Boy Scouts of America changing name to more inclusive Scouting America after years of woes

cross-posted from: lemmy.ca/post/20749204

Another positive step in the right direction for an organization rife with brokenness. There’s a lot I don’t like about the organization, but this is something a love–a scouting organization open to young women and the lgbtq community. The next step is being inclusive of nonreligious agnostic and atheist youth and leaders. As well as ending the cultural appropriation of Native American peoples.

May this organization continue to build up youth, never allow further violence against youth, and make amends for all the wrongs. There’s a lot of good that comes out of organizations like this and I won’t discount it even though it’s riddled with a dark history.

Omniraptor,

Does anyone else think “scouts of America” would have rolled off the tongue a lot better than “scouting America”

Malfeasant,

Equal opportunity for molestation…

joel1974,

Will the Girl Scouts do the same thing?

bluewing,

Probably not. they are to busy getting little girls to sell cookies for their own corporate profit.

GlassHalfHopeful,
@GlassHalfHopeful@lemmy.ca avatar

They are different organizations with different purposes and missions. Throughout all the changes within the boy scouts, I have yet to hear of any changes within the girl scouts.

arin,

Why not just merge boy and girl scouts into boys and girls scouts?

Starkstruck,

They’re two completely separate organizations with different goals. Girl Scouts is centered almost entirely around getting the girls to sell cookies, cause yay free child labor.

intensely_human,

This is not uplifting. Boys benefit from single-sex spaces just like girls do.

zalgotext,

Boys have tons and tons and tons of other male-only and male-dominated groups to choose from, they’ll live

Iceblade02,

I’ll bite - give me some examples of real-life male-only spaces that aren’t sports related.

intensely_human,

Like what?

TinyShonk,

There’s separate boy and girl troops, it’s been that way for a few years.

postmateDumbass,

Summer camp got slightly cooler.

Omniraptor,

Do they really tho?

Rivalarrival,

The next step is being inclusive of nonreligious agnostic and atheist youth and leaders.

Technically, they already are, with the possible exception of nihilists.

The scout oath does include a “duty to god”, but they do not define what they mean by “god” or “religion”. Instead, they explicitly leave those definitions to the scout.

The only requirements they actually have on the subject of religion is 1. tolerance for the beliefs of others, and 2. “reverence” for your own creed.

Under their policy, “the laws of thermodynamics” is a perfectly acceptable “god”, and “In this house, we respect the laws of thermodynamics” is a perfectly acceptable “religious” creed.

“The environment” is a perfectly acceptable god, and “we must preserve and protect our environment” is another perfectly acceptable “religious” creed.

I readily concede that their policy is needlessly complex. It would be easier to just drop the “duty to god” and “reverent” requirements entirely.

wanderer,

Treating the oath as something that can be worked around using wordplay does nothing but make a complete mockery of the oath. We had this debate a over century ago when trial witnesses were required to swear an oath to god and atheists were prevented from being witnesses. The solution wasn’t to allow atheists to use god as a metaphor for reality, but to remove the requirement for a belief in a god.

Rivalarrival,

The members of the organization decide how changes will be implemented. The members (citizens) of the US decided to remove the references. The members of scouting decided to keep the vague concept of religion, and leave it to the individual to determine specifics.

It is not “mockery” to understand that the religious aspects of scouting are defined by the scout and the scout’s family, rather than BSA or a church.

wanderer,

You are suggesting that it is acceptable to for scouts that do not believe in any god to lie and say that they do. Dishonesty goes against the scout principles.

Rivalarrival, (edited )

Dishonesty does, indeed, go against scouting principles, but I am in no way being dishonest.

What I am doing is explicitly following BSA policy, both the letter of the policy, and the intent of the policy. That policy was specifically established to be inclusive on the basis of religion. Scouting follows it’s own law: it is “Reverent”, which includes a requirement to respect the beliefs of others.

Buddhism does not include a concept of a deity, yet Buddhist youths are welcomed within the BSA. The “God” that BSA refers to can be found within a religion that does not include the concepts of a god.

Unitarian Universalism does not require congregants to have a belief in a supernatural entity. While some UU members are theistic, there are many atheists and agnostics among them.

I mention UU specifically, because the BSA entered into an MOU with the UUA on the subject. UU organizations are welcomed to charter Scouting programs, without requiring their atheist members to abstain. The “God” that BSA refers to can be found within an atheistic Unitarian.

If I were asked how I, personally, perform my “duty to god” I would say that within my worldview, the concept that BSA refers to as “god” is usually thought of as “consciousness”. My duty is to utilize that consciousness in my daily life, to experience, to learn, to discover, to teach. I would recount one of my memorable experiences to my inquisitor, and thank them not just for asking, but for giving me an opportunity to perform that duty.

BSA policy charges me with defining “god” for myself, and nothing in BSA policy prohibits me from appointing “consciousness” to that role. I am, indeed, an atheist as the term is normally used, but my belief system is compatible with Scouting.

wanderer,

The UU memorandum of understanding is irrelevant. I am not a member, and I think most atheists are not either. People should not be required to join a church or a religion to join the scouts.

I don’t believe in any gods, and would never say that something was a god if I did not think it was a god. Consciousness is not a god, nature is not a god, the laws of thermodynamics are not gods. Labeling these things gods only serves to imply some sort of mystery thing about it when there is none, I would consider it lying to do so. Do you think they would accept me? I don’t.

If the religious aspects were truly left to the scouts and their families, outright atheists would simply be accepted, and there would not need to be a memorandum of understanding so that a specific organization could participate, because they would have simply been accept beforehand.

Rivalarrival, (edited )

The UU MOU demonstrates that “atheism” is not inherently incompatible with scouting. The memorandum does not mean that if you want to be an atheist and a scout, you must also be a Unitarian. It means that the duty required of the oath can be fulfilled by an atheist. How is it possible to fulfill a duty to “god” without believing in “god”? That MOU serves to clarify the distinction between what the BSA refers to as “god” and what other entities refer to as “god”. It demonstrates that the BSA uses a non-standard definition of “god”, and that we need to understand what they mean by that term before we can make a meaningful judgment of their policies.

I don’t believe in any gods, and would never say that something was a god if I did not think it was a god. Consciousness is not a god, nature is not a god, the laws of thermodynamics are not gods. Labeling these things gods only serves to imply some sort of mystery thing about it when there is none, I would consider it lying to do so.

I consider it lying for me to deliberately substitute my meaning of a word for the meaning intended by another. What you (and I) would and would not call “god” is completely irrelevant to how BSA uses the word. BSA does not hold to the idea that “thermodynamics cannot be god”. Quite the contrary. If a scout wishes to define god as thermodynamics, BSA accepts it.

BSA does not hold to the idea that “consciousness cannot be god.” If a scout wishes to claim consciousness as god, BSA accepts it.

BSA does not hold to the idea that “God can only be a supernatural entity” or that “God refers to a sense of mystery”. If a scout does not wish to declare God to be a supernatural entity, BSA does not force them. If a scout determines that a sense of mystery is not necessary, BSA does not require it.

BSA developed their policies using one definition. You are using a completely different, contradictory definition. Your conclusions do not at all reflect their actual intent. It is intellectually dishonest for you to impose your meaning in place of their intended meaning.

wanderer,

The UU MOU demonstrates that they still discriminate. Any Christian denomination is automatically acceptable, for atheists they have to pick and choose saying “you’re one of the good ones”.

If a scout wishes to define god as thermodynamics, BSA accepts it.

OK, that’s irrelevant. Those were clearly MY opinions, a demonstration of how I refuse to label things with the term ‘god’, followed by the rationale for me doing so.

You are using a completely different, contradictory definition.

I am not using any definition of ‘god’, I am just saying that it has a definition, not any specific one just some definition, otherwise the term would be meaningless. And if I were to label anything ‘god’ it would be because that thing fulfilled the requirements for this unspecified definition. If I were to label something as ‘red’ it would be because it fulfills the requirements to be called ‘red’. If it did not fit the definition of ‘red’ I would not apply the label ‘red’. In the same way, I would not label something as ‘god’ unless I thought the label fit. If I were to label something as ‘god’ it would imply that there was something different about it when compared to something that I would refuse to apply the term ‘god’ to. And there is nothing that I would be willing to label ‘god’.

Rivalarrival,

Gotcha. You’re a connoisseur of religious philosophy. You know that it can only be called “god” if it comes from a specific region in France. Every other worldview is “sparkling belief”.

wanderer,

Apparently I have to say this again. Those are MY opinions. The goal of me sharing my opinions point out a position that I suspected would not be accepted by the scouts, at least your in interpretation of their rules. Your response was that atheists that did not believe the same as me could be accepted, which was irrelevant to the point. And here you insult me. Congratulations, you have confirmed my suspicions.

Rivalarrival,

Have a wonderful day.

zarkony,

I agree with most of your points, but I don’t know, I think I would keep the reverent in the scout law, even if the oath changed.

As a (nonreligious) scout, I always interpreted the reverent more as being respectful than actually religious. More like respecting the beliefs of others, or being respectful and solemn in a cemetery or a war memorial.

There’s nothing else in the scout law that conveys that feeling, and I feel like the law would be missing it if it were dropped.

Got_Bent,

So what happens if there’s a bear at the jamboree?

Anticorp, (edited )

This post is a cesspool of hateful comments from anti-establishment people with zero actual experience with scouting. Scouts is a wonderful organization, full of volunteers who give children - especially disadvantaged children - knowledge, life experience, and a general sense of accomplishment and competence. My involvement with scouting was the best thing about my entire childhood.

GlassHalfHopeful,
@GlassHalfHopeful@lemmy.ca avatar

There is a lot great about this article, but it’s hard to keep completely positive in light of the many horrific abuses that have taken place within the Scouts. Youth organizations and religious organizations are highly susceptible to this. Scouting America has gone to great lengths to reform and protect youth today, but the stain will be there for a long time especially since abuse still happens (this just reported on days ago).

To be frank, it’s a tense thing for me. Scouts was great for me in my youth and today as I’m involved with my children. However, I’m always on guard and paying attention. Whether it’s scouts or some other youth organization, they are vulnerable. I teach my kids to pay attention and remain ever vigilant. As great as such organisations can be, they are very very susceptible to predators.

rhadamanth_nemes,

New policies do as much as they can to protect the kids at least. Not an excuse for the past, but something.

Scouting has a dark history, but I also made lifelong friendships and learned a lot of cool stuff through Scouting. I only learned of the history more recently… No abuse locally or in any of the troops we associated with when I was younger.

Anticorp,

There is a risk of abuse in life. Most children are abused by family or family friends. Unfortunately we can’t stop all of the monsters, but at least Scouts tries, and has some of the most proactive child protection policies in the country. I had abusive teachers when I was a kid that physically assaulted me, that doesn’t mean we condemn all elementary schools. School was still a vibrant part of my childhood. I’m not trying to diminish the suffering of children who suffered abuse in a place that was supposed to provide them safety, but we don’t need to bring it up literally every single time scouting is mentioned. Most of the people on this comment chain are doing it because they get some sort of sadistic pleasure from diminishing the merits of helpful institutions like this, not because they have any sort of real concern for the children.

Corndog,

Just to be clear, the Boy Scouts actively protected abusers to protect their reputation, and went out of their way to NOT PREVENT ABUSERS FROM JUST BECOMING SCOUT MASTERS AGAIN SOMEWHERE ELSE.

This wasn’t just a ‘bad luck’ sort of thing, the Boy Scouts were actively HELPING abusers because they didn’t want the bad publicity.

seth,

You can’t possibly know if people who don’t support the BSA have experience with it or not if they don’t mention it, what a wild assumption. I was in scouts and enjoyed the outdoor activities and merit badge system, but it was definitely not an inclusive troop by any means. I didn’t notice until my teens, but anyone who was even a little bit different was bullied not just by the other scouts but also the adult leaders. It made me not want to continue past Star. And it’s so weird that they taught the concept of exclusive secret societies for the elite (Order of the Arrow).

ILikeBoobies,

Like Canada “Scouts Canada”

wetsoggybread,

Im just glad its no longer Scouting BSA its like saying ATM machine and reads like “Scouting Boy Scouts of America”

rob_t_firefly,
@rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world avatar

The scoutingest scout scouts who ever scoutingly scouted.

zarkony,

Yeah, that always seemed like a transitional name to me. The BSA branding has been so prominent historically, they kinda had to keep it for a while.

fiend_unpleasant,
@fiend_unpleasant@lemmy.world avatar

So they are opening the predator buffet to new items? The Scouts is now the Golden Corral of molestation.

eldavi,

the downvotes remind me of why the clergy is still held in high esteem even though they’ve literally diddled so many children that they’ve had to file bankruptcy in multiple countries to protect themselves from the staggering number of law suites coming from those abused children who have grown into damaged adults.

fiend_unpleasant,
@fiend_unpleasant@lemmy.world avatar

probably a lot of Drake fans IYKYK

Rivalarrival,

While we’re throwing out scouting and the clergy because they have had abusers within their ranks, let us also throw out baseball, soccer, football, wrestling, theater, choir, band, cheerleading, chess club… Hell, you’re going to have to cancel school in general, what with all the teachers raping their students.

HelixDab2,

It’s a pity that I’m still ineligible to work with the Scouts. I have a lot of happy memories from my decade in Scouting, and still have a significant interest in many of the things that I did while I was in the organization. Unfortunately, my religion is, shall we say, disfavored within Scouting, and is not permitted for either youth or leaders.

GlassHalfHopeful, (edited )
@GlassHalfHopeful@lemmy.ca avatar

Religion, while required, plays a very minor role practically speaking. Even your “disfavored” beliefs should be permitted.

My “belief” in my own imaginary mythos is enough to satiate the non-sectarian requirements thus far. I simply don’t speak about it any detail.

This thread has reminded me that talking to my kids about this is important because my eldest, practically speaking, is agnostic. I don’t want them to feel uncomfortable lying for Eagle, so I want to share some options. There’s a lot of ways for a scout to be reverent without actually believing in a deity.

Here’s a little more on the requirement: blog.scoutingmagazine.org/…/belief-in-god-scoutin…

I can’t wait until this “integral” part of the program is made a thing of the past.

papertowels,

I had no idea this was a thing. Thanks for sharing…

HelixDab2,

I am a Satanist; although it’s religious, it’s also explicitly atheistic. Per your blog, “By signing the membership application, each leader has already acknowledged the Declaration of Religious Principle which affirms a belief in God […]”. While I could quite truthfully say that I acknowledge myself as my own god, I do not believe in God, and I can not honestly affirm that I believe a belief in any external god to be necessary in order to be a good person and citizen.

“A scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent”; I can’t be trustworthy without also being wholly honest, including that I don’t believe in an external god. “On my honor, I will do my best, to god and my country, to uphold the Scout law, and to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight”; how could I say this without being deceptive? I know that the ‘god’ they’re referring to is a deity outside of myself, and it wouldn’t be moral for me to swear to this without also believing in some form of external deity.

GlassHalfHopeful,
@GlassHalfHopeful@lemmy.ca avatar

I hear you and applaud the conviction.

I feel very okay acknowledging myself as my own god and yourself as yours. It’s certainly a reinterpretation, but I’m okay with that for the sake of offering this to my own children. Children hardly know what it means to believe in a god as it is, so I figure why complicate it. I love to teach them what it means to be reverent in a way that is different from the status quo.

In the end though, my preference is that atheists are permitted as they are. Period. Full stop.

We can teach reverence without an external deity.

Rozz,

Also while it may be true in some parts of the country, I cannot imagine the other volunteers will ban you for something as semantic as the “wrong” religion or a different definition of reverence.

Rivalarrival,

I know that the ‘god’ they’re referring to is a deity outside of myself

That is false. They are very explicit in their policies that they do not define “god”. Their policies leave the definition of “god” to be determined by the scout, not the scouting organization.

The “duty to god” requirement charges you with defining your own god. You are not beholden to anyone else’s definition.

HelixDab2,

They do not define god, but they do constantly refer to God (capital G), and a requirement for faith. Faith ends up being extremely hard to define, but from the context in which it is used here, it strongly implies that faith requires a belief in an external deity.

The simple way to answer this question would be to simply ask; I can write to the Scout board, say that I’m an Eagle Scout–which is true–that I’ve had a change of faith since I was in Scouting, and that I now identify as an atheistic Satanist, and ask if I am eligible to work in adult leadership roles. Which I am doing right now.

Rivalarrival,

Your link is to a site hosted by andividual scouter. It is not the policy of the organization.

Faith ends up being extremely hard to define

Correct. Which is why the organization does not actually define it. They explicitly state that it is to be defined by the scout and the scout’s family.

I, too, am an atheist, by the usual definition of the term: I believe in no supernatural deities. However, with BSA’s definition, “atheism” is only possible if I believe in nothing whatsoever. Some extreme form of nihilism. With BSA’s definition, I do, indeed, have a “god”: my own consciousness. I do, indeed, have a “religious” creed: logic, rationality, the pursuit of understanding reality. I wouldn’t normally refer to these as “god” or “religion”, but they serve the same purposes for me that gods and religions serve to theists.

and ask if I am eligible

That is not a question they can answer. They charge you with defining your “god”. You are the authority on the subject, not them.

If asked how I fulfill my “duty to God”, I would respond that within my worldview, the concept that BSA refers to as “god” is more commonly described as “consciousness”. I might mention that within my worldview, it is considered “impolite” and “imprecise” to refer to consciousness as “god”, but that I recognize there is no malicious intent behind the BSA usage of the term. If I got any pushback on that, I would remind the inquisitor that my family and I are charged with defining God and religion. I would further remind them that a scout is reverent, and reverent includes tolerance and respect of the beliefs of others.

I would explain that I fulfill my duty by experiencing, learning, teaching. I would describe a memorable experience, what I learned from that experience, and thank the inquisitor for giving me the opportunity to fulfill my “religious” duty by sharing the knowledge I had gleaned.

If I recall correctly, (it’s hard to look at previous messages with this app), you said you could truthfully describe yourself as your own god. Do you exist? If you exist and you can describe yourself as your own god, is it still reasonable to call yourself an atheist?

If you are your own god, what duty do you have to yourself? Are you fulfilling that duty? Are you reverent? If you can answer those questions (and it doesn’t really matter what the answers are), you are eligible to be a scout.

OccamsRazer,

When your religion is defined by denial and opposition to all other religions, then it probably isn’t welcome where religious tolerance is a requirement.

HelixDab2,

Sorry, are you talking about Christianity?

Or were you talking about Islam?

Oh, wait, no, probably Hinduism.

OccamsRazer,

No I mean the literal purpose of Satanism is to oppose religion and particularly Christianity. That’s why it’s named after the embodiment of evil according to Christianity. It’s deliberately antagonistic. That’s not at all the same as believing that yours is the only true religion.

HelixDab2,

Goodness. You don’t really know a lot about Satanism, do you?

I don’t oppose religion, as long as religion stays in it’s own lane. As long as religion is personal, and not forced on other people, I simply don’t care; it’s literally not my problem, nor is it my job to ‘convert’ other people. If you’re happy being e.g. Catholic, that’s fine.

…Until you try to force me to obey the dictates of your religion because you can’t tell the difference between civil society and your religion.

OccamsRazer,

Look, it doesn’t matter what you claim to be about if the name you choose is screaming something different. It’s like if you opened a restaurant called Hitler was right, and then acted surprised when people called you a Nazi. You can tell everyone that Jews are welcome, but nobody will believe you.

HelixDab2,

::sigh::

So you tell me, since you know my religion so well; what do I believe?

OccamsRazer,

The only thing I know about your religion is that it is antagonistic toward Christianity, and probably all other religions. And that’s based entirely on the name.

HelixDab2,

Uh huh.

Would you judge a man based on the color of his skin rather than on his character?

OccamsRazer,

Uhh no? But if he chose a name for himself, I would assume that the name meant something about him.

HelixDab2,

So, to recap, you know nothing about my religion other than the name, and make assumptions about what I believe due to your prejudices, but you don’t believe that you have prejudices based on skin color. Is that correct?

OccamsRazer,

Yes, if your religion is named after the literal anti-Christ, I assume that you are anti Christian. And I don’t see what that has to do with skin color.

CompN12,

Nah, surely Mormonism.

yokonzo,

This is great, as I understand it from my GS friends girl scouts was basically a glorified cookie sales rep position

Anticorp,

Then fix the Girl Scouts…

yokonzo,

But there’s this perfectly good organization already built that the girl scouts was meant to emulate in the first place. Why not just… Allow girls?

Also, this is the boy scouts of America’s decision to make. This is a positive change they can make in their organization. They can’t do anything to fix the girl scouts because that’s someone else

AngryCommieKender,

They had a shitty scout leader. My mother was a scout leader for years for the Girl Scouts and Cub Scouts, and she took the positions because she wasn’t going to have her kids miss out on camping, archery, fishing, etc. that the scouts are famous for teaching young kids.

I realize that the good scout leaders are few and far between. They have to care about the kids, or it ends up turning into arts and crafts, with a seasonal sales period for cookies or overpriced popcorn.

Rozz,

They have to care about the kids and also have the time, capacity, and energy to put into making scouting enjoyable. If they don’t have the support of other volunteers it makes it exponentially harder too.

Regna,
@Regna@lemmy.world avatar

This is good. Scouting (in developed countries) in Europe is one and same for boys, nonbinaries and girls, mainly non-theistic (apart from the obvious theistic groups) and focused on making sure health, hygiene, happiness and life skills are taught and practiced. Girls, nonbinaries and boys coexist, do the same tasks, chores and sleep in the same tents.

JasonDJ,

Devils advocate speaking…do you want a culture war? Because this is how you get a culture war: cis white males, once again, get the short end of the stick when it comes to divvying up inclusivity.

NickwithaC,
@NickwithaC@lemmy.world avatar

Too bad.

StenSaksTapir,

Yes, will the injustices ever stop? Here’s a great article about it.

dumbass, (edited )
@dumbass@leminal.space avatar

Hahahahah, you lot are fucking afraid of everything!!

GnomeKat,
@GnomeKat@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

When you’re accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression.

oatscoop, (edited )

Your “devil’s advocate” is a moron that can safely be told to fuck off. “Cis white males” aren’t losing shit – it’s the same damn program it’s always been except it’s open to all kids now … and hopefully has far fewer kids getting molested by the adult leaders

cis white male

I would love to hear your “devil’s advocate” explain how are the white kids are being hurt by this change.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • upliftingnews@lemmy.world
  • DreamBathrooms
  • magazineikmin
  • cubers
  • InstantRegret
  • cisconetworking
  • Youngstown
  • vwfavf
  • slotface
  • Durango
  • rosin
  • everett
  • kavyap
  • thenastyranch
  • mdbf
  • megavids
  • khanakhh
  • modclub
  • tester
  • ethstaker
  • osvaldo12
  • GTA5RPClips
  • ngwrru68w68
  • Leos
  • anitta
  • tacticalgear
  • normalnudes
  • provamag3
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines
    •