RichardB Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Being that I'm extremely active in scouting and also active at the district level, I'd rather not give an exact location or district. I'll leave it at Midwest so I don't suffer repercussions... For those that don't want to believe what I shared to the forum, that's YOUR Choice. Just remember what I wrote when it starts happening in YOUR Area. A Scout is Trustworthy... So, just so you know, there is no pilot for this It's something someone made up and called scouting. Trustworthy, not so much. Putting yourself, your district, your CO at risk. That's the reprocussions. Calling something scouting that isn't does a disservice to those running the program. Good luck with whatever that is being "run". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred johnson Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 And since LFL allows atheists, either atheist boys can join via LFL, or it's lawsuit time again. I'd feel sorry for that scout and his family as their lawsuit wouldn't have a prayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 I'd feel sorry for that scout and his family as their lawsuit wouldn't have a prayer. Prayer, I get it. But seriously, I think it would depend on what the CO is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred johnson Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Prayer, I get it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'll be back again later this afternoon to do my next set. Until then, thank you and remember to pay your waitress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmberMike Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 What people don't realize that if girls change, then everything the Boy Scouts ever stood for is gone and the new organization will be different. It may be the same name, same awards, but the program will never be the same again. The first time a girl "get's her Eagle", she won't be getting the Boy Scout Eagle, she'll be getting the Boy-Girl Scout Eagle. Not the same thing. Why wouldn't it be the same if the requirements are the same? The name doesn't have to change, either. It's still "Eagle Scout". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmberMike Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Hate. It's simple. They want to tear down those establishments they see as entitled. They want to tear down something that they want to join? I don't think that's their motivation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fehler Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 One waterfountain works just as well as the other one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagledad Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 One waterfountain works just as well as the other one. Is that a racist comment? Barry 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Back Pack Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 They want to tear down something that they want to join? I don't think that's their motivation. That's the point. They CAN'T join it because it's not for them. They don't want to join the group that IS for them, so they want to force open a place they're not wanted to make a point. If simply attaining the highest rank in their gender's scouting movement was their motivation, they would go for it. But that's not their motivation. It's to tear down what they can't have. Make no mistake, forcing open an all boy organization -- when there's a perfectly goo all girl option AND perfectly goo coed option -- is tearing down Boy Scouts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Why wouldn't it be the same if the requirements are the same? The name doesn't have to change, either. It's still "Eagle Scout". One can put an exact reproduction of Abraham Lincoln in the wax museum, looks like Lincoln, push the button, talks and says the same thing Lincoln says, but it ain't Lincoln. Sorry, Co-Ed Boy Scouting is not Boy Scouting no matter how many comparisons one wishes to point out. I find it strange that pure gasoline is sold at the same pump as high octane gasoline and ethanol next to that. They are all the same, right? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 So, just so you know, there is no pilot for this It's something someone made up and called scouting. Trustworthy, not so much. Putting yourself, your district, your CO at risk. That's the reprocussions. Calling something scouting that isn't does a disservice to those running the program. Good luck with whatever that is being "run". @@RichardB, thanks for the clarification. This sounds like a bottom-up movement (home-grown pilot?) not unlike many we've seen, and we can look forward to seeing in the future. They seem somewhat careless about risk. Or maybe they've mitigated risk some other way (e.g., the CO purchasing increased liability coverage)? Or maybe they find the risk of not innovating overwhelming the stated risks of going "off the reservation?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmberMike Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 ...so they want to force open a place they're not wanted to make a point. What's your evidence that the majority of BSA members are opposed to girl members? Or is it just your opinion, and so you assume that's a universally accepted point of view... ...Make no mistake, forcing open an all boy organization -- when there's a perfectly goo all girl option AND perfectly goo coed option -- is tearing down Boy Scouts. So because other options exist, BSA going co-ed leads to the demise of BSA? I don't follow your logic. Why do the other groups even matter if it's your view that allowing girls in at all is so detrimental to the program? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmberMike Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 One can put an exact reproduction of Abraham Lincoln in the wax museum, looks like Lincoln, push the button, talks and says the same thing Lincoln says, but it ain't Lincoln. Sorry, Co-Ed Boy Scouting is not Boy Scouting no matter how many comparisons one wishes to point out. I find it strange that pure gasoline is sold at the same pump as high octane gasoline and ethanol next to that. They are all the same, right? It's still the same. Unless you're re-writig the handbooks and requirements, it's the same steps to get to the next rank, same requirements to earn Eagle. Your analogies make no sense. You're comparing things that were fundamentally different to begin with. No matter how many nonsensical comparisons you make, the BSA program as it's written today is the same program tomorrow even if girls are allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 FWIW, yesterday I talked to a boy who crossed over to a troop on the opposite side of town from me. It was an odd conversation for him because he wasn't used to adults who knew much about scouting. (Background: the boy has 4 brothers -- two already boy scouts, and parents aren't campers.) Or, maybe he wasn't used to scouters who posed as Sunday School teachers! He didn't see the sense of camping with girls. Basically, girls aren't interested in camping, as far as he can tell. I told him about my venturer who proudly wears her "Boy Scouts Italy" uniform and has been camping with her mates since cubs. He replied. "That's them. We're us." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred johnson Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 (edited) I'm okay with co-ed scouting. It's fine with me as long as we don't lower standards or change the program, which I don't think we would need to do. But on the flip side, I get frustrated with the inconsistent arguments. For example, why celebrate WNBA or LPGA competition? WNBA and LPGA competition levels are much lower than their rivals. Seems like they should be farm leagues for the big shows and promote increasing skills and ability to get into the big shows. Further, men should be able to compete in those leagues at the same wage levels as the women. It seems unfair to promote a lower competition level at a higher wage for only that gender. Women should have the opportunity to compete against men and men against women. Same for military. Why female only boot camps? It should be full integrated jobs, housing, standards. If men have to do 8 to 20 pull ups, so should women. Same standard. Anyway, I am for co-ed scouting, but I do get tired of the inconsistent arguments. Edited February 27, 2017 by fred johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now