Nitpick: The BSA has not broken the law - the various governmental entities are the ones in violation.
I was broad brush painting there, I admit. However, I have looked into each of the different attempts at spinning off Scouting groups and they have ZERO support. If there were really that many people out there wanting to do the right thing, those groups would be great and well supported. The lack of support is the best evidence I have. After that, it is anecdotal and based on conversations I have with those who have quit / left / attacked Scouting. They have not created or joined any replacement. Their sons are the ones who have lost.
The reality is that the BSA is still the best set up out there for this type of activity. They also own the rights to use of various terms, and a Congressional Charter. To create a competing organization would require the support of a lot of people - and it is just not happening. I think it could be done, but they would need some deep pockets to get it going. It would be akin to the founding 100 years ago of Scouting in America, where people like Hearst put their money behind the founding of a Scout unit based on what they were hearing from the UK.
The intent of the ACLU is to remove the BSA from any public space.
The BSA won’t change while under attack. They have assets and instead they purchase land, and remove themselves a bit more from the public square. That serves neither the public nor the BSA.
Again - I am trying to also help change the BSA. However, do not claim that there is not a cost to kids with each victory.
Depends on where you were. I was in the Boy Scouts in New York, and we were mostly Jewish. My first troop was sponsored by a nonsectarian civic organization, then my father started one sponsored by the Men’s Club of our Temple. We were all Jewish, but would have been thrilled to get non-Jewish members. The Ten Mile River Scout Camp had a Kosher camp we had to go to for the summer. A plus, since they didn’t trust the kids to wash dishes.
I don’t remember anyone checking up on religious and sexual preferences. I never made Eagle, but I never heard it being an issue. I wasn’t an atheist then, but I was hardly a true believer also.
That was back when BSA headquarters was in New Brunswick, NJ. They seem to have gone cuckoo when they moved out to New Mexico. The LDS connection is news to me.
BTW my father was Scoutmaster of the UN Troop - and they dropped “Reverent” for “believes in the UN Charter.” I believe the reason was the Soviet Union. They managed to do quite well without God.
I doubt that they have zero support, because they do actually exist, which I imagine would be hard to do if there was no one, anywhere supporting them. The question then becomes, who is supporting these groups? I have a suspicion that, of the relatively small number of people who support non-Boy Scout scouting groups, there’s probably a fair amount of overlap with also relatively small group of people who oppose the BSA’s policies.
Perhaps these people do not see the same value in scout organizations that you do? I never joined the BSA or any similar organization when I was a kid. It never even occurred to me to do so. If I had kids, I probably wouldn’t push them to join a scouting group, either, although if they expressed an interest, I would generally encourage it. (But probably not with the BSA.) What leads you to think that, if the BSA perfectly mirrored these people’s expectations, that they would give any more support to the Boy Scouts than they currently do to non-BSA scouting groups?
All very true, but it doesn’t change the fact that the people in the best position to prevent kids from missing out on the experience of being a Boy Scout, are the Boy Scouts themselves. That they consider maintain their prejudices over helping kids does not say much good about them, at least at the national leadership level.
No - the lawsuits when focusing on special privileges are the right thing to do. I hate to admit that, but it is the truth. No one organization should be allowed a monopoly on those special deals.
Example of legal pressure that was allowed to (mostly) subsist once a compromise was reached: In Newport Beach there is a Boy Scout Seabase. In response to pressure, it is now operated by the BSA for the betterment of all children of Orange County. THAT is an excellent compromise, and it has worked out very well for the kids. If that compromise had not happened, I think the spot would have been sold to business interest and kids would not be having fun on the waterfront.
My BP only really spikes when it turns into a full-frontal assault on the Scouts. This is because while attacking some guy in a goofy uniform might seem to be great sport, in reality you are attacking a bunch of kids who want to go camping. I have heard people say that we should not be allowed to hike in National Forests, for example.
The BSA only turns away avowed atheists among the youth. In truth, any boy can be a Scout, and girls can join Venturing, Sea Scouts and Explorers once they are 14. The kids are welcomed. It is only when the adults get involved that it turns into a problem.
I am sure that I have a couple of agnostics in my Troop, and possibly even an atheist. Nobody makes a big deal of it, and they just follow along much as kids do when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
National (which is in Irving Texas, not New Mexico) backed itself into a corner. They didn’t really care or talk about atheists or gays for much of Scouting’s history. Then again, gays and atheists weren’t much talked about positively by anyone else either during that time. However, once gays started being more open and welcomed in society - the BSA decided to state that they would not accept gays. This was due to a combination of homophobia and a realization that they had a concern with pedophiles (and they automatically associated the two as did much of America). The Dale case came around, and to defend itself the BSA pushed its religious angle to justify their anti-gay bigotry. THIS then lead to an even stronger anti-atheist bent. Of course, once they won their right to discriminate, they were open to lawsuits that they could not have their special deals on public property. This is what brings us to today and the Balboa Park issue, Fort AP Hill, and the Philadelphia office as well.
What I hope for is Step 1 - Local Control. This would allow, say, a Presbyterian Church to allow a gay Scoutmaster. This will cause some Troops to fall, and others to grow, and more kids to have an opportunity to be in Scouting.
For the Atheist issue, I am not sure how they will reconcile the spirituality that is wrapped up in so much of Scouting. There are Wiccan and Buddhist Troops though, so we are already pretty diverse on religion in general.
Not to give you a hard time about it, but which is it? Can any kid be a scout, or only kids who aren’t “avowed” atheists? I was also under the impression that openly gay kids were not officially allowed to be scouts, at least according to the national organization - I recognize that a lot of individual troops are a lot more flexible over what’s allowed than is laid out in the official guidelines.
If a kid walks up and says, “I am an atheist” - most Troops are going to tell him that he won’t pass a Board of Review for any rank. He could still join, but he will never earn a rank. Heck - he could earn every single merit badge - but still never make it to Tenderfoot. Now, maybe a Troop would not care. Sooner or later, however, the kid will have to make it past the District Board of Review.
There is no similar test or questioning for being gay, however. Again - not saying that an openly gay kid would find himself welcome at most troops, just that there is nothing in the Handbook or the Advancement Policies and Procedures guide that deals with this.
I am being a bit legalistic only because this is something I have looked into so that I can defend a Scout of mine if this ever comes up. What I would probably tell them, however, is to play “don’t ask, don’t tell” and enjoy Scouting if they are willing to. This means I would tell them to violate Truthful, rather than duke it out.
This is for youth. Adults, on the other hand, are under a different review and requirement and sign a form stating that they follow all of the rules for volunteering - and those specifically toss you out for being an atheist or gay.
Are you in some way inferring that the percentage of Mormon boys somehow impacts control of the National orgianization? There’s some stuff upthread about who runs BSA National – which is heavily Mormon or Mormon-influenced. Agreed that one boy in six is not anything like a majority – but the actual Scouts get to vote on very little of how their organization is run. That’s largely decided by the adult leaders.
So yes it very much is a don’t ask, don’t tell situation in the scouts.
If a scout happens to be gay he is welcome to continue and advance provided he remains in the closet. If he chooses to be out of the closet he is allowed to continue but is not allowed to advance.
Crap - they’ve updated it since I last went searching for an official pronouncement. For the longest time they were just trying to toss out gay LEADERS.
Uh, how can one be a “lesbian dad?” Isn’t that basically impossible?
x-ray vision, I think you’re looking for something that’s really not there. I was in Girl Scouts and I cannot remember any endorsement of religion except maybe my first year in Brownies, when our troop leader had us saying grace before a meal*. (Like it has been said, it’s usually up to individual troop leaders).
Other than that, it was all secular. I think you WANT to find offense so you can point and say “SEE!!! SEE!!! I KNEW you were lying!!!” (Which, you can now do with my anecdote)
Mostly I remember learning about arts and crafts, nature, cooking, sports, going on field trips to local parks and museums, holiday parties (mostly Halloween parties), gift exchanges, etc. Well, that and goofing off with my friends.
How so? There’s a pledge that clearly includes an endorsement of religion and I gave my reasoning why. How is that looking for something that’s not there?
Then you don’t remember what was in the pledge or you’re incapable of identifying an endorsement of religion.
No big deal, right? I’m sure a whole bunch of people that don’t think it is would suddenly feel a lot different if their child’s troop leader had kids reciting a Muslim prayer before meals.
Okay, I will. You’re lying. I’m not trying to find offense so that I can call someone a liar. That’s an unbelievably stupid accusation.
