On my Honor - Documentary on BSA Sex Abuse Scandal

[yknot]

2 hours ago, DuctTape said:

I agree that one does not prop up their organization by showing how much worse another one was/is. That said I do believe there is a significant difference between the Catholic Church and the BSA in regards to their responses to CSA.

No doubt the BSA failed to address CSA adequately, failed to notify authorities and their attempts to mitigate by having internal documents (IVF)  barring volunteers was not effective. 

This is in stark contrast to the Catholic Church who did not even attempt to bar known abusers but instead just moved them to a different parish.

Neither did well.

Exactly right. Which goes back to the original post by @qwazse this was responding to and why the issue with the Catholic church came up. Children are not somehow 10X safer in BSA -- or perhaps even more so in the Catholic church, if you are following his logic and basing that assessment on similar criteria. There is not a "moral" imperative for children to be in scouting, or any organization with a similar track record like the Catholic church, because they are somehow bastions of safety from CSA compared to society. That is an Alice in Wonderland claim. 

 

[Owls_are_cool]

38 minutes ago, yknot said:

Children are not somehow 10X safer in BSA

I do know that in my unit and district, youth protection is taken seriously. Compared to sport teams that myself and/or my son is associated with, the scouts are safer today. In the end, it comes down to vetting adult volunteers, which will never be a perfect process. When I coach basketball, I do have players go places in pairs and I avoid being alone with a player as much as possible. It is a good habit I picked up from scouting. 

Knowing that the vetting process is never perfect, it is important that those directly responsible for sexual abuse are sent to prison for a long time.

[clbkbx]

6 hours ago, Eagledad said:

And there are others who are obviously anti BSA. Which just makes no sense to me.

Not sure if I understand correctly but this reads as you saying there’s no scenario one can be anti-BSA that you would understand. I mean this specific portion of the forum is about kids that were sexually abused within the structure set up by BSA. I can think of several other reasons someone could be anti-BSA that I might not agree with but at least makes sense. 

[Eagledad]

26 minutes ago, clbkbx said:

Not sure if I understand correctly but this reads as you saying there’s no scenario one can be anti-BSA that you would understand. I mean this specific portion of the forum is about kids that were sexually abused within the structure set up by BSA. I can think of several other reasons someone could be anti-BSA that I might not agree with but at least makes sense. 

Correct. The program does so much good for youth and community, being anti BSA doesn't make sense. Of course we all have aspects of the program we don't like, but to come to all discussions as anti BSA doesn't make sense to me. 

Barry

[johnsch322]

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Correct. The program does so much good for youth and community, being anti BSA doesn't make sense. Of course we all have aspects of the program we don't like, but to come to all discussions as anti BSA doesn't make sense to me. 

Barry

From someone who is on the fence as to pro/anti BSA it also would make sense if you said the opposite. The BSA has ruined so many lives how could any one be in support of it? 

[clbkbx]

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

to come to all discussions as anti BSA doesn't make sense to me.

Here’s an extremely over the top hypothetical question: how can anyone be against the Weinstein Organization? They enabled great art to be made and donated a lot of their profits to so many worthy causes! There are always powerful men in society that rape women… it’s just a statistic. One-in-a-million, what’re you going to do?

Here’s another: who can be anti-the Cosby Show? They made us laugh, focused on family structures and the lead actor donated a lot of money to charity. About that lead actor, probably the same as it always was in Hollywood… we just know about it because of the media. Guess there are two million people that work in the entertainment industry because we know about the two rapists.

Of course many people are anti those things now, which seems reasonable to me, even as they were lauded at the time for their good works and contributions to society. You can’t buy your way to heaven. But that’s not my point, even as it is fun to ridicule deserving entities. 

The women that were raped were shunned, silenced, not given opportunities in the entertainment industry, hurt, not believed, etc. My point is that it is 100% reasonable for those women to be anti the structure that enabled them being raped and then punished them for it. A little empathy goes a long way. 

I would also note that criticism and dissent are positive. Maybe you’ll read my post and poke some holes in the logic… but either way I hope it opens you up to why there are people that are anti-BSA. 

[skeptic]

2 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

From someone who is on the fence as to pro/anti BSA it also would make sense if you said the opposite. The BSA has ruined so many lives how could any one be in support of it? 

You see the error in your statement.  Lives were ruined by the perpetrator.  Others that chose to cover up, or keep private, or simply ignore for whatever reasons are not the ones that did the damage, they are secondary.  The focus should not be first on BSA, or local authorities that chose to say they had no proof, or not enough, or on famillies that felt the need to keep it quiet for some reason.  IF the actual abuser had not done it, the others would not even be in the picture.

 

[MYCVAStory]

2 minutes ago, skeptic said:

IF the actual abuser had not done it, the others would not even be in the picture.

So just so I understand your view, the BSA HAD decades of knowledge that abuse WAS occuring, but because they didn't know Abuser X was going to cause abuse then the BSA has no fault in all of this?  So much for logic.

[johnsch322]

44 minutes ago, skeptic said:

You see the error in your statement.  Lives were ruined by the perpetrator.  Others that chose to cover up, or keep private, or simply ignore for whatever reasons are not the ones that did the damage, they are secondary.  The focus should not be first on BSA, or local authorities that chose to say they had no proof, or not enough, or on famillies that felt the need to keep it quiet for some reason.  IF the actual abuser had not done it, the others would not even be in the picture.

You see it is statements such as the above where I have my doubt if BSA should continue on.  Leaders such as @skepticwho want to deflect responsibility away from BSA makes the BSA a dangerous place for youth. I was in the care of the BSA at the time of the assault upon my body, the perpetrators were active adult leaders of the BSA end of story. What transpired afterwards only added to the damage. 

It is and was the BSA's responsibility to keep perpetrators out of the BSA.  After they were caught (if they were caught and most were not) it was the BSA's responsibility to keep them out of any youth's lives whether it was in a BSA environment or any other environment. It was also BSA's moral duty to inform parents and teach children of the dangers. The BSA only did the latter after decades of abuse had occurred.

If the BSA did not provide the environment, lack of vigilance and the opportunity far less CSA would have occurred.

 

Edited May 6, 2022 by johnsch322

[johnsch322]

Reactions to a post says a lot about people. I do not understand the sad face. Is it because it is a sad situation or is it because I am looked at upon as a sad person? 

[PaleRider]

10 hours ago, skeptic said:

You see the error in your statement.  Lives were ruined by the perpetrator.  Others that chose to cover up, or keep private, or simply ignore for whatever reasons are not the ones that did the damage, they are secondary.  The focus should not be first on BSA, or local authorities that chose to say they had no proof, or not enough, or on famillies that felt the need to keep it quiet for some reason.  IF the actual abuser had not done it, the others would not even be in the picture.

 

Don't you dare try to tell us who's to blame.

We know better than anybody where the blame lies. BSA failed us. They didn't do anything to protect us while knowing that this abuse was happening.

You can take up for them all you want but it's a lot of us that don't see it your way. Until you have lived 40 years of pure hell and everything that comes with being abused your opinion means nothing to me. The bottom line is for over 100 years BSA covered this up so the BSA name wouldn't be tainted. That in it's self proves that they could care less about us victims and only care about money. Don't think you can push us in a corner because of the way we feel about this organization.

You must be kin to Joe Biden because he has a hard time owning the mess he created like

You have a hard time accepting that THE BSA FAILED AND FAILED BAD. TRUTH HURTS.AND TRUTH IS THEY FAILED US 

Edited May 6, 2022 by RememberSchiff
Paragraphs for readability. Struck ad hominem attack, guilt by association

[RememberSchiff]

There are good arguments being made here, lets refrain from personal attacks.

Thanks,

RS

[Eagledad]

13 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

From someone who is on the fence as to pro/anti BSA it also would make sense if you said the opposite. The BSA has ruined so many lives how could any one be in support of it? 

There are two sides of the fence?

I have seen so many lives changed, or even saved by scouting. There is the scout who used the skills learned from the program to save a victim in a car wreck until help came. The the scout who took a drowned baby and resuscitated him back to life. There are the words of a mother who suffered as she watched kids and school teachers bully her extremely awkward son praising the scout program that welcomed her son as he is was and he flourished into a confident adult who became an officer in a submarine. Then there is the rescue of a scout who grew up in an abused home. The troop was his his sanctuary, his life of freedom and the only place he felt safe.

You can only imagine the complex feeling after call by the police in the middle of the night explaining that a boy of parents arrested for abusing asked for help from his scout leader. Scout Leaders don't sign on for that. Or, maybe some do. But, God's grace seems to find those adults.

I could go on and on and on because I have many such personal stories. Many. But, imagine, if these are the stories of just one scout leader, how many more from all the other millions of scout leaders over the past 110 years. 

That is the side of the fence I stand on. It's the side of hope and trust. It is the side of the noble program that has changed the lives of millions of people for the better.

Scouting is a place where young people can practice making decisions about other people and learn  from the results or consequence. It's and environment where fairness is learned through the guidance of an oath and law. Scouting is where the meek learn to stand up and make a difference. Scouting encourages dreaming and making the world a better place. Scouting saves lives and makes communities better. Scouting is a source for the kind of peace the world is looking for today.

I have witnessed and experienced the power of scouting and I imagine the best world is one where every person was a scout in their youth. 

Anti-scouting makes no sense.

Barry

[OaklandAndy]

35 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

There are two sides of the fence?

There are 2 sides of the fence in anything. Is Scouting inherently evil? No. Did it make a major blunder and paying for it. Yes. If people didn't believe in its overall values, there would be no memberships, no volunteers, and those of us who are still here wouldn't be fighting like h*ll to stay afloat and grow our units and continue to teach, guide, and mentor. 

You can find faults in any organization. Like the ol' saying goes, "it's not how you start that's important, but how you finish". Call me naïve, but we will make it. 

[InquisitiveScouter]

43 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Scoutingers create is a place where young people can practice making decisions about other people and learn  from the results or consequence. It's and environment where fairness is learned from Scouters through the guidance of an oath and law. Scouting is whereers teach the meek learn to stand up and make a difference. Scoutingers encourages dreaming and making the world a better place. Scoutingers and Scouts saves lives and makes communities better. Scouting is a source forers and Scouts demonstrate the kind of peace the world is looking for today.

Hope you don't mind the suggestions.

It is we who do these things.  It is we who bring the idea to life.  Scouting is an idea and a movement, but it doesn't do anything of itself.

BSA is a organization with a culture... The people in that culture knew there were wolves in the fold.  They made decisions about dealing with the wolves that seemed (repeat, seemed) to sway more towards protecting the image and existence of the organization rather than the lambs in the flock.  And, the continued decisions, actions, and conduct of those people, throughout this process, still seem (repeat, seem) to belie an attitude which sways more towards protecting the organization, image, and coffers rather than damaged and crippled lambs who grew into the strongest sheep they could.  (Please pardon the analogy...it only goes so far, and I think stretched it a bit past that point.)

My allegiance lies with Scouting, not with BSA.  I am ambivalent about BSA's continued existence.  Scouting, I believe, will continue on without it.

And the wolves are still out there, BSA or no BSA.

Edited May 6, 2022 by InquisitiveScouter