DRAFT: DE&I merit badge requirements

[InquisitiveScouter]

2 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

A Scout can define the answers however they want to.  How is that any different?

I'm not really sure you are being serious.

If so, why bother with the MB?

 

 

[ParkMan]

9 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

And Duty to God is one of the Ideals of Scouting. 

Ideals – The ideals of Scouting are spelled out in the Scout Oath, the Scout Law, the Scout motto, and the Scout slogan. The Scout measures themselves against these ideals and continually tries to improve. The goals are high, and, as they reach for them, they have some control over what and who they become.

BSA has not changed the ideals.  This Merit Badge attempts to.  And, since earning the MB is not required of Scouts anyway, unless they wish to attain Eagle Scout, I'm more interested in the rank requirements they are talking about, which haven't been released yet.

How does this MB change the ideal of Scouting?  The Scout Law includes: Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Cheerful, and Brave.  The Oath contains: "help other people at all times"

These all have some bearing how on we should approach the topic of diversity, equality, and inclusion.  I see nothing in this MB that does anything other than get kids to think about the world they live in with using the framework of the Scout Oath & Law.

[ParkMan]

7 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

I'm not really sure you are being serious.

If so, why bother with the MB?

 

 

I am being serious.  This is the crux of my point.

A lot of people seems worried about political indoctrination here but are missing the clear parallel with the religious aspect of the program.   In both places, the BSA wants to get kids thinking and talking about how they conduct themselves.  In the religious setting, they want kids to think about how the demonstrate their duty to god.  In the area of diversity, equality, and inclusion the BSA wants to get kids thinking about how they conduct themselves and in act in a country where different races, genders, sexual preferences, and gender identities are the norm. 

It's not about pushing an answer - it's about getting the kids to think about these topics.

[CynicalScouter]

29 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

But there is:

• In the Webelos level there is a Duty to God adventure.
• At the Bear level there is a Fellowship and Duty to God adventure
• At the Wolf level there is a Duty to God Footsteps adventure
• At the Tiger level there is Tiger Circles: Duty to Good 
• At the Arrow of Light level there is Arrow of Light Adventure: Duty to God in Action
• It's well known that at Eagle Boards candidates often are asked how they demonstrate their Duty to God.  Further, they are required to submit a letter of recommendation from a faith leader or parent that supports that.

 

Every single one of these are between a) the scout and their parent b) the scout and their religious leader c) both. The checkoff/approval is by the parent or the religious leader (OR for the religious awards, a mentor/instructor approved by that faith/denomination).

This however allows a Lutheran MBC to instruct and sign off on the Catholic scout and his/her's views on inclusive as they relate to gender identity and sexual orientation. And if the Lutheran thinks the Catholic Church's teachings on women priests and and sexual orientation are stupid? No sign off.

Putting aside that these conversations should be happening parent to scout (or parent to religious leader), many religious denominations provide that only those ordained or under the supervision of someone ordained my offer moral instruction.

This is BEYOND driving a wedge between the scout and parent, this is now a wedge between the scout and their religion.

When is enough, enough?

[InquisitiveScouter]

44 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

races, genders, sexual preferences, and gender identities are the norm. 

You forgot ability, ethnicity, faith and financial background.

And that is the crux of my point.

In listing some groups, you are showing bias against others.  Ultimately, the badge is hypocritical.

The "important" (sic) terms of "diversity", "equity", "inclusion", "bigotry" and "intersectionality" are all based on the controversy whirling around a current social agenda.

"There are real problems with this agenda, however. The first is that it’s dangerous, in exactly the manner it is hypothetically designed to fight. The argument made by those who are truly prejudiced has always been that the differences between groups are so large that discrimination, isolation, segregation and even open conflict–including war and genocide–are necessary, for the safety of whatever group they are part of and are hypothetically protecting. Why is it any less risky for the argument to be made in the reverse manner? The claim that group-based differences are so important that they must take substantive priority during hiring and promotion merely risks validating the opposite claim."

https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/blog-posts/lie-of-diversity/ 

This merit badge is a poison that will kill off a portion of what remains of the Boy Scouts of America.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2020 by InquisitiveScouter

[InquisitiveScouter]

And don't forget the left-handed!!

https://dailyillini.com/uncategorized/2020/02/27/left-handed-right-handed-world/

[ParkMan]

40 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Every single one of these are between a) the scout and their parent b) the scout and their religious leader c) both. The checkoff/approval is by the parent or the religious leader (OR for the religious awards, a mentor/instructor approved by that faith/denomination).

This however allows a Lutheran MBC to instruct and sign off on the Catholic scout and his/her's views on inclusive as they relate to gender identity and sexual orientation. And if the Lutheran thinks the Catholic Church's teachings on women priests and and sexual orientation are stupid? No sign off.

Putting aside that these conversations should be happening parent to scout (or parent to religious leader), many religious denominations provide that only those ordained or under the supervision of someone ordained my offer moral instruction.

A Scout has say in who the merit badge counselor is.  It's no different.  They could work with their parents to choose a MBC that they want.  There's no difference here at all.  Pick a MBC that is of a like pursuasion.

 

44 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

This is BEYOND driving a wedge between the scout and parent, this is now a wedge between the scout and their religion.

When is enough, enough?

It's not tough.  No one is telling the Scout what they have to believe - just that they need to think trough how they relate to someone.  In fact it's a very good skill for someone to have to learn how to relate to someone that has a lifestyle the disagree with religiously.

There's no wedge here at all.

[ParkMan]

21 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

You forgot ability, ethnicity, faith and financial background.

And that is the crux of my point.

In listing some groups, you are showing bias against others.  Ultimately, the badge is hypocritical.

The "important" (sic) terms of "diversity", "equity", "inclusion", "bigotry" and "intersectionality" are all based on the controversy whirling around a current social agenda.

"There are real problems with this agenda, however. The first is that it’s dangerous, in exactly the manner it is hypothetically designed to fight. The argument made by those who are truly prejudiced has always been that the differences between groups are so large that discrimination, isolation, segregation and even open conflict–including war and genocide–are necessary, for the safety of whatever group they are part of and are hypothetically protecting. Why is it any less risky for the argument to be made in the reverse manner? The claim that group-based differences are so important that they must take substantive priority during hiring and promotion merely risks validating the opposite claim."

https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/blog-posts/lie-of-diversity/ 

This merit badge is a poison that will kill off a large portion of what remains of the Boy Scouts of America.

Sure - make the list: ethnicity, faith, financial background, races, genders, sexual preferences, and gender identities.

Doesn't really change anything though.  This MB is about getting kids to think about how they relate to others that are different from them. 

What is the harm in getting kids to want to think about how they relate to those who are different from them?  That is where the instructor needs to be focusing their skills and abilities.  How to conduct a conversation that gets kids thinking about how they relate to others in the world around them.

Edited December 22, 2020 by ParkMan
expanded the thought

[InquisitiveScouter]

Just now, ParkMan said:

What is the harm in getting kids to want to think about how they relate to those who are different from them?

Everyone is different from them.

[ParkMan]

1 minute ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Everyone is different from them.

Which is probably an important evolutionary point for a kid to recognize.  So, as they are conducting themselves in their lives they cannot presume that everyone acts or thinks like they do. 

If you look at so much of what is discussed nationally, it is really about people saying that they do not feel that people recognize the challenges in their lives or that they get treated differently because of some group that they are a member of.  It's a good skill for all of us to be self-aware enough to recognize how what we say and do impacts others.  This seems to be one of the main learning points in this MB.  I would think this is where the instructor focuses - not that you have to have any particular belief set, but that you have to be intentionally aware of how others perceive your actions and the world around them.

 

[Navybone]

3 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

"There are real problems with this agenda, however. The first is that it’s dangerous, in exactly the manner it is hypothetically designed to fight. The argument made by those who are truly prejudiced has always been that the differences between groups are so large that discrimination, isolation, segregation and even open conflict–including war and genocide–are necessary, for the safety of whatever group they are part of and are hypothetically protecting. Why is it any less risky for the argument to be made in the reverse manner? The claim that group-based differences are so important that they must take substantive priority during hiring and promotion merely risks validating the opposite claim."

https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/blog-posts/lie-of-diversity/ 

This merit badge is a poison that will kill off a portion of what remains of the Boy Scouts of America.

To state that this merit badge will kill of scouts is quite dramatic.  If scouts survives the child abuse, admitting homosexuals, and girls, this should not be the last chapter.

However, Jordan Peterson is only one voice in this discussion, and one with a very limited and pointed perspective.  He is the darling of of the conservatives in the media when discussing diversity.  And if we welcome his point of view, should we also then not include the opposite side of the conversation?  

[TAHAWK]

We should welcome the expression of all points-of-view., whether we agree with them or emphatically do not.  

[InquisitiveScouter]

47 minutes ago, Navybone said:

To state that this merit badge will kill of scouts is quite dramatic.  If scouts survives the child abuse, admitting homosexuals, and girls, this should not be the last chapter.

However, Jordan Peterson is only one voice in this discussion, and one with a very limited and pointed perspective.  He is the darling of of the conservatives in the media when discussing diversity.  And if we welcome his point of view, should we also then not include the opposite side of the conversation?  

It's a metaphor.

And "...a portion of what remains..." does not mean the entire organization.

Please read for comprehension.  It is vitally important in order to relate to others.

Any arguments are welcome, as long they can back up positions with facts and logic.  Otherwise they are just opinions.  And opinions are like a certain part of the anatomy...everyone has one, and they all stink.

And Dr. Jordan Peterson is a "darling" because he uses research, facts, and clinical experience to back up his arguments.  In other words, he follows the science, instead of using feelings and perceptions as valid evidence.

 

Edited December 22, 2020 by InquisitiveScouter

[Navybone]

5 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Please read for comprehension.  It is vitally important in order to relate to others.

Wow. I guess civil discourse has truest gone the way of the dodo.  Please let me know what your preferred agreements are in favor of your position so I can just feed them to you.   

[InquisitiveScouter]

19 minutes ago, Navybone said:

Wow. I guess civil discourse has truest gone the way of the dodo.  Please let me know what your preferred agreements are in favor of your position so I can just feed them to you.   

You also show that you do not know what "civil discourse" means.  I am trying to enhance my understanding of the requirements for this Merit Badge, the motives behind it, and it's intended purpose.

Reading for comprehension is essential to enhancing your understanding of someone's point of view.

How about another point of view?  Would you listen to Dr. Thomas Sowell?

 

Edited December 22, 2020 by InquisitiveScouter