Adults "shacking up" at girl scout camp-outs

[Trevorum]

scoutldr, I suppose we'll have to start demanding copies of marraige certificates along with driver insurance information. The G2SS clearly says, while camping, adult coed couples must be married, and we surely wouldn't want to violate that important clause...

 

I wonder if they've delegated enforcement to the Uniform Police ...

[funscout]

I guess I should have known that a simple request for information would end up being political! I used the term "shacking up" because I wanted a short, but to-the-point title. I guess I should have written a very lengthy title, in order to make it politically correct!

 

Thank you to the following for answering my question:

 

SR540 Bearver, Sweetspiritpamh, Troop_Dad, ScoutNut

 

And thank you Fuzzy Bear for your humor! I love it!

 

Trevorum, I didn't intend to get into a discussion about the morality of unmarried adults co-habiting. We both know we disagree on this (and many other) issues, but that's okay. You live by your morals, and my family and I live by ours. I just wanted to know what the GSUSA guidelines were on this issue, since it is forbidden in BSA.

 

By the way, one of my Webelos has a live-in pseudo-dad. The man is very nice, and often helps out our den meetings. Although I don't agree with his living situation, it is not, of course, a problem (or my business) at den meetings. If these two adults want to tent together at a campout, then it WILL be my business, and I will very kindly explain BSA policy. I will not be pushing MY morals on them, it will be BSA policy.

[Fuzzy Bear]

FS,

We had a guy here for a while that could quote the chapter, verse but he was more political than any of the politicians that you now read. Getting an answer to a Scouting question is tricky because of the heavy personal baggage we all lug around. I think you do what you just did, which was to add up all of the responses and divide by the number of respondents and hope the average is not mean, pun intended. FB

 

[acco40]

Troopdad, again, the statement "Per G2SS, married couples can share a tent." is not 100% complete. Only married adults, and in the eyes of the BSA one is an adult over the age of 18 for the Boy Scouts and over the age of 21 for Venture and OA. So could a husband of 23 share a tent with his 20 year old wife and fellow crew member? No - she is considered a youth.

[Troop_Dad]

ACCO40,

 

I agress with you.

 

Rich

 

[Lynda J]

I think it depends on the situtation. I know of a couple in another unit that have been together 15 years. Have 2 kids but have never married. No one really knows they aren't married. I only found out by accident. I see nothing wrong with them sleeping in the same tent. Just like our SM and his wife sleep in the same tent.

I do see a problem if the parent bring casuel boyfriend or girlfirend on a camping trip and sleep together. Then next time wants to bring someone else. That is a NO NO for me.

 

This is one of the reasone we have a troop policy that if you go camping with us you get trained and are registered.

(This message has been edited by Lynda J)

[funscout]

Lynda J, you are right, it would be worse to have an unmarried couple where only one is a parent of the child, and who knows how long the "significant other" will be in the picture. This was the case with my niece's leader.

 

I still don't think unmarried adults should share a tent, because that tells the kids that it's okay to sleep together without getting married. I've never understood why a couple (especially one with kids) refuses to get married, but then expects the same benefits of a married couple. They have the right to do as they want in their own home, but they need to follow BSA or GSUSA rules when on camp-outs.

[FScouter]

The moral values of the leaders of our youth absolutely is our business.

 

The bigger issue I see, beyond whether they share a tent on a campout or not, is the fact that they demonstrate their lack of commitment to each other; that the commitment of marriage seems to be of no value to them. Two people co-habitating with no strings (shacking up) does not demonstrate the kind of good morals and values I want for my son.

 

Performing sex with a person of the opposite sex is a very big action, with very big responsibilities. I do not want my son to think that behavior like that without solid commitment (marriage) is an acceptable behavior. Adults lacking in moral values are not the kind of adults I want setting examples for my son. BSA or GSUSA leaders ought to hold themselves to a higher standard than found in shack up relationships.

 

Id seriously question whether these two have the moral standards that adult leaders setting the example for our youth ought to have. And I congratulate the man who had the moral guts to pull his daughter from the campout.

[Trevorum]

Me, I'd be more concerned with how Lynda's couple treated their son and the other youths in the troop than whether 15 years ago they had said their vows before a judge, a rabbi, or just each other.

[SR540Beaver]

Marriage has been a social standard since pre-recorded history and is something that will never go out of style. There is nothing wrong with expecting adults on a BSA campout to follow the social norm. Would those who have no problem with an unmarried couple sharing a tent on a campout also have no problem if a nudist decided to go natural on the next campout? I mean, what would be wrong with it and whose business is it anyway? God gave everyone private parts, why should it be a big deal to let someone see yours?

[acco40]

Are we debating what we like, don't like, agree with or don't agree with or what we, as Scout Leaders, have promised to do? As a registered Scout Leader, I made a promise to deliver the Scouting program to our youth. Part of that program is following the G2SS. It states that persons of the opposite sex, who are unmarried, should not share a tent. My duty is then to follow that guideline regardless if I think the couple in question is right, wrong, moral, immoral, amoral or hockey players. It really doesn't matter what I think.

[evmori]

If a man & woman are married to each other they can share a tent while on a Troop camp-out in the BSA! If they aren't married, they can't regardless of how long they have "been together". Seems pretty simple to me!

 

Helping boys make moral & ethical decisions!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[campcrafter]

 

Wouldn't in most states a man & women who have lived as a couple for 15 years be considered a common law marriage?

 

 

[Lynda J]

I know of one very good example of not getting married. Had a guy worked for me for a short period of time. He left and went to work for Gulf.

a week before his son was born he was killed at the station he work at. When the baby was born his wife was told that she and her son would receive benifits from Gulf for as long as she did not remarry. If she remarried both lost benifits.

 

She was 26 years old. She has been living with a very nice guy for about 15 years now. They won't marry until her son turns 21. At which time his survivor benifits from his father stop. At that point they plan on getting married. Do I think it is right that they aren't married. Yes. Do I think that the way Gulf has things set up is right.

NO. Why should her remarring cause her son to lose the death benifits from his father.

 

I don't know why this couple has never married. But they are one of the most stable couples I know in their relationship with each other and their kids. And their kids are some of the most respectful kids I know. To other adults and to their parents. They were together a couple of years before they had kids. Whether their kids know they aren't married. I don't know it isn't something that is discussed. What is discussed it what they expect from their kids. Both kids are A/B honor students in their schools. Both are very active in community projects.

 

 

[SR540Beaver]

Lynda,

 

IMHO, that is a really poor excuse for not getting married. The reason companies have benefits set up that way is quite simple. Their employee supported his family with his weekly paycheck. He dies and the family loses that financial support. When the spouse remarries, the financial support returns thru the paycheck of the new spouse. Why should the company continue to pay support when the "new" family is just as capable of being self supporting as the "old" family. If I were to marry a widow with children, it would certainly be with the full expectation and acceptance that I would be financially supporting everyone. I don't mean to be disrespectful and I'm not criticizing you, but it seems selfish and greedy for someone to not marry just so they can get additional money from a company. As it stands now, they have both of their incomes PLUS benefits from the company. If they married, they would lose the extra cash. I would be hard pressed to not marry and/or adopt just for extra spending cash. What kind of lesson does that teach the children?