Did the BSA ignore molestation warnings?

[evmori]

I have quoted you accurately, Merlyn. And the disclaimer on the list site is a good cover for not being accurate.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Stop lying Ed; I've already pointed out where you've tried a straw man argument.

[evmori]

I don't lie, Merlyn. I make my statements based on what you post. And I don't stoop to calling people names, either. That only reduces your credibility further.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[jkhny]

This topic is one BSA has avoided and hidden well.

 

Read "Scout's Honor" by Boyle

 

Out of print but available though Amazon used. Any BSA Leader should read this.

[Prairie_Scouter]

To Anarchist (from a few posts back)...

 

Actually, I *don't* want BSA to roll over on its principals. I would like BSA to get back to what those principals once were. Scouting was once much more inclusive than it now is; at least that's what history seems to indicate. I don't necessarily agree with Merlyn, but I'm trying to see his point of view, even tho I'd have to agree with those who see a lot of anger in his approach. No, I don't want to destroy BSA. In fact, I'm trying to work from within to make it the organization it once was. My feeling is that BSA has been co-opted by special interests intent on turning BSA into a religious organization. I don't think that's what Baden-Powell had in mind for Scouting. But, that's just my opinion; doesn't make me correct, just opinionated :-)

[Fuzzy Bear]

Scout Law 8- BP

A Scout Smiles and Whistles under all Difficulties.

when he gets an order..hardship... misses a train...has his favorite corn stepped on or any annoying circumstance...force yourself to smile at once, and then whistle a tune, and you will be all right.

FB

 

[anarchist]

Prarie_Scouter,

 

Just what were the principles scouting once had that it doesn't now??? I don't go way back...just to the late fifties and sixties... and except for a lot of 'CYA' legal crap about what we can no longer do...and how many dinguses it takes not to do it....I don't see a lot of differences in core principles...what has been lost?

 

and oh yes, whose 'history' are you reading?

 

The BSA is vastly more inclusive than ever before in its history...its just some 'folks' who want 'in' and can't play by the the same rules (and who have deep enough pockets and twisted enough minds to try to hurt a good organization) don't like being on the outside, and don't have the guts to build their own good program... (wonder if anyone would come out and play with them?)

 

To understand Merlyn's point of view, get out your dictionary...look up vindictive, hurtful, jealous, malevolent, petty and obsessive...heck it may even have his picture!

 

He posts to hurt and divide, he debates by personal attack and I'll bet he is really fun at parties! ( but count the silverware!)

still chuckling,

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Anarchist writes:

The BSA is vastly more inclusive than ever before in its history...its just some 'folks' who want 'in' and can't play by the the same rules (and who have deep enough pockets and twisted enough minds to try to hurt a good organization)

 

"Playing by the same rules" means that the BSA, too, has to play by the same rules, which means that government agencies like public schools can't charter BSA units. The constitution prohibits the government from discriminating against its own citizens on the basis of religion, but I wouldn't expect someone who uses the name 'anarchist' to care much about actual US laws.

 

The BSA has only itself to blame for chartering government agencies in the first place.

[evmori]

There he goes again! Making fun of people's handles or calling them stupid! Sounds like 2nd grade!

 

Merlyn,

The Supreme Court ruled the BSA is a private organization & can set it's own membership requirements. You want to kick the BSA out of all public institutions because of this. And you think this is a good thing? What harm has the BSA done? None. The BSA is a great institution that the federal government supports whole heartedly! Can't say the same thing about radical groups like yours.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[anarchist]

Merlyn me laddie,

 

Ed's right... there you go again...don't you just love it!

 

The government discriminates every day, as do you and I. Practically speaking every decision, from getting out of bread to what church we join -or don't, is a true example of discrimination. Discriminating folks don't place their hand in hot coals...some times discrimination is good!

 

Regardless of your mindset a school 'sponsoring' a unit is no more discriminating than sponsoring an arborist club for tree huggers, a spanish club, or an atheist club (would anyone come and play?)...boys are not forced to join scouting, meetings are after school so where is the 'establishment' of religion? (and we are off topic here, schools is a few clicks away) The schools were just offering a venue for a program they saw as beneficial to young men...it was the sore sports who forced the issue 'cause they did like the rules...so be it (truly not a great loss in my book).

The legalistic, nit- picking, road kill dining, legal beagles did their work twisting the 'establishment definition' and the govenment bought in...'nuff said...

 

But again YOU post here, only to hurt and incite...'cause sadly, you find validation and vindication in causing hurt and harm...(Were you scared by a cranky cub scout when you were a wee lad?)

...I wonder if you just took up undertaking, would you be able to feed your need for bone-picking without wasting energy on the folks who built and maintain a wonderful program?

 

...keep it up laddie, its good for your soul and its great fun for us! Heck son, your posting can even bring lots of us together...

who are on completely different sides on most topics! I LOVE IT!

 

and as to the username I chose...I am glad it causes you to think...but don't strain too much...I don't like rules,

I really don't like arbitrary rules and I hate stupid rules!

 

I would like to think we should be able to get along with just a handful of "laws" but I understand that there will always be folks like you who want to change, or get around the rules for personal gain or gratification...which begets even more rules...to satisfy the nit-pickers...

 

But you know, if I want to play in someone elses game...I play by the 'house' rules...might whine a bit but I play by the rules or get out of the game...I don't try to bring down the house!

 

tag your it!

(This message has been edited by anarchist)

[dsteele]

Actually, Anarchist, It's my turn.

 

Merlyn said: "but I wouldn't expect someone who uses the name 'anarchist' to care much about actual US laws."

 

My response: I wouldn't expect someone who uses the name "Merlyn" to care much about actual laws.

 

Especially when he acts more like Morgan LeFay.

 

Unc.

 

[Prairie_Scouter]

Anarchist,

I guess your question about "who's history am I reading" is part of my quandary, which I've opened a separate thread to discuss. There is more than one point of view on where BSA has been, how they fit into the overall concept of "Scouting" (and that, again, depends on who you read), and where it's heading.

 

I don't pretend to know the answers, but I have points of view based on what I've read and my own beliefs as to where BSA should "be". There are a number of sources that would lead me to believe that BSA is not as inclusive now as you would have me to believe. And, I suspect that there has always been a difference between what BSA puts into print and what they actually do. From what I've read, BSA seemed to be more liberal, at one time, in its membership policies than it currently is. Here's an example. The Mormon Church, a long time ago, apparently pursued a strong position in BSA because, at the time, BSA was seen as a mainstream organization, while the LDS was seen as "out there" because it's beliefs in the subordinate position of wome and polygamy. The LDS apparently wanted to be seen as more mainstream and saw BSA as a way to get there. BSA welcomed them because of what was once a more liberal admission policy. Now, that's one perspective on history; I'm not supporting it or defending it, just reporting it.

 

Then again, I think the uniform pants don't represent anything except income for the Scout Shop, so I guess I'm just a radical :-)

[jackmessick]

The channel 6 news story does not fully capture what went on. The in-depth reporting was done by the Idaho Falls Post-Register.

 

http://postregister.com/scouts_honor/part1.php

 

I will say this, the Scouts were told a number of times that Mr. Stowell was "cured" of his pedophilia by Mr. Stowell's counselors. Sadly, the people who knew about his previous problems didn't even give the subsequent new camp director any idea of this.

 

The newspaper article also indicates that there are still psychiatrists who say that pedophiles can be rehabilitated. However, I think it wise to not hire anyone with this in his background; I hope other councils learn from this. A civil suit of undisclosed amount was settled out of court with the victims (there go the FOS dollars!).

 

Even sadder--was that the boys weren't believed.

 

This should reinforce to all adult scouters, whether paid or volunteer. Report immediately to both Scout Executive and the Police. Let them do the investigation.

[OldGreyEagle]

I only know what I read in the papers, or Time & newsweek, or the cable newshows, so somebody tell me if I am wrong ( Like I have to ask)

 

But i thought it was generally considered a trueism that pedophilia is pretty much incurable, and that is the basis of Megan type laws, that the rate of recidivism of pedophiliacs is like 99.99% ?

[jackmessick]

OGE:

 

I used to think that the recidivism rate was nearly 100%, as you did, but the newspaper article I mentioned gave a recidivism rate of 3.5%. And some psychiatrists say there are 4 types of pedophiles. Others disagree. So what the Sam Hill are us laymen to do!!?