Www.Mormonsandgays.Org

[rongo]

Along with this, it is a pyramid scheme. Everything, including trainings, cost money (extortionately so. . . I just think we could take the boys camping and work on things without paying extortionate fees to BSA . . .

Case in point: our stake bought land for its own girls camp. It's undeveloped, and we're slowly going to build facilities there over time. Girls camp this year costs $80. Scout camp this year will be a stake one, at the same place, but will cost $300 per boy. Why? Because it's a Scout camp. BSA gets its cut (ostensibly, "insurance/liability"). It costs even more for an official BSA camp. Scout uniforms are obscenely expensive.

And so on.

[Stone holm]

Scouting is a mere shell of what it once was ----- it is now a "participation ribbon" version of what it used to be. The ranks, including Eagle, mean nothing today, as almost no one is turned away (symptom of the "merit badge clinic" mentality).

Along with this, it is a pyramid scheme. Everything, including trainings, cost money (extortionately so), and the time and money commitments violate Church policy (at least, Scouting represents an exception to the CHI policies on time and money demands of members ---- policies which stem from the monumental 1990 changes to Church programs and finances).

I think our young men would be well-served by a "young mens" program as opposed to Scouting. Like the intent of the new de-regulated youth curriculum, I think youth leaders should be tapped to use more initiative to meet Duty to God objectives without the Scouting program ---- and I think our boys would be better off.

That said, I sustain our leaders and the current program, and I carry it out to the best of my ability. I'm currently a Bear leader, my oldest son participates in Scouting, and I attended all of Scout camp every year when I was a bishop. I just think we could take the boys camping and work on things without paying extortionate fees to BSA . . .

I would have to disagree. Was a Scoutmaster and Cubmaster for about 20 years and had about every training program imaginable (Cubscout Woodbadge, Varsity Scout Woodbage, Camp School, etc.) Three out of my six sons made Eagle. My deceased wife was a Brownie leader and YW President, and my current wife has been a YW president -- both felt strongly that the girls were getting the short end of the straw and that the boy programs were much superior in the Church. I agree.

[rongo]

Would you have quit your calling over the first compromise? I was a Scoutmaster and Cubmaster for many, many years in the Church as my sons grew up in scouting, I can't see that the first compromise would have had any effect on our troop or pack.

It would have violated my principles. Our chartering fees, FOS money, etc. would have gone to "gay leader" troops. If the compromise would have included financial autonomy, where chartering fees, FOS money, etc. stay with the local troop and don't pay for strippers and booze at Key West (true story ---- Orange County Register expose years ago, about the national BSA meeting), then that might be different.

But that would never happen, because there would be no need for a national BSA organization. And the executives' salaries come out of that money . . .

[Stone holm]

Case in point: our stake bought land for its own girls camp. It's undeveloped, and we're slowly going to build facilities there over time. Girls camp this year costs $80. Scout camp this year will be a stake one, at the same place, but will cost $300 per boy. Why? Because it's a Scout camp. BSA gets its cut (ostensibly, "insurance/liability"). It costs even more for an official BSA camp. Scout uniforms are obscenely expensive.

And so on.

We implemented a hand me down program for the uniforms. Both of my wives were YW camp leaders and one of my daughter-in-laws is one now. The Church has a beautiful camp that at the Joseph Smith Memorial where they have YW Camp. None of these think that YW Camp in anyway measures up to a BSA Camp, and from my daughters experiences -- I agree. If it is any consolation, the Girl Scout and Brownie Scout programs suck as well. We continue to slight the girls, but that doesn't mean I would favor degrading the boys program to the YW level.

[rongo]

I would have to disagree. Was a Scoutmaster and Cubmaster for about 20 years and had about every training program imaginable (Cubscout Woodbadge, Varsity Scout Woodbage, Camp School, etc.)

How much money did you pay over the years for your "training?" How does that square with the Church's time and money policies in every other area other than Scouting?

Take Woodbadge, for example. Our stake president, under pressure from his two gung-ho counselors, asked that each ward have 30 adults Woodbadge trained within a year. I told him as a bishop that I wasn't going to ask that of my members ($200 fee plus a week off from work). Was the stake going to pay for that? No --- it would have to be a sacrifice on their part. A former member of the high council who is now in our young men's presidency attended Woodbadge, and is now attending every Roundtable for a year so he can be fully certified. His head exploded during his Woodbadge ("I can't be the only person here who thinks this is a complete waste of time and money"). It's a major money-making part of the pyramid scheme.

Three out of my six sons made Eagle.

When was this? I ask, because Scouting years ago is not the same as Scouting today. Today, we are expressly told not to fail boys in board of reviews. I was reprimanded because I told a boy who did not know any knots to learn the required knots and we would reconvene when he could demonstrate competency (one of the requriements). I was also expressly told during an Eagle board of review not to ask any questions that required demonstration of competency, but rather to focus on "warm fuzzies" (how did you feel when you did this?). The thing was that this particular boy was top-shell ---- I had paid him to put a starter into my car, he did propane conversions in car engines, he was elite in all aspects of Scouting skills. He would have shone and stood out in a rigorous board of review ----- but that's not how they do it now. Look at the current Eagles in our wards ---- they get "participation ribbons" at "merit badge clinics," and most are woefully incompetent in skill or knowledge. It's symptomatic of our larger culture ---- diplomas used to mean something, too, but now we have high stakes tests that certify that kids can actually read, write, and do math, because the diplomas don't certify this. Everybody gets one whether they can or not.

My deceased wife was a Brownie leader and YW President, and my current wife has been a YW president -- both felt strongly that the girls were getting the short end of the straw and that the boy programs were much superior in the Church. I agree.

Again, this sounds like a bygone era. You are projecting what Scouting once was, not what it now is.

[rongo]

We implemented a hand me down program for the uniforms.

Why should you have to? Why are Scout uniforms as expensive as they are?

[rockpond]

If/when the policy is changed to allow "openly gay" leaders, I will not have anything to do with Scouting (as a calling, or my sons' participation). The expected compromise position is okay with me, because it's what we actually do in the Church anyway, despite the formal BSA policy (i.e., encourage SSA-but-chaste boys to participate). I don't like dancing when we're pistol-whipped by liberal activists, but it's a compromise I can live with. I don't for a second think that those agitating for gay leaders will be any kind of satisfied by the compromise, and BSA is going to have the "moment of truth" soon ---- so they should have tackled the issue head-on this time around, anyway.

I have wrestled with this, because I was released as a bishop in November and called into Cub Scouts. I don't want to make things difficult for the current bishop and cause him stress, but in January when BSA's trial balloon was floated, I struggled with resigning from a calling for the first time in my life. The "let-each-troop-choose-whether-they-will-allow-gay-leaders" policy is unacceptable to me ---- on principle. The stay of execution until May, and the apparent compromise, put off that day, but I don't think it will be for long.

Thanks for answering. I respect your position on staying/leaving scouting. But, saying that we've been "pistol-whipped by liberal activists" seems like a stretch given that this change came from within the BSA... an organization which has a SCOTUS ruling acknowledging their right to prohibit homosexuals from joining.

[USU78]

I'm curious, USU78, what will be your reaction to the vote next week if the BSA decides to change its current membership policy?

This is not meant to be patronizing -- I know some people here in my stake who have said that they will be done with scouting, regardless of the position taken by the church. There are others who *said* that they would be done with scouting until the new resolution was put forward and the church came out in support of it. Now they are willing to give it a try but are cautious. And of course there are others who have not really cared much either way as they don't see it impacting our scouting programs all that much (this last group represents the majority of my acquaintances in the stake).

Given the strong statement you made above -- I'm just curious where you land.

Don't expect a culture of narcissism to breed paragons of restraint and honor.

If you do, you'll surely be disappointed.

[rockpond]

Scouting is a mere shell of what it once was ----- it is now a "participation ribbon" version of what it used to be. The ranks, including Eagle, mean nothing today, as almost no one is turned away (symptom of the "merit badge clinic" mentality).

Along with this, it is a pyramid scheme. Everything, including trainings, cost money (extortionately so), and the time and money commitments violate Church policy (at least, Scouting represents an exception to the CHI policies on time and money demands of members ---- policies which stem from the monumental 1990 changes to Church programs and finances).

I think our young men would be well-served by a "young mens" program as opposed to Scouting. Like the intent of the new de-regulated youth curriculum, I think youth leaders should be tapped to use more initiative to meet Duty to God objectives without the Scouting program ---- and I think our boys would be better off.

That said, I sustain our leaders and the current program, and I carry it out to the best of my ability. I'm currently a Bear leader, my oldest son participates in Scouting, and I attended all of Scout camp every year when I was a bishop. I just think we could take the boys camping and work on things without paying extortionate fees to BSA . . .

Our ward goal for FoS has been in excess of $8,000 some years (it was just over $6,000 this year due to boundary changes resulting in a smaller ward). Most years we achieve that goal (this year we did not... likely as a result of this very controversy).

My point in mentioning that is this: Can you imagine the kind of YM (and YW) program we could run with an extra $6,000-$8,000 in the ward budget?! And if the energy/time channeled into scout training and council support positions could be directed back into ward/stake programs?!

Our stake already does an absolutely amazing young mens' priesthood camp every other summer. And our ward doesn't always use local BSA camps, some years the YM leaders create their own camps, complete with merit badge classes. I love the skills and discipline that my boys are learning in scouts but I feel like the BSA is adding less & less value to our organization.

I'll probably stand beside the BSA for as long as the church does. And if the church and the BSA ever part ways, I'll be a bit sad for the end of the tradition. But I firmly believe we could (and will, if needed) create a better program through Duty To God.

Edited May 17, 2013 by rockpond

[rockpond]

Don't expect a culture of narcissism to breed paragons of restraint and honor.

If you do, you'll surely be disappointed.

You quoted me but I can't figure out what you were responding to. Could you clarify?

[Calm]

We continue to slight the girls, but that doesn't mean I would favor degrading the boys program to the YW level.

If the money that has to go to Scouting were split between the YW and YMs program, I suspect the quality of the YWs would go up. Also removing some of the safety or limitation restrictions that are in place for women that aren't there for the boys such as distance being able to travel.

[Calm]

His head exploded during his Woodbadge ("I can't be the only person here who thinks this is a complete waste of time and money").

My memory said we did Woodbadge in a weekend in Canada, one night and one full day and even that could have been cut down to the one day imo.

[USU78]

You quoted me but I can't figure out what you were responding to. Could you clarify?

People with feelings of same-sex attractions aren't exactly discouraged from acting out these days. Indeed, they're encouraged to act out on those feelings.

Given these encouragements (in the schools, from advocates, in the media, in entertainment media), how extraordinarily strong must a boy be to eschew acting out in the face of unsupervised opportunity? Are you that strong? Am I? How can we expect youth, without our wealth of experience and practice in self denial, possibly to restrain themselves?

[Calm]

Up in Canada, my son went on high altitude hikes and ocean kayaking for his summer Camps and IIRC, they took one year to do a tour of church history sights from NY to IL. Are BSA camps always located at a BSA camp or do they do any traveling?

[rockpond]

People with feelings of same-sex attractions aren't exactly discouraged from acting out these days. Indeed, they're encouraged to act out on those feelings.

Given these encouragements (in the schools, from advocates, in the media, in entertainment media), how extraordinarily strong must a boy be to eschew acting out in the face of unsupervised opportunity? Are you that strong? Am I? How can we expect youth, without our wealth of experience and practice in self denial, possibly to restrain themselves?

Okay. My question was, given the strong feelings you've expressed, do you plan to sever any ties with the BSA if they adopt the new policy? Or, do you not have any to begin with?

[rockpond]

Up in Canada, my son went on high altitude hikes and ocean kayaking for his summer Camps and IIRC, they took one year to do a tour of church history sights from NY to IL. Are BSA camps always located at a BSA camp or do they do any traveling?

The church history tour does not strike me as a BSA event. When I refer to BSA camps, I'm speaking specifically to those that are managed by the BSA or its local councils/districts. I can't answer your question about whether they do any traveling. I imagine that some might.

There are other camps/tours/events (like the church history one that you mentioned) which are likely considered "scout camps" but which are done by local church leaders as opposed to the BSA.

[USU78]

Okay. My question was, given the strong feelings you've expressed, do you plan to sever any ties with the BSA if they adopt the new policy? Or, do you not have any to begin with?

Interesting question. BSA is presently irrelevant. The "cover" for my adult handicapped son's lifetime YM program was BSA, but, in reality, there was little scouting going on . . . though seeing a 70-year-old finally get his eagle was fun.

My own involvement with scouting was so distasteful that I would only be involved for the good of my grandkids . . . and we've got 5 girls and another girl on the way.

BSA I defend because of its symbolic value. When the DNC booed the BSA color guard several years back, it was so shocking that it has informed much of my attitude towards that august body.

If the BSA embraces the counterculture cum culture that that incident signaled in order to make nice-nice with the narcissistic bullies that would tear down the institution that offends what passes for its ideals, then the BSA is no longer worthy of my interest. Period.

[rockpond]

Interesting question. BSA is presently irrelevant. The "cover" for my adult handicapped son's lifetime YM program was BSA, but, in reality, there was little scouting going on . . . though seeing a 70-year-old finally get his eagle was fun.

My own involvement with scouting was so distasteful that I would only be involved for the good of my grandkids . . . and we've got 5 girls and another girl on the way.

BSA I defend because of its symbolic value. When the DNC booed the BSA color guard several years back, it was so shocking that it has informed much of my attitude towards that august body.

If the BSA embraces the counterculture cum culture that that incident signaled in order to make nice-nice with the narcissistic bullies that would tear down the institution that offends what passes for its ideals, then the BSA is no longer worthy of my interest. Period.

Thanks for responding... and colorfully. I certainly agree with the symbolic value of the BSA.

Not sure who "the narcissistic bullies that would tear down the institution" are though. The latest round of membership policy discussions is coming from inside the organization.

[USU78]

Thanks for responding... and colorfully. I certainly agree with the symbolic value of the BSA.

Not sure who "the narcissistic bullies that would tear down the institution" are though. The latest round of membership policy discussions is coming from inside the organization.

All of the homophile advocacy groups are the "narcissistic bullies" I refer to. The psychology, as I've observed, is one of self-indulgence and worship of the self (and all that that implies). Nobody gets to be the grownup, everybody is a Lost Boy. BSA at least tries to maintain the ideal of training youngsters to become useful adults with some minimal ideals of behavior.

Homophile advocacy pushes for eternal youth and unlimited license.

So naturally it bullies out of existence anybody who stands in the way of eternal youth and unlimited license. See, e.g., the response to LDS involvement in Prop 8 . . . as well as the decades' long attacks on BSA.

[rockpond]

So naturally it bullies out of existence anybody who stands in the way of eternal youth and unlimited license. See, e.g., the response to LDS involvement in Prop 8 . . . as well as the decades' long attacks on BSA.

But the BSA came out the victor in those "attacks" with SCOTUS standing firmly behind them. This latest controversy isn't an attack and it isn't bullying. It came from within the organization itself.

[USU78]

But the BSA came out the victor in those "attacks" with SCOTUS standing firmly behind them. This latest controversy isn't an attack and it isn't bullying. It came from within the organization itself.

SCOTUS' present occupant has been all over the place on these issues . . . and would sell his mother if it got his party a retained majority in the senate and/or a majority in the house.

[rockpond]

SCOTUS' present occupant has been all over the place on these issues . . . and would sell his mother if it got his party a retained majority in the senate and/or a majority in the house.

SCOTUS = Supreme Court of the United States

[Stone holm]

SCOTUS' present occupant has been all over the place on these issues . . . and would sell his mother if it got his party a retained majority in the senate and/or a majority in the house.

I think you meant POTUS. He was very reluctant to get pulled into this fray and the brief that the Administration filed was the only "compromise" that was suggested, but it got rebuffed by both sides. The POTUS has a problem in that he tries to promote compromises in situations where neither side really wants to compromise. I find it hard to blame him on being reluctant to entrance to this cultural war. And by the way his mother has been dead for quite sometime.

[Stone holm]

Interesting just had a member of the local gay community stop by and he made a comment that the community was a-buzz with the fact that the Utah giant appears to have become the sleeping Utah giant on certain issues. I then had the opportunity to defend the Church and its policies and explain why it is no longer being politically aggressive on the issue -- and indicated that I doubted that RI and Minnesota had approved gay marriage just because the Church had not entered the political arena in opposition. I explained to him about the Constitutional shield to protect the Church from being forced to perform gay marriages, he said he didn't think that was ever on any agenda -- but some of its businesses might run afoul of gender discrimination. He also opined that the next shoe to drop would be the Muslims challenging the anti-plural marriage ban -- said I didn't disagree, and of course there might be the hippie inspired group marriages.

[USU78]

SCOTUS = Supreme Court of the United States

You know, that's so interesting. I read SCOTUS and my mind saw POTUS.

So . . . never mind what I posted, above. It is not only inapposite, but downright silly.