"Two local Boy Scout members called out the Campbell County Commissioners earlier this week for their reported fixation on LGBTQ+ material in the public library and reported attempts to meddle in the established challenge process."

[HelpfulTracks]

1 minute ago, PeterHopkins said:

Don't we still have segregated districts and simply call them Scoutreach now?

No we do not. Having been a Commissioner for such a district I can tell that is not what ScoutReach is at all. 

[PeterHopkins]

3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Religion: I will note that B-P original Scout Oath NEVER included outright references to God and there are writing indicating he was horrified about how scouting in the U.S. was so tied to churches, a result of the intertwining from the start with the LDS and the YMCA movements.

B-P's original Scout Oath was

On my honour I promise that—

1. I will do my duty to God and the King.
2. I will do my best to help others, whatever it costs me.
3. I know the scout law, and will obey it.

[PeterHopkins]

3 hours ago, skeptic said:

But somebody decided, out side the local council and unit, to make a scene and then National put the stupidity in motion.

As I recall, Dale was a very young ASM in his troop. Under, for lack of a better term, the don't ask, don't tell rules of engagement in place at the time, Dale stepped over the line. He brought photos of himself taken at an event that clearly indicated he was gay. One Scout went home and told his parents, who called the council, which, in turn, revoked his registration.

I am aware that there was never a don't ask, don't tell policy, but that was the de facto way in which things worked in many councils.

I believe Dale got help (and publicity) from the ACLU, and that turned it into a national story.

[PeterHopkins]

25 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

No we do not. Having been a Commissioner for such a district I can tell that is not what ScoutReach is at all. 

I agree that is not the intention. I also believe that ScoutReach make makes the program, at least a taste of it, available in places where it may not exist. However, the outcome it produces is segregation.

Yu just said yourself that you were a commissioner for such a district. Why are ScoutReach units grouped together and treated as a district? What would be so terrible about them attending a camporee with traditional units?

In addition to the noble goals of ScoutReach, I think there is a motivation to operate it in a way that maximize membership numbers. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the youth should be getting the full benefit of the program.

The largest city in my council, by far, has a roughly 65% black population. No one would ever guess that, if they looked around the room at one of our OA lodge events.

[skeptic]

3 minutes ago, PeterHopkins said:

As I recall, Dale was a very young ASM in his troop. Under, for lack of a better term, the don't ask, don't tell rules of engagement in place at the time, Dale stepped over the line. He brought photos of himself taken at an event that clearly indicated he was gay. One Scout went home and told his parents, who called the council, which, in turn, revoked his registration.

I am aware that there was never a don't ask, don't tell policy, but that was the de facto way in which things worked in many councils.

I believe Dale got help (and publicity) from the ACLU, and that turned it into a national story.

Actually, he was away at college, and became involved with college activism for Lgbt individuals, being elected to president, I believe of his campus chapter.  It made the papers and then the local news in his town.  Then it went from there when someone decided he should report him.  Meanwhile, the unit was already aware and had not had an issue.  It was outside people nosing into it that brought the trouble, and then National moving outside the CO, who had no issue.  It was the type of case the activists were waiting for, and the drek hit the fan.  But National did not do a good job of fighting it, and it went downhill from there, even though they won the original challenge to decide their own membership.  It was then set up for the political activists to blow it completely out of proportion and use the case for their personal gains without caring about the damage they caused Scouting.  Women had already been allowed to be regular leaders by then following a push in California.  But until that time, few problems had gone public beyond some occasional local situations that were not made a big deal.  The issue of abuse though has little to do with the LGBT proponents.  Most stats indicate abusers are straight and actually known family or friends, and trusted people; thus scout leaders, teachers, coaches and so on.  There will never be a way to completely stop it, but being aware and following the group requirements of no one on one and so on is paramount to mostly stopping it.  

[T2Eagle]

1 hour ago, PeterHopkins said:

I agree that is not the intention. I also believe that ScoutReach make makes the program, at least a taste of it, available in places where it may not exist. However, the outcome it produces is segregation.

Yu just said yourself that you were a commissioner for such a district. Why are ScoutReach units grouped together and treated as a district? What would be so terrible about them attending a camporee with traditional units?

In addition to the noble goals of ScoutReach, I think there is a motivation to operate it in a way that maximize membership numbers. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the youth should be getting the full benefit of the program.

The largest city in my council, by far, has a roughly 65% black population. No one would ever guess that, if they looked around the room at one of our OA lodge events.

Scoutreach units are treated as a district because they operate differently then, and need different services and resources than a traditional units.  They use paid leaders to provide the program, and at least in my council are always a part of council events, and are certainly welcome at other district's events.  

[HelpfulTracks]

4 hours ago, PeterHopkins said:

I agree that is not the intention. I also believe that ScoutReach make makes the program, at least a taste of it, available in places where it may not exist. However, the outcome it produces is segregation.

Yu just said yourself that you were a commissioner for such a district. Why are ScoutReach units grouped together and treated as a district? What would be so terrible about them attending a camporee with traditional units?

In addition to the noble goals of ScoutReach, I think there is a motivation to operate it in a way that maximize membership numbers. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the youth should be getting the full benefit of the program.

The largest city in my council, by far, has a roughly 65% black population. No one would ever guess that, if they looked around the room at one of our OA lodge events.

I'm not sure how you council runs ScoutReach, but we do have traditional units, at Cubs but particularly at Scouts BSA and Venturing level. 

Yes, there are different modes of getting the younger ones into Scouting activities, units that met at non-traditional locations and times from more traditional cub units. But we also had traditional cub units.

However, it was a significant challenge to get adult leaders to start that many traditional units. Sometime we could grow a ScoutReach unit into a traditional unit and sometimes cubs would move to more traditional units once they "got the bug".

Yes, they need some additional services not required by traditional units, and yes some volunteers are paid, but not all. 

All of our older units, Scouts BSA and Venturing, functioned as traditional units. 

We had a commissioner for them because they needed assistance just like every other unit, in some cases more. By the way, that was the most difficult job I have had in scouting, but also the most rewarding. 

That district no longer exist, because we have consolidated and cut in half the number of districts we have. Before we consolidated districts the district units joined a neighboring district for cuborees, cub day camps and camporees (because we did not have the level of volunteers to pull off all of those events). We also held cub events that were just for our district. Members from that district were also represented in council contingents for NSJ, WSJ and high adventure bases. 

Before we consolidated our Lodge Secretary was from that district, and now serves as Lodge VC. 

Even though that district no longer exist, those ScoutReach units do, they are just part of a different district. 

Yes we had units that were made of just minorities, because that was the neighborhood population, but we had as many that were made up of all races. Some of those predominantly white, some predominately minority.  There was and is no segregation. 

[HelpfulTracks]

3 hours ago, yknot said:

I feel like I've entered some kind of alternate reality with some of these comments. Yes, there are examples of places in BSA where it was true to it's own oath and law. 

I think you are seeing push back, at least from me, is because there are some on this site that see BSA as 100% bad 100% of the time. I personally know that not to be the base. Maybe it is just trolling for a personal agenda.

3 hours ago, yknot said:

However, Boy Scouts in general is not regarded by people outside of it as an example of a tolerant or inclusive organization. 

Most people have had a favorable opinion of Boy Scouts through its history. I has certainly decreased in recent years, but a majority of people still do.

13 hours ago, yknot said:

Over the years it has generally excluded or segregated people by race, gender, orientation, and religion. It has a history of being behind the curve on almost every important social issue. It allows this by unit to this day when it comes to religion and orientation.

 

I agree that BSA has lagged on social issues, and I have said so. But, not to the degree that you are making it out. 

BSA has never had a policy of segregation. Did they lead the charge in desegregating units in the South, no, But BSA has never, and likely will never, be an organization that is on the front lines of pushing for social change. 

 

[HelpfulTracks]

13 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Oh, but you know the "wheels were moving in that direction" don't ya know. Sure they were.

• Race: only after the NAACP started filing suit in 1974 to finally get BSA to stop its last segregated units and even COUNCILS (it blows my mind: a segregated COUNCIL)
• Gender: only took until 2019.
• Orientation: Dale anyone? BSA had to be dragged there kicking and screaming.
• Religion: I will note that B-P original Scout Oath NEVER included outright references to God and there are writing indicating he was horrified about how scouting in the U.S. was so tied to churches, a result of the intertwining from the start with the LDS and the YMCA movements.

 

Race: BSA has never had a policy of segregation. There have been black units and desegregated units since the 1910's. Were there segregated units in the South? Yes, and sadly it was the law. Crossing that line would have destroyed Scouting in the South, including the black units that already existed,  and likely gotten a lot of you people hurt or killed. The law suit you site was the NAACP was an attempt to get the LDS church to change its doctrine, it was not because BSA had any policy of segregation. 

Gender: Boy Scout units started just like Scouting the UK, for boys only. It was not long before GSUSA was created and for decades that worked for everyone. But there have been girls in Scouting since since 1971 via Explorers (later Venturing). Ironically, BSA is being sued as a result of allowing girls in Scouts BSA.

Orientation: Once again BSA lagged, but not by much, less than a decade prior to BSA admitting gay SM and youth, the majority of the country was still opposed to gays in general. 

Religion: I'll just use BP's own words here.

"When asked where religion came into Scouting and Guiding, Baden-Powell replied, It does not come in at all.   It is already there.   It is a fundamental factor underlying Scouting and Guiding." (Religion and the Boy Scout and Girl Guides Movement-- an address, 1926).

"In other words, we aim for the practice of Christianity in their everyday life and dealings, and not merely the profession of its theology on Sundays."

 

BSA is not perfect, but there are also not the evil organization you want to make them out to be. Have they failed to live up to their own standards at times, absolutely, as we all have. Have been the leading voice in social change? No, but they do not try to claim they are. 

You hate BSA because of what happened to you, and I don't blame you. But you post misleading, sometimes factually incorrect information to paint everything BSA has done as evil. As long as you do that I will continue to push back.

[HelpfulTracks]

11 hours ago, PeterHopkins said:

B-P's original Scout Oath was

On my honour I promise that—

1. I will do my duty to God and the King.
2. I will do my best to help others, whatever it costs me.
3. I know the scout law, and will obey it.

I'll add some more of BP's own words. 

"When asked where religion came into Scouting and Guiding, Baden-Powell replied, It does not come in at all.   It is already there.   It is a fundamental factor underlying Scouting and Guiding." (Religion and the Boy Scout and Girl Guides Movement-- an address, 1926).

"In other words, we aim for the practice of Christianity in their everyday life and dealings, and not merely the profession of its theology on Sundays."

[MattR]

Let me see:

"scouts celebrate lots of camping" leads to a fight about about over achieving youth, pushy leaders and false idols.

"scouts go to town meeting" leads to a fight over culture war issues.

I went to a memorial service yesterday for a scouter that spent decades volunteering. The service was the most boring service I'd ever seen and all I could think was the minister must have been a friend of the family and that the family was just being courteous. The man that died sure was.

Half the people at the service were scouters. We were polite and afterwards we gathered and started telling stories about the man that recently passed. It was bittersweet.

It's a good thing this story doesn't end up in the paper as I'd hate to see how this forum would turn it into an argument.

Edited October 9, 2021 by MattR
typo

[CynicalScouter]

3 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Yes, and sadly it was the law

There was no law requiring segregated scouting units. BSA simply let that happen.

[HelpfulTracks]

28 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

There was no law requiring segregated scouting units. BSA simply let that happen.

You really do need to read some history. 

But you are correct there was no law that said black and white children cannot be in the same boy scout troop, specifically. 

It was all good as long as they don't drink from the same fountain, eat in the same place, meet in the same place, swim in the same place, pray together. Oh, and you need to be okay with some crazy klan guy attacking you and maybe even trying to kill you.

Beyond that, knock yourself out. 

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by HelpfulTracks

[yknot]

4 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

I think you are seeing push back, at least from me, is because there are some on this site that see BSA as 100% bad 100% of the time. I personally know that not to be the base. Maybe it is just trolling for a personal agenda.

Most people have had a favorable opinion of Boy Scouts through its history. I has certainly decreased in recent years, but a majority of people still do.

I agree that BSA has lagged on social issues, and I have said so. But, not to the degree that you are making it out. 

BSA has never had a policy of segregation. Did they lead the charge in desegregating units in the South, no, But BSA has never, and likely will never, be an organization that is on the front lines of pushing for social change. 

 

I don't think BSA is bad 100% of the time. I've loved parts of the organization. But it's also fair to note that many people who have viewed BSA in a favorable light over the years have also been those who have been interested in perpetuating some of the social issues BSA has had difficulty adapting to. A lot of those people left when gays and girls were welcomed but a lot still remain.  

[CynicalScouter]

1 hour ago, yknot said:

But it's also fair to note that many people who have viewed BSA in a favorable light over the years have also been those who have been interested in perpetuating some of the social issues BSA has had difficulty adapting to.

As I noted: any progress in terms of BSA and issues like this only occurred after a lot of years and a lot of kicking and screaming.

BSA has not exactly been quick to embrace modernity and when it has it has been condemned by scouters as "politically correct".