scout denied eagle

[ghjim]

I was a scout in the 1960s and we had unmarried ASMs. We also had several unmarried Scout Executives who acted as summer camp Camp Directors.

[CalicoPenn]

Ok - clumsy description, single gay men

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Peregrinator writes:

So, Merlyn, you believe that a mark of good character is to assume the worst about people?

 

No, but at this point it's only prudent to assume the worst about the BSA. They've lied to get HUD grants, they deceived public schools into signing illegal charters, they have unwritten, vague membership requirements that are selectively enforced, and they try to sweep molestation accusations under the rug.

 

In other words, rather than assume that the policy is being applied appropriately in this case because the young man is (a) an open homosexual, whatever that might mean for someone of his age, and (b) disagrees with the Scout Oath, the taking of which is necessary for membership, you've chosen to assume that the Scoutmaster in question, and the organization of which he is a part, are acting in a capricious and arbitrary manner.

 

Why are you assuming he isn't being treated arbitrarily?

 

Was he kicked out as soon as he told his scoutmaster he was gay? Apparently not.

Was he kicked out some time later? Yes.

Was he kicked out for something he did at about that time? Apparently not; he was kicked out for being gay.

 

And exactly how does he "disagree with the Scout Oath"? As I pointed out, maybe he only disagrees with the "duty to god" policy while being a believer himself. If he can get kicked out for that, a number of people in this forum should be kicked out. And the quote from the BSA spokesman doesn't cite that as the reason for revoking his membership, only his sexual orientation. So why are you assuming the worst for this scout?

[packsaddle]

According to this, he does believe in a 'higher power' but disagrees with the DRP.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/gay-boy-scout-denied-eagle-award-believes-god/story?id=17407747#.UG9c2q6Cmmk

[Horizon]

So the Duty to God part was a lie from the Council.

 

I wonder if the boys who bullied him, who wrote "fag" on his chest at summer camp, will be allowed to pass THEIR Eagle BOR?

 

I feel sorry for the Scoutmaster - it sounds like he tried to do the right thing, but in the end had to succumb. I can see that happening to me.

[Eagle732]

Would this be our young Mr. ? (Sorry, I don't agree with putting up his name, OGE)

 

 

Someone here once said that an interesting Scoutmaster's Conference question was "If I looked at your Facebook page would I see that you're living up to the Ideas of Scouting?" (This message has been edited by a staff member.) (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

[Eamonn]

This is truly a shame.

A shame for the kid and a shame for the BSA.

I seen this on line yesterday.

There were over 2000 comments. While I didn't read all of them. For the most part the people commenting were in support of the Lad, not the BSA.

 

I don't know the Lad, so maybe it's wrong of me to talk about him.

I'm not sure what the litmus test is for being gay?

Many young boys as they go through puberty experiment with other boys. This doesn't make them homosexual.

While I'm sure that by the time I was 17 I kinda sorta knew that I was more interested in girls than boys. Still at 17 I was a virgin, I hadn't had sex with anyone. So who knows maybe if I'd met a guy who swept me off my feet and we started having sex, I might be gay?

There are many young Lads who are scared to death of girls and maybe being denied by girls and might well take what's normal male experimentation as a real sign of being homosexual.

Also when it comes to a believe in God?

There are some young people who decide from a very early age that they do not believe in any type or form of a God. But most of the young people I meet are going through a rebellion where they are more sure about not wanting to belong to an organized religion than sure about there not being a God.

All in all, everything about this is just sad.

Ea.

 

[Lisabob]

Eagle732, would you post the page of a scout and a minor from your troop on a public web forum? I hope not. So why are you posting that boy's page? Please take back your post.

 

 

 

[Eagle732]

Public information which took me about 30 seconds to find.

 

Let's not discuss the way this lad is leading his life, let's just talk about how the big bad BSA is discriminating against him.(This message has been edited by Eagle732)

[Horizon]

In 30 seconds I could find similar information on many Scouts. Those who have not learned to make their Facebook pages private have similar posts, though pointed towards the opposite sex admittedly.

 

I have brought this up in Scoutmaster's minutes and in individual Scoutmaster Conferences.

 

I have never sent out a link to one of my Scout's pages in a public forum, however.

[Lisabob]

Eagle732, it does not matter that it is unprotected or how much time it took you to find. It does not matter what the boy posted on his facebook page or whether you agree or disagree with his actions.

 

What I am saying to you is that it is unethical for you, as a Scouter, to intentionally post a child's information on a public forum in order to invite ridicule of that child.

 

 

[SeattlePioneer]

Once you've made yourself a public figure, your expectation of privacy is pretty much history, I think.

 

If you are busily throwing rocks at others as fast as you can with both hands, don't be too surprised if a rock or two comes back your way.

[Lisabob]

Minors deserve more protection than adults. And I am not at all convinced that the "public figure" definition used by the courts in libel & slander cases (for example) would fit this situation, even if we were talking about legal adults.

 

Honestly I am pretty discouraged by the fact that some scouters seem to be just fine with treating a boy who could just as easily be one of their own scouts in this way. This isn't some anonymous person on an internet forum spouting political views. This is a youth, who has grown up within our scouting program, who is now trying to handle difficult and vexing problems. Sure, he may be doing it in ways we don't all agree with, and we might even not like where he is ending up, but my goodness, that's no reason to throw him to the wolves and post links to the boy's facebook page.

 

 

 

 

[Basementdweller]

Lisa I am not as generous as you. I believe this was a publicity stunt. I saw the link before it was deleted, as his parent I wouldn't allow it.

 

So why is it that this seems to go on for the wealthy???

 

Is it they have the media's ear? Or drama just follows them.

 

It is done in my book. No eagle for you.... You lied when you took the oath and then spouted off before your eagle board. Now you get to pay the price.

[qwazse]

You forgot the part about throwing him out, qwazse. You know, the men and women of good character throwing him out for not belonging. You forgot that part.

 

Didn't forget. Just counted it gain.

 

I also did not call the "decade completing requirements" phrase a flagrant lie. I accept that well-meaning folks may use hyperbole to make a point, or they may treat cub-scouts (which has nothing to do with Eagle requirements) as part of the trail.

 

The boy may have been "led on" by his SM, but what is more important: getting a badge under some delusion that we are one big happy family, or doing good work according to your conscience in a broken world?