Girl Scout Gold recipient censored by local school board for her Gold Award project.

[skeptic]

What can we say, other than good for her.

 

https://richmond.com/opinion/column/hanover-hypocrisy-book-censorship-girl-scout/article_ca2c06be-fde7-11ee-8aea-939bb71a3f14.html

[RememberSchiff]

It appears the GSUSA allows political involvement for their capstone award projects whereas the BSA does not. I doubt my Council Eagle Board would approve this for an Eagle Scout project.

Will that change in the BSA? IMHO, I hope not as we have enough dividing us.

That said, I agree with her that school/local book censorship is rather pointless when internet access is available.

My $0.02,

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

On 4/21/2024 at 5:35 PM, RememberSchiff said:

It appears the GSUSA allows political involvement for their capstone award projects whereas the BSA does not. I doubt my Council Eagle Board would approve this for an Eagle Scout project.

Curious about this. Opposing book bans seems civic to me, as opposed to political because freedom of speech is a bedrock foundation of liberal democracy and the context of book access in community libraries is one in which freedom of speech is appropriately the most salient one, including in historical context. (As opposed to limiting speech to what is scoutlike and consistent with the Scout Law and Oath in BSA contexts, for example.) Wo Bücher brennen...

Why don't you think your council's Eagle Board would approve this?

[RememberSchiff]

23 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Why don't you think your council's Eagle Board would approve this?

Two sides to this. Freedom of expression vs child safety?

Our local Eagle Board approves projects that serve the community for greater good, harmonious, good-PR,... The Board is not looking for controversy or conflict.

Edited April 25 by RememberSchiff

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

30 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

Two sides to this. Freedom of expression vs child safety?

Our local Eagle Board approves projects that serve the community for greater good, harmonious, good-PR,... The Board is not looking for controversy or conflict.

So more conflict-averse rather than trying to draw the line between civic and political?

[skeptic]

I have a friend in Virginia whose daughter earned her Gold and who is very active in general in school, soccer, and other things.  I asked him his opinion.  His response was that the Girl Scouts encourage the girls to be activists.  An interesting view from someone that has been involved a long while with them, and and also has a boy tht is now Life.

[RememberSchiff]

9 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

So more conflict-averse rather than trying to draw the line between civic and political?

Definitely, IMHO  the BSA is conflict averse for better or worse.

[skeptic]

It seems to me that too often being conflict averse leads to conflicts of interest and lack of engagement  in life.  What do I know?  Mine is more in the rearview now.

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

Well, generally speaking, that also has to be case-by-case, no? Some boats need rocking and now is the time to do it. But not every boat, and not every boat right now.

All the combinations of good intention, bad intention, good outcome, and bad outcome occur. The trick is to get better at recognizing both intentions and outcomes. Sometimes being conflict averse is bad. Sometimes it builds harmony that leads to strength and functioning. Without a situation or a context you can't really say if it's good or bad.

With a clear and stable mind, we can take the attitude of "first thought, best thought" and do our best to use our good intention to create good outcomes.

Edited April 25 by AwakeEnergyScouter
Added last bit.

[RememberSchiff]

5 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

Two sides to this. Freedom of expression vs child safety?

Our local Eagle Board approves projects that serve the community for greater good, harmonious, good-PR,... The Board is not looking for controversy or conflict.

From Rules & Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America July, 2023

Participation in Public Functions (page 6)
Scouters must, when practicable, cooperate in connection with civic or other public gatherings of a nonpartisan and nonpolitical
character in a way that gives youth members an opportunity to render service in harmony with their training instead of merely taking
part in parades in their uniforms. Any such participation must be consistent with the principles of the Scouting movement

....

Policy Concerning Political Questions (page 7)
The Boy Scouts of America must not, through its governing body or through any of its officers, chartered councils, Scouters, or members,
involve Scouting in political matters. However, this must not be interpreted to prevent the teaching of ideals of patriotism and good
citizenship as required to fulfill the Boy Scouts of America’s purpose. Faith-based teachings incorporated into the Scouting program by
religious chartered organizations in a manner consistent with the Bylaws are not considered political matters. This policy does not
prohibit the Boy Scouts of America from expressing its opinion upon matters of governmental concern when considered in its best
interest by the governing body of the Boy Scouts of America.
This policy does not limit the freedom of thought or action of any Scouter or member as an individual in a manner not directly or indirectly
implying a connection to Scouting.

[qwazse]

18 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

So more conflict-averse rather than trying to draw the line between civic and political?

15 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

… The trick is to get better at recognizing both intentions and outcomes. Sometimes being conflict averse is bad. Sometimes it builds harmony that leads to strength and functioning. Without a situation or a context you can't really say if it's good or bad. …

In another thread, someone criticized me for being okay with scouters and other adults speaking their mind to my youth.

That got translated into allowing “hostile” acts — even though the topic was clearly discussing speech that did not involve any physical threat. Some repliesasserted that its somehow wise to shield a kid from someone who could teach a him/her how to forestall death, but has voiced problems with their membership.

Youth have a word for situational ethics: duplicity.

Edited April 26 by qwazse

[DannyG]

I believe scouting teaches youth to be involved and engaged. BSA has Eagle-required merit badges that teach civic engagement: Citizenship in the Community, Nation, World, and Society. Certainly BSA teaches this in a way to find common-ground with others: If you are out in the wilderness with a group you need to work together and solve problems as a group. We are stronger when we work together. If you take a stand as an individual, what are the repercussions to the group? There has to be a good reason and you should have allies who support you.

Therefore, I believe the Gold Award project doesn't sound eligible as an Eagle project because it is the work of an individual scout, rather than as a team. Where's the leadership? It's not about politics, as I do not believe the Girl Scout did acted in a political manner. The school board and Board of Supervisors did.  The scout created a program to help her community.

Quote

Our young people are smarter than these politicians think. They can smell the stench of rank hypocrisy a country mile away. They aren’t fooled by folks spouting platitudes about the Constitution while supporting politicians who forswear their oath to the document as they toss lit matchsticks at the First Amendment.

They can distinguish a political exercise from an educational one.

 

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

4 hours ago, qwazse said:

Youth have a word for situational ethics: duplicity.

I'm talking about karma and recognizing how it operates. That is very different from duplicity. Duplicity is changing moral view to suit oneself; recognizing how karma works is cultivating insight and allows you to at the very least accrue merit if not quite stop generating it entirely.

Volume One of The Profound Treasury of The Ocean of Dharma: The Path of Individual Liberation by Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche, page 414:

"The Six Types of Karmic Consequence

The general notion of karma is that uncertainty, delusion, or ignorance begins to trigger the mechanisms of lust, or passion, and aggression, which then produce karmic consequences. These consequences are divided into six sections, which represent six ways of organizing our world very badly; (1) the power of volitional action, (2) experiencing what you have planted, (3) white karmic consequences, (4) changing the karmic flow by forceful action, (5) shared karmic situations, (6) interaction of intention and action. It is quite predictable: since our world is created from passion, aggression, and ignorance, we get back from it what we put in. Things are happening constantly in that way. It is very steady and very predictable. (...)

6. Interaction of Intention and Action

The sixth and final karmic consequence is the interaction of intention and action. It is divided into four subcategories.

WHITE INTENTION, WHITE ACTION. The first subcategory is called completely white. An example of completely white karma is respecting your teacher and having devotion. Because that whole approach is related with healthiness rather than revolutionary thinking, ill will, and resentment, a lot of goodness comes out of it. So perpetual whiteness is created.

BLACK INTENTION, BLACK ACTION. The next subcategory is completely black. This is like taking someone's life without any particular excuse or motivation. You have murdered or destroyed something. That is completely black.

WHITE INTENTION, BLACK ACTION. The third and fourth subcategories are mixtures of black and white. The third category is basically positive: with the good intention of protecting the whole, you perform a black action. For instance, with the good intention of protecting the lives of hundreds of people, you kill one person. [My personal note - surely you recognize this category from Western moral philosophical thought as well? The trolley, for example. Surely you have engaged with this category in a hypothetical series of situations yourself.]  That seems to be a good karmic situation. If somebody is going to press the button of the atomic bomb, you shoot that person. Here the intention is white, but the action itself is black, although it has a positive effect.

BLACK INTENTION, WHITE ACTION. In the fourth subcategory, the intention is black and the action is white. This is like being very generous to your enemy while you are trying to poison him; it is a mixture of black and white."

Your intention with your scouts was probably white, but if you honestly didn't realize that the action might have been black then you - and especially anyone reading who still can change the action for their scouts - ought to know that there was something more to know. Hopefully, your scouts were able to turn their suffering into wisdom and compassion and didn't have other karmic circumstances that being expected to take sexism on the chin amplified substantially.

Speech is an act, you know. Four of the ten unmeritorious karmic acts are speech acts. Speech has causes, and is a cause to effects. (Unless, of course, the speaker has transcended karma, but that's not the case we're discussing.) You can hurt people quite well without any physical action. Also, certain kinds of harmful speech tends to precede harmful action, so waiting for predictable action is actively engaging in ignorance (here, meaning not knowing how the world works), which is also a karmic act.

What makes knowing that someone wants you excluded so corrosive is that it means that black intention is on the table, and you need to figure out just how black and just how far that person is willing to go. It forces you into a defensive posture around them at all times. Notice that this is not a free speech issue; it's a social cohesion issue. The problem is not that the government is going to come arrest you and others in a way that undermines liberal democracy, or that you are being pressured with job loss and/or other severe personal consequences for saying unpopular or even revolting things. It's legal to be a neonazi but that doesn't mean that BSA is required to let them sieg heil at scout meetings. What's right in one context can absolutely be wrong in another by consistent moral principles.

[skeptic]

Okay.  Interesting, though a bit deep or maybe confusing.  Discussions of the Eastern philosophies can be like that.  We likely do not want to confuse, but rather, with luck, enjoin them in actual use of their cerebral abilities, then share that with peers and others?  

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

I actually thought that was very clear. That section of the book stuck with me immediately upon reading and I was literally thinking of it when I wrote the general reflection above. I knew right where to find it to expand on both the actual meaning but also to (hopefully) gently and skillfully deflect the attack on my character. Perhaps it isn't so immediately relatable to everyone, then. My apologies if that wasn't clear.

My point is, I do not appreciate being called duplicitous, and I do not appreciate teachings that are very precious to me and considered a religion by the BSA being called duplicitous. You don't have to agree with the view, but attacking me for holding it is not cool.