Current BSA Policy Vs local option poll

[packsaddle]

It looks like some parents have filed suit against National over what they see as an attempt to pack the voting group in violation of the organization's bylaws:

 

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/something-rotten-in-the-boy-scouts

Delicious!

[AZMike]

An Interesting if controversial read on the controversy in the link. There was a thread (which is probably dead) earlier by a liberal scouter asking conservatives to help him or her understand their mindset. This essay probably explains a traditional way of thinking as it applies to scouts pretty well, even if many will not agree with it:

 

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2013/04/9970/

[packsaddle]

An Interesting if controversial read on the controversy in the link. There was a thread (which is probably dead) earlier by a liberal scouter asking conservatives to help him or her understand their mindset. This essay probably explains a traditional way of thinking as it applies to scouts pretty well, even if many will not agree with it:

 

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2013/04/9970/

Is this the one you're thinking about?

http://www.scouter.com/forum/issues-politics/361655-help-me-understand-your-point-of-view

[BadenP]

Twocub, I actually agree with most of your post. This new policy is like a waterballoon about to burst, all it will do is get everyone wet and mad. National has once again proven they do not have the ability or guts to come up with a viable and workable policy. Giving this decision to the CO's to decide is the only way it will work. With the way it stands now the BSA will continue to see corporate money givers continue to diminish and more CO's decide to look for alternative youth programs. Time for a restructure of the National Office starting with the CSE and giving the power back to the CO's.

[BS-87]

I think the constituency that matters most in this case is the kids.

 

The Scouters that don't agree something must be done, when you consider that the boys are comfortable having gay role models and friends, are kinda missing the boat here.

 

While there is rightfully concern about gay leaders and scouts, the fact that the boys are heavily in favor of welcoming them to Scouting should mandate that we figure out how to make it happen in a way that makes sure everybody remains safe and respected physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually.

[NJCubScouter]

BadenP says: "Time for a restructure of the National Office starting with the CSE and giving the power back to the CO's."

 

I am curious about your use of the word "back" in that sentence. When, if ever, did the CO's actually have "the power" in the BSA? I don't mean in the theoretical sense (which I believe has always been the case) but in the actual sense. When I think back to when I was a Boy Scout (late 60's to mid 70's), my general sense then was that National was "in charge", with some intermediate role for the councils, just as is the case today. (While I was a youth and therefore didn't know everything (even though I probably thought I did), I think I did pay enough attention to get a somewhat accurate sense of what was going.) On the other hand, the CO's of the two troops I was a member were definitely CO's "of convenience" -- just like the CO's of the pack and troop I have been involved with starting in the late 90's through today. I am doubtful that the fundamental balance of power in the BSA shifted after the mid-70's and then shifted back before the late-90's, so what time period are you talking about? The 50's? The 40's? I doubt you are that much older than me.

 

[NJCubScouter]

It looks like some parents have filed suit against National over what they see as an attempt to pack the voting group in violation of the organization's bylaws:

 

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/something-rotten-in-the-boy-scouts

Unless I am misreading the article, it does not say a lawsuit has been filed. It says some parents have hired a couple of attorneys and that the issue COULD end up in court. As for Packsaddle's comment, if he is saying what I think he is saying, I agree. As a former boss of mine used to say, Irony can be so ironic.

[skeptic]

Surprised no one has commented on this - it looks the LDS church has offered a (somewhat lukewarm) approval of the new resolution today:

 

Church Issues Statement on Boy Scouts of America

 

 

SALT LAKE CITY â€â€

 

For 100 years, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has enjoyed a strong, rewarding relationship with Boy Scouts of America (BSA).

 

Recently, BSA has been reviewing a possible policy change in its standards for membership and leadership. Now that BSA has finished its review process and has proposed a resolution for consideration, the Church has issued the following statement:

 

“Over the past several weeks BSA has undertaken the difficult task of reviewing its membership standards policy. In their own words, this undertaking has been 'the most comprehensive listening exercise in its history.'

 

"While the Church has not launched any campaign either to effect or prevent a policy change we have followed the discussion and are satisfied that BSA has made a thoughtful, good-faith effort to address issues that, as they have said, remain 'among the most complex and challenging issues facing the BSA and society today.'

 

"The current BSA proposal constructively addresses a number of important issues that have been part of the on-going dialogue including consistent standards for all BSA partners, recognition that Scouting exists to serve and benefit youth rather than Scout leaders, a single standard of moral purity for youth in the program, and a renewed emphasis for Scouts to honor their duty to God.

 

"We are grateful to BSA for their careful consideration of these issues. We appreciate the positive things contained in this current proposal that will help build and strengthen the moral character and leadership skills of youth as we work together in the future.â€Â

 

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-statement-boy-scouts-of-america

 

 

 

 

 

 

It remains to be seen about the supposed extra voters; somehow I think that is nonsense. On the other hand, the individuals in this particular group appear a bit hypocritical to me in that they are bending the data themselves. As far as the Catholic faith is concerned, I have no problem with it basically; but I have never understood the idea that somehow going to confession and getting forgiven repeatedly for the same sins is in itself sinful from my perspective. And that is a very common thing from appearances, though I obviously do not have anything but long time hearsay. The person that posted in their comments from the given link that ANY sexual activity within the youth is grounds for dismissal makes a valid point in regard to this update. It is a step in the right direction; but they will still need to find a way to deal with the transition from youth to adult that makes sense. How about if we simply wait and see and in the meantime just do what we do on the unit level.

[packsaddle]

It looks like some parents have filed suit against National over what they see as an attempt to pack the voting group in violation of the organization's bylaws:

 

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/something-rotten-in-the-boy-scouts

NJ, indeed.

[AZMike]

I think the constituency that matters most in this case is the kids.

 

The Scouters that don't agree something must be done, when you consider that the boys are comfortable having gay role models and friends, are kinda missing the boat here.

 

While there is rightfully concern about gay leaders and scouts, the fact that the boys are heavily in favor of welcoming them to Scouting should mandate that we figure out how to make it happen in a way that makes sure everybody remains safe and respected physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually.

I'm pretty sure many - maybe the majority - of boys would be comfortable with taking fireworks on a campout, bringing a Gameboy, and jumping off a cliff into unchecked waters. "Boy-led" doesn't mean we let them make immature decisions relating to safety, yo.

[moosetracker]

I think the constituency that matters most in this case is the kids.

 

The Scouters that don't agree something must be done, when you consider that the boys are comfortable having gay role models and friends, are kinda missing the boat here.

 

While there is rightfully concern about gay leaders and scouts, the fact that the boys are heavily in favor of welcoming them to Scouting should mandate that we figure out how to make it happen in a way that makes sure everybody remains safe and respected physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually.

AZMike - Considering the MAJORITY of the American voting population has changed thier views on homosexuals, are you calling the majority of Americans immature.. Yes, i guess you are.. After all, if it isn't your viewpoint, then it must not be the right viewpoint.

 

If YPT protects boys from female adult leaders it will work for homosexual scout leaders.. (Sorry, it IS working for homosexual leaders.. We have them with the DADT policy).. Scouts also allows cliff jumping with proper safety considerations followed..

 

Also for the umpteenth time homosexuals are not pedophiles and your one out of 100 studies that say so, don't prove it..

[Peregrinator]

BadenP says: "Time for a restructure of the National Office starting with the CSE and giving the power back to the CO's."

 

I am curious about your use of the word "back" in that sentence. When, if ever, did the CO's actually have "the power" in the BSA? I don't mean in the theoretical sense (which I believe has always been the case) but in the actual sense. When I think back to when I was a Boy Scout (late 60's to mid 70's), my general sense then was that National was "in charge", with some intermediate role for the councils, just as is the case today. (While I was a youth and therefore didn't know everything (even though I probably thought I did), I think I did pay enough attention to get a somewhat accurate sense of what was going.) On the other hand, the CO's of the two troops I was a member were definitely CO's "of convenience" -- just like the CO's of the pack and troop I have been involved with starting in the late 90's through today. I am doubtful that the fundamental balance of power in the BSA shifted after the mid-70's and then shifted back before the late-90's, so what time period are you talking about? The 50's? The 40's? I doubt you are that much older than me.

Baden-Powell thought that the BSA was too bureaucratic ... in 1912.

[Rick_in_CA]

"Boy-led" doesn't mean we let them make immature decisions relating to safety' date=' yo.[/quote']

 

There are several studies that have found that religious fundamentalists are more likely to be child abusers than non-fundamentalists*. Isn't that a YPT issue? Do you think mothers will be willing to send their sons off into the wilderness with two fundamentalists? What about fundamentalists at cub camp? It's a safety issue!

 

* I have only read two of them, and that was many years ago in college. Both of them were rather weak, and took very broad interpretations of the word "abuse".

[AZMike]

"Boy-led" doesn't mean we let them make immature decisions relating to safety' date=' yo.[/quote']

 

There are several studies that have found that religious fundamentalists are more likely to be child abusers than non-fundamentalists*. Isn't that a YPT issue? Do you think mothers will be willing to send their sons off into the wilderness with two fundamentalists? What about fundamentalists at cub camp? It's a safety issue!

 

* I have only read two of them, and that was many years ago in college. Both of them were rather weak, and took very broad interpretations of the word "abuse".

Could you cite those for me, Rick? In which academic journals did they appear?

 

What was the definition used for a "fundamentalist" in the research studies?

 

What was the definition of "abuse" - physical? Sexual? Emotional? All three?

 

What was the reporting basis - self reporting by those abused? Self reporting by the abusers? Police reports? Medical reports (and if so, how did the parent's religious denomination show up on the police or medical reports?)

 

What was the number of cases used to make this conclusion? 3? 23? 203? 2003?

 

Sounds like the very definition of junk science to me.

 

I can cite a quite good peer-reviewed academic study, funded by the government, that shows a greater percentage of atheists are involved in the most heinous crimes against children than would be expected, based on their percentage of the population. A much higher percentage of school shooters express atheist viewpoints than religious viewpoints in their final communications. Does that mean atheists can never be trusted around any children? No. What point are you trying to make in regard to the the question of whether teen and pre-teen boys should be allowed to have the final say on safety issues?

[Rick_in_CA]

Could you cite those for me' date=' Rick? In which academic journals did they appear?[/quote']

 

I don't remember. It was back in college, and that was years ago. I do remember being unimpressed with the quality of the two that I did read at that time.

 

The point I was (trying) to make was: just because you can find an academic study or studies that appear to support a point of view, doesn't mean that they are good studies, or that their conclusions are being correctly interpreted.

 

As for addressing your quote, it was probably miss-placed. I agree with you that teen and pre-teen boys shouldn't always be given a final say on safety issues. We I was trying to address, was the implied point that having gays in the BSA was a SAFETY issue. And to support that claim, some people cite a few bogus studies. Hence the jibe about academic studies.

 

As for the studies themselves, like I said, I don't even remember their titles. However, after a quick Google search, I was able to find references to several more recent ones that appear to address the issues of religious fundamentalism, abuse and violence in the "Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion". I haven't read any of them (and don't plan too - this is not an area of interest to me), so I can't comment on their relevance or quality.