fred8033

Censorship can occur in any group and does not need government or a public forum. Censorship is about blocking ideas.

Martin Luther King. Morgan Freeman. Lil'Waye. etc, etc. YouTube video "What the left won't tell you about the plight..." It is right leaning, but the comments are reasonable, polite, concise and to the topic.

The video was 100% on target and useful to the discussion. The point is the D,E&I badge will pull in politics. Period. The video was 100% on-topic. BSA was the original non-political organization. Hold up and wave the flag. I'm good with that. Pledge of allegiance. Fine. Teaching how government works fine. I've been involved for almost 20 years. Perhaps it's time for me to finish up too. It's not that I don't want to be part of an organization like BSA. I'm not sure I want my kids involved and subject to the whims of political discussions like this, left or right. Teach them fire, knives, camping, tenting, etc. Teach them responsibility and taking care of themselves. Teach them that their choices have results. Don't zip up your tent, you will eventually sleep in a soggy sleeping bag. You want a badge like D,E&I, fine. Prepare for discussion. But let it be real discussion.

The video was 100% on-topic. Many people believe the DE&I badge is propaganda and can't be taught constructively without pulling in individuals personal political beliefs. The video has 100% on-topic discussion topics. Is race real? Is it useful to discuss? Where do the issues start? How to work with police? Removing that video is today's canceling culture and is censorship. If you want this badge, we need the ability to discuss and debate the topics in the badge.

What was violated by that video? The video seemed 100% useful and appropriate for this discussion.

Removed

Outstanding video ... You are braver than I am. I would not post such a video because there are too many that are too quick to toss out words such as racist and biggot. I find the video very useful and 100% worthy of discussion. But I don't want to be the target of the stereo typing by people who would use such ugly and hateful words.

Two sided discussion is important. This badge can not sit in a one-sided political vacuum. The issues raised here really reflect that we've failed to teach "civics" as a school topic and "civility" as a social need. We need to be able to discuss these topics. That means that videos like about should be discussed without people getting upset and irate at each other. Welcome to the D,E&I (pronounced deny) badge.

Because we are continually working with our scouts teaching how to work with each other, be respectful, etc. It's what the whole scouting program is about. Scout Law and Oath. But we do it thru activities and the necessity of working with each other. I think @CynicalScouter had a great response above. But even more, it's offensive because I'm not sure I want to trust my scout to joe-blow MBC to get their view on diversity.

Thank you. It's my view of scouting is different. I've always seen scouting as something different that our youth need. Knives. Fire. Outside in the rain. Getting the scouts out doing things. It's why I like the MBs that require activity. I don't have issues with the ideas in the badge. I have an issue that it's a badge. In this context, the scouts should be required to earn a Scout Law merit badgse. We teach values during our activities, not as the activity itself.

I like the ideas discussed above. Every MB has requirements that are usually done poorly. For emergency preparedness, it's the drill. Never done great. Somehow our troop has used the summer camp emergency drill to fill the requirement. The emergency plan was often chicken tracks haphazardly done on paper.

Yeah. Over the top. My apologies.

As a MB, we are defining this as a discussion with an adult. You are right that scouts discuss this continually on their own and they discuss specifics. But MBs are about the adult connection with an experienced expert.

Because pushing this badge is offensive. A mentor of mine a long time ago said to watch out for companies that have signs such as "# of days without an accident" because those are the companies with accidents. So we need this badge because our scouts are ignorant about diversity, equality and inclusion? From what I've learned, this is being shoved down their throat day after day.

Our kids are getting indoctrinated at school, entertainment, etc all the time. Scouts should put this in the context of Scout Law and Oath and the nature of being a good person. To be honest, the MB is bordering on offensive to me that we need this as a MB. I'd rather see a required MB for sewing or a specific skill. This MB is at best a waste and a worst yet another MB that will be mostly done very poorly.

Impossible. ... We value making connections with our scouts. To make connections, we talk. Maybe a few can discuss this topic at the ideal concept level. But most will bring their politics into it, left or right. That's the nature of discussion. Specifics will be discussed. Is chanting "All Cops Are Bastards." a form of bullying? Is that the right way to protest? How about specific police incidents? Should you get a permit to protest? Is it okay to march on the highway? I can't tap dancing around the meat and expect the scouts to respect the discussion. I just don't see how this MB is a good idea. This should have been just a few additional requirements to one of the Citizen badges.

This is why I want my sons in scouting. Value statement with outdoor activities. Hike. Camp. Swim. Bike. Some of my best memories are seeing my sons outside with his friends doing things. This is a HUGE OPPORTUNITY for scouting. Break the reputation of stuffy, boring mtgs, etc. Get back to DOING THINGS. How about measuring unit quality by a simple ratio: Mtgs to Activities. Mtgs are indoor, planning, coordination, training, merit badges. Activities are movement, doing things, biking, hiking, camp fires, volleyball, swimming, exploring, etc. A goal could be 1-to-1. My first son's troop was close to 1-to-1. Great experience. My 2nd son had 1.5-to-1 or 2-to-1. My 3rd son was in my 1st son's troop and it was close to 1-to-1. My 4th son's troop was 4-to-1 if not higher. I can't call it a great experience.

I'm flexible on backpacking meals or bigger meals. I just don't want to be doing dishes late in the evening.

I just don't like overlapping both rank and MB.

I think you are both saying similar things and I concur with both.

Innocent, no. BSA exists in a society sharing deep guilt. My view is it's wrong to accuse BSA more than you accuse police, churches, schools, families. Definitely accuse those specifically involved. Beyond that, this was a society failure. Example ... A huge number of scouting units were chartered by schools. Schools. Their charters were signed by paid professionals, often school principals, whos careers were built decades of knowledge working with youth and families. But they signed the paperwork for the program. Many teachers were often leaders too. ... How did that expertise not recognize the dangers / risks / incidents / bad leaders. I've read dozens of BSAs ineligible volunteer files. BSA's records often show the involvement of families, police and other adults that were not "BSA". ... I've rarely seen any of the files say let's give the guy another try in 5 years or after he cleans up. In 1970, 1980 and even 1990, there was no such thing as a national background check that was done. In the 1970s and even 1980s, there was no nation wide email. When I was growing up, our neighbors were hockey kids ... until the suspensions. Apparently, the program was hazing the new guys. It only became an issue after a kid was hospitalized. And, the neighbor kid was suspended for what him and his hockey friends did to a few other weaker kids in the locker room. Just a few years ago, I was talking with a hockey dad where the team traveled ... all the dads would go drink and one adult would stay in the hotel with the kids. Youth protection? Every youth program, school, etc has dirty laundry and could have done better. It would be more accurate to accuse the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s as a whole.

As before, we will have to disagree. Your views are yours. I agree BSA is probably one option in many good youth programs. And, there are many more good youth choices now then ever before. In 1960, there were many fewer choices. Now, there are dozens of choices. I must disagree with you on the slap-on-the-face view. BSA is caught in a legal mess as many things get caught in legal messes when society changes. Maybe BSA was more vulnerable. Maybe. BUT, society was at fault as a whole. BSA had a system before many organizations to try to block abuse. It worked and did not work, but BSA tried.

Exactly. Many major denominations ... even in 1999 ... did not have issue with the membership questions. Instead, it got thrust into a defining statement about ALL scouting. This could have been easily side-stepped.

BSA should have found another path out of 1999 BSA vs Dale, like let the kid progress. If his scouting unit was okay, BSA should not have injected themselves. Instead, BSA choose to block and Supreme Court made a good decision protecting individual groups ... but that decision started an avalanche againts BSA. Though most can't name BSA vs Dale, every scouter has seen the result. Can't recruit in classrooms. Labeled discriminatory. etc, etc, etc. I've never seen a group work as hard to help youth participate, but at the same time get labeled as much as BSA does. There were a few more political issues like this, but this is the major one.