. Council president or someone farther up the food chain at regional may be needed.

 

Neil,

Do Councils make their employees sign morality clauses or statements? If so, the DE is toast, and possibly anyone condoning his actions. Guilt by association.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cub Scout campout eh? Maybe the Cubs might not have realized what was happening, but I'll bet some of the Den Chiefs picked up on it, or other older Scouts helping out that weekend.

 

Liz,

Two sleeping bags? I'm sure they both had sleeping bags. Then again some sleeping bags can be zipped together to make a real big one. Maybe two tents would have been more appropriate. Oh! To costly on staff wages. Scratch that, I forgot, he's mow a DE with a 4 year degree and should be able to afford two bags and two tents.

 

MichaelOA,

DO you condone letting 16 or 17 year old Scouts driving other Scout friends out to a campout? How about the 18 1/2 year old ASM sleeping in the same tent as some Scouts? No? Why??? Because it is a rule??? What is the difference here??? It is a rule. Period!

 

ASM59,

You beat me to the punch on the rest of the scripture. At least I know you made it to Mass a few weeks ago if you're Catholic.

 

Beavah, Beavah, Beavah,

Let's bend the rules? Whose business is it anyways?

You have a case come up on your docket for grand theft auto. The accused states he needed a ride to make a delivery, sees a car with the keys in it, and decides to use it. "I didn't steal it. I borrowed it. I was going to return it when I was finished. The keys were in it, right?" What is your Judge going to do? Let him off the, eh? NOT!! Or his boss says, "I don't care how you get the item delivered. Steal a car if you have to." Who is the Judge going to send to the big house? Not the boss. Well maybe as an accomplish if you have a zealous DA.

Talk with the DE? Won't work. There is already a history.

Talk with the SE? Probably will fall on a deaf ear, especially if he was condoning it. Council president or someone farther up the food chain at regional may be needed.

 

Neil,

Do Councils make their employees sign morality clauses or statements? If so, the DE is toast, and possibly anyone condoning his actions. Guilty by association.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cub Scout campout eh? Maybe the Cubs might not have realized what was happening, but I'll bet some of the Den Chiefs picked up on it, or other older Scouts helping out that weekend.

 

Liz,

Two sleeping bags? I'm sure they both had sleeping bags. Then again some sleeping bags can be zipped together to make a real big one. Maybe two tents would have been more appropriate. Oh! To costly on staff wages. Scratch that, I forgot, he's now a DE with a 4 year degree and should be able to afford two bags and two tents.

 

MichaelOA,

DO you condone letting 16 or 17 year old Scouts driving other Scout friends out to a campout? How about the 18 1/2 year old ASM sleeping in the same tent as some Scouts? No? Why??? Because it is a rule??? What is the difference here??? It is a rule. Period!

 

ASM59,

You beat me to the punch on the rest of the scripture. At least I know you made it to Mass a few weeks ago if you're Catholic.

 

Beavah, Beavah, Beavah,

Let's bend the rules? Whose business is it anyways?

You have a case come up on your docket for grand theft auto. The accused states he needed a ride to make a delivery, sees a car with the keys in it, and decides to use it. "I didn't steal it. I borrowed it. I was going to return it when I was finished. The keys were in it, right?" What is your Judge going to do? Let him off the, eh? NOT!! Or his boss says, "I don't care how you get the item delivered. Steal a car if you have to." Who is the Judge going to send to the big house? Not the boss. Well maybe as an accomplish if you have a zealous DA.

Talk with the DE? Won't work. There is already a history.

Talk with the SE? Probably will fall on a deaf ear, especially if he was condoning it. Council president or someone farther up the food chain at regional may be needed.

 

Neil,

Do Councils make their employees sign morality clauses or statements? If so, the DE is toast, and possibly anyone condoning his actions. Guilty by association.

(This message has been edited by ASM915)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the multiple posts. Something hicupped somewhere and it wsn't me. Now granddad had Parkinsons, but honestly, I wasn't shaking either.

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  

×