More on the politics of Scouting...

[qwazse]

People don't look to sports for a moral high ground. Coach can be as promiscuous as they come, as long as he aint groping kids and is winning championships.

 

Round here, conservatives send their kids to private schools, and demand vouchers to cover the expense of having to do so because of "corrupting" mandates. Or, they run for school board and attempt to muzzle permissive teaching.

[Beavah]

Yah, moosetracker, I think yeh are speakin' with limited regional knowledge. I know a number of school districts facing or that have faced political and legal challenges over promoting "diversity", especially as that often comes with veiled or unveiled intent to exclude or reject religious viewpoints which are for some reason not diverse.

 

B

 

[moosetracker]

Beavah writes

 

especially as that often comes with veiled or unveiled intent to exclude or reject religious viewpoints which are for some reason not diverse.

 

 

 

Hmmm.. has anyone denied your child the ability to go to the public school?.. Provided you have the teaching credentials are you denied the job based totally on your religious preference?

 

I don't think of it as discrimination if what you are being denied is the right to dictate to the public community that everyone do things your way.. Especially when your way demands that other people be denied their rights to a job, or to go to attend a public school..

 

If that were the case then we must allow everyone the right to demand that everything is run according to their way.. And what is the school to do to accomidate the demands of the Atheist and the demands of the religious?? Put every child in a seprate room with a personal teacher who does everything according to the childs family values?

 

 

Nope.. Maybe some people choose to pull their kids and put them in private for their religious beliefs, but never heard of them demanding the public school pay for it. I do know of one case that the parents pulled a child and demanded the school pay, but that was over sever bullying that the school did not do enough to prevent.. I know there has been talk of some people wanting credit to put their kid where ever they want or home school, but that was about 10 15 years back, and they haven't gotten that passed.. Don't know if it is still being argued for somewhere. Maybe it is not news worthy enough to hit the news, but have yet to hear of someone arguing that the public schools pick up the tab of the private school, based on the fact the parents wish to discriminate against certain people is not being respected and enforced by the school system.

[Beavah]

Yah, hmmmm....

 

That last was so muddled it's hard to know where to begin.

 

There are several school voucher programs in place in major U.S. cities (Milwaukee and Cleveland come to mind), where parents may choose to send their children to religious schools and the public tax dollars will provide a voucher to pay for it. That money does come out of the funds for public schools, though generally it is set at an amount less than the per-pupil cost of educating a public school student. Those programs have passed constitutional muster with the Supreme Court.

 

The cases that I know of are more "equal access" based. Let's say a school cancels classes to hold a "diversity day", but then refuses to allow some Christian groups to participate or voice their views. So the net effect of "diversity day" is not in fact to promote diversity and sharing, but to indoctrinate the students on the prevailing sentiments of those in local political power.

 

I don't know what this has to do with denying people a right to a job, but that can be an issue as well, eh? A Muslim teacher may not be permitted to pray with or in front of students. That can make it very difficult to find a place to pray, eh? Not in their classroom, the teacher's lounge isn't private. Does the fellow have to go hide in the janitor's closet? Of course, if he becomes a secular Muslim, that's fine, eh?

 

I'm not sure what the whole bit was about denying people the right to attend public school, but there are lots of ways to make kids and families unwelcome without actually barring the doors. We saw that years ago (and still some more recently) with respect to race. We also see it when school officials condone bullying of kids prayin' by the flagpole (the root of one of the first school shootings), or school officials get overzealous about keepin' prayer out of schools, or students who express alternative viewpoints aren't permitted to write or speak. Or simply that yeh feel that the public school you're payin' for is a cesspool of moral relativism and isn't welcoming for your family.

 

The State is a big, powerful, dangerous thing. It doesn't need to impose its views by direct force, when it can do it by economic and educational coercion.

 

Beavah

 

 

 

[moosetracker]

Sorry, like I said, I don't have news about that sort of stuff here. So, I guess I just saw the comment of

 

 

I know a number of school districts facing or that have faced political and legal challenges over promoting "diversity", especially as that often comes with veiled or unveiled intent to exclude or reject religious viewpoints which are for some reason not diverse.

 

along with qwazse statement

 

conservatives send their kids to private schools, and demand vouchers to cover the expense of having to do so because of "corrupting" mandates.

 

 

"due to corrupting mandates" seems to indicate they disagree with the gay teacher being hired, pull their kids on this issue, and demand a school system that does not have a voucher system in place, pay for them to boycott the school based on their "equal rights" hiring practices..

 

Sort of like the radio broadcaster who advocated that you should demand that your child not be treated by a health care provider who wears a "rainbow pin".. As they will not be good role models for your children. Or the poster on this forum who did state she put her children in private school due to fear of homosexual teachers..

 

 

Seems different then your latest statement of

 

There are several school voucher programs in place in major U.S. cities (Milwaukee and Cleveland come to mind), where parents may choose to send their children to religious schools and the public tax dollars will provide a voucher to pay for it. That money does come out of the funds for public schools, though generally it is set at an amount less than the per-pupil cost of educating a public school student. Those programs have passed constitutional muster with the Supreme Court.

 

 

If there is a program in place, then there is a program in place regardless of WHY you choose to move your kid to a different school.. You have a right to use it.. I think that is what was being discussed in NH 10-15 years back.. I have no problem with that.

 

 

Don't know about "diversity days".. Never heard of it.. but yes, if they have that, then everyone should get to be represented.. Just put conflicting viewpoints on opposite sides of the gym.. Surprised it caused such a ruckus parents pulled their kids out of the school system though, but I guess if you feel you are not being treated fairly you could get that upset about one single event.

 

Bullying is just something schools have a hard time really getting a handle on. The Gay kids get abused just as much as the religious ones, short ones, fat ones, weak ones.. The kids learn where they can bully that is under the radar of the school system.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

[Twocubdad]

Homework assignment: Everyone needs to get a copy of "Fiddler on the Roof" and watch it. Somewhere "there is no other hand."

 

When discussing a compromise of the BSA religious principles, I would consider the full spectrum of religious thought, not narrowly where the BSA policy currently stands. If you consider a requirement of strict adherance to a particular religious dogma to be a "10" and absolutely no religious requirement whatsoever to be a "0", I'd call the BSA Declaration of Religious Principles a "1".

 

The DRP is a remarkably liberal and accepting document. You can be ANYTHING you want as long as you have a belief in a loosely-defined higher power. If you think Harvey the Rabbit is god, and can make a sincere case for how you do your duty to Harvey and show reverence toward him, that is acceptable under the DRP. (But I will grant you, not acceptable to every chartered organization.)

 

Now, instead of discussing where we are on my 10 point scale, the debate has focused on where the program should fall between zero and one. And I promise you, if BSA says okay we'll move our policy to "0.1" the debate will then shift to arguing over 100ths or 1,000ths. At some point you can only dim a light so far before it is turned off. Boy Scouting either has a religious component or it doesn't. We either ask our members to have some belief in a higher power -- any higher power -- or we don't. We promise to do our "Duty to God" or drop that from the oath.

 

I agree with Moose that further compromise isn't possible. The compromise was made years ago. Further compromise will simply be full capitulation.

 

ON THE OTHER HAND (thank you, Tevye), there probably is further room for compromise on the homosexual issue. You have to admit, however, over the 12 years since the Dale decision, BSA has come a long way from the position set forth in its legal argument to the current "don't ask, don't tell" approach. And remember the case last year from northern Virginia where a CO booted an "unavowed" lesbian leader? The BSA folks sort of threw up their hands and said, "hey, this isn't BSA doing this, it's the local CO, we don't have anything to do with it", It seems to me the policy has now become "don't ask/don't tell/no, seriously we REALLY don't want to know".

 

Mooose and E-dad's point that BSA is in a damned-if-they-do/damned-if-they-don't is insightful. Did any of you read the comments at the bottom of The Atlantic article in the OP? Geez. It's unlikely any of those folks are going to throw their support to BSA if the membership policy is changed.

[Jeffrey H]

For most of the BSA, I suspect there is a big don't-ask-don't-tell de facto policy in place.

 

It would appear so. When an adult submits a leader application, I only ask questions that are within the content of the application itself. I dont believe that the adult application even asks the orientation question. When an adult fills out an application, he/she is signing off on agreement to the mission of the BSA, its oath and scout law, and the DRP. If he/she agrees to that, I really do not need to ask any further questions.

 

Now, if one of our leaders decides its time to tell all, then he/she will have to deal with the decision of our charter organization and/or local Council.

[Eagledad]

Personally I don't think the BSA is sitting between a rock and a hard place, I think they are in good postion. Moose and most here on this forum sensitive to the more liberal causes are examples of while many folks don't agree with all BSA policies, they are joining for the other benefits because nobody else does scouting as good or better. They aren't willing to throw the baby out with the bath water, so to speak.

 

Oh I'm sure there is a small group of folks willing to let the issues sway them away, but I personally believe most of BSA's membership issues are a result BSA internal problems.

 

Barry

[SR540Beaver]

Oak Tree: "I just looked at the Campfire USA web site, and I can't figure out what it is that they do. They use an "outcome rich curriculum" and groups "choose from a variety of fun and educational activities and projects." You've got to have a mission."

 

Not to hijack the thread, but it kind of sounds like Venturing doesn't it? Perhaps that is why it struggles to keep it's head above water. You don't have to have a uniform, you don't have to advance and you can base your Crew on whatever you want to base it on. Venturing is the anti-Boy Scout program for the folks who don't like the structure and rules of Boy Scouts. Venturing is the Seinfeld of Scouting. OK Venturers......let me have it.

[BadenP]

SR540

 

It is very apparent from your last post your image/understanding of Venturing is at best skewed and mixed up. I have been with Venturing for over a decade now, after many years as a Cub leader and a Scoutmaster and it amazes me how little most SM's understand what Venturing truly is.

 

Uniform- yea teens Venturing age don't want to wear a typical boy scout uniform, especially if it is a coed crew. However most crews do select some sort of identifying item like a sweatshirt, polo shirt, jacket, etc with the crew and Venturing logos on them, why do they need more?

 

Program/Advancement- If you look at the Venturing Leaders Manual you will see a well organized methodology of organizing and planning a wide variety of activities including crew meetings, leader training, outdoor activities, etc. As far as advancement, there are awards the teens can earn, if they want to, but are not mandatory. This program treats the teens more like adults capable of making decisions. Most of the teens in my crew have eaned several Bronze and Gold awards, Ranger and/or Quest awards, about 75% have earned the Silver Award. However Venturing is not FOCUSED on these awards, unlike cub and boy scout programs.

 

Our crew has grown from 8 members to over 80 active members over the years and continues to grow. Some of the original members are now adult advisors in the crew. So I guess this crew is truly a success story with an active outdoor program that attracts more and more teens every year. IMO, if the boy scout program had more of the Venturing methodology incorporated into it the BSA would not be losing all the boy scouts it does each year currently.

[Eagledad]

>> IMO, if the boy scout program had more of the Venturing methodology incorporated into it the BSA would not be losing all the boy scouts it does each year currently.

[qwazse]

Venturing is the anti-Boy Scout program for the folks who don't like the structure and rules of Boy Scouts.

 

Except for the 2 G's (Gays and God). I wonder if that's why we bring in the co-eds?

 

Venturing is the Seinfeld of Scouting.

 

Love it! I'm gonna use it at tonight's crew meeting!

[BadenP]

Barry

 

I am willing to bet that your failed crews were probably run by former scoutmasters who ran them like a troop keeping all the power for themselves,and the teens got bored and left. If a Venturing Crew is run like it is outlined in the VLM and you let the teens REALLY lead and organize the program to their interests then you will be successful. Your area is not typical of Venturing in most well run and Venturing friendly councils. A Venturing Crew and a Boy Scout Troop are really very different programs in scope and purpose.

[moosetracker]

BP.. You are most likely 100% correct.. My council/District, is like Barry's Venturing for the most part faulters and fails within 5 years..

 

I am hopeful though. Our district has one crew going strong out of a high school (not yet passed it 5 year mark).. It has though a exceptional high school teacher running it who "gets it".. He will be running our district Venture specific training this spring, so I hope he can get others to "get it"..

 

Problem is how to impart the wisdom onto the adult leaders, so that they don't screw it up.. Sometimes even if given great training, they just aren't the right personality for the job. It takes a very special Adult who can run Venturing the way it needs to be run.. They seem to be rare in this neck of the woods..

[Eagledad]

>>Barry

 

I am willing to bet that your failed crews were probably run by former scoutmasters who ran them like a troop keeping all the power for themselves,and the teens got bored and left. If a Venturing Crew is run like it is outlined in the VLM and you let the teens REALLY lead and organize the program to their interests then you will be successful. Your area is not typical of Venturing in most well run and Venturing friendly councils. A Venturing Crew and a Boy Scout Troop are really very different programs in scope and purpose.