- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Below is a link to the latest statement about scouting. http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-re-evaluating-scouting-program Any comments?
Why say anything? The BSA left room for individual charters to make their own decision, the church already said it would only staff heterosexual men in the leadership callings. Lastly – what doctrine.
I’m stumped.
I would love to see the church disassociate, even if I wouldn’t like this reason. I understand the irony of that statement.
Actually, I think this is a slight shift in church stance. Women have been permitted to be Scout leaders, including Scoutmaster, for decades, but the church simply doesn’t appoint women. I assumed (and still do assume) the church will do the same with openly gay leaders. I am a bit surprised at the tone of this statement, and I think part of it stems from being ticked off they held the vote when they did. Part of the statement sounds a bit like a threat, which is something the church generally doesn’t openly do with business relationships. FWIW, I do think it’s an empty threat. On the other hand, it might be good for the church to reexamine its relationship with Scouting. It does not fit all boys or all units. Scouting in other parts of the world is different. And, as the parent of three Eagles I can say it gets expensive. I would not be opposed to a different program – as long as it is a program and not just hanging out in the gym Wednesday nights (which also does not fit all boys).
The tone of the statement surprises me and i can’t remember the last statement that was this bold. It sounds like a threat to me also. The downside about leaving scouting is that we’d be left with Duty to God which I think interests young men even less than scouting. At least with scouting there is a modicum of diversity. DTG is only Mormons, is one dimensional (spiritual) and has no name brand recognition like Eagle Scouts.
I think there is a middle road for the church and BSA. We stay but don’t pay as much money.
Apparently, July is a vacation time in Church leadership councils, and even more apparently, that includes people responsible for the vetting process for press releases. Doctrine? When I read the statement, the following immediately came to mind:
[attachment=0]17896981-400-221.jpg[/attachment] Quote:As a global organization with members in 170 countries, the Church has long been evaluating the limitations that fully one-half of its youth face where Scouting is not available.
They sound like they are threatening to take away scouts as a churchwide program since it is not uniform across the world. I would assume the young men’s program would take its place. Or perhaps they are considering instituting its own program.
They also seem to be insinuating the timing of the decision from BSA was intentionally meant to prevent the church from reacting to it, or perhaps having LDS representation on a BSA council? I am not convinced the BSA would pull a move like that given how big the church is on scouting.
SilentDawning wrote:Quote:As a global organization with members in 170 countries, the Church has long been evaluating the limitations that fully one-half of its youth face where Scouting is not available.
They sound like they are threatening to take away scouts as a churchwide program since it is not uniform across the world. I would assume the young men’s program would take its place. Or perhaps they are considering instituting its own program.
They also seem to be insinuating the timing of the decision from BSA was intentionally meant to prevent the church from reacting to it, or perhaps having LDS representation on a BSA council? I am not convinced the BSA would pull a move like that given how big the church is on scouting.
The church already does not do scouting in many (most) countries since in most countries the scouting leadership (scouting corporation) sets up the leaders. In the US the chartering organization (in our case the ward) sets up the leadership and the scouting corporation only gets involved if the background check comes back cloudy.It would seem odd that the BSA would have done this on purpose without the LDS leadership being there, but where was the LDS leadership? Didn’t they know a meeting was being held? It isn’t a total surprise. The head of the BSA said months ago “it is time to consider changing this”
I have mixed feelings. While I’m not a fan of the expense of scouting, I do think the activities are great for the boys and wish that the girls had a similarly good program. Aside from that, the church seems to be acting pretty churlishly here. Their “right to discriminate” is still intact and not under threat. And yet they want to take their cookies and go home. Right. The idea that the church thinks the boys are safer with heterosexual men is pretty stupid on their part. Gay men are not the same thing as pedophiles. Jerry Sandusky was a married heterosexual.
Hawkgrrl said Quote:Their “right to discriminate” is still intact and not under threat. And yet they want to take their cookies and go home.
This is a huge question – both the SCOTUS ruling and this one give individual churches or charters the right to do what they feel best – i.e. not perform marriages or have gay scout leaders. Why then the over reactions. Extra letters, a brazen response from Otterson and team? I really don’t get it.
I still don’t know what doctrine they are talking about.
I never enjoyed scouting and neither did my son. That program could disappear tomorrow and I personally wouldn’t care. I accept that some would not feel that way. Interesting post on this at BCC http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/07/28/memo-to-the-newsroom-if-the-real-leaders-are-away-best-to-keep-quiet-until-they-get-back/ ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/07/28/memo-to-the-newsroom-if-the-real-leaders-are-away-best-to-keep-quiet-until-they-get-back/ Gerald wrote:I never enjoyed scouting and neither did my son. That program could disappear tomorrow and I personally wouldn’t care. I accept that some would not feel that way.
The option to be part of other troops in the community has always been present. I’m sure this is one of those things that different outside the Corridor, but for some of the small wards and branches here in the east participation in an outside troop is the only option because there are not enough boys or leaders to run a viable troop. Many of these troops are sponsored by other churches, some of which have the same respect for no Sunday camping as we do. My two older sons both participated in another troop when our own troop was suffering from extremely poor leadership.
I do support Scouting. I can’t say for sure that my boys would have participated were it not for the church, but I can’t say they wouldn’t have either. Well run troops do provide a good program that is beneficial if the particular young man is interested. My kids were/are also involved in sports which is just one competing interest.
I think the sheer number of boys in the Corridor will prevent the church from totally severing its ties with Scouting – but this is another of those areas where there eventually has to be a recognition that we are not just a Utah church and things don’t necessarily work the same in the rest of the world. As I said earlier, I’m OK with a different program as long as it is a program – and I agree it needs to be more than Duty to God. Unless the church has a “Plan B” sitting in a file cabinet (which I doubt), coming up with such a program is a major effort that will take time to develop and implement.
Quote:Unless the church has a “Plan B” sitting in a file cabinet (which I doubt), coming up with such a program is a major effort that will take time to develop and implement.
My understanding is that the Church DOES have a plan B. I couldn’t tell you where I heard this (so it must be relegated to the Mormon Myth column perhaps) but back when that Supreme Court case was in the news: Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000) [Thanks Google!] I remember some leader saying that very thing. The implication was that if the Supreme Court had ruled in favor of Dale, the Church would have pulled out and this alternative program would have been put in place. (My dim memory seems to tell me that the alternative did indeed center around “Duty for God”)
My, how things change in 15 years!
DarkJedi, I hope I didn’t come across as dismissive of BSA or individuals’ valuable experiences with that organization. I know that many have good experiences. My experience was always in wards in the Mormon belt where extremes seemed to rule. I saw one of my friends get his Eagle at age 12 (his father was a rabid scouter) and seeing how little impact it seemed to have on his life, jaded me a bit. Then I observed my son who never had boy scout leaders that really engaged with him also left me with a bad taste in my mouth. (I will say that when he was 11, his scout leader was terrific!) The program is great in theory but very hit and miss in implementation.
From today’s http://www.sltrib.com Quote:LDS Church leaders say they will evaluate the faith’s centurylong relationship with the Boy Scouts of America in the wake of Scouting’s decision to immediately end a blanket ban on gay adult leaders.
The policy change was approved Monday evening by the BSA’s 80-member National Executive Board in a teleconference. The new policy allows church-sponsored Scout units to maintain the exclusion because of their religion.
Even so, Mormon apostle Jeffrey R. Holland and LDS Young Men President Stephen Owen voted against the policy change, church spokesman Eric Hawkins told The Salt Lake Tribune.
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is deeply troubled by today’s vote,” the Utah-based faith said in a news release. “The admission of openly gay leaders is inconsistent with the doctrines of the church and what have traditionally been the values of the Boy Scouts of America.”
Again, what doctrines? What values?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.