Should the BSA promote creationism?

[madkins007]

Bob White...

 

'If 'they' come up with a policy, 'we' have to suck it up or leave' type statements suggest that the BSA is run without any volunteer Scouter input.

 

I was under the impression that most decisions were made by committees or focus groups of mostly volunteers?

[evmori]

Just because the BSA can do something doesn't mean they should do something. I can pass gas in public but I shouldn't.

 

NJ is correct. Since the BSA is a 501c3 tax-exempt organization it can't do "anything it wants". There are constraints.

 

I, too, would like to know how the BSA embraces Creationism, Bob. If you are basing this on the fact God is mentioned in the Oath then you are really reading into things again.

 

Just for the record, I believe in Creationism.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

Not at all Madkins,

 

The executive board of the BSA is made almost entirely of volunteers. But who and what the BSA is is not determined by unit volunteers any more than units are lead by executive board members. Each of us has a role and responsibility to play, as unit volunteers determining what the BSA stands for is not within our authority or responsibility.

[Hunt]

Bob White wrote: "The BSA as a private organization can and should promote whatever position on whatever topic that its executive board determines to be representative of the BSA."

 

I'd like to deconstruct this statement a bit. When you say "representative of the BSA," do you mean representative of the views of the majority of dues-paying members, or something else? I don't think you mean that the basic values of Scouting should be subject to majority rule. But if you mean that on more gray-area topics, the leadership should seek to determine the views of the membership, and should take that into account, I certainly agree. One way they might do that is by reading message boards like this where these issues are discussed by thoughtful people.

 

As far as "creationism," NJ points out that this term has taken on a fairly specific meaning, and that BSA's generalized theism does not really match it. Consider the following Chinese version of creation:

 

"In the beginning , the heavens and earth were still one and all was chaos. The universe was like a big black egg, carrying Pan Gu inside itself. After 18 thousand years Pan Gu woke from a long sleep. He felt suffocated, so he took up a broadax and wielded it with all his might to crack open the egg. The light, clear part of it floated up and formed the heavens, the cold, turbid matter stayed below to form earth. Pan Gu stood in the middle, his head touching the sky, his feet planted on the earth. The heavens and the earth began to grow at a rate of ten feet per day, and Pan Gu grew along with them. After another 18 thousand years, the sky was higher, the earth thicker, and Pan Gu stood between them like a pillar 9 million li in height so that they would never join again. When Pan Gu died, his breath became the wind and clouds, his voice the rolling thunder. One eye became the sun and one the moon. His body and limbs turned to five big mountains and his blood formed the roaring water. His veins became far-stretching roads and his muscles fertile land. The innumerable stars in the sky came from his hair and beard, and flowers and trees from his skin and the fine hairs on his body. His marrow turned to jade and pearls. His sweat flowed like the good rain and sweet dew that nurtured all things on earth."

 

Most American creationists would not care for this story at all (it doesn't even show intelligent design!), but BSA would presumably have no problem with it. Worshippers of Pan Gu (if there are any) would be welcome within BSA. I think it's true that BSA does promote the idea that the earth and nature are "God's creation" in some general respect, and that they should be treated with reverence and respect. I guess BSA is sectarian to the extent that it disagrees with those religions that teach that all matter is evil and that only spirit is good. (For example Gnostics--if there are any--believe that the world of matter was created by an evil god.)

 

So, should BSA promote "creationism?" No, nor is it likely to do so. Should it promote respect for "God's creation?" Yes, as it has traditionally done (even if the Gnostics don't like it.)

 

[Prairie_Scouter]

This may become more of a philosophical argument, but some of these posts are starting to sound an awful lot like "I was just following orders". It may not be within the authority of the unit leaders to develop policy, but I think it is certainly the responsibility of the unit leaders to sound off when the executives start to do things that are outside what Scouting is supposed to be about. Now, the way BSA works, there is the possibility that rocking the boat may get you tossed out, but sometimes you have to do what you think is right. Now, those that agree with BSA policy will say that you should just walk away if you don't agree, but unfortunately, I was brought up to believe that when you see something that you think is wrong, you have to try and fix it. BSA is in a unique place. They portray themselves as a private club when it suits their purposes, but also portray themselves as a sort of "all-American" institution when it suits their purposes. I try to do what I think is right for the all-American institution. Others may not agree, and that is of course their right. Maybe I'll get tossed out at some point, but I'll be able to walk away knowing I was at least trying to do the right thing.

 

And, I would say, BSA has two identities. One is the persona taken on by what we sometimes refer to as "BSA, Inc". This is the persona that is poorly portrayed in the media, wraps itself in what it thinks are "traditional values", and has a habit of getting itself drawn into legal battles. Then there is the persona that is embodied in the local units. They do the REAL work of Scouting, and this is the persona that really describes BSA regardless of what the folks in Irving do.

 

Back on point, tho, it's one thing for Creationism to come up as a point of discussion in Scouting activities. It's as good a theory as any. But I don't think that BSA should "promote" Creationism as a favored view. That is not their role, nor should it be.

[Trevorum]

Once again, "The Boy Scouts of America ... is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward ... religious training." (excerpted from the DRP).

 

Since creationism is the religious belief of some specific religions and not others, it therefore has no intrinsic bearing on the DRP's "belief in God" requirement. It follows that incorporating the religious belief of creationism into the BSA program would violate the DRP just as would incorporating the religious belief of, say, trinitarianism.

 

[packsaddle]

Back from internet limbo (to use a religious concept ), I understood Bob White's message differently. Conforming to the 'Reverent' requirement involves many forms of faith and is very inclusive in that sense. I see this, therefore, as supporting ALL of the creation myths, regardless of the religion to which they may be attached, possibly even those that are cultural and not religious. I just wish that one myth didn't take such a dominant position...the others are really interesting as well.

 

Edited part: Oops, I forgot to add...there is nothing sacred (religious term again ) about the 503c status. BSA could terminate this status and spread their wings to fly freely. Actually, that might be a good idea.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Bob White]

"about the 503c status. BSA could terminate this status and spread their wings to fly freely."

 

What exactly do you mean by that? In what way is the BSA caged by being a registered 501c3 organization? How would losing that designation bve a benefit to the BSA its volunteers or its supporters?

 

What does fly freely mean in this context? How does it relate to the topic?

[madkins007]

Bob,

 

This is off topic and refers back to the bit about volunteer input. I am just seeking information here, not carrying on a debate.

 

I was under the impression, from PTC sessions, etc. but nothing I can find in print, that the BSA usually assembled focus groups or temporary committees from unit and district volunteers. I was also under the impression that they monitored feedback and general opinions in a variety of ways (including lurking on websites and the Scout-L list).

 

Supposedly, uniforming, advancement, new badges, Cub themes, and more were the results of this sort of process.

 

Are you saying it does not happen, or that it does not happen in a way that we in the trenches need worry about, or what? And, is this based on knowledge or opinion?

 

Again, I am NOT trying to start a debate or anything, just seeking clarification for myself.

[NWScouter]

A loss of the 501c3 designation would cripple the BSA, not only would donations no longer be tax deductible, but most taxing units determine the tax exempt status of property based on it 501ce status of the owning organization.

 

If Im not incorrect the BSA ultimate governing body is the members of the national meeting, that come from every council just like the local council ultimate governing body is the annual meeting of the charter partners representatives. This how it is supposed to work not where the power is.

 

For example I believe that not to many argued with James West, I dont know if he even had a vote.

 

[Fuzzy Bear]

I ate a big bowl of Pan Gu the other day and it was great!

 

NJ

"not incorrect" is a double negative meaning that you are correct and if that is so, everything else you say is true.

 

The BSA cannot choose one religion's creation myth over another by their own current admission and policy. So like one poster said, we must follow our leaders.

 

 

[Bob White]

Madkins,

I still cannot figure out what the heck you are talking about. Before I explain how national committees function, could you please clear up your unusual comment about "terminating thier 501c3 status, spreading their wings and and flying freely".

 

In what way is the BSA restricted in their responsibilities or function by being a registered 501c3 corporation? What would the BSA, its members, and its supporters gain by a change in corporation status.

 

Answer those questions please, and then we can discuss national committees (and by the way it seems you have a lot of bad info on them as well).

 

BW

[madkins007]

Bob,

 

I did not say anything about 503 whatevers. I have no idea what they are. That would have been Packsaddle (although it seems to have been NJCubScouter who started the 503 bit).

 

As far as the National Committee's structure and purpose, you are right. I don't know much about that, which is why I was asking.

 

I was simply trying to reconcile the idea of a seperate group of volunteers (as you have suggested) with what I had heard about many issues being determined by assembled groups from across the country.

 

The first version sounds like no Scouter has a say while what I had believed is that there is at least a crude form of prepresentation in place. Obviously the BSA can operate any way it wants, I just was curious as to what the process was.

 

If this does not clarify things, ignore it and lets return to the primary thread. I don't want to sow more confusion that I apparently already have.

[Fuzzy Bear]

This is the kind of stuff that humorists would relish.

[Prairie_Scouter]

Madkins,

To paraphrase the late, great Mayor Daley I of Chicago...

"We are not here to create confusion,

We are here to preserve confusion."