bacchus

We put most of the parents on the Committee. Issue resolved?

"the OLS course on-line." Wouldn't that be a HOOT Scenario: Click the graphic to set up a tent. Now, draw a circle to show the ax yard.

"As mothers, my friend and I discussed this--including the kindest possible interpretation above. I mentioned that official national policy permits parents to attend. (that's correct, isn't it?) Can a Troop set guidelines that forbid mothers from accompanying the troop? Well, I guess they can. LDS units don't let women into the Troop atall, right?" I know this is just a side-bar to your real question but thought I would answer it. LDS units can have women serving in scouter capacities, they just do not camp with the Troop. A mother should be encouraged to participate as much as possible though, for many reasons. We have a number of mothers participating in various scouting positions in my ward.

See: http://www.scouting.org/sitecore/content/Home/BoyScouts/Adults/Training/Trained%20Leader.aspx Apparently those Venturing Crew Advisers with an outdoor program now need to participate in OLS. Oh man, I've done WB, many campouts, and attended and even helped staff numerous council camps. I've been meaning to take OLS anyway, but do I need to rip off my trained patch until then?

Yes, thank you for clarifying. And I appreciate the others at this virtual RT for their feedback. For too long there has been too little activity between our local LDS units and the council. Both groups are bending over backwards to work with each other. There has been some success that hopefully can be parlayed into a stronger program for all. When we are helping sponsor some camporees and other units are coming over to share LNT, I would suggest that is an improvement. The relationship isn't perfect yet, but we're sure working on it.

OGE, I think my response belongs here so I don't clutter the issue on the other thread. I appreciate your comments, and found many others to be helpful - even some of the negative ones. What doesn't help the discussion is the other people who post drivel about not liking LDS units or the Church itself. Too much of that drives us LDS away from the discussion, which may be the goal of some anyway.

Congratulations!

OGE "But what do you tell the people who think that if the BSA allowed Gay and Atheist memebers would instead be "Raising thier moral standard"" I try to keep an open mind and I found this statement to be very enlightening. I will let that simmer around in my mind a little. Part of the issue is that some people view the issue as tolerance, while others view it as a lack of morals. Somebody accused me of being a troll. Let me assure you that is not my intent. I was merely trying to shift the morality issue back over to this thread from another thread that was intended to be about the weaknesses of local units, and what I can do to keep mine positive. People talk about this being a virtual roundtable. Yet they next say that some units are "ghosts" because they never see those individuals, but when those individuals show up they are run out of the virtual roundtable. I can see that being very similar to your local district. If a leader shows up with a proposal and you just gang up on him, he probably won't be back. This can give the appearance of credibility to your argument that he is a "ghost" but can you say that is his fault?

Some have been posting comments in another thread that really belong over here. So to get to the real question: Why would BSA change what they have been doing for 100 years? Why would the BSA lower its moral standards? Are some of you suggesting the requests of one 800 lb. gorilla be honored for the sake of change, and the requests of all the other gorillas out there who still have the same high standards be overruled?

Thank you for all your comments. I'll do everything I can to make those units that I'm involved with a positive force in our scouting area. Even your anti- comments are helpful so that I can see what attitudes may lurk below the surface with some of our volunteers.

Apparently this 800 lb gorillas hasn't. Or are you saying it did?

Very good points, and I definitely agree with them. As a good friend of mine says, "I feel strongly both ways." I have rarely heard anybody in my area discuss recognition of the Sabbath other than LDS folks desperately trying to get trained but have to do it on Sunday. The non-LDS who want Sundays off, just want a break. However, LNT, OLS, Wilderness 1st Aid, Woodbadge, and others are on Saturday, Saturday night, and Sunday, or Friday through Sunday in the case of WB. Rather than just complaining, how about I suggest a solution. Those trainings that would be all day and night Saturday and then you get up and leave on Sunday morning could be occasionally run Friday night and then all day Saturday. I understand it gets a bit more difficult to move WB back a day and start with Thursday so people have to take 2 days off from work instead of just 1, but you would probably be surprised at how many would jump at that opportunity. For the youth at Summer Camp, they could take their swim test the previous Saturday rather than show up Monday morning expecting all the staff to get to the water early just for them. Like a couple of you have said, there are other beliefs that recognize a weekly holy day other than Sunday. I think we should do everything we can to support them on whatever day they want to rest. I also think we should do everything we can to support those who would like to have Sunday off. RedFlyer, I definitely appreciate what you are saying with your analogy to the Pharisees of old.

""...On the other side of the coin, non-LDS for the most part seem to believe Sunday is just another day of the week." Awful prescient of you, isn't this? You presume to know the attitudes of Non-LDS towards Sunday? How large a sample size have you taken? What was your instrument of measurement?" Thank you for pointing out my errors and in addition I will admit my sample size was pretty small. Also, it was not meant as a complaint as those leaders are very qualified and exceptional volunteers. Let me restate, and please accept my apologies: My personal experience with the seeming majority of those non-LDS who plan training for our area seems to treat Sunday as a 2nd Saturday. Even for those who do not attend religious services on Sunday, many would like to take a break - a "day of rest" if you will.

BadenP, so you're the guy running all over town checking each unit to see if they have any scouts on the rolls that don't attend? What makes them a ghost, less than 75% attendance? Less than 50% attendance? Less than 25%? Regardless, I'll assure that the units I'm associated with do not have any of what you consider ghosts. In fact, the lowest attendance rate in my units come from individuals who are non-LDS. Would it fit your scheme a little better if we started dropping the lowest attending youth? That would begin to look a little elitist, which would probably lead to another thread here. OGE, I like your comments about units strengthening relationships with their COs.

A scout is reverent. LDS units don't travel on Sundays. LDS leaders try not to train on Sundays. On the other side of the coin, non-LDS for the most part seem to believe Sunday is just another day of the week. I don't feel it necessary to impose my support of keeping the Sabbath day holy on others. However, I have noticed that whenever we have LDS-organized training that does not involve Sundays, that many non-LDS are interested in participating. They like to reserve Sundays for families, too. This country used to actually have laws that businesses must close at least one day a week. This was in support of the Sabbath. I'm not advocating that we should have a law to have everything closed on Sunday, but just to make a point that in this country the Sabbath used to be revered up until recently - about 40 years ago. Why do people seem so opposed to holding training in ways that do not include Sunday?

OGE, I can't speak for the Church. However, it wouldn't surprise me if they left BSA over such a drastic change in standards of morality. What does that have to do with the way scouting is run in everybody's individual units? BadenP, Let me assure you that we do not have any LDS ghost units here. My follow-up question is if we did have some scouts in name only, who would care? It would seem to me having all the youth registered in any congregation (LDS or not) it just raises the bar to be more inclusive and have a program that everybody will enjoy and attend. A "quality unit" if you will.

No need to get ad hominem. That is unless I got ad hominem with you. So which are you, homosexual or atheist?

Eagle92, I believed the same thing about LDS adults having too short of tenure. At least until my District Trainer showed me the stats that LDS tenure matched the non-LDS tenure. I understand that could just be a anomaly. OldGreyEagle, We have dealt in other threads with other churches changing their stances to allow their clergy to be homosexual, although I don't think that would apply to atheism. To be honest, I believe BSA has had a policy forever that homosexual and atheist leaders would not be allowed. As to allowing some type of "local option" so other units could pick homosexual and atheist leaders, I don't have the authority to speak for the Church. However, I would personally have issues with sending my own boys to a camp or other activity where I don't know if the leaders have the same morals with which I have tried to raise them. On the other side, you will notice the Church did not drop its support of BSA when the co-ed Venturing program began. "In the Council I serve there is one, one mind you LDS unit while several churches have dropped charters based on the BSA's discriminatory position on adult leadership. While there is virtually no LDS prescence, they still effect the COuncil's Membership and that is a source of irritation." You're telling me that the scouts from the formerly presumed homosexual- and atheist-led units quit scouting altogether instead of transferring? Morality has changed a lot in the last 100 years for some special-interest groups. That does not mean that the BSA needs to lower its standards.

I imagine they will need to change it to Quad Crown soon when the new site in WV is developed? If you don't mind, let me answer some of your comments: 1) They carry the most power within the BSA due to their chartering scheme and are unashamed to wield that power over the minority in manipulating national policy. >> I don't understand this one. What has that imagined power changed? 2) Their policy to enroll every age appropriate male youth in the program and maintain that membership despite their interest grossly exaggerates the number of youth served. Then use those numbers to justify #1. >> If the concern is that overestimating the active scouts who are in LDS COs, I don't think the people who you think are being fooled are actually dumb enough to be fooled. 3) The most embarrassing episodes in BSA history are tied to LDS charters. Forest fire in Utah a few years ago, the recent sex abuse case in Oregon, the racial discrimination case in the 70s. >> Just because the media likes to mention the Church every time they can when there is something negative, does not make the LDS scouting units negative. I don't really have the time right now, but would you like me to get around to doing an internet search of all the BSA mishaps and get a good cross-section from non-LDS units? 4) They manipulate the BSA program to better fit their use of it to prepare the boys for missionary service, yet hold firm that other units may not adjust the program to better serve individual communities. I.E. the local option for membership. In fact, they have threatened to leave the BSA, in mass, if a local option was adopted by national. >> Maybe I don't understand what you mean by local option. My COR and other scouter training specifically mentions that COs are to use the BSA programs to fit their needs. 5) Most LDS units are closed units, exclusive to the LDS wards, whereas most other units are a cross section of the communities they serve. One of the biggest benefits of being a Boy Scout is to interact and serve with a diversity of beliefs and cultures. To learn from those differences and strengthen your own character. >> Actually the LDS units are not closed units. They just don't usually recruit. My units are very diverse, racial, religious, family income, etc. 6) Interaction and fellowship between LDS and non-LDS units is nearly non-existent. >> Maybe this is satisfactory to you but I'm working on changing that in my District and Council, and things have improved substantially. YIS

Sorry to be gone so long. I got a lot of information from my request and would like to summarize some of it. Also, would like to add one additional difference, and that is that LDS congregations can start a unit with a minimum of 2 youth instead of the minimum of 5 elsewhere. This may be the only official difference. Qwazse - had a good experience witha troop, and noted that many policies get broken. Eagle 92 - DE over an "orphan" LDS unit. They were not up to snuff. Non-LDS unites are more involved so have fewer issues. Varsity created specifically at LDS request. Poor quality of training. Skeptic - Some contention LDS to non-LDS, but bridges are being built. Smaller units. Shorter tenure. BadenP - LDS week at Philmont. Largest contributor so special permission to alter BSA programs. JHankins - 3 of 25 Wards had functioning units. Eagle candidate attempted to use quorum president as POR. No Denali awards. Wards not sharing confidential info. NJCubScouter - Answering a couple questions -#5 - The Church leaders ask people to serve, who then still get the background check after submitting their forms; as opposed to non-LDS who volunteer on their own without being asked. Both sources of leaders get a background check, but in the Church if there is a known issue with no official legal history, the individual is less likely to be asked to serve there. #6 Non-LDS youth may not return, however the required activity the Church places on the LDS youth many times causes them to advance in rank faster, making their units appear as eagle mills. PackSaddle - Local option applied to non-LDS. Let me address that one - Of course it applies to all. When I took my COR training that was made very clear that the BSA intends their programs to be used by all CO's to accomplish their goals. OGE - LDS oldest CO, highest number of units, highest numbers, largest contributors of funds, therefore 800 lb. gorilla. GernBlasten - No interaction with LDS. Something about Triple Crown (new term to me, please comment). Outdoor program lacking. Poor patrol method. Disparity of "voting power." Then things turned into an LDS bash-fest. A couple more posts of note, Bando's concern that BSA puts up with the LDS due to a fear of the Church leaving. Also, the conservatism in the Church. OGE - Participate. He doesn't like how things are playing out, but it's fair. So I'm still left with my original question about what some don't like about the LDS program other than not liking the Church itself. There are a lot of issues that seem to stem from lack of leaders being trained, but lack of training is not an official policy of the Church. I'm actually a little surprised at the anti-LDS flavor of this forum. I have been to many multi-council events and without being obnoxious let them know I'm LDS and then we all pick each others brain about how to make our programs better. I have not had a scouter yet give me a hard time about being untrained, voting against them in their council, not using the patrol method correctly, or any of these other issues brought up here. In the spirit of diversity, how about we put our various religious prejudices aside and work together. In my area the Church is relatively small, but I have nothing but GOOD things to say about the non-LDS scouters. We have been working on building bridges for a long time and the entire program is strengthening. By the way, I don't understand this voting power thing as we really do things by consensus in my district. Can somebody share what types of things others vote on? Instead of worrying about having an 800 lb. gorilla in the room and that he might beat you on the head, how about you work with the gorilla and get it on your side. I think that's what the gorilla would like.(This message has been edited by bacchus)

Quazse, you are absolutely right. In fact, I think I have seen or can imagine "exceptions" (even if not correct) to all of these other than 2, 3, and 5.

I have seen a lot of comments about how people don't like the LDS use of scouting. Frankly, I just don't see a program difference between the LDS way and non-LDS way (other than what I list below). I even saw somebody's post recently that basically claimed only one LDS unit that he knows of is a good unit, and that's only because the non-LDS have basically taken over the unit. Would somebody care to enlighten me as to what the concern is? And the perceived differences between LDS and non-LDS scouts? My thoughts: 1) The BSA is not the youth program for the young men, but the Young Men is the program, and it uses scouting heavily. 2) There are no merit badge or rank differences. 3) The programs are not co-ed, even Venturing. Also, women do not go on LDS campouts. 4) The scouts are organized by age group, Age 11, Ages 12-13, Ages 14-15, and Ages 16-18. Sometimes they are put in separate patrols, sometimes they use the Troop/Team/Crew separate units. Then again, sometimes this is all ignored and an untrained LDS leader will put them all in the same Troop and the patrols won't be age-group related. 5) There is an additional step in youth protection in that they are asked/assigned to scouts rather than volunteer on their own. You might have to think about this one to get it. 6) Theoretically a scout will be active in scouts during his entire teen years as opposed to non-LDS units where a scout may leave for a couple years and come back later. This endurance of activity may give the appearance of faster rank advancement. Then again if the scout isn't motivated, or relying on his parents motivation, maybe not. 7) Oh, and LDS units don't travel on the Sabbath. What are your thoughts?

"And no, I'm not going to change the program to accommdate that one boy. If we are running the program as it should (and in that I consider stuff like hazing) and I have 60 others who are thriving and enjoying the program, why would we change?" Sounds like you have a solid program. Good work.

"Have you ever had a Scout that didn't enjoy it, and gone to the parents and said, "Johnny really doesn't want to be in Scouts, and I think it would be better for Johnny if he stopped." Are there any school teachers on this board? Have you ever gone to the parents and said, "Jimmy really doesn't want to be in school, and I think it would be better for Jimmy if he stopped?" I know you aren't going to like this analogy, however, think about that student who doesn't graduate who changes his mind when he matures at 18. What about the scout who decides at 18 he would really like to earn Eagle? I think the solution is not to cut a boy loose from scouts as it is to make it more enjoyable for him. Is there a reason he doesn't like your troop? Is he being hazed? Is he not being challenged?

I have the perspective of the parent, of the adult leader, and of the scout. I must be that pushy parent because to me it sure seems like every adult wants to slow the boys' advancement down. When we have a boy who has done all the requirements and wants a BOR but keeps getting told he'll be ready at another time, that's an unnecessary hurdle. When merit badges earned at camp are not issued for whatever excuse, that's adding an unnecessary hurdle. When a boy comes out and says in a scout planning meeting that he wants to be Eagle by the end of the year, and then a year later says he wants to earn Eagle within the next year and a half (that's 2.5 years after his original statement), there is obviously something wrong. We leaders don't need to be changing the youths' goals to fit our own. If one likes to participate in scouting activities and progress while another likes to participate in baseball and avoid scouting, but the leaders hold one back so the other doesn't get discouraged by falling behind, we have a problem. I'm very tired of the attitude that if a youth isn't Eagle quality yet, we need to make it difficult for him to earn First Class, or Star, or merit badges, etc. If we waited before they were Eagle quality before letting them get any advancement at all, most would be about 17 1/2 before they earned Star, and then I guess the Eagle reputation could be protected and the numbers could be kept low and not "diluted." A parent should not be pushing a scout to the point that he makes his child do things and participate in activities he doesn't want to do, but from my perspective I see that a parent definitely has to be involved trying to keep the adult hurdles out of the way so his son can advance. Of course when I say that, I'll back up any scout who isn't my son who is being prevented from advancement for the odd adult reason. So maybe it's a parent perspective, but it's a leader's perspective too. That is not the correct application of "adult association" in my mind.