Do you agree 100% with BSA policies?

[Joni4TA]

Over-analyzing someone else's opinion is pointless, therefor I have to agree to disagree. For ME compliance and support is the same to me on this matter.

 

It's how I personally feel about it - I don't expect anyone else to feel the way that I do, nor do I believe everyone should agree with me. We are all blessed with free will and opinion of mind.

 

As to the politician that wins - if I voted for them and contribute to their campaign every year - there's no denying my support. As for the laws that pass, if I voted for them and help pay for them getting passed - again, that shows my support.

 

Compliance of laws vs. Support? Apples and Oranges to BSA policy.

 

With laws, I have no choice but to comply lest I prefer arrest and jail. Laws are not a private organization that I can just walk away from if I disagree with. Laws are everywhere, and no matter where I went to, they would follow me everywhere I went. With the BSA, I have a clear choice - I can leave it at any time.... I don't think they'd come after me

[LongHaul]

So you "put up with complying without supporting" where you live, the place you work most likely, in practically every interaction you have in life so HEY ya just gotta take a stand someplace. Rock ON! Joni4TA Rock ON!

LH

[Joni4TA]

I'm sorry; I am afraid I do not understand your response.

 

Have you been drinking?

 

Please rephrase your response in an intelligent manner so I may properly respond.

 

Domo Arigato LongHaul San

[Joni4TA]

By the way, I'd like to point out and quote someone... and this supports my argument that (to me) as long as I stay a member in the BSA organization every year, give them my money for recharter, actively recruit for the Boy Scouts, do fundraisers for, represent in public, wear the uniform, etc., I am both complying with and supporting their policies, whatever they may be! This includes the policy on Gays!

 

This is written by (from what I can gather by posts), a Gay Scouter..... Maybe if you don't want to hear it from MY keyboard, you will believe it more coming from "the other side".....

 

'I'd hope my arguments cause [leaders] to understand they could have a quietly suffering kid in their midst today, coming to grips with their sexuality, and not concerned with interpreting the nuance of their leader's unintended judgment or implicit endorsement of prejudice against that boy.

 

No, I don't expect I'm going to change the hearts and minds of the zealots among us... but I do hope to find a few hearts and minds that are already a little open. And I'd like to cause them to think through their implicit endorsement of the prejudice, and prepare them for the day when this issue does suddenly show up in their unit or family, so they'll be prepared with more than a knee-jerk reaction."

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

When asked a question by CA_Scouter - - - Does this mean that by the simple act of being a leader in the BSA, that I'm guilty of prejudice against one of my scouts?

 

 

Yes, at least to a degree you and I both are guilty of implicitly endorsing the policy if prejudice. We both might rather focus on great campouts and developing leaders within our unit, and probably do for the most part.

 

But to the kid who is quietly coming to grips with a part of his being that he's unable to change, do you think he's able to understand the nuanced difference between a BSA national policy you may or may not agree with, one that labels him "incapable of being the best kind of citizen", and what Mr. CA_Scouter really believes about him?

 

Just as bad, if you and I disagree with the prejudice, by donating our money and time and adding our name to the membership count, we're lumping ourselves under this very public stance that the BSA has taken. Now we may both decide the overwhelming value of Scouting justifies our involvement, but to the young parents of a Cub Scout age boy evaluating the organization from the outside, they identify you and me and the organization as an agent of prejudice. Clearly, smart people will assume not EVERY leader in the organization believes as the national policy states, but since there's no mechanism for you to set yourself apart from the prejudice (no "local option", no tolerance for members who speak out against the policy, etc), how will you get through your implicit endorsement of the prejudice?

 

 

 

And this is EXACTLY what I was trying to say about compliance and support. This guy says it WAY BETTER than I ever could. And I agree with him 100% completely. It doesn't matter if I am hanging around hoping to effect change from within on the BSA's policies. The fact that I am a member of the BSA and give them my time and my money every year shows my support and my compliance, my agreement, my discrimination...... guilt by association.

 

And that's why it is that simlpy cut and dry to me - a "like it or leave it" situation - if there is a policy that is so far out of the ballpark that I can't agree with it and support it, I would rather LEAVE the BSA....

 

 

 

 

[acco40]

I recoiled from the "America - Love it or Leave it!" mentality. I hated the draconian drug laws that we had in the 1970s. I don't like some of the stances that the BSA has taken. However, as a program, I think it does a wonderful job and has a very good mission. Therefore I support it while quietly trying to "tweak" their program.

 

I know many feel that I'm taking a "wishy washy" or worse - hypocritical position. I know what Scouting has done for my sons - and I support it. I think Scouting could have done just as much or more for my sons the requirements for membership were slightly different. At one time, the BSA joining requirements were different. They changed. If one supported the earlier requirements does that make them hypocritical?

[Beavah]

Yah, I don't buy the "implicitly endorsing a policy of prejudice" bit.

 

Buying a banana doesn't implicitly endorse poor labor practices in Latin America. It's just buying a banana.

 

Being a U.S. citizen doesn't implicitly endorse every U.S. government policy or screwup.

 

Same with da BSA.

 

And I think Joni's correspondent is simply foolish if he thinks that BSA policy has much of an impact on kids perceptions. Kids who are struggling with issues are going to turn to adults with whom they have long term supportive relationships. Ain't nothing better than Scouting in that regard, outside of family and maybe church. Coaches, teachers, etc. are mostly one-year-wonders in a boy's life.

 

I've had lots of conversations with kids who have approached me with hard issues over the years. So has every scouter who's worth a darn. BSA policy never stopped 'em, nor did I need a rainbow knot to invite 'em.

 

All da prattle about "organizational prejudice" is just silly adult nonsense. Kids know that relationships are personal, and are just as sophisticated at distinguishin' organization from individual.

 

Probably better at it in fact, because they're always put in organizations - from family to school to scouts - where they disagree with some things but can't change the "policy."

 

Beavah

 

[Beavah]

(duplicate deleted)(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Joni4TA]

My correspondent is a message board member.... "one of us." I didn't link to the original post because it was partially irrelevant. It received minimal response.... Perry book to tout Scout values

 

The link is here: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=171718

 

 

But the fact that he is a Gay Scouter is interesting and I believe offers a different, more personal perspective into this issue. He's offering personal experience from his youth, how he became to know he was gay, etc. And then he offers his personal perspective on how that effects him now, as a Gay Scouter. I think the guy's spot on with how I view the situation! Again, I don't expect anyone else to agree, I am just showing a corroboration to my argument.

 

It's worth pointing out as well that the poster and I are on two different sides of the spectrum, but seem to agree. I am openly against gays being in the BSA, and he's probably one that would like to see change on that policy. Yet we both see it pretty much the same way - that it's discrimination (he uses the word prejudice), and with our continued membership we seemingly endorse, agree with, support, comply, etc. with the BSA's policy on gays.

 

I don't know if I am on-board to label it "prejudice" though. Looking at the meaning of the word, I don't believe the BSA is coming down with "an adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts," which is the definition of prejudice in The American Heritage Dictionary.

 

I believe they do have knowledge and have examined facts, but still choose to legally discriminate against gays. The law protects their decision to do so.