Long-time lurker here, but also a long-time scouter (Cub Scout, Boy Scout, Eagle Scout, OA, Philmont, summer camp staff, adult leader). I find this development dismaying, but not because I have a fundamental problem with divergent sexual orientations.
When confronted with over-bearing and nonsensical policies, we complain that we are not allowed to excersise our judgement and rely on our competence when dealing with our Scouts. But the opposite of these restrictive polices, opening up the program to disruptive topics and conflicts, I believe further encourages a LESSER standard of judgement.
I truly believe that anyone who feels compelled to make their sexual orientation such a core component of their identity that they MUST openly declare and promote it does not possess the maturity, discretion, and judgement to lead and mentor youth in the age range of Scouting. It opens the units, leaders, and parents up to the question of "What is gay?" among boys that do not have the maturity or experience to properly discuss and process topics regarding sex and sexuality. And I certainly do not believe that the vast majority of these individuals are qualified to lead any such discussion as they almost certainly will arise.
On organization competence, why are we contemplating the introduction of such an obviously incongruent element that the program is not designed to handle? And by past evidence, the ability of the organization to move in an efficient and effective manner to address these issues in a timely and reasonable manner is sorely lacking. I lack complete confidnce in an organization to create sexual topic policies when they ban water guns for inter-youth play.
I'm disapointed by the abandonment of the 10th point of the Law: Brave. Rather than take a stand and defend the preferences of the majority of the families participating in the program, policy makers would rather bow down to supposedly popular and noisy sentiment and cave to corporate blackmail (see public comments and policies by AT&T, Disney, etc).
I am also discouraged by the abandonment of the 2nd point of the Law: Loyal is also troubling. I have yet to personally encounter anyone within or outside of the Scouting program that is in favor of the direction policies regarding sexuality are headed. Instead of standing by the vast majority of those in the program (you know, the ones actually PARTICIPATING and DOING things in Scouitng), the powers that be are listening to the noise-makers, the cultural band wagoners, and those who state that THIS topic is the only thing keeping them from joining. I find it hard to believe that policies are being altered in fundamental opposition to the core beliefs of the program to the point of hypocrisy based merely on protests of a vocal minority.
I also fel there is a violation of the 9th point of the Law: Thrifty. Instead of being smart with the most valuable resource at its disposal, the active membership and supporters, The BSA is willing to throw this capital away in favor of appeasing a far lesser population that has yet to prove their participation in and value to the program.
I see the BSA following a path that leads to irrelevance and decline, both internally within the membership and externally to its value and influence.
Edited by numbersnerd, 21 May 2015 - 12:42 PM.