Churches Evicting Troops, and a new organization

[EmberMike]

So for all purposes this organization was created, by people who already wished to leave and make a more faith based organization. Following that then they policy change was just an excuse to leave.

TLUSA had all the pieces in place to get started long before the vote on gay scouts was cast. So yes, they used it as an excuse. They would have gone ahead with this either way, most likely. If the vote failed, they then probably would have had some other reason for breaking away.

[EmberMike]

I see a lot of opinions of why folks are leaving the BSA for Trail Life and likely they are all correct depending on the unit. The local Trail Life near me organized as a result of the BSA membership decision. There was no thought of changing before. I know of a couple of Texas units considering Trail Life because the church has asked the BSA units to leave. I know of another boy run unit looking into Trail Life to get more freedom in there program. I don't think there is one main reason. But if Trail Life can get their feet under them, they might make a go of it. I don't feel Trail Life will hurt the BSA program. But it might keep them from going more liberal with membership like allowing atheist. Barry

For an organization that just formed in the last few months, I find TL's growth rather impressive. They're highly organized, have a pretty complete looking program, handbooks, uniforms, units, leadership, members, they're hitting the ground running. It may seem like basic stuff to us, but think about how much time and effort it takes to start something like this, write the program, get all of the materials made, get the organizational and business stuff sorted out, etc.

 

Based on how far they've come in just a few months, I'd regard TL as a major threat to the BSA in some areas.

[EmberMike]

...I personally find this new organization disturbing for many different reasons.The first is their oath which is a dead ringer of the boy scout...

 

I don't think their oath is that similar. But even if it was, it's not like the BSA can claim that for their own. The original oath and law were written by Baden-Powell in his 1908 Scouting for Boys books, before the BSA formed. Much of the BSA program came from BP's original scouting movement over in the UK.

 

Other scouting groups besides the BSA also use similarly worded oaths and laws. No one really owns them.

[Rick_in_CA]

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

[Stosh]

Conservatve church "scout" like programs have been around for years. Just one more to add to the pile.

 

Stosh

[Eagledad]

I see a lot of opinions of why folks are leaving the BSA for Trail Life and likely they are all correct depending on the unit. The local Trail Life near me organized as a result of the BSA membership decision. There was no thought of changing before. I know of a couple of Texas units considering Trail Life because the church has asked the BSA units to leave. I know of another boy run unit looking into Trail Life to get more freedom in there program. I don't think there is one main reason. But if Trail Life can get their feet under them, they might make a go of it. I don't feel Trail Life will hurt the BSA program. But it might keep them from going more liberal with membership like allowing atheist. Barry

Good point Mike, we will have to see how it goes. What I think will slow their growth is TLs strict use of using religious institutions for COs. Barry

[Eagledad]

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

I don't agree. The BSA moved away from these concervatives, not the other way around. Church COs bailed on the BSA after the changes, not before have forced the units to move. Organizations have to stand for something. I know a lot of scouters who just want more freedom to run their program like traditional scouting program, much like Kudo. I don't think TL fits that type of program, but we will see. I heard of a few people who were talking about organizing scout units specifically for gay scouts as kind of a sanctuary. That's not pluralism, that is political activism. And for that reason, I don't think they will get enough interest. Barry

[T2Eagle]

My understanding is our Council hasn't lost any units. The most conservative/fundamentalist Church in our area has a long time very active Troop, they still don't have any women leaders, but they are sticking around. I lost one scout, which is odd because we're a Catholic unit and the new policy is pretty much the same policy our schools have. I never had to confront the issue, but I think the previous policy was as much a violation of our rules as it was consistent with them.

 

I wonder how well the level of political activism in the Church correlates with the likelihood that they are leaving.

[GeorgiaMom]

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

As an American Heritage Girls leader, I do have to clarify one statement on behalf of the organization and our church.

 

We have no problem "rubbing elbows" with people outside the Christian faith. *All* girls are welcome in AHG, and in our church, as you will find in the mission statement at http://www.ahgonline.org. We have a wide variety of girls in our troop and our church.

 

AHG, and our church which sponsors our troop, *does* require that *leaders* teaching children agree to uphold the church's statement of faith and the AHG mission statement.

 

We are protestant Christians. When I take my child to a protestant Christian church or group (like AHG), I expect her to be taught and mentored by protestant Christian leaders. Not Muslims. Not Hindus. Etc. There is an enormous gulf between respecting other people's choices in their own lives and allowing them to mentor my own children.

 

I have many friends of many faiths. I have no problem "rubbing elbows", being neighbors, doing business, etc. Everyone deserves my respect. *No one* has a "right" to mentor my children. That is a privilege I entrust to people who share my own personal religious beliefs and values.

 

Trail Life is to BSA what AHG is to Girl Scouts: a faith based alternative for those parents who are uncomfortable with the moral direction the earlier group was taking. It's called religous freedom and freedom of assembly.

[moosetracker]

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

Eagledad = are you saying these conservative CO's were not involved in BSA until the BSA created the rule against homosexuals in the 1990's?? I could agree they were probably involved in pushing BSA into making this self-destructive policy in the first place.. But to influence BSA to do so, they were already members of BSA.

 

BSA is now going back to it's original stance on the issue.

 

Gorgia Mom - that has all that has been said.. You welcome children of all faiths, but feel adults of any faith other the Christian (and I don't know if AHG also considers LDS not Christian) as not worthy to be leaders.. The only reason I see for that is in the hopes of trying to convert them to your faith.. I could see children who really don't follow an organized religion perhaps joining.. But, if I was a Jewish parent or Buddist or whatever, I would not allow my child to join a group that states that their parents due to their faith are unworthy.

[moosetracker]

My understanding is our Council hasn't lost any units. The most conservative/fundamentalist Church in our area has a long time very active Troop, they still don't have any women leaders, but they are sticking around. I lost one scout, which is odd because we're a Catholic unit and the new policy is pretty much the same policy our schools have. I never had to confront the issue, but I think the previous policy was as much a violation of our rules as it was consistent with them.

 

I wonder how well the level of political activism in the Church correlates with the likelihood that they are leaving.

We had one cub whose parent left due to the vote.. The parent sited this issue as against his faith, but he was a member of our CO chuch, and the priest had no issue, and even tried to talk him off the ledge.. I think some people have allowed their politics to define their faith, rather then their church.

[Sentinel947]

My understanding is our Council hasn't lost any units. The most conservative/fundamentalist Church in our area has a long time very active Troop, they still don't have any women leaders, but they are sticking around. I lost one scout, which is odd because we're a Catholic unit and the new policy is pretty much the same policy our schools have. I never had to confront the issue, but I think the previous policy was as much a violation of our rules as it was consistent with them.

 

I wonder how well the level of political activism in the Church correlates with the likelihood that they are leaving.

Moose tracker, you couldn't be more correct.

[Eagledad]

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

No, the churches were COs for many many years. The recent membership change was the reason behind their decision.

[moosetracker]

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

True, but then you are saying in the '30's or 40's through the '70's or 80's the lack of a policy against homosexuals did not cause them to refuse to consider association with the BSA and found a BSA unit.

 

So BSA pulled away from it's origins of not taking sides to be taken over by the conservative viewpoint.. Now it is swinging back to it's origins of not taking sides.. BSA was off course, and is righting it's compass. They aren't there yet..

[Stosh]

My understanding is our Council hasn't lost any units. The most conservative/fundamentalist Church in our area has a long time very active Troop, they still don't have any women leaders, but they are sticking around. I lost one scout, which is odd because we're a Catholic unit and the new policy is pretty much the same policy our schools have. I never had to confront the issue, but I think the previous policy was as much a violation of our rules as it was consistent with them.

 

I wonder how well the level of political activism in the Church correlates with the likelihood that they are leaving.

Or maybe they just live their faith and ignore the politics.

 

Stosh