Who knows the minds of the BSA, but I would seriously doubt it had anything to do with Hacker Scouts inclusive policy. It’s more than likely a blanket “protect our trademark” thingy. Now, if the BSA was worried about anything, it’s the STEAM aspect of Hacker Scouts. There seems to be a faction in the Boy Scouts who really want to push that, but I don’t think they know how to do it.
That’s true. There are some very liberal Troops. But considering that most Troops are sponsored by LDS churches, if we leave it to the membership, it will be a very long time before gay adult leaders are accepted. We ask our Scouts to be “brave.” Shouldn’t we expect the same from the BSA?
For those that aren’t aware: Official BSA policy is rarely of major interest to individual troops.
Yes, scout troops that are led by Mormons, Catholics or other homophobes will point to BSA policy as justification for excluding gays, and in multi-troop activities or sites like camporees or Camp Rodney a bigoted leader could indeed make minor trouble for a troop with more tolerant leadership. Similarly a Mormon, Catholic or otherwise anti-atheist leader can insist that boys in his troop must profess some kind of religion (although, BSA leaders are so utterly clueless about theology that they will accept nontheist Bhuddists, Jains, and nontheist Hindus - they are unaware that atheist religions have existed for thousands of years).
But in real everyday scouting, the local leadership sets the tone of the troop, and many troops knowingly and routinely violate BSA policy in order to provide the benefits of scouting to their local communities. Many more pursue a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy - they will simply not ask any boy what his religious beliefs or sexual orientation are. Obviously DADT is a less satisfactory situation than one where leadership truly knows the boys in the troop.
People, particularly scouts, particularly Eagle Scouts, need to continue to pressure the BSA to reject Mormon/Catholic bigotry. But be aware that your local scout troop may well be a force for good. Or not.
1 Like
For that matter, the Spiral Scouts actively position themselves as the non-religious or pagan alternative to the Boy Scouts. (Uniforms are goofy as hell, but they’re sweet folks.)
I was just wondering what the relationship may be between this legal case and BSA’s recently launched STEM Initiative and Nova Award:
Maybe they are remembering their brand extensions, the Air Scouts and the Radio Scouts from back in the 1930s. Of course, that was from when they were still a relevant organization.
Sorry, but by concealing their deceit were you being ‘morally straight’? I don’t think so…
Or, and this is totally off the wall here, those troops that do not obey policy might want to consider striking off on their own. Like joining the Baden Powell Service Association: http://bpsa-us.org/ or something similar.
The BSA has some sporty uniforms and a long history, but so do a lot of organizations that one finds morally objectionable. I think the scout law ™ requires Loyalty, Trustoworthiness, and and Obedience. If two of those require nixing a third, both parties are going to be better off apart.
obviously
Bummer. Wait till Tonto finds out he has to rename his horse or be sued by the BSA.
They arrived at a cookie-based settlement.
1 Like
On the other extreme, it would sadden me greatly if BSA becomes like the other scouting groups of other countries. All you need do is attend an international event and look at the campsites to know instantly which group is better trained and organized. There was a major storm at the World Jamboree in South Korea that I used to hear about: “when we woke the next morning and looked out over the field, only the American campsites were standing.”
BSA is conservative for a reason. It keeps up standards. However, it also causes the organization to be slow to right wrongs.
Yes, I do think it was the morally correct thing to conceal those girls. I would also conceal a gay scout or scout leader as well.
I have always heard that the Mormons are the main reason BSA corporate fights for these backwards causes. They’re afraid to lose the money from the church.
I don’t know about you, but I’ll personally back Australian scouts as at least the equal of American scouts in terms of training.
And on top of that, I’d love to hear your reasoning as to why changes like going co-ed or allowing homosexuals would have a detrimental effect on the training of American scouts.
If your training is as good as you suggest - I take issue with the idea that it’s generally superior, that’s certainly not something I’ve observed in my travels, but I will say they’re very well trained, that much I can’t dispute - then it doesn’t matter who you’re eying up as a cutie, or what sort of gear you’re swinging(or not swinging, as it were) in your uniform trousers, because the training is about how to do certain things, and do them well.
Hardly the first time you’ve changed your base values without detriment to the organization, after all. You can bet your Queen’s…Sorry, Eagle Scout badge on that.
I think most such troop leaders have decided that the greater good is served by being less morally and ethically rigid (and isn’t ethical rigidity the basic problem of the national leadership, only with different ethics? ) so that the boys can get the advantages of the huge support infrastructure of the BSA, which includes sites, instructors, and educational materials that are not easily matched.
Personally, I am pretty conflicted about it. I treasure the skills and values I got from participation in the BSA as a boy in the 1960s, and my atheist son’s currently a boy scout, but I have repeatedly refused to become a leader because of the very issue you raise - I cannot stand in front of a group of young people and swear oaths I will not fulfill, or lend my support to an organization that has immoral policy documents.
1 Like
I’d love to hear your reasoning as to why changes like going co-ed or allowing homosexuals would have a detrimental effect on the training of American scouts.
I think you misunderstood me. I was saying that BSA’s conservatism has served it well and harmed it at the same time.
because the training is about how to do certain things, and do them well.
That’s what I was trying to convey about the BSA. The program has had a lot of time to get this part right.
All of the international scouts I’ve met in my travels were wonderful people, but it was really obvious that they weren’t as organized. The Aussies and the Japanese were an exception. I should have said that, but I was trying to be brief.
I know exactly how you feel. My boy is 4.5 now, but I’ve already made the decision to just roll with it like we scouts have always done. Because if you’re not involved, who’s going to change things? I still think the positives of the organization far outweigh the negatives. I’m just trying to figure out how to give my younger daughter the same or at least comparable experience.
2 Likes
I often try, and just as often fail. Don’t worry about it, say what you gotta. I’ll read it, you have to be getting into some traditional epic-length sorta territory before I start skimming.
That said, it’s always best to include exceptions with these sorts of statements. Better to be a little lengthy, than have some git kick off at you because they’re misunderstanding you.
1 Like
- Put 'em both in the same group (http://navigatorsusa.org/, for example),
- Help bring your local group up to the organizational standards you see fit.
My kids are going to learn to pitch a tent, chop a tree, tie a knot, organize a site the way I know, no matter what they’re taught in whatever organization we get into, the same way they’ll learn to drive to my standards no matter what their high school teacher says.
If the BSA is going to refuse to change to meet the standards I’d like, I’m cool with branching out and making sure any organization I deal with is. I’m not sending in money to get uniforms, books, or campsites to organizations I don’t support.
