| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. The pentagon announced today that they are starting a six-month review to decide if transfolk can openly serve in the military. This is the first step in lifting that ban.
Did you see the Boy Scouts' announcement?
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. The pentagon announced today that they are starting a six-month review to decide if transfolk can openly serve in the military. This is the first step in lifting that ban.Did you see the Boy Scouts' announcement?
I hadn't, but I just looked it up. They just ended the ban on gay scout leaders. Double wow.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't see any details of anyone wanting to get together for Gencon.
I would love to organize a breakfast club for family members (all of you).
If you are interested, and are an early bird, I plan on hitting Steak and Shake for breakfast several mornings.
I have to be at PFS HQ at 7:30, so this would mean a 6:00 am breakfast at Steak and Shake on Thurs/Friday/Sat/Sun.
I plan on being on a bus on Monday to leave Indi, but can also do breakfast that day also, but I can actually sleep in a little, but must make the greyhound bus station at 10:00am.
Who might be up to join me any of those days?
System Administrator
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
She was very happy that someone else defended her. I'm sure she's done it enough and I'm sure that her coworkers have as well. I don't see a lot of people around here saying anything negative like that to employees. Seattle is mostly polite and accepting. There are always the few who feel the need to try and ruin someone's day though.
That's one of the reasons I moved here. It's safer than where I came from. I loved oklahoma but it was increasingly obvious that it was getting dangerous for me to live there. There are a whole lot of resources out here for trans women and LGBTQ youth. You get the occasional person from another state or visitor that gives you the eye when you are holding your partners hand or being cute in the checkout line but by and large it's been pretty safe. Recently things have gotten a bit intolerant on capital hill though. I hope that self corrects. Hate crimes on the hill were largely a thing of the past when I moved up 11 or 12 years ago.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
He declined saying that it's either his friend/lab partner or not at all. They decided to not take his picture. I haven't forgotten that small gesture.
That's wonderful. I am absolutely amazed by the kindness people can sometimes show.
I hadn't, but I just looked it up. They just ended the ban on gay scout leaders. Double wow.Wow. The pentagon announced today that they are starting a six-month review to decide if transfolk can openly serve in the military. This is the first step in lifting that ban.Did you see the Boy Scouts' announcement?
One should remember that the BSA is run by the Mormon church.
The only reason they started accepting black people into the church was because they basically had to, in 1967 (68?).
I see this as a similar case.
They're not growing to be more accepting, they just don't want the bad press.
I hadn't, but I just looked it up. They just ended the ban on gay scout leaders. Double wow.Wow. The pentagon announced today that they are starting a six-month review to decide if transfolk can openly serve in the military. This is the first step in lifting that ban.Did you see the Boy Scouts' announcement?One should remember that the BSA is run by the Mormon church.
The only reason they started accepting black people into the church was because they basically had to, in 1967 (68?).
I see this as a similar case.
They're not growing to be more accepting, they just don't want the bad press.
Just to note, while the BSA quite often does have a religious angle to it, it isn't run by the Mormon church. Mormon churches are the single biggest organizers of BSA troops and account for about 17% of membership. Methodists are close behind though, counting for 13%.
The BSA is the only officially recognized youth organization for boys in the Mormon church though, and it's the only large religious organization that's done this.
The BSA was racially segregated until 1974.
In Mormon troops, to become a senior patrol leader you have to be a deacon in the church, the lowest level of the priesthood. Since Mormon's didn't allow people of African descent to join the priesthood (until 1978), it meant that even in Mormon integrated troops, African-American children weren't allowed to advance ranks.
|
|
She was very happy that someone else defended her. I'm sure she's done it enough and I'm sure that her coworkers have as well. I don't see a lot of people around here saying anything negative like that to employees. Seattle is mostly polite and accepting. There are always the few who feel the need to try and ruin someone's day though.That's one of the reasons I moved here. It's safer than where I came from. I loved oklahoma but it was increasingly obvious that it was getting dangerous for me to live there. There are a whole lot of resources out here for trans women and LGBTQ youth. You get the occasional person from another state or visitor that gives you the eye when you are holding your partners hand or being cute in the checkout line but by and large it's been pretty safe. Recently things have gotten a bit intolerant on capital hill though. I hope that self corrects. Hate crimes on the hill were largely a thing of the past when I moved up 11 or 12 years ago.
I remain convinced that Seattle is the best place in the country to be trans. One of the things it has over most other places is viable trans organizations with trans leadership. Most other places either struggle to get critical mass on the one hand, or in places like San Francisco are spinoffs of groups formed for LGB peoples, and so have mostly gay & lesbian leaderships that can miss some of the nuances of the trans needs and experience. (Situations have probably changed somewhat in the last six years since I was paying close attention, but that was definitely true then.)
I enjoy living in Western Michigan a lot more than I ever thought I would, but not a week goes by that I don't miss Seattle.
Even though Seattle is a relatively safe place to be, I'm still terrified to leave my home if I'm dressed up. (For those who aren't aware, I'm a crossdresser. I'm not a trans woman). I don't trust my neighbors and I don't feel comfortable interacting with strangers if I'm dressed up. I don't know how to get around that. I know that I don't have a lot of support from people. I have plenty of encouragement but no one seems to be willing to be there with me. It's a very lonely world I live in.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hadn't, but I just looked it up. They just ended the ban on gay scout leaders. Double wow.Wow. The pentagon announced today that they are starting a six-month review to decide if transfolk can openly serve in the military. This is the first step in lifting that ban.Did you see the Boy Scouts' announcement?One should remember that the BSA is run by the Mormon church.
The only reason they started accepting black people into the church was because they basically had to, in 1967 (68?).
I see this as a similar case.
They're not growing to be more accepting, they just don't want the bad press.
Just to note, while the BSA quite often does have a religious angle to it, it isn't run by the Mormon church. Mormon churches are the single biggest organizers of BSA troops and account for about 17% of membership. Methodists are close behind though, counting for 13%.
The BSA is the only officially recognized youth organization for boys in the Mormon church though, and it's the only large religious organization that's done this.
The BSA was racially segregated until 1974.
In Mormon troops, to become a senior patrol leader you have to be a deacon in the church, the lowest level of the priesthood. Since Mormon's didn't allow people of African descent to join the priesthood (until 1978), it meant that even in Mormon integrated troops, African-American children weren't allowed to advance ranks.
I was born in 1978.
Coincidence? I think not!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even though Seattle is a relatively safe place to be, I'm still terrified to leave my home if I'm dressed up. (For those who aren't aware, I'm a crossdresser. I'm not a trans woman). I don't trust my neighbors and I don't feel comfortable interacting with strangers if I'm dressed up. I don't know how to get around that. I know that I don't have a lot of support from people. I have plenty of encouragement but no one seems to be willing to be there with me. It's a very lonely world I live in.
There's at least one good Crossdressing-focused group in the area. I'll PM you some info later.
In Mormon troops, to become a senior patrol leader you have to be a deacon in the church, the lowest level of the priesthood. Since Mormon's didn't allow people of African descent to join the priesthood (until 1978), it meant that even in Mormon integrated troops, African-American children weren't allowed to advance ranks.I hadn't, but I just looked it up. They just ended the ban on gay scout leaders. Double wow.Wow. The pentagon announced today that they are starting a six-month review to decide if transfolk can openly serve in the military. This is the first step in lifting that ban.Did you see the Boy Scouts' announcement?One should remember that the BSA is run by the Mormon church.
The only reason they started accepting black people into the church was because they basically had to, in 1967 (68?).
I see this as a similar case.
They're not growing to be more accepting, they just don't want the bad press.
I thought I was an pretty good expert on Mormons, but I had no idea about this. Normally the SPL is either elected by the boys or selected by the Scoutmaster to a degree, had no idea the Mormons had a specific church rank that one had to be in order to just be an SPL. I suppose even when one thinks they know everything, there's something new to be learned every day.
I've been pushing for the move to allow Gay Leaders since they kicked one out a few years ago, so I think this decision is long overdue.
There should be a few things noted however. This was a decision by the executive council, it still is not approved. There now will be a vote I believe by the National council to see if this passes or not. It's not over yet.
In addition, though I have heavily thrown support in regards to Gay Scoutleaders (I think they can be just as moral and supportive as others, and can stand for the scout law and oath and other scout measures), I am heavily pro-religious freedom.
I mention this because most scout troops are sponsored by an organization. It does NOT have to be a church, it CAN be a school or other organization. However, if the troop or pack is sponsored by a church, I heavily agree that they should be allowed to practice their religious preferences with the troop that they are sponsoring (and normally which they heavily support with members of their church).
There are some in the LGBT movement that do not agree with this and feel we should push that these churches (and note, that these are specifically the CHURCHES I am talking about, I am actually in agreement with them in regards to non-religious organization) to accept LGBT leaders of any sort (even if these leaders do not even espouse the tenets of the BSA at all) in churches sponsored troops and force the issue if necessary.
I disagree with that particular stance and find it reprehensible.
However, there are a LOT of organizations which are NOT anti-LGBT and probably will allow openly Gay leaders (there have been organizations already that have defied the scouts in hiring leaders, as well, and there are Gay leaders that are not open about it to the organizations) and I think this is terrific news for them.
The National vote could be extremely tough, but I think the Mormons are actually onboard to support the decision at this point, and probably the Methodists (which both were mentioned above). I don't know how it will go with everyone else though.
There was a LOT of resistance to Homosexual Scouts being allowed, and in many ways this is far more controversial among the BSA than that. Just hope the LGBT advocates do well in their discussions.
I currently feel if the moderate LGBT advocates are heard there is a VERY good chance of it passing. I fear if the extremists (those that I currently am NOT liking, and who's views I shared above to state what I didn't agree with) are heard instead and get loud enough to drown out everyone else...I fear that we will lose this at the national vote VERY badly.
It's one BIG reason to hate the extremists view and how loud they can shout sometimes, because they LITERALLY could get this lost very easily because they won't listen to any reason or anything else. AT least for me.
However, though MUCH quieter (I don't think you hear the moderate LGBT views normally in the media and otherwise) I think the moderates have this one in the bag, or so I hope. It's LOOOONG overdue.
But it's too early to party yet I think, at least from what I've heard thus far. I haven't gotten word that the final approval or vote has occurred, probably won't until the national council gets together for the actual discussion and vote.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, would we put up with some churches wanting to exclude a particular group of people if that group was a race instead of a sexual minority? I don't think so.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree with that particular stance and find it reprehensible.
As a foreigner, I have no knowledge of the BSA beyond the basics, but in general, I find it morally worrisome to allow an organisation to use money to buy compliance to their mores or cultural tenets outside their legally-defined sphere of influence.
I find it highly troubling if I see an organisation (not just a church, but churches are the most likely to bother investing money into that) using their "support" to push their agenda outside their buildings and usual forums.
This wouldn't be an issue if we were more strict about denying organisations the ability to expand their sphere of influence by puppeteering other organisations through their financial support.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mention this because most scout troops are sponsored by an organization. It does NOT have to be a church, it CAN be a school or other organization. However, if the troop or pack is sponsored by a church, I heavily agree that they should be allowed to practice their religious preferences with the troop that they are sponsoring (and normally which they heavily support with members of their church).
I don't think most people would have a problem with this if said churches weren't also tax-exempt. I think having tax-exempt status comes with it a certain responsibility to the community as a whole.
That could be just me though. I'm very much against any tax-exempt organization pushing issues.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mention this because most scout troops are sponsored by an organization. It does NOT have to be a church, it CAN be a school or other organization. However, if the troop or pack is sponsored by a church, I heavily agree that they should be allowed to practice their religious preferences with the troop that they are sponsoring (and normally which they heavily support with members of their church).
I disagree strongly. The BSA doesn't advertise itself as a religious organization, and scouting is supported/promoted by a lot of schools.
If churches want to have a scouting troop that promotes their religious ideals, they're free to start one. They shouldn't be Trojan-horsing their dogma in through their local chapter of a national, secular organization.
It's dishonest, and it's abusing the power/reputation of the organization. If they wanted to, say, advertise their church youth group to the Boy Scout troop, I wouldn't have a problem with that, but they shouldn't be covertly turning the troop into their youth group.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even though Seattle is a relatively safe place to be, I'm still terrified to leave my home if I'm dressed up. (For those who aren't aware, I'm a crossdresser. I'm not a trans woman). I don't trust my neighbors and I don't feel comfortable interacting with strangers if I'm dressed up. I don't know how to get around that. I know that I don't have a lot of support from people. I have plenty of encouragement but no one seems to be willing to be there with me. It's a very lonely world I live in.
I know how you feel (although I no longer identify as a crossdresser and instead as nonbinary). I used to never go out dressed up, but I've veeeeery slowly begun to venture outside by myself, if I'm just taking out the garbage or taking my dog to do his business (although I still avoid strangers on the street as much as possible). I've been out to actually do things only with close friends, and that's extraordinarily helpful in making me feel safer. My partner is also extremely supportive, and has offered to beat up anyone who gives me trouble (so far that hasn't happened, as Portland seems like a pretty chill place, but there are inevitably jerks everywhere).
If churches want to have a scouting troop that promotes their religious ideals, they're free to start one. They shouldn't be Trojan-horsing their dogma in through their local chapter of a national, secular organization.
I'm going back to some 30 year old memories of my brief time in the cub scouts for this, but I recall a fairly heavy religious tone to scouting back then. I think there was a kind of Family/Church/School trinity that got pushed.
Maybe this was my particular branch (which I think was through the school) and this was a long time ago, but I thought the scouts pushed religious faith (perhaps not a particular faith) as being really important.
|
System Administrator
|
The oath requires a belief in god as I remember it. It's been a long time. Reverence is in the the Boy Scout Law and duty to God and country is in the oath. I don't remember any focus on it in actual meetings or anything but there maybe some community service badges that deal with church, etc. Also, a lot of the local stuff was done in churches if they didn't have a real meeting place.
Yeah, the Girl Scout oath has "serve God and my country" in it, but a passing reference in a pledge is a far cry from being a religious organization.
I get that most of the Boy Scouts culture was developed in a time when the default was assumed to be Christian and Christianity was much more of a normal part of everyday American life, but that doesn't mean it's okay for them to keep pushing religion now.
I mention this because most scout troops are sponsored by an organization. It does NOT have to be a church, it CAN be a school or other organization. However, if the troop or pack is sponsored by a church, I heavily agree that they should be allowed to practice their religious preferences with the troop that they are sponsoring (and normally which they heavily support with members of their church).I disagree strongly. The BSA doesn't advertise itself as a religious organization, and scouting is supported/promoted by a lot of schools.
If churches want to have a scouting troop that promotes their religious ideals, they're free to start one. They shouldn't be Trojan-horsing their dogma in through their local chapter of a national, secular organization.
It's dishonest, and it's abusing the power/reputation of the organization. If they wanted to, say, advertise their church youth group to the Boy Scout troop, I wouldn't have a problem with that, but they shouldn't be covertly turning the troop into their youth group.
Odd. I was a scout for many years and I didn't know a single troop that WASN'T part and parcel of a church's youth group. Same for girl scouts. Hmm...
Odd. I was a scout for many years and I didn't know a single troop that WASN'T part and parcel of a church's youth group. Same for girl scouts. Hmm...
I don't think it's possible for a scout troop (boys or girls) to be outside of a church's influence unless actively fought for. I highly doubt most churches would pass on the opportunity to expand their sphere of influence into that age range.
|
System Administrator
|
i don't know that anyone actively fought for it ours. Our cub scout group was largely run by a biologist at the local university and there wasn't even a hint there other than a couple of local events like the pine wood derby or a cake auction being done at the local catholic church. I think the southern baptist moms would have pitched a fit if the catholic parents tried to proselytize at those events. We met at his house and he and his wife who was a medical doctor also helped where needed. It was a pretty great experience really. The boy scout events were held in a this old round building that was near the high school. It had a loft with all the tents and stuff and a regular meeting are in the bottom. No churches involved really. It didn't take long before I just got exceedingly uncomfortable with myself and left the organization to pursue different things, but what I remember of it, there was little church stuff involved and no one really fought one way or the other. Even camp was pretty agnostic. =/ And I lived in a pretty religious town in a really religious state. Night quite mormon levels of church going but not far away either.
I mention this because most scout troops are sponsored by an organization. It does NOT have to be a church, it CAN be a school or other organization. However, if the troop or pack is sponsored by a church, I heavily agree that they should be allowed to practice their religious preferences with the troop that they are sponsoring (and normally which they heavily support with members of their church).I disagree strongly. The BSA doesn't advertise itself as a religious organization, and scouting is supported/promoted by a lot of schools.
If churches want to have a scouting troop that promotes their religious ideals, they're free to start one. They shouldn't be Trojan-horsing their dogma in through their local chapter of a national, secular organization.
It's dishonest, and it's abusing the power/reputation of the organization. If they wanted to, say, advertise their church youth group to the Boy Scout troop, I wouldn't have a problem with that, but they shouldn't be covertly turning the troop into their youth group.
I know a lot of people are disagreeing with me on this, but let me put it another way.
IF this is pushed in that manner, this would not have gotten executive approval of the scouting organization. It will NEVER pass the National vote at this point either with that agenda.
In fact, the people pushing this have been THE BIGGEST OBSTACLE TO GETTING GAY LEADERS IN THE BOY SCOUTS...period.
They are the WORST enemy to LGBT rights in pushing the leadership aspect forward in the scouts.
Of course I have my personal views (I really dislike the anti-religious movement of the more extreme LGBT people and think they would rather push hate crimes ON ALL LGBT rather than let anyone other than an extremist have a voice...meaning even LGBT are discriminated against by these extremist types, and yes, that burns me FAR more than those that I expect it from already)...but the fact is...
Those pushing this agenda...you can like them all you want...but in liking them you basically agree that there should be NO Gays allowed as leaders in the Boy scouts.
IF you agree with this (you can say you don't, but they have LITERALLY been the biggest obstacle to this for years...their no negotiation, no retreat type tactics have made it almost impossible for normal LGBT folks to get ANYTHING done...and yes, that lawsuit thing they try to push...already tried and lost...)you basically are against the LGBT movement.
THAT's another BIG reason I hate them. They discriminate against the moderates of the movement, and the fight against progress and are a bigger obstacle to it than almost (I say almost) anyone else!
I've been pro-Gay Leaders in the Scouts for several years...and the biggest enemies to having Gay Leaders in the scouts ironically has NOT been the conservative churches (they have been an obstacle, but many of them have been somewhat more reasonable in negotiation and discussions) but this extremist minority (and I truly believe they are a minority) that hates anyone (including LGBT folks from my experience who don't tow their extreme lines) who doesn't agree with them.
Now that we've made some progress, you know what CAN still prevent it...these extremist views which I think is a minority view among the movement.
I also think that anyone pushing this does NOT understand the dynamic between the scouting troops and BSA itself. In many of the churches, the troop is literally PART of that church. Religion and religious views ARE protected under the US constitution. Furthermore, the assumption that LGBT are NOT religious (which seems to NOT only be a thing among the FAR Right conservatives, but also among these LGBT extremists who think it impossible that there is such a thing as an LGBT Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Buddhist) is pretty discriminatory in and of itself.
As a rather religious person myself, one of the great protections I have in the US is the freedom of religion. Now, I've seen a lot of persecution (actually MORE from the far right Conservative Christians than anyone else to tell the truth) against many religions in the US, but the fact that I CAN practice my faith and religious ideals with out being charged with a crime or sent to jail is sancrosanct to me.
Furthermore, I currently have two kids in scouts. This is a big deal. We have LDS troops in the area, but we also have other troops and packs. I have chosen to go to OTHER more liberal packs and troops in my area. UNLIKE many people may think, with scouts there are normally several choices in an area...and most of the time, if there is only ONE choice it will be with a more liberal organization rather than a conservative one.
This means, if I am an LGBT and have kids in the scouts, I can now openly serve as a scout leader if I so choose. If you think that's wrong...and want to discriminate against people like me because you have this misunderstanding about how scouting units work, the choice that anyone can make about which unit to join, or just simply hate any moderate who isn't an extremist in the LGBT movement...well...you know...if you are LGBT I actually find you perhaps being worse on the discrimination and hate front than the ones I would normally expect it from in the first place.
My take is if they feel that strongly about it, just like people have stated religions should do (and scouts and religious sponsorship has gone on FAR longer than MANY other things these days), they should start their own scouting organization.
Perhaps this is taken a little too personal in some ways, but these people are the very ones we are currently fighting to try to get this passed. Their take it or leave it all approach is the one thing in my opinion that could kill this entire deal...and yes...I really hate those pushing it in this way as they are showing discrimination in an entirely different fashion that ALSO works against the LGBT equal rights, those fighting in the legal circles for those rights, and those who would love to be scout leaders but currently cannot openly display their preferences due to the current regulations.
It's great to have an opinion, and if you aren't an American, I can understand it as many nations do NOT protect this idea of religious liberty and the ability to choose what or who you support. However, as an American, and one who has a TON of very conservative troops in their area (probably 95% or more) and still had a choice of troops that would allow a more liberal view...if you ALREADY are participating in Scouting I expect you already know what I've already stated and the LOOOONG road that we've traveled down.
However, from many of the responses I've seen here, it sounds like some are jumping on a perceived bandwagon that they think is popular instead of any real participation (or desire) to be in scouting.
The Boy Scouts still officially prohibit atheists and agnostics, though that's enforced on the local troop level and in at least some troops it's easy to overlook - though the pledge includes a God reference. Despite me being atheist/agnostic even back in those days it wasn't that that drove me out. It was a new scoutmaster who was more interested in drilling to march in parades than in camping and hiking. :)
The Girl Scouts have dropped the God requirement as well as the straight one. Because the Girl Scouts are cooler than the Boy Scouts.
The BSA has made recent changes that I'm not entirely onboard with, as I think it makes it harder on the cubscouts (which is where my kids are), but overall I support the organization. It's overall goal from what I see is to help boys become moral leaders by utilizing camping and the outdoors. I know MANY VERY MORAL (and some of those are very religious also...though there are also those that are not) people who are LGBT.
I also don't get why people think LGBT are NOT religious. The majority of those that I know that are LGBT or involved with the movement ARE very religious...though that may not necessarily mean far right conservative Christians.
As for the changes in the BSA they now have all the cubscouts learning the Boy Scout Oath and Law instead of the old cub scout promise and law.
The Boy scout oath and law are longer and thus harder for the young kids to understand (we also have two girls that go and participate in the activities, though technically they aren't part of the BSA...we're pretty open on that type of participation).
The Oath is
On my Honor, I will do my best, to do my duty, to God and my Country. To obey the scout law, to help other people at all times, the keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.
the promise is
A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
As an interesting aside, girls can also be Boy Scouts (as weird as that sounds) once they are a certain age.
I was a Boy Scout long ago, and would love to be heavily involved with it.
As far as I know, whether you can be in the BSA as an atheist or not is probably up to the pack or troop, but in ours I haven't seen any turned away for anything dealing with religious views.
They DO start it with a prayer and they normally state, "please prepare yourself in the way you are accustomed" before hand. I also know, when I look around (okay, I'm not always that terrific, I admit) there are occasionally others that really aren't in what people may consider a "prayerful" stance. I think the statement is there to address those of ANY belief or faith or thought.
It also doesn't state what is defined by the Oath in regards to deity...that could be any number of things (which I would view as including Athiest even).
On the otherhand, a troop sponsored by a more religious organization could have a VERY different view on things.
The organization which sponsors (and charters) your pack or troop can have it's views heavily reflected upon that troop or pack (as I stated in a previous post, in many churches these troops or packs are actually a PART of the church).
In the community packs and troops I don't think it's as big a deal. At least in my experience.
Odd. I was a scout for many years and I didn't know a single troop that WASN'T part and parcel of a church's youth group. Same for girl scouts. Hmm...I don't think it's possible for a scout troop (boys or girls) to be outside of a church's influence unless actively fought for. I highly doubt most churches would pass on the opportunity to expand their sphere of influence into that age range.
I suppose if you are only referring to troops or packs sponsored and chartered by churches.
Even there, you have many churches which are FAR more open and welcoming to LGBT rights than many make it sound. There are several of those which sponsor scout troops and packs.
In addition, you have many schools, districts, and towns that also sponsor their own units. These typically have far less discrimination and are far more open and welcoming...being limited on their leadership ONLY due to the regulations currently in place. If those regulations change to what's been put forward by the Executive council, then Gay leaders can openly serve (many already serve, but not openly due to that very fact) without fear of repercussion.
If churches want to have a scouting troop that promotes their religious ideals, they're free to start one. They shouldn't be Trojan-horsing their dogma in through their local chapter of a national, secular organization.
I'm going back to some 30 year old memories of my brief time in the cub scouts for this, but I recall a fairly heavy religious tone to scouting back then. I think there was a kind of Family/Church/School trinity that got pushed.
Maybe this was my particular branch (which I think was through the school) and this was a long time ago, but I thought the scouts pushed religious faith (perhaps not a particular faith) as being really important.
It really depends on the unit. Some units it's probably one of the core items pushed and practiced by their boys.
In others it has far less emphasis.
In ours it seems to be more that the boys have fun, learn to respect others, and learn to respect the outdoors.
I know some packs seem to have a VERY hardcore religious slant though, it isn't such a major factor in ours. To tell the truth, I don't think I've even met the pastor which is in charge of the church which sponsors our pack (though I have met the unit commissioner, live across the street from him even).
Odd. I was a scout for many years and I didn't know a single troop that WASN'T part and parcel of a church's youth group. Same for girl scouts. Hmm...I don't think it's possible for a scout troop (boys or girls) to be outside of a church's influence unless actively fought for. I highly doubt most churches would pass on the opportunity to expand their sphere of influence into that age range.
Every Girl Scout troop I've been part of or spoken to has been completely independent of a church, no fighting that I'm aware of.
I don't know about the Boy Scouts, but the Girl Scouts are not like that at all.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not that I don't understand what you're saying, GrayWolfLord. I understand it fine.
And I disagree.
Odd. I was a scout for many years and I didn't know a single troop that WASN'T part and parcel of a church's youth group. Same for girl scouts. Hmm...I don't think it's possible for a scout troop (boys or girls) to be outside of a church's influence unless actively fought for. I highly doubt most churches would pass on the opportunity to expand their sphere of influence into that age range.Every Girl Scout troop I've been part of or spoken to has been completely independent of a church, no fighting that I'm aware of.
I don't know about the Boy Scouts, but the Girl Scouts are not like that at all.
wow. I think this may have more to do with the circles my mother and, later on, stepfather, ran in than anything else. Still. Cool.
As an interesting aside, girls can also be Boy Scouts (as weird as that sounds) once they are a certain age.No they can't.
They can be an Explorer, a Venturer, or a Sea Scout, but not a Boy Scout.
cooooooool....
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did y'all hear about how the Girl Scouts turned down a $100k donation because the contributor specified that the money wasn't to be used for trans girls? And then they crowd-funded a new donation of something around $250k?
Anyways, I don't know much about scouts, but the Girl Scouts sound great.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did y'all hear about how the Girl Scouts turned down a $100k donation because the contributor specified that the money wasn't to be used for trans girls? And then they crowd-funded a new donation of something around $250k?
Anyways, I don't know much about scouts, but the Girl Scouts sound great.
Yep! Made me grin like a fool ^_^
I think I actually linked to it somewhere in here...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can't boys join the Girl Scouts, too?
As an interesting aside, girls can also be Boy Scouts (as weird as that sounds) once they are a certain age.No they can't.
They can be an Explorer, a Venturer, or a Sea Scout, but not a Boy Scout.
Those are ALL Boy Scouts. They are all part of the BSA.
It sounds as if you are talking particular portions of the BSA but all scouts are Boy Scouts under the umbrella of the boy scouts. Now there are different types of Boy Scouts of which you have the Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts (same name as the general term), Varsity Scouts, and Venture Scouts. Sea Scouts fall under the Venturing Program.
I don't believe there are any more Explorer Scouts (formally known as Explorers under the Exploring program which I believe was done away with in 1998), those who wished to follow the career options of the Explorer ideas and not be Boy Scouts were moved to a different organization (learning for life?). They are no longer considered Boy Scouts or under that umbrella(unsure if learning for life is even still under the Boy Scout ownership even) and are only known as Explorers.
At least in the US.
I believe they may still have Explorers in the UK, but I am not involved with the UK scouts in any way, shape, or form, or have an interest in them.
If memory serves there are a number of Venture Crews and Explorer Posts dedicated to allowing Girl Scout troops access to Boy Scout facilities like the Philmont Ranch. I know there was at least one in my Council.cooooooool....As an interesting aside, girls can also be Boy Scouts (as weird as that sounds) once they are a certain age.No they can't.
They can be an Explorer, a Venturer, or a Sea Scout, but not a Boy Scout.
Girls can be part of Venture crews and be in Boy Scouts that way or be Explorers. However, as I already stated, Explorers are not Boy Scouts nor part of the BSA umbrella anymore, nor have they been since (I think it was this year) 1998.
Girls on the otherhand can be very active in Boy Scouts. Our Venture Crew is mostly Girls. They went with the younger boy Scouts to the Winter Klondike Camp this winter as instructors and in leadership roles (though obviously they slept in a different campsite).
They are VERY accomplished in Scouting and some of the better leaders in our council for youth leadership currently.
Added: In addition, in order to get the Summit award, they have to participate in several Boy Scout camps as trainers, leaders, and instructors to earn it. (Summit is sort of like the equivalent of Eagle, though in some ways it's harder to get).
Wrong. Play all the semantic games you want, but they are not Boy Scouts. Boys in those program aren't Boy Scouts either, unless they're also a member of a Boy Scout troop. Learning for Life is still owned by the BSA, and Explorer Posts still exist.As an interesting aside, girls can also be Boy Scouts (as weird as that sounds) once they are a certain age.No they can't.
They can be an Explorer, a Venturer, or a Sea Scout, but not a Boy Scout.
Those are ALL Boy Scouts. They are all part of the BSA.
It sounds as if you are talking particular portions of the BSA but all scouts are Boy Scouts under the umbrella of the boy scouts. Now there are different types of Boy Scouts of which you have the Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts (same name as the general term), Varsity Scouts, and Venture Scouts. Sea Scouts fall under the Venturing Program.
I don't believe there are any more Explorer Scouts (formally known as Explorers under the Exploring program which I believe was done away with in 1998), those who wished to follow the career options of the Explorer ideas and not be Boy Scouts were moved to a different organization (learning for life?). They are no longer considered Boy Scouts or under that umbrella(unsure if learning for life is even still under the Boy Scout ownership even) and are only known as Explorers.
At least in the US.
I believe they may still have Explorers in the UK, but I am not involved with the UK scouts in any way, shape, or form, or have an interest in them.
WE could go round this all day. As someone with people involved with scouts heavily currently, you can use your religious views and definitions all you want.
Doesn't change what they do or are under or their requirements.
Just because your religion or whatever it is makes you want to deny girls can be in Boy Scouts and participate in it, doesn't make you correct or accurate.
As I said already, Explorers are under the Learning for Life program now and NOT Boy Scouts. They haven't been since around 1998.
Venture Crews however ARE under the Boy Scouts and considered as such.
You can also earn your Eagle Scout as a Venture Scout (as long as you were a first class scout by the time you left the Boy Scout section of Boy Scouts and I believe under the age of 18)...but your Eagle Project and your Project for your Summit Award (if you get to the Summit Award) must be different projects.
Venture Scouts are just as much Boy Scouts as the other Boy scouts such as Cub Scouts and Varsity Scouts.
This has nothing to do with Semantics, but how the programs are run and how they use the facilities.
For example, my kids are cub scouts, and they are VERY MUCH Boy Scouts as well...even if not in the actual 10.5-13 year old age range of the section of Boy Scouts which is known as Boy Scouts.
This is why Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, Varsity Scouts, and Venture Scouts all are in the BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA instead of simply Scouts of America. There has been a little push to simply CALL it scouting instead of Boy Scouts, but they've yet to change it.
Explorers on the otherhand, are NOT part of the Boy Scouts of America nor do they fall under that umbrella. There is no confusion in any Explorer or Exploring group that they are any way connected to the BSA, as they fall under Learning for Life (which could be owned by the BSA, but doesn't fall under the actual Boy Scout umbrella and hasn't for some time).
There is no such thing as Explorer scouts as you stated previously, at least not for over a decade (and almost two decades) at this point.
I will concede, PERHAPS Venture scouts might not be Boy Scouts if they aren't part of a Troop that is also part of a chartered Boy Scout organization. I do not have experience with one that isn't.
Our Venture Crew IS part of the Troop, and I have yet to find a Venture crew that is NOT part of a chartered organization which also runs Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts...but it is distinctly possible. I would think they would also fall under the boy scouts as others do, but it could be they don't. They would still fall under the Boy Scouts of America however, and their requirements for the Summit Award would remain the same as those that do.
Second Addendum: Just to clear up some confusion, in general, most of the time all scouts are referred to simply as scouts...but under the umbrella of the Boy Scouts of America. As per their most recent faq, when referring to individual groups (either in a troop or unit, you can have different groups for example in our unit, Cub Scouts meet in a separate area than Boy Scouts...though the Boy Scouts and Venturers meet in the same location at first and then separate) you can refer to them as their specific name (aka...Venturers, Cub Scouts). However, when combined you can simply call them all Scouts. In this context, Krensky would be correct in that you would differentiate between Venturers and Boy Scouts. However, when combined, it is appropriate to refer to them all as Scouts as they all fall under the Boy Scouts of America.
This goes hand in hand with partially why they changed all the parts of the unit to use the same oath and law supposedly...to show the unification of the different groups under the one organization of the BSA. Not that I entirely agree with the move, but that's what's happened. I surmise that the Venturers now have the same Oath and Law as everyone else now also (Varsity and Venturers used to have different oaths and Laws as well, just like the Cub Scouts).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There has been a little push to simply CALL it scouting instead of Boy Scouts, but they've yet to change it.
Let's hope that doesn't happen.
A primarily male organization shouldn't get to monopolize the name "scouting."
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps it's time to move the discussion of scouting to its own thread?