Npr Story On Bsa/lds Relationship

[CalicoPenn]

Well then maybe it's time to call their bluff and let them leave.  Isn't that what a lot of non-Mormon Scouters have wanted for decades anyway?  I've heard an awful lot of campfire and cracker barrel chat from an awful lot of non-Mormon leaders wondering why their camporees and summer camps and one day events have to be planned around the LDS schedule.  I've heard an awful lot of campfire and cracker barrel jokes about LDS units getting lost in the woods, or setting forests to blaze.  I've heard an awful lot of campfire and cracker barrel chat about LDS units handing out Merit Badges like candy, and folks calling Mormon Eagle Scouts "Seagull Scouts". 

 

When I was a Scout the LDS units in my Council did not really participate at the District or Council level - they pretty much ran their program on their own.  About 1976 or so, the LDS Stakes (and there were quite a few spread out around the Council) decided they wanted to start taking advantage of District and Council events.  The word got out and only one District (and I'm proud to say it was the District I was in) said they would welcome the opportunity to bring the LDS folks aboard so every LDS unit, no matter where they were in the Council, we assigned to my District - the leadership of the other Districts just flat out refused to welcome them (and no, this should'nt be that much of a surprise - white bread Chicago suburbia in the 1970's?  Archie Bunker's home was reality television).  Of course, we had to adjust our programming a bit - and when the Stake leaders saw us doing so, they adjusted some things as well (all of a sudden, it was possible for the Scout Troops to travel on Sundays if the campground was more than one hour away).  And still, I heard rumblings about the LDS.

 

Can the BSA survive the loss of half a million boys?  Sure - we've done so before.  Can they survive the loss of $15 Million in revenue?  Yeah, probably.  Knowing the Mormon's I know, if the LDS leadership eliminates Boy Scouting from the Church, they'll join up with non-LDS units.

 

I suspect that the Executive Council is just not losing any sleep over this decision - I don't see why any of us should either.

[Gone]

The BSA has been having this discussion about gay members for years, if not decades.  The BSA executive board is well aware of the LDS position that they don't want any gay leaders and the latest decision is a compromise to accommodate religious COs who don't want to disallow gay leaders, such as LDS.

 

Like the Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians and Anglicans/Episcopalians, the LDS members have been putting a lot of pressure on the LDS leadership to be more tolerant.  LDS has been running a big campaign to reach out to their gay members and the gay community at large.  It would seem that breaking from the BSA over the new gay leader policy would be a step backwards for the LDS.

 

More "tolerant"? At some point those supporting the inclusion of gay leaders need to realize -- or should I say, be more tolerant -- of the religious beliefs of those against it. It's pretty hypocritical to call the conservative religious folks intolerant when doing so is being intolerant of their freedom of religion. 

 

If, as you say, BSA has been mulling this over for "decades", then their mishandling of the timing of this announcement and lack of a back-up plan to fill the gap of funding about to go out the door is even more silly. BSA is demonstrating no head for business here, and that's not good for an organization hemorrhaging membership and sponsorship dollars. 

[Gone]

 

Can the BSA survive the loss of half a million boys?  Sure - we've done so before.  Can they survive the loss of $15 Million in revenue?  Yeah, probably.  Knowing the Mormon's I know, if the LDS leadership eliminates Boy Scouting from the Church, they'll join up with non-LDS units.

 

I suspect that the Executive Council is just not losing any sleep over this decision - I don't see why any of us should either.

 

That's $15 million in just dues. Add in the FOS loss and the losses within supply (scout stuff) and I would wager that number is a great deal higher.

 

Can BSA survive? Sure....but what will it look like? How will they make up the loss in revenue? What programs or camps will have to close?

 

Losing that many members and their wallets will hurt. Who knows what other losses BSA will take?

[Southpaw]

As an LDS scoutleader in Utah here is my take:

 

The LDS church is pissed because of a lack of curtesy on the part of the BSA.  The vote seems intentionally planed at a time that the BSA knew that the LDS leadership would not be available.

 

If the BSA and LDS split it will impact the BSA:

 

The church will not simply drop scouts, but will replace scouting with its own youth program.   The youth and leaders will stay with the church’s new program.  A very small number of youth and an even smaller number of leaders will seek scouting elsewhere.  And those scouts will be short-lived once people learn how much scouting costs.

 

I suspect that the farther away from Utah the less of an impact will be felt locally.

 

The three councils in Utah will be financially decimated.  And with each reporting close to a 99% LDS membership they will not have any scouts.

 

The word that I am getting from the councils outside of Utah, are that 2 in Nevada, 2 in Colorado, 1 in Idaho, 1 in Wyoming, 1 in Arizona, and even 1 in California are reporting about a 50% LDS membership each.  If that is true I would be asking, “What are the impacts of restructuring the Western Region?â€

 

I am guessing we will see:

Councils being merged and or absorbed. 

Several hundred people will be out of a job (including myself).

A massive sale-off of camps.  Maybe the church will buy some of them.

 

But, if I can pull enough scouts and adults together to float a neighborhood troop, it will be a nice change to have a troop of people that actually wanted to be there.

[Rick_in_CA]

More "tolerant"? At some point those supporting the inclusion of gay leaders need to realize -- or should I say, be more tolerant -- of the religious beliefs of those against it. It's pretty hypocritical to call the conservative religious folks intolerant when doing so is being intolerant of their freedom of religion.

Wow. So when I ask that the BSA follow it's stated values and allow my CO to follow it's religious beliefs when picking it's leaders, I am being intolerant of the conservative religious COs that don't agree with my CO? But when they insist that my CO NOT be allowed to follow it's religious beliefs, they aren't being intolerant? I don't think I undestand your definition of "intolerant".

 

It's like the old joke about the Puritan complaining about the end of the death penalty for Catholics:

Look at those Catholics walking around as if they have the right to live! If this isn't religious discrimination, I don't know what is!

Edited August 3, 2015 by Rick_in_CA

[CalicoPenn]

 

The LDS church is pissed because of a lack of curtesy on the part of the BSA.  The vote seems intentionally planed at a time that the BSA knew that the LDS leadership would not be available.

 

 

 

 

I've been thinking about this argument and I just don't buy it - not in 2015 in an age of instantaneous communicaton almost anywhere in the world.  If the issue was that important to the leaders, they would have found a way to discuss it - it's not like the Mormons are technological luddites.

 

And frankly, what would be the point of waiting?  The position would have been one of two - We support or We oppose.  It doesn't sound like the Executive Board would have been swayed either way so might as well just get on with it.

 

So ok, maybe the BSA merges all of the Utah Councils in to one - I'm surprised the BSA hasn't already done so anyway - Utah has a population of about 3 million people - that's less than half the population of the Chicago metro area, and all but one of those councils have merged already.  Having more than one council service a population of 3 million seems like a waste of resources.

[Southpaw]

I think that size has more to do with the number of youth being served and not the population.  The smallest of the three Utah Councils, Trapper Trails, has nearly 50,000 youth; the Great Salt Lake Council is claiming more than 76,000; and the Utah National Parks Council is reporting around 80,000.  If the church splits that will leave around 5,000 scouts in Utah.  

[DenLeader2]

It seems to me and has been stated earlier, maybe not in this post, that the BSA wants all religious affiliated COs out.

They can't be that inept and short sighted to not consider the fallout with the LDS and Catholics, etc..

I'm taking my money and leaving after this year in Cub Scouts. I will work with the boys in my den to get them through

Bear.

[DigitalScout]

More "tolerant"? At some point those supporting the inclusion of gay leaders need to realize -- or should I say, be more tolerant -- of the religious beliefs of those against it. It's pretty hypocritical to call the conservative religious folks intolerant when doing so is being intolerant of their freedom of religion. 

In a pluralistic society there exists an expectation of a certain level of tolerance in order to maintain a peaceful coexistence with others.

 

Yet Americans have a long history of creating religious enclaves so they can embrace their religion easier without outside influences and temptations.  One such enclave is New Square, New York, whose inhabitants are "members of the Skverer Hasidic movement who seek to maintain a Hasidic lifestyle disconnected from the secular world."

 

I'm not suggesting that you go live on an island, I'm merely pointing out that others with strong religious convictions have found it necessary to create a closed community free from the offenses of pluralism.

 

I admit that I am baffled how the presence of a gay person at the grocery, at school or at a scouting event is an infringement of religious freedom.

Edited August 4, 2015 by DigitalScout

[skeptic]

"It seems to me and has been stated earlier, maybe not in this post, that the BSA wants all religious affiliated COs out."

 

Where do you get this idea?  After all, roughly 70% of CO's are connected to religious groups; about half of those still have strong concerns about this decision.  But, by allowing each to choose their own direction within the unit, how is it an attack on those that disagree?  And, how can the slight possibility of being exposed to a Gay leader in larger group interactions be any different than the chance of the same thing in many other public venues such as schools, sports teams, concerts, and so on?  Seems totally irrational to have such fear.  

 

As has been noted, this whole issue has very little actual effect in most units.  We do the program and keep private things private.  And we follow YP rules and simple common sense.  That is the direction our unit will continue to go with the continued support of the Methodist Church.

[walk in the woods]

It's funny. In Terry's thread about scout-like behavior, DigitalScout said:

 

I believe this is a good example of what Terry wants to moderate. This kind of post uses improper debating techniques because it uses the fallacy of stereotyping. Stereotyping is the generalization that some people of a group have a characteristic so all members of that group have that characteristic.

 

Since it is not valid in a debate, it must be assumed that statistics are meant to denigrate the group which, I agree with Terry, is very un-scoutlike.

Your photo above is meant to denigrate a group, which I agree with Terry, is very un-scoutlike.

 

The silence of the moderators is deafening.

 

[Moderator Note: Cartoon in question has been hidden.]

Edited August 4, 2015 by NJCubScouter

[walk in the woods]

Terry said when he started that same thread:
 

Here's the standard and direction I will give to Moderators:

 

• Scouting already decided that every unit must not discriminate, exclude or otherwise harm gay kids. Period. No exceptions. And there very well may be one of those kids in your unit, or certainly reading this forum.
• Scouting seems poised to decide that only religiously-chartered units may choose to not select gay parents or leaders as mentors, and that would take effect immediately (like, next week).
• It is impossible to honor point #1 above while standing around a campfire (or this virtual campfire we call SCOUTER.com) denigrating or shouting angrily into the wind your personal distaste for gay people. It's impossible to honor point #1 while disparaging an entire group of people that may include one of those kids.

As such, I encourage moderators to simply delete posts they feel could violate point #1 above.

 

Substitute Christian for Gay in points 1 and 3 above.  Do the moderations rules still apply? 

Edited August 4, 2015 by walk in the woods

[qwazse]

@@MattR, although the tension may come when you have a homosexual who you would like to register with your unit, a more likely scenario would be that your unit might be assigned an openly homosexual ranger or site-guide or Seabase captain. Even now, you could have heterosexual leaders with pictures of their out-of-wedlock children stitched into their gear.

 

@@Southpaw, what profiteth the BSA if it saves New York, but loses Utah?

 

To those who wish to grouse about how their fellow forum members have posted (rather than address their content) there is another topic where you may argue over style.

[Gone]

In a pluralistic society there exists an expectation of a certain level of tolerance in order to maintain a peaceful coexistence with others.

 

Yet Americans have a long history of creating religious enclaves so they can embrace their religion easier without outside influences and temptations.  One such enclave is New Square, New York, whose inhabitants are "members of the Skverer Hasidic movement who seek to maintain a Hasidic lifestyle disconnected from the secular world."

 

I'm not suggesting that you go live on an island, I'm merely pointing out that others with strong religious convictions have found it necessary to create a closed community free from the offenses of pluralism.

 

I admit that I am baffled how the presence of a gay person at the grocery, at school or at a scouting event is an infringement of religious freedom.

My point remains, the country is split on the gay rights issue. It not like those against are some small minority. The liberals are merely demonizibg those who don't agree with them and belittling the religious beliefs behind the conservative's reasoning. If that's no intolerance I don't know what is.

 

Let's not sugar coat it.

[Gone]

Wow. So when I ask that the BSA follow it's stated values and allow my CO to follow it's religious beliefs when picking it's leaders, I am being intolerant of the conservative religious COs that don't agree with my CO? But when they insist that my CO NOT be allowed to follow it's religious beliefs, they aren't being intolerant? I don't think I undestand your definition of "intolerant".

 

If you think the left's management of this issue with regard to the right's exercise of their religious beliefs is tolerant then I can't help you.

 

Religious protection is expressly called out in the constitution. Need I say more?