stemelbow Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I think the boys who are really working on it do care. My oldest son doesn't seem to care and doesn't work that hard at scouting. I've decided not to make an issue out of it. Our other two boys really want to get their Eagle. Some would care, some would not. I had initially thought most would not, but I'm probably wrong. It may be pretty evenly split.
KevinG Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 If I were a boy who was close to my eagle and the church said, no more scouts, I'd say, Wahoo! I didn't need to get that meaningless award anywho. NO offense to scouts, I'm just saying, I don't know that that many boys would care. My youngest son's response to the original announcement was "I'd better hurry up and finish my project while I can still do it in the Church". Your personal experience does not translate generally. There are alternatives to Scouting (Duty to God, Missionary Work, school clubs, basketball, YM non-Scouting activities, etc.) available to all Young Men. Scouting is an option not a requirement. It does not have to be done to go to the temple, go on a mission, go to BYU, take the Sacrament, etc. In fact my younger boys have chosen to join a local Venture Crew that is more active in Scouting than the ward so they can continue to enjoy it along with their baby sister, our families first female Scout. Two of my daughters qualified for the YW Recognition Award. I wish we could have made their ceremony as big a deal as the Eagle - that is something we do need to correct in the church IMO. The youngest was more interested in doing what her brothers did (Scouts) so we made it happen. I have never pressured a boy to get an Eagle. If someone has they are doing it wrong. 2
KevinG Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I wish the PA crew didn't go rogue in their public statements(-; You and the First Presdiency probably agree on that. (Scott? Oh Scott? any insights?)
KevinG Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 They announced the vote weeks in advance. The church responded by saying they were on vacation during July and asked for it to be postponed. That request was denied and the vote was held as scheduled. Ahhh... thanks for clarifying.
ALarson Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 If I were a boy who was close to my eagle and the church said, no more scouts, I'd say, Wahoo! I didn't need to get that meaningless award anywho. NO offense to scouts, I'm just saying, I don't know that that many boys would care.I would think if a boy was close to earning his Eagle, he'd already have a lot invested in it and would want to finish it. Not always, but generally if a boy gets that far, he's interested in scouting and has set a goal to earn his Eagle scout. And, to call the award "meaningless" is your opinion and you have every right to feel that way. However, many would disagree with you and I'm one of them. Both of my sons earned theirs and they've had employers tell them it was impressive to see that on their resumes. I agree that the older a boy gets this doesn't always apply. 4
stemelbow Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I would think if a boy was close to earning his Eagle, he'd already have a lot invested in it and would want to finish it. Not always, but generally if a boy gets that far, he's interested in scouting and has set a goal to earn his Eagle scout. And, to call the award "meaningless" is your opinion and you have every right to feel that way. However, many would disagree with you and I'm one of them. Both of my sons earned theirs and they've had employers tell them it was impressive to see that on their resumes. I agree that the older a boy gets this doesn't always apply. I didn't say I thought it meaningless, only that many boys do think it meaningless.
Buckeye Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Very good knews. Just in time for our court of honor tonight and pack meeting tomorrow.
KevinG Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I didn't say I thought it meaningless, only that many boys do think it meaningless. I'd ask for help with grammar if that was your intent. Don't ask me I use a proof reader at work. 1
KevinG Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Very good knews. Just in time for our court of honor tonight and pack meeting tomorrow. Thank goodness you won't be in a state of apostasy tonight. Imagine if they had made the announcement a day later. Your poor Bishopric would have had a lot of paperwork on their hands.
stemelbow Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I'd ask for help with grammar if that was your intent. Don't ask me I use a proof reader at work. Sure. I meant to suggest any old average boy might say something like that, as I put myself in their shoes. Meant no offense, as I said in that very post.
KevinG Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Sure. I meant to suggest any old average boy might say something like that, as I put myself in their shoes.Meant no offense, as I said in that very post. No troubles... I cant resist a good opportunity to tease!
jbarm Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Read the statement. I read it as "The Church is not immediately leaving Scouting but probably will in the not-to-distant future." Lukewarm endorsement of participation. Once the lawsuits are filed, easy exit. The damage has been done to Friends of Scouting already. I'm predicting a precipitous drop in donations starting now. 3
KevinG Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I think it reads "we will continue the relationship as long as the BSA defends our right to select our own leaders, by our own standards". That is how the local non-religious troops, Protestant sponsored troops, and Catholic sponsored troops are reacting in our area (Atlanta). Although some Catholic and Protestant sponsoring organizations have already dropped their programs. I'm guessing anyone who attempts to mind read the brethren and predict something outside of the face value of this statement will be disappointed, surprised, or wrong. (Including me). 1
The Nehor Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I read it as "staying for now but no promises. No matter what happens we wish the best for BSA with or without us" 2
Stone holm Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I think this pretty much confirms that initial statement was probably a "rogue" comment from somebody in the Public Affairs department regardless of whether the Church backed up the misfire and denied that there was any "daylight". The initial comment was truly badly thought out. 2
rockpond Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 I heard the vote was a surprise. Perhaps my rumor mill needs tuning? The MormonNewsroom.org statement after the July 27 vote made it sounds as if Mormon members of the board were not able to vote. But that is incorrect. Our three members (Elder Holland is one, I can't recall the other two) all voted "no" on the proposal. They were in the ~20% minority of that vote. The vote was announced a month in advance. And the Church News published a statement from the church two weeks prior to the vote indicating the we would need to retain the right to choose scout leaders according to our own principles and beliefs (paraphrasing). 1
ERayR Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 (edited) I think this pretty much confirms that initial statement was probably a "rogue" comment from somebody in the Public Affairs department regardless of whether the Church backed up the misfire and denied that there was any "daylight". The initial comment was truly badly thought out. Not necessarily. It could very well been a warning that the BSA had gone far enough. This sentence (in the current release) reinforces that warning: ” At this time, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will go forward as a chartering organization of BSA." At this time the Church will continue its association but the relationship is not on the solid ground it once was. Edited August 26, 2015 by ERayR
KevinG Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Still not donating to Friends of Scouting. Still not donating to Friends of Scouting. Never did... never will... I prefer to do a donation from my paycheck to the local BSA Council. That way it goes to support my Troop, Crew, Lodge, etc. Of course as any parent of a youth involved in Scouts, Music, Sports. etc... I make lots of direct donations for activities. 2
ERayR Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Never did... never will... I prefer to do a donation from my paycheck to the local BSA Council. That way it goes to support my Troop, Crew, Lodge, etc. Of course as any parent of a youth involved in Scouts, Music, Sports. etc... I make lots of direct donations for activities. Mine go to the ward scout troop. 1
rockpond Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Not necessarily. It could very well been a warning that the BSA had gone far enough. This sentence (in the current release) reinforces that warning: ” At this time, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will go forward as a chartering organization of BSA." At this time the Church will continue its association but the relationship is not on the solid ground it once was. Same threat we've been making since the 90's.
ERayR Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Same threat we've been making since the 90's. Such is the negotiation process.
rockpond Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Still not donating to Friends of Scouting. In the past years, our Stake Presidency has set goals/quotas for each ward's Friends of Scouting campaign. I believe it was $175 per registered scout this year. It will be interesting to see if the stake continues that for 2016 in the wake of this decision.
rockpond Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Such is the negotiation process. Empty threats weaken your negotiating position.
ERayR Posted August 26, 2015 Posted August 26, 2015 Empty threats weaken your negotiating position. Who said they are empty?
Recommended Posts