NPR All Things Considerered: New Policy For Boy Scout Sponsors Slows Approval For Certain Groups

[John-in-KC]

I'll just leave this here...

New Policy For Boy Scout Sponsors Slows Approval For Certain Groups

 

A transcript is available at the link.

Edited January 19, 2016 by John-in-KC

[CalicoPenn]

The one thing that really stood out for me is that there is a "special vounteer committee" being formed to review the application for the all-inclusive Troop.

 

Agree or disagree with the policy all you want (and is it possible to discuss this without it devolving into a hate/love the policy discussion?) but how many new unit applications had to be approved by a "special volunteer committee" before being approved in the last few decades?  Is this new "special volunteer committee" going to be consulted if the LDS church applies for a new Troop, or for that matter, if any other long-time relation has a new unit application in the works?

 

This stinks of National and the Council not wanting to take responsibility for either approving or not approving the unit - they want to be able to point to the "special volunteer committee" when whichever "side" gets upset about the decision and lay blame at the volunteers feet.  Any volunteer that agrees to serve on this "special vounteer committee" should have their head examined.

 

A Scout may be Brave, but apparently Professional Scouter's are allowed to be cowards.

[Krampus]

 

A Scout may be Brave, but apparently Professional Scouter's are allowed to be cowards.

 

This cannot surprise you. They've been cowards along this whole discussion. 

 

I am not surprised. Not at all.

[Stosh]

I don't even have a come-back for this sort of thing.  Stosh is speechless.

[skeptic]

If it is obvious to anyone with a brain that a group's real purpose in wanting to begin a unit is for political or other specious reasons, then they should expect to NOT be accepted. I fail to understand the continuing need for a minority of people to push generally unaccepted or controversial ideas by politicizing successful groups, thus undermining the programs. It does little to enhance their standing, but it usually ends up harming the success of the commandeered organization.

 

Perhaps the best answer would be to simply let the group try. Chances are that it will fail once they no longer can use it as a political puppet. It is the very idea that they are making the challenge that is their purpose. Once that David versus Goliath syndrome is not viable, it will likely collapse on its own in most cases.

 

Give them the same general support all units are given and let them succeed or fail on their own.

[qwazse]

The verbiage alone in the preface of the new version has doubled compared to the previous New Unit Application. Not sure any new CO would be in a hurry to sign on.

[MattHiggins]

I honestly do not understand the constant need to force certain organizations to comply to your ideals.

 

It's clear--in my opinion--that the activist Mark Lawrence, in the interview, is only motivated by his agenda and not a desire to serve youth. Instead of suing the BSA, start your own organization. If it's truly what the majority wants, it will flourish. But, it's not about helping kids, it's about the agenda.

[Stosh]

All politics is 99% about the agenda and 1% about the people.  That 1% might be a bit generous.

[Krampus]

I don't even have a come-back for this sort of thing.  Stosh is speechless.

 

Note the date and time.

[cyclops]

Noted..for sure!

 

It could be, though, that this has an upside of setting a precedent for volunteers taking over the decision-making with regard to chartering, membership and a host of other things. Or (dare I say it?) expansion of local control. The logical next step is to start cutting 'professional' positions which are currently involved with these tasks. It could be 'win - win'.