Killing off the Boy Scouts

[Anonymous]

Just wanting to step in on a few of the comments here....

Regarding EMF & radio waves etc.... The National Institutes of Health has done a study of studies, that is they studied the results of over 150 different studies on powerline EMF and cell phone EMF and their possible health effects. their conclusion? IF there are any deletrious effects to the stuff, the risk is so low as to be very hard to measure. We have MANY more things to worry about, and should be spending our money there instead of spending millions of $$$ on something that may affect a few people in the U.S. every year. I've had to talk to many people and done EMF surveys for them on the stuff. TV's, dishwashers, flourescent lights, and that cheap-o clock-radio next to your headboard are the biggest sources of EMF in the home. Especially the clock-radio!

As for treated lumber.... Any biological thing that has been treated to resist decay in the environment is by its very nature dangerous to be around. It's treated to kill germs, bacteria, and anything else that might like to take a nibble out of it. Penta has been banned in Washington State for the treatment of power poles. CCA is not far behind. All wood treated with this stuff leaches the bad stuff into the environment. It's a fact of life that cannot be avoided. Wooden playground equipment is being destroyed to get rid of the admittedly low risk of the stuff. Creosote has the same problem. Am I afraid of it? As long as I'm not chewing on it, I'm O.K. Don't eat the sawdust or breathe the stuff and you should be fine. Wash your hands after handling it and you'll be fine.

I'm a big fan of the Scouting program. Been involved in it for many years. I'm firmly against the PC types stepping in to try and make it "all-inclusive", but having to destroy the ideals of the program to do it. The Canadian program has been destroyed by such meddling of the program. Gays and women are now openly invited to the program. As a result, scout camps are being sold to meet operational expenses, membership has plummetted, and the program is dying. The ideals taught the boys are what's required to help them develop into young men and good productive members of society. Some interesting nuimbers for us to remember....

Scouts account for:

- 64% of Air Force Academy graduates
- 68% of West Point graduates
- 70% of Annapolis graduates
- 72% of Rhodes Scholars
- 85% of F.B.I. agents
- 26 of the first 29 astronauts. As of Oct. 1999, of the 293 former and current astronauts, 201 had taken part in Scouting. 41 were Eagle Scouts, and 25 were former Life Scouts.

Once an Eagle, ALWAYS an Eagle.

Mark in Utah
Scoutmaster, Merit Badge Counselor, ex-Cubmaster, Dad

[Pruitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gbailey

I think you are joking, Brunton.

But if you are not (or others think you are not), I will reassure them (or you) that there is NO scientific evidence for this.

Yes, I was speaking sarcastically.

A great many of the possibly hazardous materials we come, or came, in contact with daily have their danger levels outrageously exaggerated by two factors - the desire of the person or group making the danger known to be recognized and heard, and the subsequent litigation hazard to anyone dealing with the substance in the media who does not scream "DANGER!" at the top of their lungs.

Lead is a great example of this phenomenon.

[Fergmiester]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mark_in_utah



I'm a big fan of the Scouting program. Been involved in it for many years. I'm firmly against the PC types stepping in to try and make it "all-inclusive", but having to destroy the ideals of the program to do it. The Canadian program has been destroyed by such meddling of the program. Gays and women are now openly invited to the program. As a result, scout camps are being sold to meet operational expenses, membership has plummetted, and the program is dying. The ideals taught the boys are what's required to help them develop into young men and good productive members of society. Some interesting nuimbers for us to remember....

Scouts account for:

- 64% of Air Force Academy graduates
- 68% of West Point graduates
- 70% of Annapolis graduates
- 72% of Rhodes Scholars
- 85% of F.B.I. agents
- 26 of the first 29 astronauts. As of Oct. 1999, of the 293 former and current astronauts, 201 had taken part in Scouting. 41 were Eagle Scouts, and 25 were former Life Scouts.

Once an Eagle, ALWAYS an Eagle.

Mark in Utah
Scoutmaster, Merit Badge Counselor, ex-Cubmaster, Dad

I have to say as a Canadian Scout Leader. Not only do I consider this as an erroneous statement but I take great offence to the contents. You sir have done a great diservice to the organization as well as many women serving in the service of your country.

Our enrollment problems stem from issues such competition from other youth groups, homework, demographics, as skyrocketing insurance premiums and redtape created by litigation and bureaucrats.

We still teach the values that Scouting were founded upon. One of them being Love thy Neighbour and Love thy God.

Next time before you offer your left hand in friendship to a fellow Scouter think about "Why the left hand".

Fergus Francey
Area Assistant Commissioner Dartmouth East, Scout Leader 1st Woodlwan, Former Akela, Former Beaver Leader
Father of two

BTW My Father was a Scouter back in the Thirties in Scotland. One of his leaders was a Woman[:0]

[davekelly]

One of most successful leaders in my son's old Pack was a woman. Currently 2 of the 4 den leaders are women - no men volunteered. One of our counsel's best rifle instructors is a woman and she can outshoot any man!

My wife got her introduction to the world of 10 year olds when we were dating - she's pretty much became one of my son's assistant den leaders (I was the other), made every meeting and every campout. Of course her main reason for getting involved was way cool ("we only get him over twice a week - and one of those is Scout night - so I'm not going to miss it" she's the greatest!). She also sees the positive impact that Scouting has on the boys and sees it as a way to contribute.

On a side note. A oldest Boy Scout troop in our town used to number over 100 members. Women aren't even allowed into the meeting room. It now has only 30 members. My son's troop - which allows everyone to the meeting - has grown from 30 to over 100, awards several young men their Eagle rank every year, and has very little attrition (there are just as many 14 and 15 year old members as 10 and 11's - that says alot). Just an observation.

[selector]

As a woman, my mother, a highly intelligent and devout person, was prohibited from the priesthood. Had she wanted to become one, she would have been refused simply because of her sex. But, the rules of the institution are currently such that she could not be a priest. When the Church changes, women will eventually be admitted. Scouts have changed, but the Guides in Canada have yet to admit males. What's up with that?

[Anonymous]

Fergus,

I had no intention of causing ill feelings. I was referring to the drive currently within the U.S. of admitting gays and atheists to Scouting. There has also been a drive to admit girls to Boy Scouts. Explorers in general, and some Explorer posts in particular have been doing this for some time, but it's a different group of boys (older), and it's a known quantity up front. Some Explorer posts do not admit girls. It's on a post-by-post basis.

Things not compatable with Scouting:
How can you be morally straight when you're not?
How can you recognize your duty to God when you refuse to acknowledge him in your life?

From what I've been told, the scouting program in Canada has been struggling with these problems. If I'm wrong, please tell me.

There's no doubt that women in scouting as a whle provide a very commendable and valuable service to the youth. My wife serves as a Cub Wolf den leader. There's a difference between mixing the sexes as leaders (potential problems) to mixing the sexes of youth on a campout, right? There's also a leadership / example thing that male leaders can provide older boys that women have a more difficult time getting across simply because of their sex. It's easier for a guy, through his actions, to say "Be a man like me", than for a woman to say, through her actions, "Be a man like me", know what I mean? No fault of thir own, and it's not for lack of effort or training, it's just simple biology.

Mark in Utah

[davekelly]

Hmmmm. At the fear of offending anyone here goes.

I think the action of a woman saying "Yes, I volunteer to be a Scout leader" is a much better example than all the Dads that said "Be a man like me and don't volunteer." Of course that's our Pack. Others may do things differently, and that's their choice.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[howmus]

Just an FYI here.... ( from a BSA leader with over 27 years experience).

Women have been leaders in the BSA since the beginning of the Cub Scout program many, many years ago. The BSA removed restrictions of male only leadership in the other programs years ago. In our Council, we have been fortunate to have the very first Woman in the Order of the Arrow to receive Vigil Honor in the United States. She was also the Scoutmaster of our last Woodbadge Course (Mountaintop leadership training for adults) and all the men and women in the course have completed their requirements for the course (which is unusual). She is also our Program Directer at our Boy Scout Camp. The very first professional in our council to ever be promoted to Field Director happens to be a women (one of my former students). We have several troops that have women as Scoutmasters. To a one, they are the strongest troops in our council. Women serve as Den Leaders, Cubmasters, Scoutmasters, Venturing leaders, committee chairmen, and ***'ts in all programs. Women have been, are, and will continue to be valuable leaders in the Boy Scouts of America.

The Boy Scouts of America has three basic programs:
1. Cub Scouting. This includes Tigers, Cubs, and Webelos. (age 7 to 10)
2. Boy Scouts, age 10 1/2 to 17.
3. Venturing. This is a co-ed program that includes young men and women ages 14 to 20. Varsity Scouting is similar but is limited to men only.

For more information on these programs go to: http://www.scouting.org/nav/enter.jsp?s=mc&c=fs

Exploring is now not really part of the main program of Scouting but is supported by Scouting along with Learning For Life. For information about these programs go to: http://www.learning-for-life.org/

fergmeister is absolutely correct when he says: "Our enrollment problems stem from issues such competition from other youth groups, homework, demographics, as skyrocketing insurance premiums and redtape created by litigation and bureaucrats". This is true of the Boy Scouts of America as well. The biggest problem that I personally see is so called "Trained" leaders that do not use the program well. If a Troop is to be sucessful, there are three things that have to done well - PROGRAM, PROGRAM, and PROGRAM. The gender of the leader is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

I’d much prefer to see this forum be used for discussing model railroading, but since this conversation is still continuing, another perspective does need to be heard.

I used to be involved with Scouting, as an Explorer, and later on as an adult volunteer and chaplain for another Explorer Post. At that time at least the Posts were affiliated to some degree with the local Boy Scout Council. And for reference material, we happen to have on hand in our house Boy Scout Handbooks printed in 1936, 1944, 1970, and 1972. The message in all of these editions is consistent with how I approached my chaplaincy, and to my mind, at odds with the current doctrine of exclusion.

In all of these editions, the definition of the Scout Law -- A Scout is Reverent is spelled out as: “He is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties, and respects the convictions of others in matters of custom and religion.”

The Revised Edition printings of ‘36 and ’44, and the 7th Edition printing of ‘70 do not expand at all on the Scout Oath of “morally straight”. But the 8th Edition of ’72 does. And it does so in a manner consistent with the long established definition of reverent. Page 37: “Morally Straight -- You are honest, clean in speech and actions, thoughtful of the rights of others, and faithful to your religious beliefs.” And on page 51, there is a further addition to the explanation of reverent: “There are many different religious beliefs in the world. Some are like your own. Others are very different. The men who founded the United States of America believed in the right of all men to worship God in their own way. This is a great heritage they have given us. Scouts can strengthen it by their actions.”

The ideals of Scouting are (or at least they used to be) pluralistic -- people of all different faiths are encouraged to live according to their own faiths, and to respect each other. Respecting others is an equally important part of being reverent. Scouting is not limited just to Christianity, and certainly not just to certain denominations, or even just to Biblical faith traditions. Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans, Unitarian Universalists, Zoroastrians, and many others are all part of the fabric of American society and of Scouting.

Today, the problem facing Scouting in America is not that gays want to join, but that some leaders want to impose their sectarian religious doctrines on people of other faith traditions and use this to exclude gays. Its perfectly fine under US law and Scouting ideals for some religions to define being gay as immoral * within * that religion and to take whatever internal sanctions they like. It is not OK to define morality for people who follow a different faith, or who live under an atheistic morality. In quite a few religions and denominations, homosexuality is morally acceptable. It is not the established custom for Scouting to exclude any religion, or to make any religion pass a doctrinal litmus test before it is welcomed. Those who are trying to do so now are wrong. They are weakening our great heritage by their actions.

When the Scouting leadership took away the right of the Unitarian Universalist Association to give out its Religion In Life medal because they personally disliked the UUA’s teaching on homosexuality, The Scouting leadership was not only violating the principle of respecting others religions, they were in fact asking Unitarian Universalists to actively go against their own religious teachings. That’s not the Scouting I grew up with, and its not the way of respect I taught as a chaplain. Everyone was welcome to join the post regardless of their religion. For all of them, I believe their own sense of morality was strengthened by contact with others who believed and lived differently. And every one of them was encouraged to live their best within their own beliefs. We had theists, polytheists, atheists, and agnostics, and they could all engage in conversations of how to best live their lives and how to get along with others. The ‘Golden Rule’ works quite well without having to bring any Gods or Goddesses into the equation.

Being ‘Reverent’ and ‘Morally Straight’ within a pluralistic society and pluralistic vision of Scouting really is as easy as it is spelled out in decades worth of Scout Handbooks: Be faithful in your duties and beliefs and respect the convictions of others -- which means they must be free to be faithful to their own duties and beliefs even when those are different than your own.

Maureen

[selector]

Maureen, would you 'respect' my conviction that 12 year-old boys are morally and legally capable of lying with me if they chose..and if it is their conviction? Sorry, but I do not, and will not respect others' convictions when they are at odds with mine to that extent. For example, would you have me embrace the convictions of a satanist? If so, than I would indeed have to respect them. But, I do not. You see, Satan is the father of all lies, and a liar is not welcome in the Scouting organization that I know. How, then, can I respect a liar's convictions?

Sorry to tread so heavily, but your post is a statement that was offered for scrutiny.

[Anonymous]

Being respectful means to respect people, in spite of their beliefs.

Being in a pluralistic society does not mean that everyone is right. Realitive morality simply does not cut it. Sorry, some things are right, and some things are wrong, no matter who says it or what they profess to believe. Being too open minded means that sometimes your brains spill out. It doesn't mean I have to wave a banner in front of their house, but it DOES mean that I don't have to listen to them or follow along with what they say. Sometimes it DOES mean that I have to come out publically and disagree with them so they do not screw up the rest of society. That's called Duty to God and Country.

Not saying that's what people here are espousing, but THAT is what a lot of people are trying to force upon the Scouting program.

Mark in Utah

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

Maureen, would you 'respect' my conviction that 12 year-old boys are morally and legally capable of lying with me if they chose..and if it is their conviction?

Respect it as a belief system yes. Allow it to happen, no. In some cultures that is appropriate. Among others, it was legally and morally correct in Athens when democracy was invented. However, regardless of anyones personal beliefs, it is illegal in our country today and I certainly would report any such behaviour to civil authorities. Activity between consenting adults is much different than between an adult and child of any genders. Our legal system defines this as harm to the child, and an underage child does not have legal standing to make such a choice, personal conviction does not change that law.

QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

For example, would you have me embrace the convictions of a satanist? If so, than I would indeed have to respect them. But, I do not. You see, Satan is the father of all lies,

Embrace and respect are different. I do not embrace Satanism, and never had a Satanist in the Explorer Post when I was chaplain. But if one did show up, I imagine I'd have to sit down and have a good talk with them and let them explain how their beliefs might or might not fit within Scouting ideals. It would be a particularly interesting dialogue if there were any Zoroastrians (whom I have met) in the Post at the same time, since the concepts particularly associated with Satan seem to have been brought into Christianity from that religion. But over time various religious groups have demonised other religions for what they "knew" about them, which has led to much bloodshed and persecution of Jews, Indigenous peoples, and even against other Christians. The Romans 'knew' that Christians killed babies, so they killed Christians. Later on the Christians 'knew' that Jews and Pagans killed babies, so they killed them. We still have Catholics and Protestants killing each other in Ireland; and Hindus and Moslems in India; and on it goes. Instead, I would prefer to try understand people's vision of their own religions than claim I know they are bad.

QUOTE: Originally posted by mark_in_utah

Being in a pluralistic society does not mean that everyone is right. Realitive morality simply does not cut it.

Within any individual religious organisation, that's a fine approach. When it comes to groups that are open to people of all religions though, it is incumbent on anyone who wishes to join to learn to get along and that "one true belief" cannot be imposed on such a group as it can within one religion, or group of like-minded religions.

At least that is the way that Scouting used to be.

What is the alternative? Is there to be a grand inquisitor to check the purity of each religious group and sub-group before they are allowed to stay in scouting? Whose religions get to staff such an inquisition and write the universal religious law? I suppose it would be safe to kick out the Unitarian Universalists first, then most of the Jews (the Orthodox are probably OK, but the Reform Jews, the largest Jewish reform group in this country accepts homosexuality). It would probably be best to get rid of the Buddhists too, I don't think they have any national position papers on this, but all of the Buddhist monks and nuns that I know tend to be pretty accepting of all people. The Congregationalists and Episcopalians are sliding away fast. The Presbyterians are OK, but I'm not sure about that congregation over there, you know who they voted for....

Condoning such intolerance is not what I see as duty to my God or my Country, so you probably shouldn't let me back in either.

Maureen

[selector]

So, my point was: yes, the law requires of all citizens that they conduct themselves within certain guidelines. Transgressors have a duty to place themselves under the judgeship of an appointed citizen and could incur a penalty sanctioned by the citizenry in a penal code. If the constitution/bill of rights requires that all citizens are equal under the law, including satanists, then the Scouts may not discriminate in their open membership when an avowed statanist applies. That is a secular, statute law. We are both bound to it if we want to enjoy the benefits of the society in which we live. But, because it conflicts with my moral code, AND with my faith (or 'values'), I have simply withdrawn from the scouting organization. It otherwise forces me to interact in 'good faith', and 'respectfully', with those whos views are repugnant to my own. That is the tyranny of the modern libertarian democracy.

All that said, Maureen, thanks very much for the interaction, and for having the 'faith' to post an opinion here. I do hope you understand that I respect you and your convictions because they are in large measure like my own.

Now, I have surely gone on much too much about this, and will remain silent for now.

My regards.

[Anonymous]

With all deference to those engaged in this controversy, at the current rate of proliferation we will all miss the 9:26 a.m. express and the next train is a mail/milk train at 10: 04 p.m. Don't know about the rest of you but maybe some of us should catch the 9:26 and others take the mail train (e-mail "addy" that is) for a more personal "one on one" experience. In either case, "happy rails" to all of you and thanks for your ridership.