Major Change in Chartered Organization Relationship

[GrammaScout]

On 3/22/2022 at 11:27 AM, T2Eagle said:

It's not twisting it, it's a question of the order of things.  No unit is required to accept into their unit, or to allow to continue in their unit, any particular scout.  So, if I have a scout that simply will not follow the rules of the troop I can end their membership in the troop, that doesn't mean they aren't scouts, but I don't have allow them in my unit.  Similarly, a unit can require as a precondition of membership, that a scout be a certain faith or member of the CO.  The rule you cite concerns scouts who have been allowed membership in the unit, assuming the unit allows members from outside their CO.  If I let non Catholics in my unit I cannot then require that they participate in Church services, but I can, before allowing them in the unit require that they are enrolled in my parish school.

Whereever have you found an official statement stating that a Church CO CAN require that the Scouts be of the same denomination?     Horrible!    That was done only by the Mormons because THEY made the Scout program part of their youth programs.  If you were a member and the 'bishop' told you you would now be the Instructor for sky-diving, you had to comply or lose your TR etc.     Do you NOT realize that Scouts have their own denominations..??    It would be the end of Scouting if this was done.    It is contrary to ALL the principles in the program since its inception.

 

[skeptic]

5 minutes ago, GrammaScout said:

I understand that Troops are allowed very little in 'selective membership'.   Atheists are not allowed to join of course because the Policy is that the Scout must believe in a power higher than himself.  Although they lie and get in anyway.   Of course, if you are an atheist, you operate on different values anyway.   A Scout with a history of being 'trouble'...is not automatically allowed to join either.   Other than that, any selectivity in membership would be quite contrary to the policies of the Program.

Today especially I believe that not allowing professed atheists to join would be problematic in some cases.  Part of the issue for youth, those that are still in the younger ages especially, really are too young to have established that belief themselves.  Their parent(s) may make that claim, but they really are at best searching agnostics.  I have seen a couple of youth that were struggling with the Spiritual issue due to their maturing and wider exposure to other religious beliefs.  But, as they experienced a deeper immersion with the realities of nature, especially dark skies and infinite stars, they grew in personal Spiritual growth.  That is one of the often positive results of the outdoor program.  

I might add too, that IF part of a religious outreach is to bring in others, not allowing a nonbeliever seems counter productive.

[Eagle94-A1]

24 minutes ago, GrammaScout said:

Are you certain that there ARE 'waves of lawsuits'?....

My understanding is that a bunch are on hold due to the lawsuit, and bunch are waiting on a decision from the bankruptcy before they go after  COs. Which is one reason BSA has been trying to protect COs.

25 minutes ago, GrammaScout said:

And, are not the CO's covered by the umbrella policies of the Council?

Not before 1976 according to legal documents in the lawsuit. AND the BSA's insurance kicks in after the CO's insurance is finished paying out. Hence why many CO's are dropping scouting units altogether, or are taking more control over the Scouting units. To me that explains the situation with your CO. They just found out how much much BSA'S promises are really worth, and they are on the hook if anything happens.

[T2Eagle]

7 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

I'll eat my words. From the "Rules and Regulations, 2020 edition, page 12"l...

Young people of all religious backgrounds are welcome in Scouting, with some participating in units for youths of a particular religion and the greater majority participating in units open to members of various religious backgrounds.

For the record, my unit doesn't do this, and I can't really reconcile a healthy scout troop and such a policy.

[GrammaScout]

4 hours ago, skeptic said:

Today especially I believe that not allowing professed atheists to join would be problematic in some cases.  Part of the issue for youth, those that are still in the younger ages especially, really are too young to have established that belief themselves.  Their parent(s) may make that claim, but they really are at best searching agnostics.  I have seen a couple of youth that were struggling with the Spiritual issue due to their maturing and wider exposure to other religious beliefs.  But, as they experienced a deeper immersion with the realities of nature, especially dark skies and infinite stars, they grew in personal Spiritual growth.  That is one of the often positive results of the outdoor program.  

I might add too, that IF part of a religious outreach is to bring in others, not allowing a nonbeliever seems counter productive.

There are clearly two very different takes on this.   The BSA is considered a Community Youth Program....not a Catholic youth ministry.  It IS a ministry of course...but THE program in NOT a Catholic one or a Lutheran one, it is one that respects and encourages religious beliefs and participation.  I cannot fathom that parents who practice THEIR faith in one denomination are going to accept having their Scout become part of another denomination just so he can be in the Program.   it becomes discriminatory which I thought we were supposed to teaching non-discrimination.  Exposure to different people, cultures, beliefs, etc. is what the program is partly about...yes??  An atheist parent is going to allow his son to discover Christianity using the Boy Scouts???..   Lets look at the Girl Scouts.  Up until 1993, their Oath and Promise,etc. included the words about 'God.  But about that time there was an uprising of all these parents whose girls wanted to join...for the fun activities, be with friends, etc.  They complained about any reference to 'God' and so the GSA dropped the requirement to say anything about 'God'...They can substitute any name they want in its place...Elvis or themselves.    This program succumbed to the pressures of the secular segment.   Some parents removed their girls.   At least by those in Christianity, it was viewed as taking a downward step in ethics....and a far distance from the values of the founders.,

 

[GrammaScout]

4 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

My understanding is that a bunch are on hold due to the lawsuit, and bunch are waiting on a decision from the bankruptcy before they go after  COs. Which is one reason BSA has been trying to protect COs.

Not before 1976 according to legal documents in the lawsuit. AND the BSA's insurance kicks in after the CO's insurance is finished paying out. Hence why many CO's are dropping scouting units altogether, or are taking more control over the Scouting units. To me that explains the situation with your CO. They just found out how much much BSA'S promises are really worth, and they are on the hook if anything happens.

Our Troop of 50 years has had no claims of abuse...and input from all former Scoutmasters and COR's has validated that.  So this fear about not being covered by the insurance of the BSA simply was not a factor inthe decision to 'dump' this Troop of 70.   Your statement that the BSA insurance ONLY clicks in after that of the CO's...is contrary to what we have been told by our Council...Taking more control over the Scout Troops does WHAT exactly?   It has no connection to any 'funny business' or 'damage', etc. that may occur.    

 

[GrammaScout]

5 hours ago, GrammaScout said:

Whereever have you found an official statement stating that a Church CO CAN require that the Scouts be of the same denomination?     Horrible!    That was done only by the Mormons because THEY made the Scout program part of their youth programs.  If you were a member and the 'bishop' told you you would now be the Instructor for sky-diving, you had to comply or lose your TR etc.     Do you NOT realize that Scouts have their own denominations..??    It would be the end of Scouting if this was done.    It is contrary to ALL the principles in the program since its inception.

 

Since when do we 'require' that Scouts must participate in Church activities??.....They have joined the BSA NOT the Church !!!      Chartering means Sponsoring....which obviously now has 17 explainations as to how WE all think that is supposed to work...    Do you really not want YOUR Scouts to be around Protestants?    If so, I think you have a problem.

[GrammaScout]

On 12/4/2020 at 8:56 AM, gpurlee said:

I have confirmed all of this with our denominational leadership. I don't think that the word has gotten down to the council level yet in many instances.  We are clearly heading into a tipping point, probably more rapidly than most of us would have anticipated. This is a route to attempt to deal with the recommendations by conference attorneys that churches distance themselves from Boy Scouting. The irony here is that the program is probably the safest it has been in the past fifty years. And needed more than ever, I believe. I understand the concerns but sense the danger of an over-reaction. The new option would allow our existing units to continue to function even if a chartered partner choose to cease sponsorship. 

The program IS the safest it has ever been.  Our experience was that those 'Attorneys' have NO clue of what is really happening....nor does anyone.  "..distancing from Boy Scouting'..??       no reason..........

[Eagle94-A1]

10 hours ago, GrammaScout said:

 Your statement that the BSA insurance ONLY clicks in after that of the CO's...is contrary to what we have been told by our Council...

Don't I know it. I am a former professional. One of the points I was told to use to try and start new units was that BSA's insurance would cover COs. I only found out that was incorrect when this lawsuit happened. As posted elsewhere, get the promises in writing.

10 hours ago, GrammaScout said:

Taking more control over the Scout Troops does WHAT exactly?   It has no connection to any 'funny business' or 'damage', etc. that may occur.    

Since units are legal extensions of COs, legally COs own them. CO's can add safety measures that their organization or insurance requires. For example, some COs require Scouters to go through their own version of YPT in addition to the BSAs. Some COs have implemented changes to the definition of "youth supervision" to mean direct, line of site (don't get me started on that one). Some COs now require preapproval of activities if conducted outside of the established room. A lot of this is for liability issues.

And, I have seen this first hand too many times, COs can say no more Scouts. My troop growing up was asked to leave when a new CO, who hated Scouts for whatever reason, took over. Another CO, despite telling them they own the unit, have final say in selecting leaders, are protected by BSA's insurance, etc, did away with their pack because of the then upcoming Dale vs. BSA SCOTUS case. A third CO is getting rid of their units, because they see Scouting as a liability since the protections they were promised appear to be limited.

[FormerCubmaster]

17 hours ago, GrammaScout said:

Whereever have you found an official statement stating that a Church CO CAN require that the Scouts be of the same denomination?     Horrible!    That was done only by the Mormons because THEY made the Scout program part of their youth programs.  If you were a member and the 'bishop' told you you would now be the Instructor for sky-diving, you had to comply or lose your TR etc.     Do you NOT realize that Scouts have their own denominations..??    It would be the end of Scouting if this was done.    It is contrary to ALL the principles in the program since its inception.

 

For what it’s worth, when I was a cubmaster in an LDS congregation (and when I previously worked with 11 year olds in a different LDS congregation) (and when I grew up as a scout in yet another LDS congregation), church membership wasn’t a prerequisite for troop or pack membership.  Non-LDS kids generally weren’t interested in our units precisely because of our religious affiliation; but the one or two who *did* show interest and didn’t mind being seen in the company of a bunch of Mormons were welcomed.  We saw it as an outreach/fellowshipping opportunity.  I suppose if a particular non-LDS kid were engaging in particularly disruptive behavior, then at some point we may have had to pull the plug; but I never saw anything like that happen.

So FWIW—even as a Mormon myself, I have no idea why one would want to limit troop membership to adherents to the denomination of the chartering organization.  I’m a bit of a libertarian at heart, so I prefer to see the COs given the option—but I can’t imagine why they’d want to take it.

Edited March 24, 2022 by FormerCubmaster

[mrjohns2]

12 hours ago, GrammaScout said:

Our Troop of 50 years has had no claims of abuse...and input from all former Scoutmasters and COR's has validated that.  So this fear about not being covered by the insurance of the BSA simply was not a factor inthe decision to 'dump' this Troop of 70.   Your statement that the BSA insurance ONLY clicks in after that of the CO's...is contrary to what we have been told by our Council...Taking more control over the Scout Troops does WHAT exactly?   It has no connection to any 'funny business' or 'damage', etc. that may occur.    

 

Well, you’d only have 5 years of liability. Troops of 100 years may have more risk. 

[PACAN]

@FormerCubmaster  What I remember from my dealings with the LDS units was that all boys were LDS HQ paid for all registrations hence the large number of LDS youth in the BSA.   The local Bishop would say that all are registered but not all actually participate.  This was different in that all LDS youth were required to participate in their weekly church night.  These units did not have any non-LDS youth but they were not precluded from joining the BSA program.

[T2Eagle]

1 hour ago, FormerCubmaster said:

For what it’s worth, when I was a cubmaster in an LDS congregation (and when I previously worked with 11 year olds in a different LDS congregation) (and when I grew up as a scout in yet another LDS congregation), church membership wasn’t a prerequisite for troop or pack membership.  Non-LDS kids generally weren’t interested in our units precisely because of our religious affiliation; but the one or two who *did* show interest and didn’t mind being seen in the company of a bunch of Mormons were welcomed.  We saw it as an outreach/fellowshipping opportunity.  I suppose if a particular non-LDS kid were engaging in particularly disruptive behavior, then at some point we may have had to pull the plug; but I never saw anything like that happen.

So FWIW—even as a Mormon myself, I have no idea why one would want to limit troop membership to adherents to the denomination of the chartering organization.  I’m a bit of a libertarian at heart, so I prefer to see the COs given the option—but I can’t imagine why they’d want to take it.

When the LDS pulled out we ended up with a transfer from the local LDS troop.  His best friend/next door neighbor was LDS so he had been with them since Cubs.  They were terrific about his transfer, they had always paid his registration and even paid for his first year with us.

[MattR]

21 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Mostly based on the application.  It requires a unit leader signature.  That is the chance for the unit to indicate whether unit accepts the scout.

I never said no but there was pressure to say no when our troop got too big.

[FormerCubmaster]

2 hours ago, PACAN said:

@FormerCubmaster  What I remember from my dealings with the LDS units was that all boys were LDS HQ paid for all registrations hence the large number of LDS youth in the BSA.   The local Bishop would say that all are registered but not all actually participate.  This was different in that all LDS youth were required to participate in their weekly church night.  These units did not have any non-LDS youth but they were not precluded from joining the BSA program.

Yeah, that sounds accurate; but with the clarification that (at least when I was going through the program as a youth after the age of 12) there was basically no distinction, for practical purposes, between “weekly church night” and “weekly Scout meetings”.  Any suggestion that there was a quid pro quo,  “if you want to come to our Scouts meeting on Tuesday you must also come to our church youth group meeting on Wednesday”, doesn’t really capture the dynamic that was at play—the two were one and the same meeting.

Edited March 24, 2022 by FormerCubmaster