Decision delayed

[Nike]

They don't need to ask every Scouter or parent. They only need to ask about 1500. Do a scientifically valid survey of the local unit volunteers and another of the parents. However, are we all going to be preapred to accept the survey results, whatever kind they might do?

 

PS: If my math is off, Stats was a long time ago.

[bnelon44]

Is anyone surprised by them not making a decision...business as usual. Why do we' date=' the heart and soul of the BSA put up with this kind of stuff. Can we fire these bums?[/quote']

 

Did you hire them? If not, they you probably can't fire them.

[NJCubScouter]

I think DeanRx says it very well, except that in his last sentence, I wouldn't say I am "disgusted", just very disappointed. I have gotten used to the BSA not handling difficult issues very well, but it did seem like they were moving in the right direction on this one. I still don't get why they would put that statement up on Scouting.org, linked from the front page, if this were not a done deal.

 

As for petitions and surveys, I have not participated in any on this subject. I guess I should decide which is the right way to make my opinions known to National, and do it.

 

It also baffles me that anyone could read the opinions expressed in this forum, many of which favor the change, and still conclude that the impetus for this change is some "outside" group or groups. The people in this forum who favor the change are all active Scouters, with one exception that I am aware of. Additionally, as far as I know, not that it should matter but for whatever anyone thinks it's worth, none of the people actively posting in this forum are gay, or at least nobody has identified themselves as such. (There was one who did, but he has not posted for a number of years.) We're just Scouters who disagree with National's policy and think local option would be in the best interest of the organization, and ultimately in the best interests of the Scouts.

[moosetracker]

I remember someone posting about a year or so back.. I believe he was a youth, and did admit he was still in scouting, just not coming out.. "You know, the closeted homosexual, that we are suppose to accept, because they are not openly gay".. Some of our conservative scouters called him every name in the book, and acted like he was lower then pond scum.. Yet they say things like "Truely we respect them, just not near us".. I didn't blame him for not returning to the forum. It was not this forum's finest moment..

[Eagle92]

Unfortunately we are in a no win situation. If we change the policy, I feel we will lose at least 20 % of our members, if not more. This is based upon the group of councils asking for time to study the question and get input from the members and parents, or as they put it, "the stakeholders." Also don't forget, those pushing for the change will not be happy with local options as "It's a good first step" as one gentleman put it.

 

And if we keep the current policy, we become a cultural paraiah.

[AZMike]

I would not want to be in charge of security at whatever site is chosen for that national meeting. The protestors outside and the media obession is going to make it into a total freak show.

[Hal_Crawford]

I have about had it with BSA's national leadership. I am seriously considering whether I can remain a member of this organization. I have been a scouter for 15 years, pack committee, Cubmaster, troop Committee Chair and for the last 8 years I have been an assistant scoutmaster. I have been crew advisor on 5 high adventure treks. The scouts that joined when my son aged out have just aged out themselves. Most earned Eagle. I have continued in scouting for the boys but I am increasingly uncomfortable with the out of date membership policy. At work I have had to be increasingly cautious about with whom I discuss my involvement in scouting. Eagle92 said it best, we are becoming a "Cultural pariah." Some would say we already are.

 

I guess I will hold on to May but if BSA does not change the policy I will fulfill whatever commitments I have to our troop and then leave. I am tired of explaining my continued membership to my friends, my co-workers and--most importantly--my wife.

[Sentinel947]

I have about had it with BSA's national leadership. I am seriously considering whether I can remain a member of this organization. I have been a scouter for 15 years, pack committee, Cubmaster, troop Committee Chair and for the last 8 years I have been an assistant scoutmaster. I have been crew advisor on 5 high adventure treks. The scouts that joined when my son aged out have just aged out themselves. Most earned Eagle. I have continued in scouting for the boys but I am increasingly uncomfortable with the out of date membership policy. At work I have had to be increasingly cautious about with whom I discuss my involvement in scouting. Eagle92 said it best, we are becoming a "Cultural pariah." Some would say we already are.

 

I guess I will hold on to May but if BSA does not change the policy I will fulfill whatever commitments I have to our troop and then leave. I am tired of explaining my continued membership to my friends, my co-workers and--most importantly--my wife.

Hal- you've gotta do what you gotta do. Most of us here wouldn't begrudge you making that decision. I know I personally struggle with the same issues. All the good we do in the BSA is getting swallowed by this membership policy controversy and it's deeply frustrating.

 

Yours in Scouting,

Sentinel

[JMHawkins]

This was the WORST thing they could have done ! Who exactly are they getting more input from? As a registered leader for the past 7 years' date=' I have never, not once been asked to give my input - fill out an online survey regarding this issue, etc... but they have no problem getting ahold of me for a FOS donation every year! [/quote']

 

Funny, I used to be active in a political party, was even a Precinct Captain for a while. Every year they sent me a survey on various national issues. The last question was of course, how much money can you donate... Maybe BSA ought to adopt that. Hey, we have FOS coming up! Maybe...

 

This delay is really the worst of everything. At this point, I think Irving needs to find some way to declare the moral equivalent of bankruptcy, find a way to distribute the character and morality aspects of the program to a bunch of other people. The whole cause of this imbroglio is National setting themselves up as a moral arbiter. To be perfectly blunt, they aren't good enough at it. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with their G-G-G positions, they've done a terrible job of explaining their decisions, and simiply allowed the program to become a lighting rod for political pressure from all sides. They did the most foolish thing possible, they centralized authority and then weren't prepared for the inevitable power struggle that comes when you do that.

 

 

 

[Oak Tree]

HELLO!?!?! Anyone capable home up there? I'm doubting it because it seems like national decisions are being made by the least competent people you could imagine running a corporation. Either that, or else by a group of monkeys with a keyboard. Is there any professional out there anywhere who thinks that this was handled well? First the surprise announcement that they were changing the policy, and then the surprise backpedal.

 

At this point I am completely in awe of the BSA's ability to do this so incredibly, stunningly, badly. I think Homer Simpson could do a better job. I am normally bemused by the BSA's lack of corporate polish - but this level of sheer unadulterated stupidity goes way beyond head-scratching.

 

There are ways to handle this. Survey the troops. Hold meetings with various groups, some publicly - hint that your position is evolving. Prepare people that change is coming. And then when it does come, actually DO IT!

 

I'm with Dean - I am truly disgusted.

[packsaddle]

My advice to DeanRx is to remember that he does not serve the organization. He serves the unit and the boys and families which compose the unit.

Otherwise, "I can feel his pain". (sorry, that just slipped out)

 

With only one or perhaps two exceptions that I see, it looks like forum members on both sides of the issue at least can unite in disgust with the 'leadership' displayed yesterday. Kudu, some of your biting commentary on corporate leadership development would be well-received just now.

 

But there is another point to take away from this (you know me, always looking for the bright side of things) - We can all ask ourselves the question with crystal clarity now, no matter how we feel about gays: "Are these guys REALLY the reservoir of wisdom and the central authority whom we want to dictate membership policy to ALL of us?"

Is there anyone in these forums who does NOT think they could make a better moral decision for themselves than the BSA leadership has just demonstrated?

CAN THERE BE a clearer demonstration for the need for LOCAL OPTION than what we've just witnessed?

[perdidochas]

Look' date=' I have my gripes about how national and local councils operate as much as the next scouter. But the BSA is between a rock and a hard place right now. It's obvious......at least to me....that the possible change in policy is financially driven. BSA has always enjoyed support by the business community. Many of those businesses are politcally correct because to do otherwise would make them a target of activists just like the BSA. So in order to keep vocal customers happy, said businesses start telling the BSA that until they change their traditional ways, they can no longer support them financially. BSA has to make a decision of how to keep the lights on and starts mulling over the change. The other side of the equation is that the majority of the charters are churches....some of who might support the change and some who might not. Now they have to consider how much loss of membership they might incur as opposed to how much financial support they are losing. It's a tightrope they are walking. I would assume that the delay is due to having heard from the rank and file membership who say they will leave. I don't envy the decision makers.[/quote']

 

 

I totally agree. National is in a no win situation. I think the local option, though, is the only real choice. It is a compromise position, where both sides get something. I wish that national had just made the decision, not just assign to talk in another committee.

[perdidochas]

They don't need to ask every Scouter or parent. They only need to ask about 1500. Do a scientifically valid survey of the local unit volunteers and another of the parents. However, are we all going to be preapred to accept the survey results, whatever kind they might do?

 

PS: If my math is off, Stats was a long time ago.

Roughly speaking, if they select the volunteers and parents randomly,400 should be enough of each (about a 5% error). 1500 would be a bit more reliable, (about a 3% error). My latest pet peeve of surveys is that too many surveys I've been involved with lately have been thrown out. IMHO, it's because the results didn't match what the higher ups wanted.

[OldGreyEagle]

If we go with the original "news" that the BSA was going to talk about ending the Gay ban was leaked by an entity other than the BSA, it shouldnt surprise us that the vote was delayed. Something like this should be decided by as any people as possible, not the Executive Board but the Voting members of the National Council (Hope I got that right). No matter what occurs, serve your unit, its the best threrapy I can think of

[FScouter]

I am a show me kinda guy.....

 

 

So I would like to see a link or source for the statistic of 70% of councils favor it.

It's true... I saw it on facebook.