Venturing Eligibility for OA - An Idea...

[Lisabob]

At this point in the thread, the idea of allowing young women who are in Venture Crews and actively serving the scouting movement to join OA has been compared to:

 

allowing cub scouts to join OA

allowing gays to join OA

allowing atheists to join OA

allowing cross-dressers to join OA

 

The "slippery slope" argument is based largely on false comparisons. What will be next: "letting female Crew members join OA is like letting murderers join!" ??

 

 

(now mind you, I don't necessarily feel the BSA should exclude gays, atheists, or even cross-dressers from scouting, but that's a different matter. I would draw a line at murderers. )

[nolesrule]

I'm the one who mentioned Cub Scouts, and it was intentional hyperbole. Don't lump me in with those other ones.

 

And my point about the Cub Scouts was that even they could meet the spirit of membership in the OA (as listed by Eagle92), and even all the requirements for candidacy EXCEPT First Class rank (just like a Venturer who was never a Boy Scout).

 

Edit to add: my argument has nothing to do with gender or socio-religious-political leanings.(This message has been edited by nolesrule)

[sherminator505]

"This is all about traditions, thats what the BSA program is, unchanged in how many years??"

 

Hmm... let's look at that one... From emb021's post, it appears that the OA's relationship with Exploring was rather dynamic between 1948, when OA officially became a part of the Scouting program, and 1991, when Explorer elections were discontinued. So to which "tradition" do you refer, exactly?

 

"So if we start taking females just to be PC, where do we stop?? Gays? Athiest? Crossdressers?"

 

Who said anything about this being about females, or being done just to be PC? This is about whether we truly consider Venturing to be part of the Scouting movement or not. I'm assuming you think not, and that you think that because they have (gasp, shudder) females.

 

I shudder to see a fellow forum member compare every female youth member in Venturing to gays, athiests and crossdressers. I'm guessing that many of them wouldn't appreciate the comparison.

 

"Its a slippery slope and we should not go there."

 

Really? Fearmongering?! What dire consequences do you foresee from making this change, exactly?

 

"Again I say, if venturing wants an Honor Program, make one. Its just that simple."

 

I guess that in your world, Venturing youth are just not good enough to be included in "Scouting's National Honor Society." Is that really what you're saying?

 

(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

[BadenP]

sherm

 

nldscouter is a good old fashioned "red coat" scouter and will never be open to change, like Gary he zooms in attacks, makes his point then leaves the discussion, so good luck getting answers to any of your questions.

[Eagle_23]

with cub scouts it would be about maturity. there are some rather "complicated" values based around the OA, like the meaning of the admonition and the meanting of the obligation and such. A Cub Scout just would not be able understand the true meaning of the Ordeal ceremonies or other "values" of the order.

 

 

[Eagle_23]

with cub scouts it would be about maturity. there are some rather "complicated" values based around the OA, like the meaning of the admonition and the meanting of the obligation and such. A Cub Scout just would not be able understand the true meaning of the Ordeal ceremonies or other "values" of the order.

 

 

[Eagle92]

One thing about Cubs and OA, unless Res Camp is a week long, which in the council's I've been in it isn't, they would not be eligible.

 

Now Scouters in a Cub Pack could be eligible IF they meet the camping criteria and are nominated by the district. Had 1 female CM nominated b/c of her work on the District Committee. Unfortunately she didn't want to go through the Ordeal to become a member.

[Gary_Miller]

Ok,here is my personal opion on the subject.

 

I think Venturing Crews are an integral part of the Boy Scouts of America. I have seen many youth in the Venturing program who have easily live up to the Obligation of the order. I have never understood or agreed with the guideline to exclude youth in Venturing crews, both male and female, from the order.

 

All that would need done is to change the rank requirement to read differently or remove it all together. Although I think changing it to read differently would be best. As for the camping requirement I would keep it as it is.

 

As a Scouter most familiar with the LDS program. I have seen many youth who have turn 16 and entered into the Venturing Crew, who were well deserving of being in the OA who just never had a chance to be elected because their troop/team never held elections. Who now are no longer eligible just because their membership is now in a crew.

 

So yes I think Venturing Crews should be allowed to hold OA elections and I also think both male and females in the crew should be eligible.

 

Now you have my real take on this subject.

[bacchus]

Gary, they can be dual-registered in the Troop to remain eligible.

[BadenP]

Gary

 

After reading your last post I was quite amazed by your open minded attitude and commend you, and agree with you. Venturing IMHO is a positive method in retaining older scouts, allowing girls to participate in a great scouting experience. and a great tool in reaching those older boys who dropped out or who never were in scouting.

[SR540Beaver]

What if it is a non-camping venturing crew? How do you change the eligibility requirements to also allow them?

[sherminator505]

I wouldn't waive the camping requirement, as promotion of Scout camping is and has always been a goal of the Order. As I stated in my original post, a Venturing youth would have to satisfy the camping requirement to be eligible. As for the advancement requirement. I proposed the Gold award. Some fellow forum members have recommended the Outdoor Bronze, which upon reflection may be sufficient.

[BrotherhoodWWW]

Wow so much for a friendly discussion! I hesitate to even offer my opinion on the matter as it seems that many here with a different view will simply name-call or want to argue with me about my opinion. But whatever..... As John and I have discussed in a differing topic of the same subject matter the problem of summer cmap staffing is not as simple as we could hope. At one time our camps were fully staffed by youth male Scluts that made little money. Sadly much simpler times. If you want to increase the OA staffing of camps offer a competitive wage for the job. However that said I think youth should sacrafice and work at their council camp for little pay and it sould be the Arrowmen that are doing it. It is after all selfless service! The problem is how do we get them to do it.

 

As far as allowing elections in Venturing as a way to reward young women camp staffers with OA membership......... Youth are elected based on UNIT service. Working at summer camp is not unit service unless the purpose of the unit is to staff a camp; would that not then be more of Exploring or learning for life than adventure based leadership?

 

I am opposed to elections in Venturing because I do not see a benefit of OA (to those currently within) being co-ed at the youth level. If it were I would not be involved. I am involved in Boy Scouts because it is not Co-ed if it were neither I nor my son would be involved. To me it is a matter of tradition. If co-ed venturng is such a great thing then why does it not have exponetial growth? If Venturing wants an honors program why do they not develop their own? Perhaps they could come up with something that would fit their target age group which should be older than those of Boy Scout age if you buy their argument that Venturing should be a natural fit after boy scouts.

[Eagle92]

Brotherhood.

 

Summer camp staff as Venturing crews goes way, way back to the Exploring period. heck I was part of 2 posts/crews and 1 ship that all were staff based.

 

The thing is that staff are teaching scouting skills, and hence fall into traditional Scouting as opposed LFL.

 

Now some crews only meet durng the camping season, others meet periodically, and other are very active.

[BadenP]

WWW

 

I would say your position had much more validity in the 50's or 60's than it has in todays scouting program. Since the 1970's the OA with active lodges has been in an even steeper decline than the boy scout numbers. Today it seems that even those boys who are elected to the OA after the ordeal soon drop out of participating in lodge activities. In many cases this is due to the only lodge activity being work parties at the council camps and little else. I have personally seen lodges folding up right and left in my own councils, and in talking to others at NOAC over the years. Again IMHO this is due to a myriad of factors such as a real image problem, as well as equating OA to ONLY doing work service projects, etc..

 

Venturing involved in the OA would bring in some new and vitally needed energy to the organization and help rebuild it to its former self. Would this mean the OA may be a little different than it was years ago? Yes, but in a very positive way IMHO. Holding on to old traditions is good, until they begin to be detremental to the continuance and prosperity of the organization, then they need to be changed.(This message has been edited by BadenP)