8 ms·

Boy Scouts of America is a discriminatory religious organization with a ridiculously long record of exclusionary policies [1]. They don't "welcome" gay scouts,

Boy Scouts of America is a discriminatory religious organization with a ridiculously long record of exclusionary policies [1]. They don't "welcome" gay scouts, but permit them. Atheists still aren't allowed to be scout leaders. As a parent I refused to let my son have anything to do with them. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scouts_of_America_membership_controversies https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scouts_of_America_member...

brobdingnagians 8y ago
I think it is important to distinguish between "freedom to act as you see fit" and "discrimation" per see. If you have a private organization and want to give good experiences to young men, then I think you should be able to do so. Someone else can make another organization for young women, or even one for both, each of these provides a unique experience for those who want it, and in a pluralistic society this kind of diversity enriches society for everyone. Look at it more as diversity. Atheists can make their own camps which promote their own ideas and ethics, and it will be a haven for good memories among them. It isn't good to homogenize all of society and attack those who just want their own little "safe haven" and "summer camps" for their children and their cultural ideas without bothering anyone else. I fully support your right to put your son wherever you want, just please support my right to do the same.
- EvanAnderson 8y ago
  The Boy Scouts of America has a congressional charter. They are not a run-of-the-mill private organization. Their discrimination is unacceptable as a publicly-chartered organization.
  - zamadatix 8y ago
    Does that mean anything or is it just honorific like most recognition of groups from the government? I think it's quite well established the Boy Scouts of America are a well recognized group regardless of this so I don't see how this is what makes them non run-of-the-mill.
    - EvanAnderson 8y ago
      The Boy Scouts have used the trademark rights granted by their federal charter to bully other organizations to change their names. In a trademark dispute it would be necessary for a claimant to demonstrate that there is a likelihood of confusion between their mark and the allegedly infringing mark. The BSA has claimed that their federal charter allows them to be exempt from that requirement and, in the 2008 Wrenn vs. BSA decision the court affirmed that claim, stating "The Court agrees with the BSA that it need not demonstrate the likelihood of confusion because it has been granted special protection by Congressional charter." That is sufficient demonstration, to me, that they derive value from their federal charter above and beyond it simply being an honorific.
  - brobdingnagians 8y ago
    One of the problems with our society is that the government has it's hand and it's funding in almost everything. I don't think public institutions should take sides, which means they should get out of interfering with private institutions. If the government didn't take a large percentage of our money to hand out to organizations we disagree with, then maybe we could support the things we do agree with. I wish they didn't have a congressional charter, maybe then they'd be more independent.
    - EvanAnderson 8y ago
      Your libertarian-leaning sentiments don't change the facts. The Boy Scouts of America have a congressional charter. They've used that charter to bully other programs into changing their names (evidence "Youthscouts"[1] or "Hacker Scouts"[2]). If they're going to use the imprimatur of the United States Congress to their advantage then it follows, to me, that they aren't a run-of-the-mill private organization and should be bound by the Constitution in the same way as other public entities. (Their discrimination against atheists, for example, is directly in conflict with the first amendment and, to my mind, unconscionable.) I'm glad to see the Girl Scouts (also federally chartered) going after them. The Girl Scouts have a much better track record of being a good actor when it comes to discrimination and acting like the public entity that they are. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrenn_v._Boy_Scouts_of_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrenn_v._Boy_Scouts_of_America [2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20130821172216/http://hacker-scouts.org/blog/hacker-scouts-and-bsa https://web.archive.org/web/20130821172216/http://hacker-sco...
  - EvanAnderson 8y ago
    BTW: If you find this kind of thing interesting there's some really engaging analysis here: https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/64622/OSLJ_V53N5_1385.pdf https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/64622/OSLJ_V53N5_13...
- richmarr 8y ago
  > I think it is important to distinguish between "freedom to act as you see fit" and "discrimation" per see By all means try to distinguish between them. You haven't yet done so.
  - brobdingnagians 8y ago
    "freedom to act as you see fit" is usually a human right guaranteed legally by the Constitution, but discrimination is a cultural idea which is slowly gaining the power of legal force to prevent people from doing what they would normally choose. To be "discriminating" used to be a compliment, it meant you could intellectualy discern the logical differences between two things, much like how we use "observative". But now it means something more like "making choices someone personally disagrees with or thinks is unfair to a certain preferred group". They are indeed, diametrically opposed in that sense. If it is only a cultural or social opposition to someone's choices, then sure it could be a good thing, but it is becoming more and more a legal construct to oppose a person's freedom to act as they see fit if you think they are being unfair.
    - CydeWeys 8y ago
      > But now it means something more like "making choices someone personally disagrees with or thinks is unfair to a certain preferred group". Your definition of discrimination in the second sense (which is actually listed first in the dictionary) is off. Let's consult that: "The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex." It goes a lot further than merely making disagreeable choices or being unfair.
- xoa 8y ago
  >distinguish between "freedom to act as you see fit" and "discrimination" These are not linked, they are independent and orthogonal. The first is a matter of legal ability, the latter is a moral issue (that may under some circumstances also be illegal). There are many, many instances in life where you have the legal right to do something that is nonetheless despicable, and it is social consequences that moderate it (or not). russellbeattie did not say the Boy Scouts were criminals or should be banned, merely that they are discriminatory. And they are. They apparently have the freedom to be discriminatory, but private citizens may still judge them for that choice. Refusing to have one's child be involved which an organization that does that is a completely legitimate social and moral judgement as a parent. Debating and socially pushing back against evil is a critical part of society and reason free speech and association.
  - brobdingnagians 8y ago
    Err, sure, I support freedom of choice and opposing evil, but calling someone evil for deciding to send their son to a boy's only summer camp seems a bit extreme to me. Civil society also depends on people being tolerant of those they disagree with and practicing kindness and persuasion when they do disagree. Sure, there are things that we set strict laws against and things we oppose morally whether they are legal or not (e.g. murder, mass murder, oppressive surveillance), but which summer camps you decide to sponsor or go to don't seem to me to be part of that list. Maybe I'm just out of touch with society...
    - CydeWeys 8y ago
      Both of your comments are arguing against strawmen. You're the only one calling them evil. You're also the only one talking about the boys-only aspect of it when it's clear that the problems the other commenters have with it are that it discriminates against atheists and homosexuals. Do better.
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  We're not talking about discriminating against girls, but against atheists and LGBT people.
- jmpman 8y ago
  Substitute any other minority for Athiest in your sentence to explore your underestimation of the extent of discrimination you’re advocating.
JoeAltmaier 8y ago
As is every club with any kind of charter. The DAR; the sports teams at my local high school; heck even girl's schools like Wellsley. And the religious component is contained in "adherence to spiritual principles, loyalty to the religion that expresses them and acceptance of the duties resulting therefrom" Its about teaching young people to respect spirituality, to accept loyalty in Scouts to their own faith. I can't see harm in this. Perhaps an Atheist, dogmatically demanding that we all give up faith, could see harm?
- candu 8y ago
  Meanwhile, in Canada: http://wiki.scouts.ca/en/Sexuality http://wiki.scouts.ca/en/Sexuality ...which goes to show that you can run a chartered organization, even one otherwise substantially similar in content and procedure to BSA, without being discriminatory about it. Same goes for religious organizations: several Christian denominations allow openly gay ministers. There's nothing about spirituality that requires we discriminate against or hate each other. IMHO, we can and should expect better of organizations than to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, especially those organizations that purport to model good behavior for youth.
  - grigjd3 8y ago
    The BSA now allows openly gay members and leaders. It took a while to get there, but it happened.
- endymi0n 8y ago
  So which faith should I be loyal to please if I have none? And which universal „spiritual principles“ exist in the world that I could adhere to, except for „whatever my religious leader says“ (of which I don‘t have any)? There‘s simply no logic in these sentences, which points back again to the boy scouts being a de facto religious organization.
  - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
    Most young people do grow up in some spiritual environment, at least in America. And all Scouts are required to respect others' faith. I call straw man - what specific problem is being referred to? An imaginary youth raised in a cave?
ryanmercer 8y ago
>They don't "welcome" gay scouts, but permit them. They don't "welcome" heterosexual scouts, it's a children's organization... sex and sexual orientation have nothing to do with it and should never have anything to do with it given we are talking about MINORS, a good chunk of which are pre-pubescent.
- sb8244 8y ago
  Scouts range ~12 up to 18. Cub scouts are pre-pubescent and also a different organization. Adults should have nothing to do with sexuality then, but it's definitely there for the scouts. The discussions in my troop were very much "keep that away from here" which is a correct attitude coming from 40+ year olds who aren't family.
grigjd3 8y ago
You're aware that they now allow gay members and leaders and that the atheism thing is on it's way out, right? I'm an atheist eagle scout. I'll grant you that it has been tough to get these changes in, but they are clearly happening.
- EvanAnderson 8y ago
  The organization's recent reaffirmation of the "Duty of God" doesn't make me think the "atheism thing" is at all on the "way out": https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/05/31/bsa-reaffirms-duty-to-god-aspect-of-all-programs-through-resolution-adopted-at-2018-national-annual-meeting/ https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/05/31/bsa-reaffirms-d... Where I am, in semi-rural Ohio, I think an openly atheist person would have a very tough time being accepted.
  - grigjd3 8y ago
    Well, as an eagle scout who has influence in this (they actually listen to their eagle scouts), I know many of us have been pushing for a wider view of what is meant for spirituality to include atheists, just like we pushed to allow in gay scout leaders and scouts, and we pushed to open the program to women.
    - CydeWeys 8y ago
      They need to take out the "spirituality" aspect of it, full stop. Atheists by and large aren't "spiritual" for any meaningful definition of the word, and pretending that they are won't actually make atheists feel more welcome.
- lovich 8y ago
  I was told that I would be allowed to stay part of the troop but would not be able to advance on rank any further due to being an athiest, and the people who made that decision are still involved with the organization. Parts of the boy scouts may have moved on, but it is by no means an official change
Balgair 8y ago
The BSA is a large and diverse organization. There are many troops out there and each one is a world unto itself. It takes some time to find a good fit for your child, but it is very much worth the efforts. Many troops and councils have openly bucked National's policies for a while now [0] [1] [2] with varying repercussions. Like any large bureaucratic group of people, change takes time. But I think you can see that change is happening within the BSA. I think that you would be surprised at the inclusiveness of some troops (not all, by any means). Importantly, if you want the scouts to change, doing so from inside the organization is the most expedient way to do so (frustrations are bound to occur though). Please, give Scouts a try! Interview local scoutmasters and attend some troop meetings. I promise that they will be happy to talk with you. If you are in the Bay Area I know of a few troops that may fit your family well. I think you will find a troop that aligns fairly well with your priorities (nothing is ever 100%). If that fails, please consider starting your own troop! [3]. Scouting is a great opportunity for young people. It's a fantastic 'grit' builder, leadership trainer, and social experience. It teaches uncountable lessons to your children and helps them prepare for later life like no other thing [4]. Many people [5] cite their one-of-a-kind scouting experiences as the nucleus of their future careers and passions. Personally, I cannot wait to see what becomes of the first female Eagle. Whomever that young woman will be, I am certain that she will have a unique place in her community and world. The lessons of Scouts are uncountable, the friends are innumerable, and the food is, well, usually inedible. [0] https://www.glaad.org/blog/local-boy-scouts-council-approves-gay-scout-ryan-andresens-eagle-application https://www.glaad.org/blog/local-boy-scouts-council-approves... [1] http://www.scoutingforall.org/data/layer02/store.html http://www.scoutingforall.org/data/layer02/store.html [2] https://www.vox.com/first-person/2017/7/27/16049924/boy-scouts-trump-speech https://www.vox.com/first-person/2017/7/27/16049924/boy-scou... [3] http://www.bsa-grc.org/membership/how-to-start-a-new-unit/54591 http://www.bsa-grc.org/membership/how-to-start-a-new-unit/54... [4] https://www.scouting.org/discover/parent/benefits/ https://www.scouting.org/discover/parent/benefits/ [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eagle_Scouts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eagle_Scouts
dsajames 8y ago
I was in scouting for many years. Why should they welcome anyone? I was permitted to join, onboarded, etc. Anyone else who joined was given the same treatment. The red carpet wasn't rolled out for anyone. It's religious only in a vague way. There was a religious requirement to get Eagle, but aside from that, my troop wasn't religious. My father wasn't religious and he was a scoutmaster. You sound like someone who has made a judgement based on what some people have chosen to highlight. With the same kind of attitude you might think you are in grave danger of getting killed at any moment in America (if you base your opinion on the US on naysayers). Certainly if what some higher ups decide about an org matters to you the most, you shouldn't join. Trump was elected president and lots of liberals found enough reason to still love America. In all seriousness, I learned a lot there. There are other orgs that can accomplish the same. You wouldn't believe how many people I run into today who can't even tie a couple of knots.
Bjartr 8y ago
As an Eagle Scout I'll say that I'm not a huge fan of the BSA organization, but wholeheartedly support local troops. Not every troop is good, to be sure, but I don't think dismissing the whole of Boy Scouts is appropriate.
- carlmr 8y ago
  I loved my time in the Boy Scouts. The organization doesn't matter if you find a troop with a good leader.
paulddraper 8y ago
> They don't "welcome" gay scouts, but permit them. This information is outdated. They had "don't ask, don't tell" for a very long time. But they've had openly gay Scouts since 2014 and openly gay leaders since 2015.
boyce 8y ago
That's odd to read. The scouts are very different in the UK. They have an explicit "Open to all" policy. I know several scout leaders who are gay, plenty who are women, and I believe they've removed the mention of god from the pledge.

brobdingnagians 8y ago

I think it is important to distinguish between "freedom to act as you see fit" and "discrimation" per see. If you have a private organization and want to give good experiences to young men, then I think you should be able to do so. Someone else can make another organization for young women, or even one for both, each of these provides a unique experience for those who want it, and in a pluralistic society this kind of diversity enriches society for everyone. Look at it more as diversity. Atheists can make their own camps which promote their own ideas and ethics, and it will be a haven for good memories among them. It isn't good to homogenize all of society and attack those who just want their own little "safe haven" and "summer camps" for their children and their cultural ideas without bothering anyone else. I fully support your right to put your son wherever you want, just please support my right to do the same.

EvanAnderson 8y ago
The Boy Scouts of America has a congressional charter. They are not a run-of-the-mill private organization. Their discrimination is unacceptable as a publicly-chartered organization.
- zamadatix 8y ago
  Does that mean anything or is it just honorific like most recognition of groups from the government? I think it's quite well established the Boy Scouts of America are a well recognized group regardless of this so I don't see how this is what makes them non run-of-the-mill.
  - EvanAnderson 8y ago
    The Boy Scouts have used the trademark rights granted by their federal charter to bully other organizations to change their names. In a trademark dispute it would be necessary for a claimant to demonstrate that there is a likelihood of confusion between their mark and the allegedly infringing mark. The BSA has claimed that their federal charter allows them to be exempt from that requirement and, in the 2008 Wrenn vs. BSA decision the court affirmed that claim, stating "The Court agrees with the BSA that it need not demonstrate the likelihood of confusion because it has been granted special protection by Congressional charter." That is sufficient demonstration, to me, that they derive value from their federal charter above and beyond it simply being an honorific.
- brobdingnagians 8y ago
  One of the problems with our society is that the government has it's hand and it's funding in almost everything. I don't think public institutions should take sides, which means they should get out of interfering with private institutions. If the government didn't take a large percentage of our money to hand out to organizations we disagree with, then maybe we could support the things we do agree with. I wish they didn't have a congressional charter, maybe then they'd be more independent.
  - EvanAnderson 8y ago
    Your libertarian-leaning sentiments don't change the facts. The Boy Scouts of America have a congressional charter. They've used that charter to bully other programs into changing their names (evidence "Youthscouts"[1] or "Hacker Scouts"[2]). If they're going to use the imprimatur of the United States Congress to their advantage then it follows, to me, that they aren't a run-of-the-mill private organization and should be bound by the Constitution in the same way as other public entities. (Their discrimination against atheists, for example, is directly in conflict with the first amendment and, to my mind, unconscionable.) I'm glad to see the Girl Scouts (also federally chartered) going after them. The Girl Scouts have a much better track record of being a good actor when it comes to discrimination and acting like the public entity that they are. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrenn_v._Boy_Scouts_of_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrenn_v._Boy_Scouts_of_America [2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20130821172216/http://hacker-scouts.org/blog/hacker-scouts-and-bsa https://web.archive.org/web/20130821172216/http://hacker-sco...
- EvanAnderson 8y ago
  BTW: If you find this kind of thing interesting there's some really engaging analysis here: https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/64622/OSLJ_V53N5_1385.pdf https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/64622/OSLJ_V53N5_13...
richmarr 8y ago
> I think it is important to distinguish between "freedom to act as you see fit" and "discrimation" per see By all means try to distinguish between them. You haven't yet done so.
- brobdingnagians 8y ago
  "freedom to act as you see fit" is usually a human right guaranteed legally by the Constitution, but discrimination is a cultural idea which is slowly gaining the power of legal force to prevent people from doing what they would normally choose. To be "discriminating" used to be a compliment, it meant you could intellectualy discern the logical differences between two things, much like how we use "observative". But now it means something more like "making choices someone personally disagrees with or thinks is unfair to a certain preferred group". They are indeed, diametrically opposed in that sense. If it is only a cultural or social opposition to someone's choices, then sure it could be a good thing, but it is becoming more and more a legal construct to oppose a person's freedom to act as they see fit if you think they are being unfair.
  - CydeWeys 8y ago
    > But now it means something more like "making choices someone personally disagrees with or thinks is unfair to a certain preferred group". Your definition of discrimination in the second sense (which is actually listed first in the dictionary) is off. Let's consult that: "The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex." It goes a lot further than merely making disagreeable choices or being unfair.
xoa 8y ago
>distinguish between "freedom to act as you see fit" and "discrimination" These are not linked, they are independent and orthogonal. The first is a matter of legal ability, the latter is a moral issue (that may under some circumstances also be illegal). There are many, many instances in life where you have the legal right to do something that is nonetheless despicable, and it is social consequences that moderate it (or not). russellbeattie did not say the Boy Scouts were criminals or should be banned, merely that they are discriminatory. And they are. They apparently have the freedom to be discriminatory, but private citizens may still judge them for that choice. Refusing to have one's child be involved which an organization that does that is a completely legitimate social and moral judgement as a parent. Debating and socially pushing back against evil is a critical part of society and reason free speech and association.
- brobdingnagians 8y ago
  Err, sure, I support freedom of choice and opposing evil, but calling someone evil for deciding to send their son to a boy's only summer camp seems a bit extreme to me. Civil society also depends on people being tolerant of those they disagree with and practicing kindness and persuasion when they do disagree. Sure, there are things that we set strict laws against and things we oppose morally whether they are legal or not (e.g. murder, mass murder, oppressive surveillance), but which summer camps you decide to sponsor or go to don't seem to me to be part of that list. Maybe I'm just out of touch with society...
  - CydeWeys 8y ago
    Both of your comments are arguing against strawmen. You're the only one calling them evil. You're also the only one talking about the boys-only aspect of it when it's clear that the problems the other commenters have with it are that it discriminates against atheists and homosexuals. Do better.
PhasmaFelis 8y ago
We're not talking about discriminating against girls, but against atheists and LGBT people.
jmpman 8y ago
Substitute any other minority for Athiest in your sentence to explore your underestimation of the extent of discrimination you’re advocating.

JoeAltmaier 8y ago

As is every club with any kind of charter. The DAR; the sports teams at my local high school; heck even girl's schools like Wellsley. And the religious component is contained in "adherence to spiritual principles, loyalty to the religion that expresses them and acceptance of the duties resulting therefrom" Its about teaching young people to respect spirituality, to accept loyalty in Scouts to their own faith. I can't see harm in this. Perhaps an Atheist, dogmatically demanding that we all give up faith, could see harm?

candu 8y ago
Meanwhile, in Canada: http://wiki.scouts.ca/en/Sexuality http://wiki.scouts.ca/en/Sexuality ...which goes to show that you can run a chartered organization, even one otherwise substantially similar in content and procedure to BSA, without being discriminatory about it. Same goes for religious organizations: several Christian denominations allow openly gay ministers. There's nothing about spirituality that requires we discriminate against or hate each other. IMHO, we can and should expect better of organizations than to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, especially those organizations that purport to model good behavior for youth.
- grigjd3 8y ago
  The BSA now allows openly gay members and leaders. It took a while to get there, but it happened.
endymi0n 8y ago
So which faith should I be loyal to please if I have none? And which universal „spiritual principles“ exist in the world that I could adhere to, except for „whatever my religious leader says“ (of which I don‘t have any)? There‘s simply no logic in these sentences, which points back again to the boy scouts being a de facto religious organization.
- JoeAltmaier 8y ago
  Most young people do grow up in some spiritual environment, at least in America. And all Scouts are required to respect others' faith. I call straw man - what specific problem is being referred to? An imaginary youth raised in a cave?

ryanmercer 8y ago

>They don't "welcome" gay scouts, but permit them. They don't "welcome" heterosexual scouts, it's a children's organization... sex and sexual orientation have nothing to do with it and should never have anything to do with it given we are talking about MINORS, a good chunk of which are pre-pubescent.

sb8244 8y ago
Scouts range ~12 up to 18. Cub scouts are pre-pubescent and also a different organization. Adults should have nothing to do with sexuality then, but it's definitely there for the scouts. The discussions in my troop were very much "keep that away from here" which is a correct attitude coming from 40+ year olds who aren't family.

grigjd3 8y ago

You're aware that they now allow gay members and leaders and that the atheism thing is on it's way out, right? I'm an atheist eagle scout. I'll grant you that it has been tough to get these changes in, but they are clearly happening.

EvanAnderson 8y ago
The organization's recent reaffirmation of the "Duty of God" doesn't make me think the "atheism thing" is at all on the "way out": https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/05/31/bsa-reaffirms-duty-to-god-aspect-of-all-programs-through-resolution-adopted-at-2018-national-annual-meeting/ https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/05/31/bsa-reaffirms-d... Where I am, in semi-rural Ohio, I think an openly atheist person would have a very tough time being accepted.
- grigjd3 8y ago
  Well, as an eagle scout who has influence in this (they actually listen to their eagle scouts), I know many of us have been pushing for a wider view of what is meant for spirituality to include atheists, just like we pushed to allow in gay scout leaders and scouts, and we pushed to open the program to women.
  - CydeWeys 8y ago
    They need to take out the "spirituality" aspect of it, full stop. Atheists by and large aren't "spiritual" for any meaningful definition of the word, and pretending that they are won't actually make atheists feel more welcome.
lovich 8y ago
I was told that I would be allowed to stay part of the troop but would not be able to advance on rank any further due to being an athiest, and the people who made that decision are still involved with the organization. Parts of the boy scouts may have moved on, but it is by no means an official change

Balgair 8y ago

The BSA is a large and diverse organization. There are many troops out there and each one is a world unto itself. It takes some time to find a good fit for your child, but it is very much worth the efforts. Many troops and councils have openly bucked National's policies for a while now [0] [1] [2] with varying repercussions. Like any large bureaucratic group of people, change takes time. But I think you can see that change is happening within the BSA. I think that you would be surprised at the inclusiveness of some troops (not all, by any means). Importantly, if you want the scouts to change, doing so from inside the organization is the most expedient way to do so (frustrations are bound to occur though). Please, give Scouts a try! Interview local scoutmasters and attend some troop meetings. I promise that they will be happy to talk with you. If you are in the Bay Area I know of a few troops that may fit your family well. I think you will find a troop that aligns fairly well with your priorities (nothing is ever 100%). If that fails, please consider starting your own troop! [3]. Scouting is a great opportunity for young people. It's a fantastic 'grit' builder, leadership trainer, and social experience. It teaches uncountable lessons to your children and helps them prepare for later life like no other thing [4]. Many people [5] cite their one-of-a-kind scouting experiences as the nucleus of their future careers and passions. Personally, I cannot wait to see what becomes of the first female Eagle. Whomever that young woman will be, I am certain that she will have a unique place in her community and world. The lessons of Scouts are uncountable, the friends are innumerable, and the food is, well, usually inedible. [0] https://www.glaad.org/blog/local-boy-scouts-council-approves-gay-scout-ryan-andresens-eagle-application https://www.glaad.org/blog/local-boy-scouts-council-approves... [1] http://www.scoutingforall.org/data/layer02/store.html http://www.scoutingforall.org/data/layer02/store.html [2] https://www.vox.com/first-person/2017/7/27/16049924/boy-scouts-trump-speech https://www.vox.com/first-person/2017/7/27/16049924/boy-scou... [3] http://www.bsa-grc.org/membership/how-to-start-a-new-unit/54591 http://www.bsa-grc.org/membership/how-to-start-a-new-unit/54... [4] https://www.scouting.org/discover/parent/benefits/ https://www.scouting.org/discover/parent/benefits/ [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eagle_Scouts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eagle_Scouts

dsajames 8y ago

I was in scouting for many years. Why should they welcome anyone? I was permitted to join, onboarded, etc. Anyone else who joined was given the same treatment. The red carpet wasn't rolled out for anyone. It's religious only in a vague way. There was a religious requirement to get Eagle, but aside from that, my troop wasn't religious. My father wasn't religious and he was a scoutmaster. You sound like someone who has made a judgement based on what some people have chosen to highlight. With the same kind of attitude you might think you are in grave danger of getting killed at any moment in America (if you base your opinion on the US on naysayers). Certainly if what some higher ups decide about an org matters to you the most, you shouldn't join. Trump was elected president and lots of liberals found enough reason to still love America. In all seriousness, I learned a lot there. There are other orgs that can accomplish the same. You wouldn't believe how many people I run into today who can't even tie a couple of knots.

Bjartr 8y ago

As an Eagle Scout I'll say that I'm not a huge fan of the BSA organization, but wholeheartedly support local troops. Not every troop is good, to be sure, but I don't think dismissing the whole of Boy Scouts is appropriate.

carlmr 8y ago
I loved my time in the Boy Scouts. The organization doesn't matter if you find a troop with a good leader.

paulddraper 8y ago

> They don't "welcome" gay scouts, but permit them. This information is outdated. They had "don't ask, don't tell" for a very long time. But they've had openly gay Scouts since 2014 and openly gay leaders since 2015.

boyce 8y ago

That's odd to read. The scouts are very different in the UK. They have an explicit "Open to all" policy. I know several scout leaders who are gay, plenty who are women, and I believe they've removed the mention of god from the pledge.