LDS Dropping Senior Youth Scouting

[Ankylus]

Ok Ankylus, you have made several statements now about the "left", "leftists" etc. Please explain how you think the program has been affected by "pressure from the political left."

 

And also please provide a source for the idea that the Baptists have "left" Scouting. I am sure some did leave, but I am not aware that they have "left" as an official policy.

 

Here are three ways: the acceptance of openly gay leaders, the admission of openly gay boys, and the admission of "trans boys".

 

My source is my personal observation. Every Baptist church within 20 miles of where I sit did not recharter within 2 years of the acceptance of gay leaders.

 

Also, although not as strong as my statement:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/us/boy-scouts-transgender-policy.html

 

https://www.dallasnews.com/life/faith/2013/06/05/some-churches-severing-ties-to-boy-scouts-over-allowing-gay-youths

 

https://baptistnews.com/article/churches-drop-boy-scout-ties/

 

And I didn't say it was an official policy. The  Baptists do not have a national "policy setting" group like LDS or the Roman Catholic church.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Ankylus

[Ankylus]

You're perhaps forgetting that girls are appealing to boys ;-)  And that the model has worked in pretty much every other country with a Scouting organization.

 

 

 

Well, sounds like your mind is already made up.

 

It's so easy to blame abstract (and usually fictional) ideology when the truth is rather hard to digest.  Youth who are active in Scouting of their own free will are in Scouting because the like the program, they like participating in the program with their friends, they like the challenge and opportunity the program offers.  And, most importantly, they have units in their area which deliver this high quality program. Youth who take a pass on scouting do so because either they aren't interested in the program, or they don't have local access to a unit that delivers the kind of program they are interested in.  The "3Gs" really don't come up when you ask the youth what about Scouting they do or do not like.  It's all about program.

 

Tip O'Neill is credited with saying, "all politics is local" - and I think that's a good metaphor for what we're seeing in Scouting.  Its easy for us, as adults, to blame (or credit, depending on your position) big-picture ideology for Scoutings' success or failures.  But, in reality, when it comes to actually serving youth, the biggest impact is you as a unit-level leader, what you bring to the table, and what program you deliver.

 

No, I am not forgetting that girls are appealing to boys. And we all know that boys have no other place they can meet girls. Not in school, not in church, not at the ballpark, nope...no place at all to meet girls in this culture.

 

The old, "well, everyone else is doing it", excuse. No dispute that every other scouting program is doing it in the world. (Not precisely accurate, but close enough.) (1) we shouldn't be interested in being like everyone else, (2) we shouldn't care what everyone else is doing--we should care what works for our children, (3) it may work, but would it work better otherwise?

 

What do you think my mind is made up about?

 

There is nothing abstract or fictional about the political left. Or did you think Hillary Clinton ran as a Republican? I agree with the rest of that paragraph.

 

"All politics is local." First, that cuts directly against your point that "the model has worked in pretty much every other country with a Scouting organization.". Please be consistent.  But I don't blame any particular ideology for Scouting's success or failure. I "blame" BSA's response to that ideology's attacks on the program BSA provides. The rest of that I mostly agree with, except to the extent that what program I deliver is controlled and determined by BSA, unless I choose to deliver only a BSA-based program. So the "local" sentiment is nice and all, but misplaced.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Ankylus

[NJCubScouter]

Here are three ways: the acceptance of openly gay leaders, the admission of openly gay boys, and the admission of "trans boys".

 

None of that is "program".

[Col. Flagg]

OK. All I know is that every Baptist church within perhaps 20 miles of where I am sitting did not recharter their troops. Maybe its different where you are. But they certainly pulled out here.

 

Texas? If so, they pulled out near me too. One of the largest Baptist churches in my area (think live Nativity scene every Xmas) kicked out it's Cubs and Boy Scouts. Church of Christ did the same thing.

[Col. Flagg]

None of that is "program".

 

We as Scouters don't see it as "program". 

 

The average parent is not going to distinguish it as we do. They see the whole thing (program, membership, policy, etc.) as "program".

[Ankylus]

None of that is "program".

 

OK. As a term of art, you are correct. I was using it in the vernacular sense. I concede that  point. What about the rest of the points I raise?

[Ankylus]

Texas? If so, they pulled out near me too. One of the largest Baptist churches in my area (think live Nativity scene every Xmas) kicked out it's Cubs and Boy Scouts. Church of Christ did the same thing.

 

Yes. Houston. There are a LOT of Baptist churches within 20 miles of me. Church of Christ....no doubt...as well as the other Pentecostal denominations. But in general, Pentecostal denominations aren't even as strong as supporters as the Baptists were.

[Col. Flagg]

Yes. Houston. There are a LOT of Baptist churches within 20 miles of me. 

 

Several units I know down there said the same thing. Got kicked out and could not find a CO. Many went to other troops but a large number of Scouts just dropped. Very sad.

[DuctTape]

I find it interesting that many are suggesting that BSA should be careful to not piss off religious COs, yet that is exactly what happened a few decades ago when the religious COs pushed the BSA to back policies which drove away other non-religious COs like PTAs, and public schools. Of course the majority of present COs are religious orgs at present, they couldn't fathom that other COs didn't follow the same religious code, and forced the BSA to kick out scouts of other non-religious COs. Yeah, we harken to the good ole days, back when gays and atheists were in scouts and no one made a big deal about it. We harken to the days before the zealots told our COs that we weren't allowed to have certain scouts and scouters in our troops. Now the pendulum is swinging back, the religious COs can still prohibit whomever they want, but at least they can't tell my CO who to bar from membership. /rant

Edited May 12, 2017 by RememberSchiff
typos

[ghjim]

 We harken to the days before the zealots told our COs that we weren't allowed to have certain scouts and scouters in our troops. Now the pendulum is swinging back, the religious COs can still prohibit whomever they want, but at least they can't tell my CO who to bar from membership. /rant

 

As far as I can see nobody on the left telling the religious COs they have to leave the BSA or that they even have to include anyone they don't want.  The Mormons are making their own decisions which seem to me to be based on losing this authority over everyone else.

Opening the BSA to the irreligious and girls will be the best thing that can happen.  

[Col. Flagg]

I find it interesting that many arecsuggesting that BSA should be careful to not piss off religious COs, yet that is exactly what happened a few decades ago when the religious COs pushed the BSA to back policies which drove away other non-religious COs like PTAs, and public schools. 

 

Well, if non-religious COs were the majority back then, it would have been stupid to reject them. I suspect this was when numbers continued to fall. See what THAT did. Are we expecting this current rejection/pendulum swing to do any different? 

 

Opening the BSA to the irreligious and girls will be the best thing that can happen.  

 

Define "best thing that can happen"? Increased membership losses? Reduced revenue? Revised program (because if girls come in that's what comes next)?

[jwest09]

No, I am not forgetting that girls are appealing to boys. And we all know that boys have no other place they can meet girls. Not in school, not in church, not at the ballpark, nope...no place at all to meet girls in this culture.

 

The old, "well, everyone else is doing it", excuse. No dispute that every other scouting program is doing it in the world. (Not precisely accurate, but close enough.) (1) we shouldn't be interested in being like everyone else, (2) we shouldn't care what everyone else is doing--we should care what works for our children, (3) it may work, but would it work better otherwise?

 

What do you think my mind is made up about?

 

There is nothing abstract or fictional about the political left. Or did you think Hillary Clinton ran as a Republican? I agree with the rest of that paragraph.

 

"All politics is local." First, that cuts directly against your point that "the model has worked in pretty much every other country with a Scouting organization.". Please be consistent.  But I don't blame any particular ideology for Scouting's success or failure. I "blame" BSA's response to that ideology's attacks on the program BSA provides. The rest of that I mostly agree with, except to the extent that what program I deliver is controlled and determined by BSA, unless I choose to deliver only a BSA-based program. So the "local" sentiment is nice and all, but misplaced.

 

Wow, quite a bit going on here...

 

Your argument is that, a hypothetical co-ed program will be less appealing to boys, and thus cause a further decline in membership. I'm suggesting that that isn't inherently true.  Other countries have had great success with co-ed scouting programs.  Its entirely possible to run a co-ed program that is appealing to boys, and maybe even moreso as they can include more of their friends and peers in the program.  Your sarcastic remarks about "no place at all to meet girls in this culture." are neither relevant nor appreciated.

 

"The old, "well, everyone else is doing it", excuse."  Wrong again, sir.  My reference to other successful programs was in no way suggested as any kind of "excuse."  Rather, it is simply a demonstration of successful Scouting programs which are different from the BSA.  You may find some of the differences to be unacceptable, and I expect that you do.  But you cannot deny that there are examples of co-ed programs which are succesful.

 

"There is nothing abstract or fictional about the political left. Or did you think Hillary Clinton ran as a Republican?"  I'm suggesting that the impact of the political left on the BSA membership is largely fictional - not that the political left does not exist.

 

"First, that cuts directly against your point that "the model has worked in pretty much every other country with a Scouting organization.". Please be consistent"  Sigh.  No, it does not.  Those organizations all have their own local politics.  They just seem better, overall, at prioritizing the creation and delivery of unit-level programs unburdened by divisive political issues.

[MrBob]

 (because if girls come in that's what comes next)?

 

Cooking will be dropped as an Eagle requirement, because it'd be sexist to force a female to cook for her male patrol members.

[Col. Flagg]

Cooking will be dropped as an Eagle requirement, because it'd be sexist to force a female to cook for her male patrol members.

 

I guess guys couldn't teach girls how to set up tents because that would be sexist too.

 

I'm just waiting for the first SJW to attend an OA call out or ordeal and scream "Cultural Misappropriation!!!"

Edited May 12, 2017 by Col. Flagg

[Peregrinator]

TL-USA was founded in 2013 and started operations in 2014.  They have 26,000 members and only increased approximately 6,000 members from 2014 to now.  The BSA has 2.35 Million.

 

30% growth over 3 years (an average of over 9% per year) is "limping along"? I have my own criticisms of Trail Life but as far as I can tell they're not "limping along." 9% is good, sustainable growth.