Here we go again....

[packsaddle]

What's the chance that councils would open the books so we could explore their budgets? Or is this already possible? A lot of these questions would be laid to rest fairly quickly, I think.

 

Zahnada, I have heard those six things in different forms as well. Some have an element of truth. Good evidence to the contrary exists for 1), available to anyone with a critical view. The second misconception is held by many persons and certainly not confined to BSA. However, I just scanned my latest Eagletter and saw a very white document, probably dominated by Christians. 3) is obviously wrong but also an easy misconception. Any church with dominance in membership will tend to exert its influence, in this case LDS. The last one is curious because although not exactly correct, I cannot envision strong denials by BSA. I would indeed enjoy seeing a publicity campaign to counter these things (doth they protest too much?). Does anyone seriously think such would change many minds?

But your point is taken regarding the fit of BSA with a broadly-based organization like UW.

 

[Bob White]

Keep in mind that many of the things listed are misconceptions deliberately started and spread by individuals and groups with specific political agendas. No amount of contradiction will change their minds, it would only give them a larger forum than deserved.

 

Some of the misconcptions listed are fueled by our own volunteers who through lack of training simply don't know better. In these cases the BSA's efforts are to promote training rather than argue the specific points.

 

The people with United Way who determine the distribution of the funds are commnity volunteers just like us. We speak of "them" just like many of us refer to "council" as though they are some faceless beings. But "they" are our neighbors and business associates. They will know who we are and what scouting really stands for by our actions.

 

If you are concerned that they think we are a white christian organization then make efforts to diversify the membership in the unit you serve, or assist your local Scoutreach professional in their efforts to reach other cultures in your community.

 

Work with your local professional staff and visit the National web-site. Learn what the BSA's true feelings and beliefs are when it comes to its membership rules, and when someone asks, explain to them what the real issues are.

 

Don't feed the fires of controversy. Speak positively in public of the organization, and the work accomplished in the unit, community, and nation that are serve through the scouting program.

 

Get trained and use the program. When the public sees dozens of units all doing scouting a different way it is difficult for them to comprehend who we are and what we do.

 

Food for thought,

Bob White

[Zahnada]

Certain groups and individuals have targeted BSA as the battle field for equal rights protests. No amount of PR could change their views. But Bob White has made a point that very effectively supports what I previously said. "Keep in mind that many of the things listed are misconceptions deliberately started and spread by individuals and groups with specific political agendas."

 

Most certainly! And where do these misconceptions spread to? To MILLIONS of uninformed Americans. The liberal side of this country has been fed these misconceptions and have begun to use them as the mental base of what they think of scouting. Then these people who don't have a political agenda lean on groups like the United Way because "I'm not supporting discriminating homophobes!" The United Way needs public support and even if their officials know the truth about BSA, they must give in to their members.

 

Bob, I'm afraid you're classifying the country as "us" vs "them." Which can easily turn into a battle of conservatives vs liberals or republicans vs democrats. But there are millions out there who are liberal and have no ill will towards scouting. Take me for example. Look at several other people on this forum. I don't agree with the policy at all. I've met too many gay men who were great humans and some who are amazing Eagle Scouts. But I still love scouting. However, if I wasn't raised into scouting, I would be biased against it by now. When the only news about BSA is bad PR, then it doesn't matter what the troops at the local level do. "Gee, it's nice of the scouts to clean up this park. Too bad they hate gays." The public image out there is one that if I hadn't been connected to scouts, I wouldn't allow my son to join.

 

BSA has not articulated its policy very well. The country still does not know what scouting is all about. Fortunately, it is still strong and still has strong support. I just hate to see that alternative view of scouting floating around the community. Of course I probably live in a more liberal area than you.

[dsteele]

I want to go to the question someone raised earlier (and I thought I was going to take the weekend off,) about "how do we get the council to open it's books ... or something along those lines. He/she was speaking of the financials.

 

The best way is to call the office and make an appointment with whichever professional is in charge of finance. That's what you ask for when you call. Depending on the size of your council, it might be an appointment with the Director of Finance, Finance Director (yes, there is a difference,) Assistant Scout Executive, Field Director, or even the Scout Executive. Let them know your questions in advance as specifically as possible -- so they can do their homework prior to the meeting -- and then go meet with them.

 

Every council in the U.S. is a registered not-for-profit corporation. Every council has to publish an annual report with financial information contained. Every council has to go through an independant audit every year and supply it to numerous sources.

 

Most people, however, don't understand the intricacies of book-keeping and tend to fly off the handle if they see numbers without explanation.

 

You can research your own council, or any other non-profit of significance by getting a copy of their IRS form 990, which are available on-line. However, even I can't read one of those without asking questions of the people who are responsible for those numbers. I don't advise you to use this method.

 

Meet with a financial professional in your council and ask your questions. If they really are the things some folks accuse us of being, they would have been busted by now.

 

DS

[packsaddle]

Dsteele, It was my question and thanks for an informative answer. I tend to agree that there are few persons who would 1) have the time or expertise to wade through those documents (not me for sure) or 2) would want to anyway. But for anyone who challenged their council's funding decisions, an invitation to view the books might be a quick way to quiet them. Like you said, most of the persons at the top are human and they would probably be very capable at answering queries if asked directly. You know, since all this stuff is in spreadsheet form anyway, why not just put it on the web, you know, a button to download a copy?

 

Zahnada, I didn't see the 'us' vs 'them' element in BW's reply and I think he did not mean to be taken that way at all. I don't deny that such exists but it seems to just emerge from a lack of positive outreach by BSA (their policies don't help much). BSA's comparative silence often seems to provide silent confirmation of the characterizations that you describe. I think I understand your thoughts regarding the polarization of people and society...I guess I try to ignore the ugly side of all this and keep my sights on the boys and their program. It's hard to do. BSA rigidity has closed many options by making what seem to be unchangeable policies, nearly impossible to rescind. I have decided that any disagreement I may have with BSA will fall on deaf ears so I complain loudly anyway, if I get the time, and then I get on with the troop.

[KoreaScouter]

Here's a little more irony, if you can stand it.

 

Lad in our neighborhood, 7th grader, good kid, friends with my son and about six other Scouts in our troop. He's tagged along to Eagle COHs, troop meetings, bowling outings, etc. On weekends when we're camping, he's got to be lonelier than a Maytag repairman. I've asked him why he doesn't join the Troop, and he says his mom won't let him, because of BSA policy on gays.

 

While you're busy scratching your head over why a parent would have a 12-year old boy pay the opportunity cost of her self-defined social responsibility, bear in mind that the BSA policy mirrors almost exactly the DoD policy (don't ask, don't tell). And, this woman's husband is on active duty and by extension supports the DoD policy. Last I heard, she's not insisting he resign his commission on the same grounds.

 

KS

[dsteele]

KS --

 

Isn't it amazing that some people in this world refuse to make sense? I wish there were something we could do to re-join the kid's mom with reality, but I fear there isn't.

 

One final story before I leave to do something truly important -- call the veterans I know and thank them for their service on this Memorial Day 2003 . . .

 

There was a Scout Executive, not so long ago, who had been in the same position in the same council for 23 years at the time of this story. Let me further illuminate by saying that calling this man merely eccentric would be like calling a Harvard Professor a Yale Professor -- you demote them both!

 

A television reporter called this Scout Executive to arrange an interview regarding child abuse in the Boy Scouts. The Scout Executive said, "What time do you go to bed at night?"

 

"Around 12:00 AM," the reporter answered.

"Fine," the SE said, "Call me at home at 11:30." This was Eastern Standard time and the news comes on at 11:00 PM.

 

The reporter called the Scout Executive at home at the appointed hour. The Scout Executive, I said, was eccentric, but a long cry away from being dumb. He knew the reporter wasn't used to working at that hour. He figured, correctly, that the reporter wouldn't be thinking quite clearly and he counted on it.

 

The reporter requested an interview date, and the Scout Executive said (I'll get this as close to verbatim as I can,)

 

"You're in the news business," he said to the reporter, "so when you watch the news, you probably do nothing else and pay attention to every word."

 

The reporter agreed that he did.

 

The Scout Executive said, "Well, I think I'm like most people. When I watch the news, I'm also reading the paper, doing some work, glancing at a magazine . . . something else as well. Do you think most people do that?"

 

The reporter allowed that yes, most people do other things while watching the news.

 

The Scout Executive said, "So, when I watch the news, let's say I'm watching the interview with you and I. Every once in a while, I look up at the TV and hear child abuse and the Boy Scouts. Child abuse and the Boy Scouts."

 

 

The reporter agreed with that, too.

 

"Let's say that I'm a father of a first-grader who wants to join Tiger Cubs. All I remember from that interview is child abuse and the Boy Scouts. Do you think I'm going to sign my son up if that's all I remember?"

 

The reporter agreed that he probably wouldn't.

 

"Are you aware," the Scout Executive asked, "that of every 100 boys who join Scouting, 2 will use their scouting skills to save their own life?"

 

The reporter wasn't aware of that.

 

"Are you aware that of every 100 boys who join Scouting, 2 will use the skills they learn in Scouting to save someone else's life?"

 

The reporter wasn't aware of that either.

 

The Scout Executive, rounding the bend, said, "Are you aware we're talking about 600,000 lives saved? I don't want to be responsible for the deaths of all those people, do you?"

 

There was no interview in that council.

 

Have a good Memorial Day.

 

Thank you to all the veterans of our Armed Forces. The red, white and blue ribbons tied to my trees are for you guys.

 

DS

[dsteele]

Something bad happened in these forums this evening. I'm not sure what it is, but didn't want to see this thread buried before we were done with it.

 

So here it is.

 

Post away.

 

DS

 

PS from DS, is there a moderator who would explain what happened? Just curious and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

 

DS -- again.

 

 

[ghostdancer]

As I stated in an earlier post.

 

"It is in my opinion that scouting is under attack because it is one of the few long standing PRIVATE organizations that has not bent to the wills and wantings of liberal America. It has stood strong for near 100 years without bending or compromising its moral and religeous standards. I myself am conservative as far as the "Gay" ordeal goes. I for one support the decisions made by the courts to give the BSA the right not to allow gays in scouting. If gays want to be part of an organization that is similar in nature to the BSA but more acceptable by liberal standards then by all means seek out the help and get the program off the ground, but quit attacking the BSA name to make a political statement or get your 5 seconds of fame. What are we supposed to do turn our backs on everything scouting was and is. Scouting, like our nation, was founded upon certain religeous and moral foundations. If these religeous and moral standards are in any way bent or compromised then the program itself will fall. However, if we stick to our guns and keep the foundations strong then none can take the program down. We will be able to provide our sons and our daughters(for those GSA parents) a program that is rich in moral living and standards thus producing better people."

 

gays need help I agree but not at the expense of the scouting organization lowering their standards to make them feel more comfortable with their decision of their way of life. it is unacceptable. Yes help them find their fellow homosexuals, direct them to support groups that will help them deal with their decision.

 

as far as the united way, they can take a swift kiss of my hind quarters. any organization that feels they can dictate policy because they have a minor contribution made to the scouting program needs to pull their head out of their behind and relize the scouting organization is independantly wealthy through PRIVATE contributions, fund raising, and other means of funding. Their measly 450,000 is just a small amount of money in comparison to what they give to other organizations.

[berkshirescouter]

Interesting artical. Don't know if its true.

http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?ID=8938&sd=06/12/03

[Joni4TA]

KoreaScouter,

The mother of that 12yr old boy that is paying the price for his mother's ignorance is either some ultra liberal freak, she's bi-sexual, confused about her own sexuality or has a family member that is gay. Either way, I agree with the rest that have said it, the woman makes no sense!

[evmori]

ItsATrailDay,

This is a good thing!

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[packsaddle]

Because the subject is "here we go again....", here we go again.

Ghostdancer, the article cited by 'Its Trail Day'

demonstrates a long-standing problem with the policy that has been discussed ad nauseum in earlier threads. Specifically, BSA does allow gays as members and leaders so long as those gay members and leaders keep quiet about it. Gays are only dismissed when they proclaim such publicly. The hypocrisy of such application of the policy should be obvious.

 

Additionally, this leaves you (and us) with the knowledge that: 1) we do have gay scouts around us anyway, they're just quietly in the closet, and 2) BSA's policy will likely keep them in the closet for fear of being dismissed...and keep them quietly around us. We'll just never be quite sure, will we? Have a nice day.

[Rooster7]

packsaddle,

 

BSA does allow gays as members and leaders so long as those gay members and leaders keep quiet about it. Gays are only dismissed when they proclaim such publicly. The hypocrisy of such application of the policy should be obvious.

 

I strongly disagree. What official BSA policy are you quoting? The BSA policy states that homosexuals are not proper role models for Scouts. Homosexuals are NOT allowed to become members or leaders.

 

Keeping quiet will not prevent your expulsion. This much was proven in the James Dade case. He did not tell BSA officials of his sexuality. Someone uncovered this fact when they stumbled upon a newspaper article, which mentioned his membership in a gay college organization.

 

The BSA policy is NOT - Dont ask, dont tell. The BSA does not have the resources to conduct investigations to determine peoples sexual behavior. Similarly, they dont have the resources to conduct investigations to determine if someone is a drunk or a drug user. Regardless, certainly the BSA will expel a leader if it comes to light that he/she is an addict. Do not expect the BSA to act any differently if they should discover a leader to be gay. There is NO hypocrisy in this application of policy. Its clear. Its practical.

 

By the way, criticizing the BSA based on the actions of an insubordinate council (i.e., C.O.L.), as was done in the aforementioned article, is pretty lame. The C.O.L. Council was never authorized to sublimate or adapt national policy to their liking. The fact that the BSA has used its muscle (political, legal, or otherwise) to force a few loose cannons (i.e. C.O.L., Boston, etc.) to comply with national policy should not be surprising to anyone. Nor should they be criticized for it. They should be applauded for maintaining a consistent and noble stance. They are determined to uphold the traditional values that most its members embrace.

 

Additionally, this leaves you (and us) with the knowledge that: 1) we do have gay scouts around us anyway, they're just quietly in the closet, and 2) BSA's policy will likely keep them in the closet for fear of being dismissed...and keep them quietly around us. We'll just never be quite sure, will we? Have a nice day.

 

Hmmm. This brings to mind several thoughts. I agree - It is quite likely that there are a number of homosexuals within the ranks of BSA. So what? There are probably a few pedophiles within the ranks of the NEA. Does that mean it makes sense for the NEA to adopt a policy that accepts the behavior? The whole premise of this argument is silly. You are suggesting to the BSA and others - that is better to accept immoral people (or improper role models if you prefer) and know who they are (although, a change in policy wouldnt necessarily even accomplish this), then to reject their behavior and not know who they are. Yeah, youre right Ill never be quite sure. Ill never know if theres a homosexual in my kids troop, or his tent for that matter. Likewise, Ill never know if theres a pedophile in my kids classroom. But you know what Ill be damned if Im going to accept a policy that would deem either scenario to be acceptable.

 

BTW - Have a nice day too! :-)

[packsaddle]

Nice to hear from you again, Rooster. I don't remember saying that it is BSA policy to allow gays. What I said is that in application, gays are allowed as long as they keep quiet about it. It may not be a consistent matter as you point out in the Dade case (BTW membership in a gay college organization isn't exactly in the closet), but it does happen. Executive William T. Dwyer III confirms this if the quote by Lattera is accurate in the aforementioned url.

Lattera's statement, "He (Scout executive Dwyer) said, 'Well, there ya go.... You went and made your sexual orientation open. If you had just kept your mouth shut and been a good scout and employee, you wouldn't have this problem.' I (Lattera) said, 'I have a few more questions,' and Dwyer said, 'God bless you, Greg,' and hung up. That was the end of the conversation."

 

Scout executive Dwyer may or may not said what Lattera quoted him as saying, but I am waiting for Dywer's denial. But assuming the quote is correct, that particular executive seems to be saying precisely that if Lattera had not gone public, he would have been safe with BSA.

 

Regarding hypocrisy, I understand that you view the policy as rigid and clear. In that view there is no hypocrisy. However, if in practice, BSA turns a blind eye to quiet practicing gays, as I believe they do, then a judgement of hypocrisy seems accurate. Yet another element of hypocrisy also occurs in that case if in this practice, BSA condones the lie.

Any logical inevitability for this situation does not relieve BSA of that judgement. The only way to avoid it is to take the extraordinary measures you mention and root out all immoral persons. Rigid and clear. It would be interesting to see who was left standing at the end.