religion as a core component of the BSA

[Jeffrey H]

BSA does itself a disservice forcing the DRP on membership, especially since religion is not a core component to the program, IMHO. They should drop the DRP, but retain everything else.

 

GernBlasten,

 

The BSA forces no one to become a member or stay a member.  If any adult has a serious disagreement with the DRP (Declaration of Religious Principle), then they should not complete a BSA membership application.  Adult leaders and scouts agree to the DRP when they apply for membership.   

 

My grandfather and father served as scouts and scoutmasters going back to 1922.  Learning from their experiences, a scouts Duty to God and a scout is Reverent have always played an important role in the BSA.  I agree that religion is not a core component, but it does play an important role in how a scout interprets his Duty to God and the Scout Law. 

 

Scouting has never been just a camping/outdoor program.  Its a values-based program that heavily uses the outdoors and camping to teach and apply the Oath and Law.  Some will view values-based as some form of religious fundamentalism.  I disagree with that perception.  Scouting is not for everyone and never has been.  No organization can make everyone happy.

 

[GernBlansten]

The Elvis club analogy works for me, but for a different reason.

Obviously, you would want to limit membership to those who think Elvis is King, because loving Elvis is a core component/value to the club, those hating Elvis would not want to join. But there might be those who love Elvis, but hate Las Vegas. Although Las Vegas is related to Elvis and some might consider Las Vegas and Elvis inseparable, it would be wrong to exclude those who despise Sin City from the Elvis club. If in the Elvis Club Oath, one needs to face Las Vegas when singing it, would that make Las Vegas a core component to the club and be the primary membership gate?

[GernBlansten]

The BSA forces no one to become a member or stay a member. If any adult has a serious disagreement with the DRP (Declaration of Religious Principle), then they should not complete a BSA membership application. Adult leaders and scouts agree to the DRP when they apply for membership.

 

How would dropping the DRP effect the program? Would it make religion any less of a component? Would it effect your enjoyment of scouting?

 

The DRP is divisive and causes the majority of BSA's image problems. IMHO, this is the primary reason BSA is facing a declining membership.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Hunt writes:

I recall reading about a town where the Little League was

disbanded and replaced with a church-based youth baseball league with

membership restricted to Christians. That seems wrong to me, and I

guess the reason is that it seems like baseball was the core element,

and religion was a pretext to exclude undesirable people.

 

So religion is a core part of scouting, but not a core part of Little League, even though Little League ALSO has a pledge that includes 'god' (and thus excludes atheists and polytheists)? Why don't you support Little League's right to practice religious discrimination just because you can't appreciate how vitally important it is for all members of Little League to be monotheists?

[packsaddle]

Hunt, I'll offer a mild disagreement with Gern on the Elvis thing. The analogy would be better in my mind if there existed a private club for boys for which the goal was to offer opportunities for boys to grow into good citizens while learning about outdoor skills. One of the recognized values, with equal importance to honesty and friendliness, is reverence. If one of the membership requirements, however, was to demonstrate reverence through belief that Elvis was king, THAT would be a better analogy.

No, even that is a bad analogy because Elvis (IMHO) was not supernatural, invisible, and without any evidence of his existence.

Reverence, as expressed by Kudu, is something that IS more inclusive and available to nearly everyone. The God thing, is not.

The benefit I keep looking for is the benefit derived by excluding boys who would be good members if not for that supernatural part (or the divinity of Elvis). Your answer to the benefit question is 'none' and I agree with you. No benefit. Huh?

As Gern implies, exclusion on that basis elevates reverence for god, any god, or to Elvis... to a status greater than that of honesty or friendliness. Whether anyone likes it or not, the effect of such elevation is that of a core component. Those who promoted the Jim Crow laws thought they were good too. But I doubt they would have called them 'inclusive'. JeffreyH agrees, "Scouting is not for everyone and never has been." Indeed...benefit: none.

[Trevorum]

Ive been waiting for someone to respond to packsaddle with the one obvious benefit to those in the program: social group exclusivity allows those on the inside to feel more virtuous about themselves.

 

By erecting an impermeable barrier between themselves and those on the outside of the social group, people highlight differences and obscure similarities (Think: We dont allow black people in our country club, even if they, like us, are wealthy and have Ivy League degrees). Where the differential is emotionally laden, we can sniff and tell ourselves that we dont care to associate with their kind.

 

[John-in-KC]

Lisa,

 

I think your thread is well and truly hijacked...

[Lisabob]

John, I have to agree. I'm thinking of opening a new thread titled "The 2007 Ed & Merlyn smackdown" just for them.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

I've replied to Eagledad a lot more than Ed in this thread, and I've attempted to keep on-topic, at least from my point of view that the BSA's religious requirements are theologically meaningless to such a degree that it serves no purpose and excludes people for the sake of excluding a much-despised minority. I agree with your first post that the BSA is just kowtowing to their major religious sponsors.

[Jeffrey H]

"How would dropping the DRP effect the program? Would it make religion any less of a component? Would it effect your enjoyment of scouting?"

 

It dont believe it would affect the program or my enjoyment of it.  However, in the meantime, the DRP is still on the application.  If you are a BSA member, you agreed to the DRP when you signed your application.  If you dont agree with the DRP, then you should not sign the application.

 

[SSScout]

Aye, Pack, me bucko, 'tis good ta see that Aye'm not tha oonly one what sees tha Pirates Coode ta be maar Guidelines, like.

 

A Harr.

 

 

 

"I would never belong to any club that would have me as a member."

 

== Groucho Marx ==(This message has been edited by SSScout)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Yep, the Sands Point Bath and Sun Club refused to admit Groucho as a member because he was Jewish. I hope none of the BSA's defenders would fault another private club in having membership standards...

[Kudu]

John-in-KC writes:

 

I think the major issue is where do we perceive attacks on the values Scouting holds dear in modern American society, and where we can counteract the attacks through using tools of the Scouting Program?

 

Kudu comments to the "religion of the woods", but the fact of the matter is, if you read Robert SS Baden-Powell's writings, he is expressly and overtly a Christian.

 

Baden-Powell was a Christian in the "love others, feed the hungry, attend to the sick, do a good turn daily" sense, not the Ollie North "where do we perceive attacks on the values Scouting holds dear in modern American society, and where we can counteract the attacks through using tools of the Scouting Program?" kind.

 

B-P did not attend church on a regular basis, preferring to spend the time in nature. He quoted Carlyle as saying: "The religion of a man is not the creed he professes but his life--what he acts upon, and knows of life, and his duty in it. A bad man who believes in a creed is no more religious than the good man who does not."

 

He had the wisdom to understand that not all youth in the Empire would be Christian, so he gave substantial latitude. As I read his writings, though, I think he expected young subjects of the Crown to be inside Christendom in one form or another.

 

That is indeed an odd combination of sentences. From the very beginning Baden-Powell explicitly stated that cultures that do NOT believe in God could be model examples of his idea of "Practical Christianity:"

 

Its aim should be to instill "character" into the men of the future. By "character" is meat a spirit of manly self-reliance and of unselfishness -- something of the practical Christianity which (although they are Buddhists in theory) distinguishes the Burmese in their daily life (Baden-Powell, Scouting for Boys)

 

John-in-KC writes:

 

In other words, "Religion of the Woods" is NOT, imo, a construct to get you almost to an agnostic sorta godhead;

 

It depends on how you read it. Religious fundamentalists might see the following passage that refers to St. George as requiring a belief in dragons, but most atheists and agnostics would read it in the anthropological spirit that it (and the more intellectually challenging The Order of Nature book upon which it is based) was written:

 

http://inquiry.net/ideals/b-p/backwoods.htm

 

I would note that atheism and agnosticism are often philosophical stances held in responce to philosophical assertions made by theists, so therefore such frames of mind tend to be intellectual in nature and NOT in the spirit of the awe and wonder which Baden-Powell's "Religion of the Woods" (AKA "Religion of the Backwoods") is intended to inspire.

 

This awe and wonder would be closer to the Carl Sagan/Einstein/Spinoza pantheistic sense of "God as the sum total of all the natural laws of physics in the universe."

 

it's a tool in the toolbox to get the young man to the Almighty God he already believes in.

 

Yes, it can be used by conservative Christians for that. But it can be used by atheist parents to instill in their children a Carl Sagan sense of awe and wonder about the process of scientific discovery as well.

 

Packsaddle writes:

 

But I'm also realistic enough to understand that, having rendered unto Caesar, conservation of my energy involves applying it to one of those 'local option' units, and not to BSA. Except, perhaps, for spending some time recreating on these threads.

 

Yes, we all must make compromises based on our limited individual energies and talents. As I see it, the real problem is that Scouting is currently a state-sanctioned religious monopoly and as such you need within this monopoly about 20,000 Scouting units to outvote the policies of a major conservative church.

 

If we succeed in the deregulation of Scouting, it will be easier to establish niche markets for progressive churches but even then our efforts will continue to be limited by our individual energies and talents.

 

Stay tuned!

 

Kudu

 

[Eagledad]

>>By erecting an impermeable barrier between themselves and those on the outside of the social group, people highlight differences and obscure similarities (Think: We dont allow black people in our country club, even if they, like us, are wealthy and have Ivy League degrees).

[packsaddle]

Kudu, "...even then our efforts will continue to be limited by our individual energies and talents"

I understand.

Which completes the circular system and at least makes it a stable, if disillusioned, system.

1. The policy is there to satisfy the conservative majority.

2. At the same time, BSA needs numbers to get funding.

3. But many local units are resistant to some aspects of the policy

4. Some local units adopt a 'local option' approach, violating policy

5. BSA ignores this with a "don't ask, don't tell" approach

6. The numbers don't decline too badly (especially if BSA...naah!)

7. Everyone is happy.....not. But at least the cash is still flowing.

 

This can actually be modelled using some fairly simple equations into a neat little negative-feedback system. Outside the benefit mentioned by Trevorum (we're better than you), there is no particular problem except for the pesky aspect of honesty with which Lisabob started the thread. But the system is stable as long as nearly everyone involved gets onboard with the 'dirty little secret'.

Of course those who think the emperor is naked can be ushered out of the club if they say something publicly, thus protecting the lie.

 

If Kudu and like-minded persons WERE able to complete their "evil mission" and deregulate Scouting, what would become of the system? That experiment has already been performed. It is called the 'civil rights movement'. Is it possible that in the eyes of those who thought that the civil rights movement was an "evil movement", it was just a tragic error?

I have to tell you, at that time (and I remember it very well) I was told quite forcefully to the sound of thumping bibles, quoting chapter and verse, that black people and other mud races ('tough luck', Groucho) are inferior and should not be allowed equal rights and opportunities. No club membership for them.

There's an analogy for you, Hunt.