- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SilentDawning wrote:
Here is a more journalistic interpretation of the Scouting policy.https://www.yahoo.com/news/mormon-church-pulls-older-teens-boy-scouts-132902626.html It seems to imply that a long term movement away from Scouting for ALL boys is signaled by this change to the program for older youth.
You could also look at it the way a business guy would. When we have supplier who we want to maintain a relationship with, but who is not behaving, it’s not uncommon to reduce the book of business we have with them, reroute the business to competitor for a while, or otherwise signal they are at risk of losing their business with us unless they stop doing something that bothers us. So, you could look at the shift away from BSA for older boys as a warning shot over the bow to the BSA. It is not a huge amount of boys, but significant enough to send a message to the BSA…
The thing I don’t get is that the BSA always lets religious groups implement the program as it fits their own communities and religious values. So, whether the BSA allows gay leaders, or opens the program to girls and women in their template for the program has no effect on any religious organization that disagrees with those policies — other than the trend it shows in society.
Does the entrechment of values the church does not support in society by such BSA policies warrant the church’s withdrawal from scouting eventually?
I think the real underlying factor here is that in the not too distant future the church needs a program that fits all boys everywhere – like YW does. That is, Scouting is pretty much only a US and Canada thing. In the not too distant future the majority of our deacons aren’t going to live in those places. This is a growing pain for the church, but a necessary one.
SilentDawning wrote:
You could also look at it the way a business guy would. When we have supplier who we want to maintain a relationship with, but who is not behaving, it’s not uncommon to reduce the book of business we have with them, reroute the business to competitor for a while, or otherwise signal they are at risk of losing their business with us unless they stop doing something that bothers us. So, you could look at the shift away from BSA for older boys as a warning shot over the bow to the BSA. It is not a huge amount of boys, but significant enough to send a message to the BSA…
Interesting theory.
Willhewonder wrote:
This change gets scouts in the Church closer to what it was 50 years ago when I was in scouts. Be hard to go to Mutual now after turning 14, but did you see the note about once a month? Maybe not so bad.
I didn’t see the note about once a month. What are the details of that?
Some years ago my stake experimented with a not-every-week mutual night for kids in that 10 to 11 year old range. The end result was no one, not even the leaders, could keep track of the weeks when people were supposed to show up. We quickly moved back to the every week schedule.
If the church moved to a once a month program I suspect there would be lots of people forgetting about the meeting and not showing up, not unlike when you show up to church and only realize it’s fast Sunday once someone in the BP mentions it during the opening announcements… but that never happens.
DarkJedi wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
Here is a more journalistic interpretation of the Scouting policy.https://www.yahoo.com/news/mormon-church-pulls-older-teens-boy-scouts-132902626.html It seems to imply that a long term movement away from Scouting for ALL boys is signaled by this change to the program for older youth.
You could also look at it the way a business guy would. When we have supplier who we want to maintain a relationship with, but who is not behaving, it’s not uncommon to reduce the book of business we have with them, reroute the business to competitor for a while, or otherwise signal they are at risk of losing their business with us unless they stop doing something that bothers us. So, you could look at the shift away from BSA for older boys as a warning shot over the bow to the BSA. It is not a huge amount of boys, but significant enough to send a message to the BSA…
The thing I don’t get is that the BSA always lets religious groups implement the program as it fits their own communities and religious values. So, whether the BSA allows gay leaders, or opens the program to girls and women in their template for the program has no effect on any religious organization that disagrees with those policies — other than the trend it shows in society.
Does the entrechment of values the church does not support in society by such BSA policies warrant the church’s withdrawal from scouting eventually?
I think the real underlying factor here is that in the not too distant future the church needs a program that fits all boys everywhere – like YW does. That is, Scouting is pretty much only a US and Canada thing. In the not too distant future the majority of our deacons aren’t going to live in those places.
This is a growing pain for the church, but a necessary one.
Excacerbated by BSA’s stance on gender quality and same sex positions in the BSA….if they were really happy with the program, would they not have considered expanding the BSA concept to other countries?
SilentDawning wrote:
Excacerbated by BSA’s stance on gender quality and same sex positions in the BSA….
I initially read “same” as “some” and had to do a double-take.
As you were.
Reuben wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
Excacerbated by BSA’s stance on gender quality and same sex positions in the BSA….
I initially read “same” as “some” and had to do a double-take.
As you were.
There were others with their mind in a gutter. I saw on the blogThe Church is Partially Pulling Out of ScoutsAnd there was one quote (removed) saying something like
Quote:you may want to rethink your title!
And someone out did them by commenting
Quote:Iām not sure I understand the thrust of your comment
š® š³ :wtf: I was about to reply with something, but then your name gave me pause. SilentDawning wrote:Excacerbated by BSA’s stance on gender quality and same sex positions in the BSA….if they were really happy with the program, would they not have considered expanding the BSA concept to other countries?
While Scouting exists in many countries, it’s not anywhere near what BSA does IMO. I do think at one point the Church highly desired YM in all countries to participate in their country’s version of Scouts. In the dark ages when we missionaries could only communicate by snail mail and used flipbooks, wards in New Zealand did use Scouting – but it just wasn’t the same. Likewise, in more liberal countries the idea of Scouting being more open is likely way ahead of the US, hence not of interest to the church.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
I was about to reply with something, but then your name gave me pause.š³ I had never thought about my pseudonym in that way. I was thinking when I created it more like “very studious” as in I was studying this out. I did wonder if someone thought I was a body-builder, but this is more like me
[img]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51a5fJ-y0pL._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [/img] Reminds me of what Mae West said — sanitized — “A studious man is good to find”. LookingHard wrote:
Over dinner my son asked, “so do they have a program to replace it. I mentioned the activity of cleaning the church and my son said, “Oh Crap” and his mom got on him. he he he
Lol!
In our ward for the past few years we have been fudging the paperwork anyways, as we have only a few YM and many times there were none in a particular program (no Teachers for example) we would fill positions with names just to have slots filled and keep the charter going.
I understood why the programs were set up.like they were, mirroring the priesthood offices so quorum’s could stay together, and this was confirmed when I saw the history of how venturing and varsity came into being. It’s been in transition and change through the years, and we are at the beginning of another transition.
Personally I would have like it had we kept the boys in one troop from 11-18. The younger boys need the older ones to look up to, and the older ones need to help the younger.
Of the half of the YM that are active, only half of those are interested in scouts, and half of those again are the ones that are actually committed to showing up every week. It’s disheartening coming from a parental point of view and from leadership. Often we have the same boy show up alone to scouts.
He will be the one that will continue towards Eagle, and unless the other parents step up their game and make it a priority the other boys wont.
It’ll be interesting to see the new program that gets rolled out by the church. It will take a few years to implement. The award at the end of the new program, won’t be and Eagle scout award, unless it is an integrated program that will qualify while working on spiritually based goals as well (ie: some duty to God stuff qualified with bsa requirements ).
I’m glad that lone 15 year old will still be able to work towards his Eagle. The other boys that are not currently showing up probably won’t show up for this new program. Don’t like to be a downer but I’m a realist.
Long and short, I’m glad varsity is going away (essentially this will kill it as there are very few non-lds varsity teams). Looking forward to changes and hopeful that scouting will still be string in the church even though it’s not for everyone, we’ve always tailored it to boys that weren’t scouty.
Even if they allow girls in bsa, that would be fine with me. Our program has camp etc. and I know some of the girls would love high adventure.
I agree with most all you said LDS_SM (I think I probably already posted it!) On you last comment of integrating the YW. I still think there is way too much “you got to keep the kids away from each other or they will be sexing all over the place” mentality. A stake near me required girls going to camp to wear crew neck t-shirts over their swimsuits in 100 degree/100% humidity. The justification is that there will be maybe 2 adult males there acting as lifeguards. That is just sickening to hear about. If it was my daughter, I would have raise a bit of hell over that.
I am sure a PORTION of the girls (just as a PORTION of the boys) would love many high adventures – and some boys and girls would rather not – depending on the activity.
But remember they did say they were aware for some time about the funding differential between YW and YM. So we assume they would equalize the funding, but that does not mean they would equalize the fun.
LDS_Scoutmaster wrote:
Personally I would have like it had we kept the boys in one troop from 11-18. The younger boys need the older ones to look up to, and the older ones need to help the younger.
This. Exactly this. I was in a scout troop sponsored by a Methodist church and
that’s how we did things and we liked itLDS_Scoutmaster wrote:
The award at the end of the new program, won’t be and Eagle scout award…
Each award could be an extra long fringe to put on the borders of a white shirt, which is the uniform of the priesthood.
:angel: :angel: :angel: :angel: :angel: nibbler wrote:
Each award could be an extra long fringe to put on the borders of a white shirt, which is the uniform of the priesthood.:angel: :angel: :angel: :angel: :angel:
How about now with the bsa allowing girls? Maybe fringe that covers the knees?
nibbler wrote:This. Exactly this. I was in a scout troop sponsored by a Methodist church and
that’s how we did things and we liked itSame here. A large part of Scouting (outside the Church) was always learning how to turn experience into leadership. You can’t get that by splitting up the kids to the point where everyone’s at very similar experience levels.
Quote:I realize this can’t work everywhere due to geography but that’s why I’d like to see one troop at the stake level as opposed to every ward having its own troop. It solves the problem where more leaders show up than actual kids.
Maybe a (reasonable) geographic limitation on multiple troops within a stake. My stake is well over an hour drive across, and the stake center is at the edge of the stake, so limiting it to one troop would be a death sentence for Scouting, (though forcing some of the kids into non-LDS troops likely wouldn’t be such a terrible thing) but maybe no additional troops within a stake boundary unless the meetinghouse is at least 20 miles from any existing troop in the stake. (And I might even say that “within the stake” is being too Church-culturey; what the heck would it really hurt if a troop has some kids from the next stake over?)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.