EmberMike Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 20 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said: But you are wrong in that the "Family Scouting" program is capped. Even now the idea of coed patrols is being discussed by national... How does co-ed = "Family Scouting"? The two aren't mutually inclusive. Girls in a troop does not necessitate the whole family being involved. 23 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said: Just look at how many things BSA has caved in on in the last five years. Single-sex troops will be the targets of all those groups looking to take down the last bastion of this formerly boy-only program. And yes, I think they will use all the tools at their disposal to further water down the program to make it what THEY want. I love when people remind me that issues I fought for, issues I believed in and petitioned the BSA to address, along with thousands of other Scouters, that the result of all of that was really just that the BSA "caved in" to my agenda. This nefarious "THEY" is right here. People wearing the same uniform that you do. I'm not some outsider working to poison this program. We're all here because we love this thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkMan Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 4 minutes ago, EmberMike said: How does co-ed = "Family Scouting"? The two aren't mutually inclusive. Girls in a troop does not necessitate the whole family being involved. My point exactly. These are completely different things. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col. Flagg Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 10 minutes ago, EmberMike said: How does co-ed = "Family Scouting"? The two aren't mutually inclusive. Girls in a troop does not necessitate the whole family being involved. They are not mutually exclusive either. This is already happening. Families have been trying to water down Scouting for years. This is just another avenue for them to use. And when you look at how BSA has been marketing family this and family that, can "compelling" troops and crews to be more "family-friendly" really be un-thinkable? I can tell you from personal experience it is already happening. 10 minutes ago, EmberMike said: I love when people remind me that issues I fought for, issues I believed in and petitioned the BSA to address, along with thousands of other Scouters, that the result of all of that was really just that the BSA "caved in" to my agenda. This nefarious "THEY" is right here. People wearing the same uniform that you do. I'm not some outsider working to poison this program. We're all here because we love this thing. And the majority of people in Scouting who didn't want the change are right here too. What makes your position any more correct than ours? We were working to keep BSA the way it was but you imply with your response that you hold the moral high ground. Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 I think BSA is simply using the term Family Scouting in place of coed as they are attempting to keep some single gender aspects of the program intact. For example, in my.scouting.org if you go to Organization Manager and are the CC for a Pack, you can click on setting you will see a new section called “Family Scouting”. That appears to be able to be set to is or is not available. I believe they use this term instead of coed. Again, as they want to say the family (both boy and girls) are invited to join. I don’t see this as a strategic change to also include mom and dad earning ranks or going on all activities. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmberMike Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said: They are not mutually exclusive either. This is already happening. Families have been trying to water down Scouting for years. This is just another avenue for them to use. And when you look at how BSA has been marketing family this and family that, can "compelling" troops and crews to be more "family-friendly" really be un-thinkable? I can tell you from personal experience it is already happening. So you're arguing against a current policy change using an old issue that already existed to further your point. Understood. 14 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said: And the majority of people in Scouting who didn't want the change are right here too. What makes your position any more correct than ours? We were working to keep BSA the way it was but you imply with your response that you hold the moral high ground. Really? I have yet to see the data saying that the majority of people scouting wanted one thing or another in any of these issues. You know as well as I do that those surveys are very questionable when it comes to being impartial and accurate. I'm not claiming any moral high ground, I said in the post you quoted that we're all in this because we love it. The difference between you and me is that I'll debate these issues with you and treat you as an equal while doing so. Meanwhile you treat anyone who disagrees with you as that nefarious "they", the agenda-weilding nusiance bent on destrying the BSA. Edited January 24, 2018 by EmberMike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RememberSchiff Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Ok then... has this topic run its useful course? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle94-A1 Posted January 24, 2018 Author Share Posted January 24, 2018 Regarding the surveys and policy changes, I think it is safe to say national doesn't care what we in the field think. The homosexual membership policies had slim majorities against the change, and they did it anyway. And let's not forget the Instapalm survey in 2015. 94% agreed or strongly agreed with keeping the 3 months tenure for palms, and national created instapalms anyway. And if the surveys, which were IMHO deliberately limited to avoid a good sample AND had such biased questions that it was ridiculous, truly reflected the majority of members, Scouters, and family members supports girls joining the program, then why don't they publish the results? Again the decision was made by national, and it was made prior to July 2017 as the newest membership applications remove the words boys when describing Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col. Flagg Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Mike, you seem to be arguing that your position is the right one and how dare anyone denigrate what you've worked for. All I a saying is that many here see what you supported as denigrating our work to keep things the way they were. So you can't call out someone for opposing what you worked for when you oppose what they were working for. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RememberSchiff Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 (edited) Ok then, @Col. Flagg and @EmberMike have agreed to disagree. Let's move on. Thanks. @Sentinel947 @NJCubScouter @LeCastor Edited January 24, 2018 by RememberSchiff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmberMike Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 8 hours ago, Col. Flagg said: Mike, you seem to be arguing that your position is the right one and how dare anyone denigrate what you've worked for. All I a saying is that many here see what you supported as denigrating our work to keep things the way they were. So you can't call out someone for opposing what you worked for when you oppose what they were working for. I'm not saying that at all. Not even sure what I've said that could be interpreted that way. Nevertheless, let's move on. 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