Well, why not?
What’s so important about being a global organisation if the members don’t support the values of Scouting?
If they stay in, then Scouting as a whole has to live with the fact that people will assume that Scouting as a whole is OK with what each Scout Org. is doing.
Well, that’s rather the question being asked isn’t it? Have Scouting’s attitudes evolved? Have they evolved to where they should be?
Regardless of what your view is, people are entitled to ask and come up with answers that don’t agree with yours.
Could you explain which parts of “They are all weird paramilitary groups for kids” you find offensive?
Weird, I can understand complaining about, especially if you are a member. It has to be said that for an outsider, Scouting - like any organisation with it’s own rituals and conventions (take rugby or the House of Lords 
) - looks odd.
For kids? Well, definitely.
Paramilitary? That also seems obvious. The uniforms and Scout Leaders do rather give the origins away. Do they still have Patrols?
Is that necessarily sinister? Not in my view but I guess that depends on whether you support the aims and baked-in principles and assumptions that the organisation seeks to instil.
Are there positives to being a Scout -sure.
Can they be achieved without the hangovers of Imperial legacy and pseudo-militarism?
Probably, see the numerous groups that split off from Scouting to get away from the military aspects.
