Replies

WARNING: Rant follows.

Gates' announcement that the BSA will embrace contemporary moral standards (something that I'm not certain has ever worked at any time, in any situation, in any society) regarding gay Scout leaders made a big splash and is certainly a Scouting slouch towards Gomorrah.

It still stings, but those of us in Scouting who followed these things such as who was appointed to the National Board each year, and who was in the progression to become President, knew it was coming - and knew it was coming this year. Not that it helps anything, but I've had more than two years to be nauseous in anticipation of this. Heck, I was nauseous back in '82 (?) when Philadelphia's Cradle of Liberty Council announced it would break its agreement with National and would permit gay Scouts and Scout Leaders (a position the Cradle of Liberty Council backed down from at the eleventh hour - a committee vote was scheduled at the National Meeting, held that year in Philadelphia, to revoke the Cradle of Liberty Council's charter/agreement to be a BSA Council, and only when the Council found out that it could not stop that vote - it was going to take place - and that the overwhelming majority of delegates were going to support the action - did the Cradle of Liberty Council have a change of heart and decide to uphold the BSA ban on gay Scouts and Scout leaders.

I was nauseous when San Diego broke the Sea Scout 'perpetual lease' and right to moor ships - particular their tall ship on piers built and maintained by the Sea Scouts, which was given to San Diego along with other property owned by the BSA, improved by the BSA, and maintained by the Sea Scouts - some of which was given over to public use - all under the theory of "hey, you know that perpetual lease on the property you owned, developed, maintain, and gave us along with the improved land you gave us for the public, all in return for a perpetual right to moor your tall ship at and use certain space on a pier? Well, we're revoking that lease because you don't have the same views on buggery as we enlightened San Diego politicians have, and it doesn't matter that none of this is mentioned in the lease, and we believe the courts here in SoCal will agree with us that's you're evil and wicked and mean and bad and nasty and will cancel the lease (and so the courts, up to the California Supreme Court).

And I was nauseous when Philly's Cradle of Liberty Council sued the BSA in 2003(?) over the gay Scouts and Scouters issue - principally because the City of Philadelphia was taking legal action to terminate the Council's perpetual lease on the Council's headquarters - a valuable, venerable, old building on valuable land that had been built with BSA money and donated to the city in return for that old, perpetual lease for very, very little rent, for reasons I don't remember. But when the Cradle of Liberty Council wouldn't approve gay Scouts and Scout leaders - hey, perpetual lease, schmerpetual lease, you need to vacate house.

I've been nauseated before over valuable real property that BSA Councils have lost over the 'no gay Scouts or Scout leaders' stance, and the willingness of courts to throw out contract law on decades old contracts to humor current sociological abandonment of moral stances endorsed by every major religion for thousands of years. But perhaps that's just me.

So . . . Gates' first announcement only makes me hope the reincarnation of Caligula isn't appointed to the BSA National Board next spring, but today's little 'ummm . . . but there is an exception" aftershock does a lot more than the media is likely to report.

An overwhelming majority (71.5%) of Scout units in the U.S. are chartered by religious institutions whom, as Gates said, don't have to allow gay Scout leaders if doing so would conflict with the chartered organization's religious beliefs.

If you take the BSA units chartered by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Methodist Church, and the Roman Catholic Church, those three churches charter units with more total Scouting youth than all other religious chartered organizations combined (sure, the Presbyterian and Lutheran Churches do their share, but the other three churches mentioned about served over four times as many youth as the Presbyterian and Lutheran Churches combined, about six times as many youth as all of the remaining religious denominations combined, twice as many youth as all civic, non-educational sponsor organizations (VFW, Boys and Girls Clubs, YMCA's, homeowners' associations, Chambers of Commerce, etc.) , and almost three times as many youth as educational sponsor organizations combined (parent-teacher groups (PTAs, PTOs, and the other parent-teacher groups) in public schools, private schools). Add the Baptist Church, the Church of Christ, African Methodist Episcopal, and 'evangelical' churches . . . a few other Scouting units sponsored by generally conservative religious groups - whether the Salvations Army, the Lutheran Church, the Church of the Nazarene, Jewish Temples, the Episcopal Church, and other religious groups - are simply a small footnote,

In short, take away the units chartered by the LDS, Methodist, and Roman Catholic churches and more than half of Scouting is gone. Gone. Add other conservative religious sponsors and religious sponsors not likely to accept gay leaders on an automatic basis, and the new policy, while painful and a slap against what I believe the majority of current and former Scout leaders believer, current and former Scouts believer, and current and former parents of Scouts believe, it's going to touch only a small minority of Scout units.

I don't foresee a wave of religious organizations selecting gay Scout Leaders on the basis that doing so doesn't violate the organization's religious beliefs.

by the way, here's an up-to-date list of the number of units and Scouts within units by type of sponsoring organization, or denomination of religious sponsoring organization.)

However, from the beginning of this many of my friends had (and still have) no idea how a local Scout Pack/Troop/Ship/Crew/Team gets chartered, comes into existences, and continues in operation.

Most of them seem to think there's a direct link to BSA and Irving, TX, without understanding that there's always a chartering organization (which signs a Charter Agreement with the BSA, and that the Charter/Chartered Organization (please make up your mind, BSA) is responsible for the Scout unit and the selection and approval of Scout leaders subject to BSA rules that prohibit certain individuals from becoming Scout leaders..

The two largest sponsors of Scouting in the US are the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and the Methodist Church. Add the Roman Catholic Church and those three institutions serve over 1,000,000 youth..

I doubt you'll see the LDS approve any openly gay leaders anytime soon, and I doubt you'll see any significant number of Methodist churches or Roman Catholic approving openly gay Scoutmasters in the next six months. although some will, tomorrow if not today.

Most units sponsored by religious organizations can't afford to do appoint openly gay Scout leaders. There's always that Baptist-sponsored Troop down the street to which a family may transfer its son(s) and daughter(s) (Venturing), and those Southern Baptist churches are not going to be approving openly-gay Scout leaders.

The interesting issue is going to be the chartered organizations that are not religious organizations but would not be inclined to select a gay Scout leader - like the American Legions (the second-largest sponsor among non-religious, non-educational sponsors, with almost 2,500 units) and the VFW (the fifth-largest sponsor among non-religious, non-educational sponsors, with almost 1,100 units). I don't think the membership of those groups are going to have open arms with it comes to gay Scout leaders - but Gates didn't exclude them in his announcement regarding religious organizations and I haven't looked to see if the VFW or American Legion have codes or creeds that would prohibit gay Scout Leaders - but those codes or creeds aren't religious beliefs held by religious organizations and Gates didn't give those groups a pass when it came to accepting gay Scout leaders.

So, I guess, bring on the lawsuits in states and cities with strong 'non-discrimination' laws regarding homosexuals.

The VFW and American Legion aren't tiny players in Boy Scouting. Those two groups sponsor more units than public school parent-teacher groups (although their units tend to be smaller and don't serve nearly as many youth).

So . . . . I hate to see the rainbow warriors victory on paper and in the headlines, I truly do, but we all thought this was coming the moment Gates became a member of the BSA's National Board, and we all knew it was coming when he fell in line for the Presidency of the Board. We all knew this would be the year, because this was the year he was to become President.

However . . . . I don't expect a large number of gay Scout leaders suddenly to appear, and I expect parents to pull a lot of Scouts out of the units which appoint gay Scout leaders (either out of Scouting completely, or to move them to church-sponsored unit that doesn't permit gay Scout leaders, or perhaps into something like Trail Life USA).

I will admit we've now set foot on that slippery slope, in shoes manufactured by Gates that feature wax paper soles, but what else is new about today's society? (And for the record, I hope that's the last time I use the phrase 'slippery slope." It was cute when used by the USSC, and about the three times it was used after that, but the phrase became trite so long ago I can't remember when it wasn't trite.)

FOOTNOTE: Before somebody kindly suggest that my units switch to Trail Life USA, that's not an option for practical and philosophical reasons that I've detailed before.

BTW, a handy list of BSA Chartered Organizations by type, number of sponsored units, and number of youth served can be found here.

Heh, word wall...

Thanks for the insight...I don’t envision a mass exodus overnight, but membership will drop and it will be a constant.

Regardless of whether one believes BP’s original intent of using Scouting to “build the Kingdom of God” or not, Scouting has had deep rooted, faith based principles since its inception...Scout Oath and Law represent them quite clearly. To deny this is absurd.

Many churches have become quite compromised in the ways of homosexuality, it will be interesting to see if their members follow those ways or part ways.

I don’t believe for one second that National will honor its promise to defend religious groups from persecution by the homofascists...thus, more Troops and Packs will fold once the first unit is made an example of.

Myself, I have already begun the process of leaving Scouting...truthfully, after the 2013 decision, I have been ambivalent towards it.

I have already contacted the Council and District having all correspondence stopped. I have removed myself from our 2016 District Camporee Staff, I have notified the Course Director for our upcoming Wood Badge that I am not able to comply with National’s new policy and leaving it up to him if he wants me to remain as the SPL for the course...among other things.

I will be notifying the 3 Scouts in my Troop currently working their Eagle that I will no longer be a Scouter come 31 December. If they want my assistance, they’d better get cracking.

What do I expect the homos and their numerous supporters within Scouting to do? Besides spiking the football as they’re doing, I expect that for every 5-10 leaders who leave, they’ll get 1 who quit in support of the homos to return...

They will flaunt their “victory”, they just can’t help it, it’s in their nature. This will drive many more out. In a few years, things will stabilize and then the rainbow flags will proudly wave over the carcass of what was once a good and moral organization.

As I’ve said on other threads, Scouting is tearing itself apart from within...Gates and his cabal of immoral board members must be grinning about that.