California judges and the BSA

[carlimac]

It doesn't surprise me. I'm personally convinced,  many Californian judges are not only friends of homosexuals but homosexual themselves.  (Remember Proposition 8). 

 

In my opinion one should pay attention in the future to the fact, that there is a certain parity between homosexual judges and normally oriented ones. Therefore the state or the authorities would have to put those sexual inclinations publicly. And it should be possible to disqualify a judge of suspected bias if he's a homosexual and has to judge about cases around homosexuality.

 

I agree. I've wondered how their isn't a conflict of interest problem with allowing gay judges to rule on these laws.  Just as they believe being a BSA would make a judge biased toward gays. Seems hypocritical.

[MarginOfError]

Depends. If the BSA leaves such restrictions to each chartered organization or unit, probably nothing.

 

It's interesting to note that last January, the BSA's governing board was poised to pass a provision that would have let chartering organizations choose their own membership policies.  There was such a backlash on that idea (owing to now allowing the local councils to vote), that the motion was set aside and a dialog opened that eventually brokered the deal of uniformly allowing youth members regardless of sexual oreintation, but still prohibiting homosexual adult leaders.  

 

In my opinion, the original compromise was a much smarter compromise, and I'm inclined to believe it would have satisfied a lot more people for a lot longer. 

[Guest]

It's interesting to note that last January, the BSA's governing board was poised to pass a provision that would have let chartering organizations choose their own membership policies.  There was such a backlash on that idea (owing to now allowing the local councils to vote), that the motion was set aside and a dialog opened that eventually brokered the deal of uniformly allowing youth members regardless of sexual oreintation, but still prohibiting homosexual adult leaders.  

 

In my opinion, the original compromise was a much smarter compromise, and I'm inclined to believe it would have satisfied a lot more people for a lot longer. 

 

You're missing the point of the dissent.  The dissent was not about leadership/membership in charters but the moral code of the entire BSA organization.  As it stands right now (and including last January), the BSA has a moral code that is not different in every charter.  Now, this moral code is in question.  If you're proposing the solution to be that each charter comes up with their own moral code, then that's different than just saying each charter can chose their own membership/leadership requirements.  But that unravels the purposes of the BSA organization.  BSA was created to instill, not just life skills, but a moral standard on young boys/men.  It shakes up the organization when you now want the moral standard (which would permeate to the life skills) to be de-standardized.  Then the BSA really ends up standing for nothing.

[JimmiGerman]

Is this the craziness we'll see in the rest of the country soon and the creep into religious freedom territory?

 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765667022/California-bars-judges-from-Boy-Scouts-membership.html

 

 

"The group allows the participation of openly gay boys but continues to prohibit gay and lesbian adults from serving as leaders."

 

I think that's more than enough. Should they also allow homosexuals to serve as leaders, to give them a fine place for sexual abuse? 

Edited January 29, 2015 by JimmiGerman

[Crypto]

It's interesting to note that last January, the BSA's governing board was poised to pass a provision that would have let chartering organizations choose their own membership policies.  There was such a backlash on that idea (owing to now allowing the local councils to vote), that the motion was set aside and a dialog opened that eventually brokered the deal of uniformly allowing youth members regardless of sexual oreintation, but still prohibiting homosexual adult leaders.  

 

In my opinion, the original compromise was a much smarter compromise, and I'm inclined to believe it would have satisfied a lot more people for a lot longer. 

There are potential legal consequences of letting local charters choose their own membership policies. The worry is that local units will begin to get sued, and without the funding and support of national it could be quite detrimental to BSA as a whole. It would also be difficult for national to support local charter organizations on an individual basis if these lawsuits become common.

Ironically the same people pushing for a change in essence are the same as who are preventing it.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Crypto

[omegaseamaster75]

I have recently completed the basic set of training for Scoutmasters. As far as I know, the above is mostly untrue, especially touching manuals and how things are governed.

 

 

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/english/young-men/35814_scout-handbook_eng.pdf?lang=eng

 

Our troops are not run like conventional troops as you have stated, I have also completed the training fro scouting, this training is universal. The church's input and influence into the troop ties directly into how it is run.....the problems you have outlined in your prior post touch on some of the functional issues. 

 

Try camping out a Saturday night, having more than one fundraiser a year. Scouting in the church does not function as a traditional scout troop would as I am sure you are very aware. 

 

Church scouting is similar in name only....they both use the word "scout"

[Crypto]

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/english/young-men/35814_scout-handbook_eng.pdf?lang=eng

 

Our troops are not run like conventional troops as you have stated, I have also completed the training fro scouting, this training is universal. The church's input and influence into the troop ties directly into how it is run.....the problems you have outlined in your prior post touch on some of the functional issues. 

 

Try camping out a Saturday night, having more than one fundraiser a year. Scouting in the church does not function as a traditional scout troop would as I am sure you are very aware. 

 

Church scouting is similar in name only....they both use the word "scout"

hmm I recollect something about policies on fund raising for lds scout troop being changed. It may be allowed now, i'd have to double check.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Crypto

[Crypto]

hmm no real change this is what i've found:

https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church/activities?lang=eng#13.6.8

 

Fund-raising activities are not usually approved because expenses for stake and ward activities are paid with budget funds. As an exception, a stake president or bishop may authorize one group fund-raising activity each year. Such an activity may be held to raise funds for the following purposes only:

1. 1. 

   To help pay the cost of one annual camp or similar activity as outlined in 13.2.8.

2. 2. 

   To help purchase equipment that the unit needs for annual camps as outlined in 13.2.9.
    

It can also be found here:
https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/english/young-men/35814_scout-handbook_eng.pdf?lang=eng

Hmm I wonder where I heard this misinformation from....

Edited January 29, 2015 by Crypto

[Just_A_Guy]

It's interesting to note that last January, the BSA's governing board was poised to pass a provision that would have let chartering organizations choose their own membership policies.  There was such a backlash on that idea (owing to now allowing the local councils to vote), that the motion was set aside and a dialog opened that eventually brokered the deal of uniformly allowing youth members regardless of sexual oreintation, but still prohibiting homosexual adult leaders.  

 

In my opinion, the original compromise was a much smarter compromise, and I'm inclined to believe it would have satisfied a lot more people for a lot longer. 

 

This would make a lot of sense as long as troops never intermingled with other troops.  The problems come into play when you get into district-wide or council-wide activities, or Scout Camp, or the like.

 

While I wouldn't go quite as far as to use the language that others in this thread have used; I do think it extremely unlikely that the LDS Church would approve of sending their youth on overnight campouts where an unidentified number of those present might be sexually attracted to those youth.  (I'm not trying to draw an equivalence between pedophilia and homosexuality here--far from it--my concern is that a lot of those youth do look like adults and might draw the attention of those who would be attracted to adults of that gender.  I wouldn't send my daughters to girls' camp, either, if I thought that those males present weren't going to stick out like sore thumbs and be--let's face it--watched like hawks the entire time they were there.)

Edited January 29, 2015 by Just_A_Guy

[Vort]

Church scouting is similar in name only....they both use the word "scout"

I would certainly not go that far, but I agree with much of what you say. In some ways, I wish the Church Scouting program would follow "regular" BSA much closer, e.g. having ALL Aaronic Priesthood YM involved in the Scout troop instead of breaking them up into Scouts/Varsities/Ventures.

 

As for the Saturday night / Sunday morning campout rule, I fully support that. Sunday is sacred and we should go out of our way to treat it as such, even if that means we miss important camping time that we might otherwise have.

[yjacket]

hmm no real change this is what i've found:

https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church/activities?lang=eng#13.6.8

 

Fund-raising activities are not usually approved because expenses for stake and ward activities are paid with budget funds. As an exception, a stake president or bishop may authorize one group fund-raising activity each year. Such an activity may be held to raise funds for the following purposes only:

1. 1. 

   To help pay the cost of one annual camp or similar activity as outlined in 13.2.8.

2. 2. 

   To help purchase equipment that the unit needs for annual camps as outlined in 13.2.9.

    

It can also be found here:

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/english/young-men/35814_scout-handbook_eng.pdf?lang=eng

Hmm I wonder where I heard this misinformation from....

 

It has changed; 10 years ago a LDS BSA troop could hold as many fundraisers as they needed during the year.  They are now limited to 1 fundraiser per year.  Growing up we would generally do 1 Krispy Kreme donut sale fundraiser a quarter. Consequently, the Church itself now funds more of the troop rather than obtaining funds from the community. 

[yjacket]

As for the Saturday night / Sunday morning campout rule, I fully support that. Sunday is sacred and we should go out of our way to treat it as such, even if that means we miss important camping time that we might otherwise have.

 

I'm in general agreement, but most other troops are religiously sponsored and they do end up having a religious service on Sunday.  Even at the big week-long campouts (i.e. National Jamboree) they have LDS church services on Sunday.- I was got to see Pres. Monson speak before he was the prophet at one.

 

There isn't much difference in getting up from a campsite, cooking breakfast and going to a church service, than getting up at your house getting ready and driving to church.  

 

But I fully understand and support in general no Sunday camping. 

[bytor2112]

I was Scout Master for three years and we traveled on Sunday and camped on Sunday at summer camp with Stake approval.

[The Folk Prophet]

For what it's worth, which may not be much, if a scout troop were having a campout that went over a Sunday, whether it was LDS or not, I would likely not allow my sons to go. Though, to be fair, I would be more inclined to let them go if the troop were LDS than otherwise...but I digress. I do not agree with the idea one bit that there is no difference between getting up and going to church from a camp site vs. from home. Nor is the idea of keeping the Sabbath day holy only about going to church.  

[Vort]

I don't have a problem with an occasional (once a year, say) camping trip that extends into a Sunday, as long as the Sabbath day is kept strictly holy and not compromised (no swimming, pleasure boating, competitive racing, or general recreational activity). If the bishop gave permission for sacrament to be served, and the Melchizedek Priesthood leaders held an actual sacrament meeting where the Spirit of the Lord was welcomed and testimony exchanged, I could see that as even being of great value.

 

But I think there is entirely too much likelihood that such a campout devolves into an extended weekend outing, with the Sabbath observance being an afterthought, at best. Such a thing should and must never be sponsored by the Church.

[yjacket]

The dissent was not about leadership/membership in charters but the moral code of the entire BSA organization. 

 

The dissent was about money.  When the decision came down from BSA HQ I was a executive committee chairman and I received a letter from the district informing me of the decisions.  Reading the letter it was pretty obvious that the reason that the BSA changed their policy was all about money.

 

The true costs of scouting is pretty high and it's a lot more than the $14 or so per boy to sign up.  The district leaders are paid full-time by the BSA and their salary and their job is to fund-raise.  They fund-raise by going to your local Home Depot, Wal-mart, etc. meeting with store managers, community leaders etc. to give money to the BSA.  Because the BSA is chartered as a charitable organization these companies receive a tax-break for donating money to the BSA.

 

Right before their big meeting when the decision was made, UPS (I believe) pulled its financial support for the BSA b/c UPS was getting hammered as supporting a "bigoted" organization.  The letter that I received made it very clear that at the district level fund-raising was drying up due to the BSA's stance on homosexuals.  In order to bring back some of their big donors, the district leaders (who again are paid by the BSA-and they are different than district volunteers) at the national BSA conference voted in favor of the rule change.

 

Unfortunately, the BSA has put itself in an untenable position.  It doesn't have a prohibition against homosexual scouts but it does against homosexual leaders.  At some point enough of those homosexual scouts will want to be homosexual leaders, at some point the LGBT movement will put it's muscle behind that effort, at some point the big donors will feel the pain of supporting a "bigoted" organization and the money will dry up and the BSA will change its policy.

Edited January 29, 2015 by yjacket