Undue Influence?

[CubsRgr8]

In another thread on this forum, someone seems to express the opinion that the LDS and RC church bodies hold undue influence on the Boy Scouts of America. In order to evaluate this opinion, I'm wondering if anyone out there can direct me to some membership statistics. Specifically, I'm looking for a breakdown of the type and number of units sponsered by different religious and non-religious charter organizations. I tried the official BSA website to no avail. Thanks in advance.

[Bob White]

CubsRgr8,

You are partialy correct in what you say in that there are a large number of representaatives at the national level representing specific religions. However it is not accurate to say "undue" influence.

 

Representation is based on the number of chartering organizations using the scouting program. In the case of the LDS church, they have have chosen to make the Boy Scouts of America the official youth program of their church. Every LDS church in the country has a scout unit. Nationally the LDS has 11,738 scout units serving 412,240 youth as of Dec. 31, 1998.

 

The LDS have by far the largest number of units, therefore the most representation. However, they do not serve the most youth. That distinction goes to.... no not the Roman Catholic Church.... The United Methodist Church, with 11,738 units at the same point in time. The Catholic Church is however second in number of units and third in number of youth served. So these three organizations have the greatest representation because they are the biggest users of the program. So you see it is not "undue", it is representative of the scouting community.

 

Here is a site where you can get more statistics. Stats are usually 2 to 3 years old because it takes time to accumulate accurate figures due to the size of the program.

 

http://members.tripod.com/troop485/catholic/charter.htm

 

You should know also that national scouting is run by volunteers like you and me. The pros jobs are to implement the decisions made by volunteer committees made up of scouts, scouters and Charter Organization Representatives from every council in the country. The Advancement Committee alone has over 200 volunteers that meet twice a year and review and update aspects of the advancement program.

 

I hope this helps,

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[tjhammer]

CubsRgr8:

 

Sorry, I know you asked for this information before, and then I got distracted with work for the past two weeks. Let me give you the info I have most handy right now, which unfortunately is from 1996. I am compiling additional information for more recent years.

 

 

 

 

Chartering Organization

 

1996 No. of Youth

1996 No. of Units

% of Total BSA

Units

% of Total BSA

Members

Avg Size of Unit

 

 

United Methodist Churches

407,243

11,587

10.25%

13.00%

35.1

 

 

LDS Churches

397,824

29,315

25.92%

12.70%

13.6

 

 

Public Schools

396,126

11,163

9.87%

12.65%

35.5

 

 

Roman Catholic Churches

344,063

9,590

8.48%

10.99%

35.9

 

 

Parents Clubs in Schools

186,032

4,032

3.57%

5.94%

46.1

 

 

Lutheran Churches

146,390

4,340

3.84%

4.67%

33.7

 

 

Presbyterian Churches

144,200

3,940

3.48%

4.60%

36.6

 

 

Parent Teacher Association

110,952

2,229

1.97%

3.54%

49.8

 

 

Baptist Churches

108,584

4,799

4.24%

3.47%

22.6

 

 

Lions International

106,359

3,248

2.87%

3.40%

32.7

 

 

Industry/Business

76,864

3,478

3.08%

2.45%

22.1

 

 

American Legion

75,449

2,482

2.19%

2.41%

30.4

 

 

Fire Services

71,488

3,400

3.01%

2.28%

21.0

 

 

Law Enforcement

56,097

3,160

2.79%

1.79%

17.8

 

 

United Church of Christ

51,899

1,448

1.28%

1.66%

35.8

 

 

Rotary International

51,752

1,443

1.28%

1.65%

35.9

 

 

Kiwanis International

48,349

1,349

1.19%

1.54%

35.8

 

 

Episcopal Church

48,314

1,374

1.21%

1.54%

35.2

 

 

Hospitals, Clinics

46,381

1,378

1.22%

1.48%

33.7

 

 

Veterans of Foreign Wars

40,319

1,225

1.08%

1.29%

32.9

 

 

Christian Church (DOC)

36,058

1,094

0.97%

1.15%

33.0

 

 

Private Schools

33,227

1,280

1.13%

1.06%

26.0

 

 

Elks Lodges, BPOE

29,644

871

0.77%

0.95%

34.0

 

 

Community Centers

26,489

1,216

1.08%

0.85%

21.8

 

 

Housing Authority (H.U.D.)

19,642

1,164

1.03%

0.63%

16.9

 

 

Optimist International

17,316

440

0.39%

0.55%

39.4

 

 

Camps, Parks, Recreation

14,714

748

0.66%

0.47%

19.7

 

 

Homeowners Associations

14,056

428

0.38%

0.45%

32.8

 

 

Church of Christ

13,208

465

0.41%

0.42%

28.4

 

 

Loyal Order of Moose

12,624

408

0.36%

0.40%

30.9

 

[tjhammer]

Bob White said: I'm confused! Why is it that the LDS's representation is "skewed", when as a national sponsor it has the most units and the second most number of youth served? Who do you thing has the most Representatives in Congress, California or Rhode Island. If other organizations used scouting as completely as the LDS church they would have more representation.Im not sure its fair to say the LDS church "uses Scouting so completely"... they have a lot of units, but theyre awfully small by comparison to other COs. As you said yourself, representation on the National Relationships Committee (which is behind the current policy banning avowed gays and was behind the banning of women Scout leaders, etc) is influenced by the number of Scout units that a CO sponsors.

 

Your analogy of the way we determine congressional representation is a good one, and illustrates my point well. The Mormon Church represents only 12% of the BSA membership (less than the UMC), but more than 25% of the number of units (against the UMC 10%). Which CO is doing a better job of using Scouting?

 

This would be akin to Rhode Island having twice the congressional influence despite having fewer citizens. I think there's no doubt that statistically, the Mormon Church's influence over the BSA is skewed.

 

But the influence goes much further than just statistics... the Mormon Church more aggressively exercises their influence than most of the other COs... they're the primary driver behind this current policy.

 

The Methodist Church is much divided over homosexuality and specifically over the appropriateness of gay Scout leaders... major bodies within the Church filed opposing views before the Supreme Court, and the National Board of the Church has no official position either way. And while they have never threatened to abandon the Boy Scouts regardless of BSA policies, they have learned that they need to beef up their influence. I recall reading a statement about eight months ago from a group in the UMC (General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church?) that wanted to aggressively expand the number of Scout units they sponsored so they could have more of an influence over this BSA policy (which they opposed).

 

I think there's no doubt that the BSA is being influenced by numbers (numbers of units and money associated mostly). As mentioned before, the Chief Scout Executives comment that the BSA would have to reconsider it's policy if it started to see a significant drop in membership because of it speaks volumes, and frankly is a disconcerting position for what is supposed to be "all about morality".

[tjhammer]

OldGreyEagle said in another thread: Once again I refer to my comment, "I must be out of the loop". When did the LDS tell national that it had to make a rule no gay leaders? What documentation is used to support this claim? I am not disputing it, I just want to know where this information may be found as I am constanly reading things on this foum that I never knew (Thank you Scouter.COm for this forum)and these facts are presented in a manner that makes me feel I am the only one who doesnt know this stuff.

 

When is this stuff discussed? Not at any committee meeting I have been to or round table or even at the national jamboree have I heard this topic brought up by any adult leader. The only reference I hear to the no gay policy comes from scouts who usually tell me they dont understand why gays cant be leaders. Other than this forum, where do you guys discuss this subject? OGE, I think the fact that you (and all but a small few of the rest of the adult volunteers and parents in this organization) feel "out of the loop" is further indication of just how insular this ban on avowed gays is.

 

I have explained before, this is a policy that was born out of the National Relationships Committee. The recent affirmation of the policy from an "independent task force" was in fact made by a group appoint by the Nat Rel Committee (this national committee consist of representatives of the top COs in the country, which is strongly dominated by the LDS and other religions). They claimed the task force that recently affirmed this policy was a true representation of all of Scouting, consisting of parents, clergy, and leaders from a broad cross-section of America covering many geographic locations, religions, education levels, etc. They failed to emphasize that somehow they "achieved" this diversity with just 12 to 20 members on the "task force". And that those members were hand picked by the Committee that was seeking validation for their policy.

 

I would challenge you to find one Council Scout Executive, or one Council Board, or a Unit Committee, or any group for that matter beyond the National Relationships Committee that has officially contributed to the debate on this policy (the only examples you'll find are of councils, etc, that have come out AGAINST the policy). It's quite insular, indeed. Unfortunately, the recent strongly worded affirmation (the first really since the BSA fought the completely right but different battle in the Supreme Court for self-determination) now makes any eventual change in this policy seem like a major compromise of principle (and casts the nine major metro councils and others that are publicly campaign against this as "anti-Scouting").

(This message has been edited by tjhammer)

[CubsRgr8]

Thanks to both Bob White and tjhammer for their replies. Any chance either of you (or anybody else) knows where the most current version of this information exists on a public website?

[Bob White]

tjhammer,

The reason no discussion takes place on this at Roundtables, or district meetings etc. is that it is an irrelavent topic. The pupose of those bodies is to support and provide program for the units in their area, not to debate national membership regulations.

 

The LDS is not a majority vote at national, and as you pointed out, other organizations have the ability to increase their use of scouting and I hope they do. The fact is according to a recent Harris pole 95% of US familiies polled supported the present values of the BSA. In addition A Newsweek poll found that the public overwhelmingly supports the Supreme Court decision that supported the BSA constitutional right to free association.

 

Does everyone agree with the BSA? No. Throughout our history there have been people who haven't liked our values, our uniform our methods etc.

 

Has this affected our membership? Check the figures, scouting is growing in total numbers. Has it affected our financial stability? Sorry, NO. In almost every community where we have lost United Way funding we have rebounded within two years to beyond the monies we received from United Way.

 

You are welcome to disagree with scoutings values. You are welcome to protest our values. But if you are waiting for those values to change... pull up a comfy chair because you are going to be waiting a long long time.

 

By the way if you think our stand on atheism and homosexuality is prejudiced, they are not, they are legally discriminatory. If you want to see prejudice take a look at your own views of the LDS representatives at the national level.

 

It is easier to remove a splinter from a freinds eye, than a plank from your own.

 

Bob White

[tjhammer]

It's actually a shame that BSA doesn't publish this information themselves. It seems that in recent years the membership details have become much harder to locate (I suppose there is a conspiracy theory in there somewhere). On the whole, membership data paints a pretty good picture... usually increasing our membership year after year, if only slightly. I suppose if I had a theory on why the information is becoming increasingly less public it would be a paranoia by that national professional staff that would fear showing ANY membership trends to the general public, good or bad. The Annual Reports of the (recent years of which are available on the BSA's web site at http://www.scouting.org/excomm/) seem to publish less info as the years go on, or they pick just a few statistics to emphasize (Cub Leader registration has gone up x%, etc). My own information from above was transcribed from a National Relationships Committee newsletter from 1996 highlighting the top 30 COs.

 

I would suggest that you MAY be able to receive this information by calling External Communications department at the BSA National Headquarters, but I'm doubtful that they will make it available to you.

 

[tjhammer]

BobWhite... have you read any of this discussion that's already been had in either Why it's relevant... or Scouting's Real Gay Policy? I realize you did not contribute to those discussions (and I respect the VAST amount of your posts to this board that are made outside this debate), but most of the points you raise now were already covered there.I agree with the Supreme Court decision, which was about self-determination for the BSA, I just worry we'll die on the sword we picked to fight that battle (an inarticulate, vague and intellectually dishonest ban on avowed gays from being Scouts or Scout leaders).You're claim that 95% of America agree with the BSA on this policy is absurd, and no poll has ever shown that.You say that this policy has not affected our membership... well, I suppose that is yet to be seen, but I'm certain that it won't have a major effect because that vast majority of people (like me) recognize the real value of Scouting has nothing to do with banning gay Scouts; it seems really the only people who dont understand that are the LDS Church and the zealots who have drawn a line in the sand and said that they would abandon Scouting and all of its value if we stop agreeing with them on this one issueYou say I am welcome to disagree with Scouting values and I say that banning avowed gay Scouts is NOT a Scouting value... I embrace all Scouting values; I was raised by the Movement and teach those values to Scouts today.Stand on atheism.... Bob, I know you don't intend to equate homosexuality with atheism... obviously a fundamental tenant of Scouting is Reverence and Duty to God, and atheism is not acceptable in Scouting, but homosexuality has nothing to do with belief in or reverence for God... if it did, there would be an awful lot of Churches and very religious people who disagree with the BSA ban (and even said so in court briefs) that you would be linking to atheism.I am discriminating against LDS? No, Bob, I'm just not LDS. And I don't like the fact that their influence is being used to force me to adhere to their Church's beliefs.

[Bob White]

Yes tjhammer there really is a poll!

 

"A Louis Harris poll found that 95% of U.S. parents want the Scouting program and its values for their children"

http://www.bsa.scouting.org/excomm/values/newsletter/0106/beacon.html

 

Yes, I've read the other strings but I thought what we were talking about was the "undo" influence of the LDS and Roman Catholic religions in the rule setting of scouting.

 

I am not a member of the LDS church and no one and nothing in scouting has ever asked that you or I follow the teachings of the LDS Church.

 

The values of BSA existed long before the LDS Church adopted this program for their youth outreach. As did the method of representation on the Board. How come none of the national board members are screaming "foul" if they feel their input is overshadowed? Why aren't more scouts leaving than joining if this were an LDS controlled organization? Why aren't there more LDS youth members if the program was pushing LDS beliefs?

 

I'm sorry but the whole thing smells of a red herring. If you want to change something about scouting, let's get rid of that ugly new webelos hat. Or maybe that's the way the LDS Church wants it to look?

 

As far as my VAST posting on other topics. Welcome to America my friend. A free exchange of ideas is what we are all about.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[tjhammer]

As far as my VAST posting on other topics. Welcome to America my friend. A free exchange of ideas is what we are all about.Bob, I think you misunderstood me. I was paying you a compliment, I respect the knowledge you have contributed to this forum, and the huge number of posts that you make indicate a willingness to help your fellow Scouters. I'm not sure why you suspected sarcasm in my remark. Yes tjhammer there really is a poll! "A Louis Harris poll found that 95% of U.S. parents want the Scouting program and its values for their children"Of course... that Louis Harris poll is fantastic, and has been used for years to prove the value of Scouting. I used to photo copy charts from it and hand out during recruitment. I encourage everyone to read it -- it probably was some of the best public relations data we have generated as an organization. But Bob, that data was not a poll on whether 95% of Americans thought Scouting should ban avowed gay Scouts. Come on, as I said in my previous post, just about everyone (except those that have threatened to abandon Scouting) agree that Scouting's value is not based in its exclusion of gay Scouts.no one and nothing in scouting has ever asked that you or I follow the teachings of the LDS Church... How come none of the national board members are screaming "foul" if they feel their input is overshadowed?I've already stated above that the Methodists have discussed inflating the number of units (notice, not necessarily members) so they could carry more influence in this specific debate (which they find themselves opposed to the Mormons on). I've been clear that many of the people that know the inner workings of the National Relationships Committee understand who controls that committee (largely the Mormons). This is the exact same fight that was had with the Mormons when they tried to block women Scout leaders (for years) and the age for Cub Scouts (both of which ended in compromise that allowed the Mormons to have different standards than the rest of the BSA, in effect, local control). If you disagree with all of these statements and still insist that the Mormon Church is not wielding any undue influence over Scouting, why don't you tell me where you think this BSA's policy DID come from?Why aren't more scouts leaving than joining if this were an LDS controlled organization?Because the ban on avowed gay kids and adults is one of the few broad ranging effects of LDS pressure and it's not felt by a majority of the organization. And because a lot of people sympathize with the LDS church on this issue (recent polls are showing the country is about evenly divided on homosexuality, Scouting members tending to be a bit more conservative on the average). And because most rational people believe Scouting's worth a whole lot more than just being a safe haven from associating with avowed gay kids and adults.Why aren't there more LDS youth members if the program was pushing LDS beliefs?Because they already have every boy Church member registered in Scouting, or at least they do until they decide to bail on Scouting and start their own internal program.I'm sorry but the whole thing smells of a red herring.Red herring? Heck no, I don't want to divert attention away from the flawed policy and damage it causes. I'm just trying to explain how the policy "became"... understanding that is fundamental to eventually correcting the situation. I do not begrudge the Mormons their right to a different belief on the morality of gay Scouts. I just dont like them dictating to me and other religions what the belief should be.

[Bob White]

The mormons don't have a monopoly among the religions when it comes to not accepting gay scout leaders.

[NJCubScouter]

Well, I see that after an apparent few days absence leaving me to carry the torch for truth, justice and the ever-increasingly American way, the much better-informed tjhammer has jumped back in and is saying almost everything on this issue that I would say, and more. So I just have a few things to add:

 

BobWhite... and by the way, I also want to sincerely thank you for the wealth of information and wisdom that you bring to the day-to-day Scouting topics. In all the recent debates about how troops should be run, advancement, boys with blue hair, etc., some of which got ridiculously overheated, I have agreed with you virtually every time, and have learned from you. I respect you and your obvious concern for the boys and providing them with a good program, and teaching other adults to do so as well. This seems to be the one topic where we disagree, and we disagree very strongly. Funny, huh?

 

Anyway, Bob, one problem I have is that when the BSA talks about its values, as in "A Louis Harris poll found that 95% of U.S. parents want the Scouting program and its values for their children," I think most people do NOT understand that to have anything to do with the gay issue. When I think of the values of Scouting, I think of trustworthy, loyal, etc., morally straight (mainly meaning to respect and not hurt other people and to obey the law and be ethical, don't take drugs, don't father any children yet, and like that), respect for others, respect for the environment, duty to whatever you call God in whatever form he/it may take for you, self-reliance, and all the others Scouts practice (or are supposed to) on a daily basis. I don't see how heterosexuality (of which, despite some speculation, I am a practitioner) is a "value" that belongs on this list. Non-discrimination, however, IS a Scouting value.

 

I guess this is where the real conflict comes in on this issue: You believe that people like me are trying to change the values of Scouting, while I believe that the current BSA policy violates the values of Scouting. Maybe not the values of Scouting as they existed in 1910, when those values also included racially segregated troops, but the Scouting values of today -- which we probably agree on 98 percent of the time -- the 2 percent being this one issue, and perhaps what I see as an overemphasis by some on religion in Scouting.

 

As for the web site you posted, Bob, I went there and read it, and it is great information but as I say, does not support the BSA's position on gay leaders. In fact, I found this part particularly interesting:

 

BSA has a long tradition of service. In the midst of the Depression, Boy Scouts provided nearly 2 million items of clothing, food and household furnishings for the needy. In 1954, Scouts planted more than 6 million trees and set out 55,000 nesting boxes for birds. In 1988, Scouts collected 65 million cans of food for the poor.

 

In various "Get Out the Vote" campaigns, Scouts have been responsible for millions of adults going to the polls. Other Scouting programs have urged people to comply with the national census, donate blood and organs, practice natural resource conservation and implement Civil Defense advice.

 

Scouts serve their country in wartime, too. During World War I, Boy Scouts grew fruits and vegetables on thousands of mini-farms, sold war bonds and savings stamps to help finance the war, and organized coastal patrols to watch for enemy ships. They collected 100 train car-loads of peach pits and nut hulls to make charcoal for gas mask filters. And they conducted a national census of black walnut trees (prized for making gunstocks and airplane propellers), locating enough to fill 5,200 rail cars.

 

World War II saw Scouts distribute posters, conduct defense housing surveys, sell war bonds, assist the Red Cross and provide food for GIs. In 1944 alone, 184,000 Scouts planted victory gardens, and 126,000 more helped short-handed farmers harvest their crops.

 

An Emergency Service Corps composed of older Scouts worked with Civil Defense officials as messengers, emergency medical assistants and fire watchers.

 

In addition, Scouts collected precious commodities: nearly 6,000 tons of rubber, 17,400 tons of tin cans, 21,000 tons of scrap metal, 590,000 tons of paper, 10 million used books for GIs to read, 7,000 tons of clothing for European and Chinese refugees and 750 tons of milkweed floss (used as a substitute for hard-to-get kapok in life jackets).

 

Great stuff. And it would not have made the slightest difference if some of the leaders and some of the older boys were gay. And guess what? I am sure that some of them were. They helped build Scouting and they helped build this country (and one of them recently helped prevent terrorists from flying a plane into the Capitol or White House, in the face of his own certain death), and it was just fine as long as they stayed "in the closet." Some of them -- including a very, very small number of prospective Scout leaders -- don't want to be there any more, because apparently it is not a very healthy place to be. And for that, an "intense minority" (as we used to say in political science class) has banished them from the BSA -- at great cost to the program's public image, and by extension to the program itself.

 

Finally, as for the ugly new Webelos hat: Obviously SOMEONE who does not share my values designed that hat. On the other hand, after my son tried on the new hat, he said that it is more comfortable. It (along with the new Tiger, Wolf, Bear and Scout hats) is softer and sits flat on the head, unlike the "old" hat my son still wears, which has that stiff piece of material that makes the front "stand up" a bit. (On the other other hand, they also removed the "head guard" in the Webelos hat, a little flap of material that gets between the clasp on the activity badge pins and the boy's forehead. And they raised the price from $9 for each of 4 hats over a 5-year period, to $11 for each of 5 hats.) But the new "comfort factor" goes to show, I guess, that even when Scouting makes a mistake, there is some good in it.

 

Except on the gay issue.

[Bob White]

Hi NJcubscouter,

 

I fully accept the fact that there are scouters who disagree with the BSA stance on on Gays in scouting and I will address that in a minute.

 

First I want to say that I have no problem problem with people disagreeing with the policies of the BSA. I have a big problem with the conspiracy fantasies that some support.

 

Now as far as gays as members. if you reread my few posts on this subject you will see that I have never given my personal view on this topic. Because what I think on membersip rules is not relevent to my responsibilities in the program.

 

All I have ever said was I know what the BSA policy is and that since I volunteered to play the scouting game, and since I have full knowledge of the rules and agreed to abide by them that as long as I am a member I will follow the rules. If I ever felt I needed to comprise myself to do an activity I would quit.

 

If I was on a baseball team and thought they should allow 4 strikes instead of three, I would never be so insistant that the game rules be changed to match my preference. I chose the game, I should abide by the rules or pick a different game.

 

I don't think that scouting will ever change their stand. Does that change the fact that this is a tremendously valuable and effective youth program? I think not.

 

By the way, thanks for the kind words. I am much more comfortable talking about the fun stuff and enjoy the strings that help me share the methods of scouting with others the best. The political stuff is where I come to vent my spleen from time to time.

 

Bob

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[evmori]

tjhammer,

I beg to differ with your statement "homosexuality has nothing to do with belief in or reverence for God".

In God's eyes, homosexuality is a sin. Therefore being homosexual is a sin. Sin is separation form God. In my opinion, one cannot be reverent to God if you are separated from Him.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1(This message has been edited by evmori)