Pregnant Leader

[Eamonn]

This one took a little thought from me, I really was between a rock and a hard place.

Here I am in this organization that has as its mission Ethical Values.

Here I am a member of a church that does not sanction sex outside of marriage.

And then there is this young person who is clearly not setting the example, that I want for my son.

To the best of my knowledge there is nothing in the BSA rules to prevent this young Lady becoming a leader, once she has met all the age qualifications. So that is not an issue.

Then there is the teaching of my church. Of course she might be in a unit that is not affiliated with a church.

But even if she was in my old unit that was chartered by a local Roman Catholic Church. We are not to sit in judgement of others, and the church teaches us that our God is a loving, forgiving God.

The final say about her becoming a Leader is as Bob White has stated.

Some years back I was a Cubmaster in the pack chartered by St. John The Baptist R.C. Church. The Den Leader Coach was really into the program, we used to laugh saying that she went to bed in her uniform. She really was "On the job 24/7"

She was a divorcee, and had a son in the pack.

Somehow. someway she became involved with the Round Table Staff of the district next door, and before long her and the then District Commissioner were living together. He was also divorced.

These guys were great, they really knew their stuff, he was an ex-marine, who could live in the wilds with nothing but a swiss army knife and a Kendal Mint Cake, She could turn old copies of the Readers Digest, into great works of art.

Everything was fine.

About this time I became the District Cub Scout Training Chair.

This pair were natural Staffers for the Webelos Scout Den Leader Outdoor Training.

However they became very upset with me when I informed them that while at the course they could not sleep in the same tent.

But back to this young Lady.

While I see that there might be a problem or problems, - I can get past them.

In fact I would be hoping for a boy - we need Membership.

[scoutldr]

Isn't it amazing how the definition of "morally straight" keeps changing? If the BSA is to be consistent in it's active discrimination against the morally flawed, there is no choice but to deny her membership. Otherwise, someone in Irving needs to explain to me why being gay is prima facie evidence of immorality and a bad role model, but being an unwed mother is not. Our kids are confused enough without having to sort out the mixed messages.

[OldGreyEagle]

Thank you Scoutldr for stating what I wanted to better than I ever could

[Bob White]

Excuse me sctldr, are you suggesting that

a) The BSA should not have standards.

b) The BSA disallow pregnant women

C) The BSA ask every pregnant woman who applies for leadership if she became pregnant in a morally approved way.

D) no married woman has ever become pregnant outside of marriage.

E) how a woman became pregnant is anyone's business if she chooses not to tell.

 

The BSA treats all membership the same. Other than a criminal hidtory check, the BSA does not have the responsibility to investigate the morals of an applaicant or member. They depend on two things 1) that a responsible chartering organization will check references and carefully select leaders and 2) the public behavior of the applicant or member.

 

The BSA has a a specific standard that the member meets the values of the program as represented in the Oath and Law.

 

The BSA views homosexuality as innappropriate to the goals of scouting, they do not view pregnancy as inappropriate. If you were to publicly declare or support homosexuality you risk expulsion by your own admission. If you declare publicly the conditions of your pregnancy and your charter organization does not approve, you risk expulsion due to your own admission.

 

There is no double standard. Now perhaps if you were a member who supported homosexual BSA members but not members approved by the BSA and the charter organization, that could be viewed as a double standard, but the BSA has extended the same stardards to all.

[evmori]

I've been watching this thread for some time & I am amazed at the variety of ways we can justify this woman becoming pregnant out of wedlock. I know this happens all the time but that doesn't make it OK. And just because she waited until she graduated from high school doesn't justify it either. Was she sexually active during high school? Did she become pregnant before she turned 18?

 

I understand there is nothing in BSA policy that states an unmarried pregnant woman can't become a registered leader. There is also nothing that states an alcholic can't become a leader! But do we want an alcholic as a leader?

 

I know there are a lot of single mom's involved in Scouting units of all levels. The difference between them & this female is they WERE married before they had kids!

 

I would not encourage this female to become a registered leader. Why? To me, she is not setting a good example for the members of the Troop. What this is saying to the other members of the Troop is it is OK to have sex prior to marriage & it is OK to become pregnant out of wedlock. I don't believe either of these things & don't consider this type of behavior to be in accord with "Morally straight".

 

Happy Father's Day

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[scoutldr]

Bob, you just don't get it.

It has nothing to do with being pregnant. It has everything to do with being an "avowed" adulteress. "Look at me, I'm pregnant...ain't that great?"

 

Now it seems we need a list...which immoral and sinful behaviors are OK and which will bar your membership from BSA.

I'm all for standards...but not if they are not applied fairly and consistently. As I have stated elsewhere in this forum, if we ban gays then where do we stop? Some bad role models are OK? Can't have it both ways...kids see right through that kind of doublespeak. If we are to be effective leaders and parents, we need to be firm, fair and consistent.

 

Maybe she will turn out to be a pregnant lesbian...that would sure make things "cleaner", huh guys?

 

[Rooster7]

I'm all for standards...but not if they are not applied fairly and consistently. As I have stated elsewhere in this forum, if we ban gays then where do we stop?

 

Turn that scenario around and ask yourself the same question. What's the next standard or moral value that gets thrown aside because someone feels it cannot be applied fairly all the time? Eventually, you will have no standards at all. Life is not always fair. No matter how well intended, as long as humans are involved in applying standards, there will be some injustices. Still, should we have no standards just so we can claim that there was no malice? Please, let's be realistic. This girl may be a true blessing or a horrible curse...who can really say? Yet, her behavior and subsequent condition, clearly indicates that she has bad judgment. As humans, we will never know what is in someone's heart. Thus, the Bible tells us not to judge others. However, we are also responsible for those under our care. We need to be prudent about who we entrust to guide our children. Certainly God wants us to act wisely. There is a difference between pronouncing someone unfit to come before God (which I believe the Bible instructs us not to do) and denouncing someone as a leader and teacher of children (which I believe the Bible warns us to take seriously). The first is a matter of moral authority, which we do not have - while the other is a simple matter of exercising common sense.

 

[dsteele]

The Boy Scouts of America has a policy that prohibits homosexuals and atheists from joining. The BSA has a stronger procedure that requires the Institutional Head or Chartered Organization Representative and the Committee Chairman to approve unit level leaders.

 

Regardless of my personal feelings about unwed mothers (which aren't good) and my personal feellings regarding sex before marriage (which I don't endorse) it is up to those who have to sign this young ladie's application whether to approve her or not.

 

I worked in Michigan for many years and they were early on the bandwagon of criminal background checks. Most applicants came back clean -- the few offenses that were returned were things like "Driving under the influence" and "editing and publishing" which is basically writing bad checks. In those cases, our procedure was to notify the chartered organization and let them mame the determination of whether to let the individual be registered or not.

 

If the violation were a crime involving children, homosexual behavior, or something else clearly against BSA membership standards, we would have kicked them out automatically. If it's not explicitly against the rules, it's up to the people who sign the applications.

 

That's what we're dealing with in this instance. The unwed mother scenario is up to the IH/COR and Committee Chair.

 

DS

[Bob White]

Now you are getting closer to the point sctldr,

 

The pregnancy is not what the relevant issue here. It is the "avowed" behavior that a chartered organization needs to consider. Since pregnancy is not an issue with the BSA, but as with "avowed" homosexulas or "avowed" athiests, it is the member's public expression or support of their personal values and how they relate to the values of the BSA that must be considered.

 

Our opinions in this matter are irrelevant as well. The responsibility to determine this issue is in the hands of the IH, COR and CC. Since the CO is allowed to be more strict than the BSA is. I believe they will make the right decision, based not on the individual as much as on what is the best way of communicating to the scouts the values of the Chartered Organization and the Scout Oath and Law.

 

Bob White

[KoreaScouter]

I agree that the "suitability" issue is something for the CO to determine. Obviously, some will care, some won't. I've been known to raise a glass now and then, and listen to rock music, too...I'll bet there are COs out there that wouldn't let me clean their meeting room, let alone help deliver their program. I don't think most families choose a troop based on the character/suitability standards of the CO...if they're even aware there's a CO or what their role is. Presumably, many are surprised and perhaps uncomfortable, depending on their personal and religious beliefs.

 

I also think there's a difference between a single mother and an unwed one. My mom was a single mother because my dad died when I was 4; not because she chose to get pregnant before she got married. Let's define our terms before we nominate somebody for sainthood.

 

Yes, it's a matter of personal choice, and while I certainly hope my 10-year old daughter doesn't make the same choice when she's 18 (and we reinforce the values all the time), the abortion option is certainly worse in my view, and many use it as birth control.

 

I don't think there should be any difference between males and females when it comes to the stigma and negative connotation of unwed teenage parenthood. One thing that would make me uncomfortable as a leader and a parent is having an unwed teenage mom in our midst, pretending it's perfectly normal and okay, and watching the teenage Scouts in our troop soaking this up...then, after tacitly endorsing it on the one hand, we expect them to not do it themselves on the other. Here's your cake, now don't eat it.

 

Not to be catty about this, but maybe instead of Venturing, she should have been in Girl Scouts. Say what you will about the program, its focus, the price of the cookies, or whatever. But, I can tell you this as the father of a Girl Scout, their attention and focus on the girls' self esteem and self image reinforces positive values and, I think, helps reduce the chances of them needing to feel important and grown up by becoming a mom before they're ready for it.

 

Good luck, Matua...you're going to need it.

 

KS

[OldGreyEagle]

I'm sorry, I dont get this. I don't see how having an unwed Assitant Scoutmaster Pregnant is not a bad role model and should/can be a registerd leader. I can't beleive I am saying this, but as has been mentioned many times, there is no specific rule against bestiality loving satan worshippers (ok, maybe its a hyperbole) but if such a Coven decided to sponsor a unit, I think they would get turned down.

 

Ok, she is going to be a unwed mother giving birth to an illegitimate child and I should be pleased to know she even has a part-time job"? If she really has her wits about her she needs to be in or had been in vocational training because a part time job dont support a parent and child, at least not where I live. Maybe its different in Guam.

 

I agree with Rooster (I cant beleive I said that). I am not judging her, no one knows her heart. If she is such an asset to the troop, I could see the troop using her to get its paperwork in order and perhaps paying her, she is gonna need the money. I am in no way advocating the Troop or Crew turn its back on her, but to put her on the Charter is beyond the pale to me.

 

I am thinking about a couple high school graduations in the area. Human interest stories abound in the newspaper, WWII Veterans getting their diplomas that couldnt collect them on time because they were in the service, Grandmas graduating with Grand daughers you know the type. The Unwed mother story, how she got pregnant at 16, but with encoragement from her parents and the school, she got her diploma on time. Yip pee Yo Ki Yay. Lets celebrate the unwed mother, lets give her a hand, tell her premarital sex is fine by us. What about the hundreds of virgins who graduated. The ones who said no to sex, the ones who said this is not right. The ones who come from marginally funcitonal families, or no parental support at all. Maybe she didnt make the Deans list, maybe it took every ounce of effort to graduate. What are we telling her when we spot light the unwed mother. Golly kid, thats great your not knocked up, but hey, this other kid has a story. She gets the spotlight. So the freshmen, the sophamores, every kid in the school knows hey its OK to have sex, lets see if I can get pregnant, I want all this attention too, she got, I want it too.

 

The kids in your Crew, the kids in the Troop, they can say hey, you know Mr Matuawarrior, he says we should follow the Scout Oath and Law, but if you dont, its ok, he lets you become a leader. Guess I can screw up pretty big and it will be ok, have sex, take drugs, that morally straight stuff is all for show its really not for real.

 

I admit I can be stubborn, but you are really going to have to convince me on this one

[Twocubdad]

I generally agree with you, OGE. As a general proposition, a girl in this situation is a poor role model for a troop. But as other posters have noted there may be mitigating factors or other positions in unit she could take which may change my mind. My IH, COR and I would have a long discussion. But it is a contradiction that we are given the descretion to make that judgement but if the girl were an avowed lesbian, we would have no choice in the matter.

 

Therein lies is my core objection to the ban on gay membership. BSA is picking and choosing the sins it doesn't like. There is a huge difference between a national policy prohibiting membership for avowed homosexuals and a CO having the local option to decide on the membership of an avowed adulterer.

 

In the case of the adulterer, the CO has the authority to judge the situation and it's effect on the unit. They can consider the individual as well as the values and goals of the institution -- hopefully, as Bob notes, all in light of the Scout Oath and Promise. A conservative Christian church may reach a different decision than an inner-city service organization which works with many unwed teenage parents. But a group serving an area with a large gay community doesn't have the option of considering its values and interests when deciding the membership of an avowed homosexual.

 

Question for those of you who would not allow this girl to be an ASM: would you favor a national policy prohibiting her membership? How would you draft such a policy? If the real issue is unmarried sex, not the pregnancy, would you ban everyone who has sex outside of marriage? Does the age of the person matter? Does this apply to men and women equally? Is there some time period after the baby is born that the person would be acceptable as a Scouter? What if the girl (couple?) became pregnant during their "one and only time," and promise it will never happen again? Are they then "disavowed adulterers" and welcome back? It seems to me the problem is that you can neither avow or disavow being nine months pregnant. But are we more comfortable with a sexually active 18-year-old as long as she doesn't get pregnant?

 

The devil is in the details.

[nldscout]

Now some of you are begining to sound like Hypocites. First off you have no knowledge of how she got PG. Can you say Artificial Insemination? Maybe she did that. I have heard nothing of a guy mentione from Matua at all.

 

And another thing would we even be having this discussin if this was a 18 yr old guy who got his GF pregnant? I don't think so. We would just write it off as a guy thing

[Bob White]

"would you ban everyone who has sex outside of marriage?"

 

As with the any member or applicant who made their personal behavior public knowledge, a responsible HI, COR and CC would need to consider their behavior and beliefs as they related to the values and mission of scouting.

 

"But a group serving an area with a large gay community doesn't have the option of considering its values and interests when deciding the membership of an avowed homosexual.'

 

You need to appreciate and accept that the program belongs first to the BSA and secondly to the chartering organizations. The BSA sets the major boundaries. The CO may narrow those boundaries but may not expand beyond them.

 

"It seems to me the problem is that you can neither avow or disavow being nine months pregnant."

 

I do not speak for the BSA but I think I am familiar enough with the program to say that being pregnant is not the issue here. What would be an issue for many chartering organizations, and perhaps at some point for the BSA, is a member or applicants public statements or behavior regarding any actions or beliefs that are not in keeping with the values of the BSA or the values of the Chartering Organization. That is why this is not a male or female issue.

 

I think that the officers of a responsible CO would also look at an applicants ability to make responsible decisions when chossing an ASM.

 

The medical condition of being with child is not the issue. It is the moral decision, and the decision making process itself, which she has voluntarily shared, that could place her membership in jeopardy in my opinion.

 

Bob White

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

If it was a young man I would feel the exact same way. That the young man wouldnt be a scout, he would have to much to do making a home and fashioning a life for his child. If he and his lover decided not to get married, he would have to be sure he provided financial and emotional support for the innocent he brought into the mix.