I understand But..

[dana_renner]

This thread was spun from another thread.I can understand your point of view, and may I say I agree on some points, however I would not nor will I say that everyone in Exploring youth or adult are all gay, agnostic, or athiest, I believe that Venturing should be and in most councils is seperate from Exploring, however in some councils it is in a EV division, I am however registered in BSA and was in Learning For Life,I will say that BSA has a habit of shooting itself in the foot when it comes to program issues, it hurts itself many times and I believe in 1998 they did, why didn't they discipline the people who did the deed and then appologize and go on. Well here 6 years ago we have 2 seperate programs in 2 different divisions and other youth that did no wrong were hurt and so were adult leaders who did no wrong were hurt as well and all this about gays and straights is hurting BSA all over everywhere, We leaders need to take a stand and let our voices be heard, or is that happening already, Boy Scouts, and Cub Scouts were down in enrollment last year, However my program Venturing enrollment increased. Maybe we need to discover traditional scouting once again, and speak out and protect american traditional scouting and God and Country

[Bob White]

dana renner,

 

I believe you have a misunderstanding of Exploring and Learning for Life. They are not divisions of the BSA. Learning for Life is a division of Scouting Publications which is a subsidiary of the BSA not a division.

 

There are no Explorer/Venturer Divisions in the BSA. There may be, in some smaller councils, professionals assigned to manage the growth of both areas. But the funding, membership, program elements and ideals are totally separate.

 

Everyone is qualifies for membership in the BSA traditional programs also qualify for Learning for Life. But, not everyone in the Learning for Life program can qualify for membership in the BSA.

 

This is not to minimize the importance or quality of either program, but to clarify that there is a distinct and purposeful division between the two.

 

Do not expect to turn back time. The BSA made learning for Life in order to protect the trational scouting values you speak of, and to protect our programs served by agencies that by law or by choice are unable to charter traditional units.

 

While your input on this board is welcome, I am sure you are aware that with the exception of a couple of posters in the issues forum that this board is inhabited almost totally of leaders and members form the traditional scouting programs.

 

As afar as membership, do not assume that the minute decrease is harmfull or long term. Or that it is a national problem. The council I live in saw a 16% increase in scouting.

 

If you are looking for conversations on Exploring and LFL you may want to investigate other boards as well.

 

[Fuzzy Bear]

dana,

 

I returned to the original post about Exploring and LFL and all of the many questions you had. They are very good questions.

 

Please ignore those that have objections to your interest and that use your thread as an opportunity to expound on their personal beliefs. Although be careful, you will still find some truth in their posts, just use a sieve with large holes to get the good stuff. Throw the rest where it belongs, remember a Scout is Clean.

 

Many are quiet that come here for fear of a verbal thrashing for being wrong or for some other perceived wrong that may or may not be true. Hopefully, someone will speak up and answer your questions that has helpful information. Everyone that comes here is not of one mind, not of one background, nor of the same ability.

 

So, welcome and please continue with your search that is filled with interest and don't let a few thrown stones keep you from your destination.

 

FB

[Bob White]

dana,

I'm not sure what FB is referring to, but since mine was the only response you got , I will presume it was about my post.

 

There is nothing in there with my personal opinion, and I am not against you posting here, I was just pointing out that the board is populated by folks who have very little experience in Learning for Life. I suggested that there may be other forums that might be more specific to that program area. And I pointed out some facts about how the BSA is organized.

 

I'm not sure what stones were thrown other than a few typos (sorry, I forgot to run spell check, I was multitasking at the time).

 

I do not know why FB felt the post has antagonistic but it seems pretty clear he did. I hope you read it as it was meant, informational, perhaps instructional, but certainly not antagonistic.

[dana_renner]

gentlemen I want to thank you for the information and the encouragement to investigate and post on this board and on other boards that maybe more knowledgeable about Learning for Life and Exploring in specific, My writing on this I believe to be a honor, I never thought that with some of my opinions that I would be agreed with or disagreed with, I am a person who just wants to express myself I too am a scouter, Venturing Roundtable Commissioner, and I was a Learning for Life Volunteer for a while, I happen to like what the Exploring program was about prior to 1998, and I like the Vocational and Career side of the Program, I happen to like Sea Scouts, and Venturing as well, I do not like what happened to Exploring, I cannot change that and do not expect to see it changed soon,basically I am a moderately traditional scouter, both programs are interesting,but I must say after a lot of thinking about things lately I will stay a Venturing Roundtable Commissioner and probably not cross into LFL again. No problems with any people there or anywhere in my Council but I believe in the Traditional BSA program better,

[Fuzzy Bear]

Bob White, (please read carefully)

 

Go to the original post prior to the spin-off and then reread his spin-off again.

 

His questions were never answered, he was attacked, and he was told to go elsewhere to find answers.

 

There are hundreds that come here to read and few post because they fear the outright angry responses they get.

 

It is possible that some one of these individuals may have an answer.

 

This issue of anger has been addressed in numerous threads and yet it persists.

 

His spin-off was a confused defense because there are those that answer on this forum that simply lack courtesy and are not friendly.

 

This young man has posted 10 times and he was excited about his interest. I am not sure what answers he has found here but they are not helping him.

 

[Bob White]

Dana,

You understand why exploring had to be moved to Learning for Life, right?

[Eamonn]

Yes It was I who was so bold as to use the original thread to expound on my personal beliefs. If you look back at most of the things that I have posted you will find that I make a habit of it. In fact I'm inclined to think that I am one of many.

At no time did I attack or go out of my way to be rude to the originator. At no time did I state that everyone in LFL is gay, agnostic or an atheist. I did state that unlike the BSA program, you could be gay,agnostic or an atheist and a member of LFL.

I may be guilty of jumping to the conclusion that dana renner was mixing up Venturing and Exploring. I did point that out.

Here I go with yet another of my personal opinions. While I feel sure that there are a great many youth organizations that do a whole lot of good and the LFL program may well fall into that category I don't think that it is right that my money. That is the money that I donate to the Council that I belong to should be used to help pay for this program. However being as the Council is a small one there is no way that we can keep the two programs apart. Unless we were to stop supporting the LFL program. So I only have two choices support the program that I love and put up with the other one or stop giving completely.

As to the membership item. As a District we met both our Venturing goal and the Boy Scout goal. We didn't meet the Cub Scout goal - Yet the percentage of the total available youth in that age group went up by 2.6%.

I don't have the final numbers for the year but as of November 30,2003 the Venturers were at 247,905 a gain of +0.2% from 2002 (247,354) Yes it was the only program area that had any growth in membership. Still these numbers do not show the percentage of available youth served. There is a drop of -2.8% in total traditional membership. While there may be a need to look at what is and what isn't working. This may well be reinforced with efforts from both the National and Council but as far as I'm concerned it starts with me. As a District Chairman I know the District works best when I'm organized, work diligently and involve the other volunteers in the District. I know that if we work side by side and I can get them excited about a vision for the District and have them take ownership of the vision we as a District can achieve great things - You can bet that growth in membership is near if not on top of that list.

Eamonn