[Vision2020] BE OUTSIDE!

Tue Feb 3 23:09:24 PST 2009

Darrell,

You are probably correct that the BSA uses a good method to sell its product. 

You are correct, it is in part about religion, but it isn't about A particular religion. 

I do think that men, in general, are more insecure about their sexuality than women. 
I think men tend to be more discriminating than woman, in general. 
When talking about specific individuals, I don't think those generalizations always apply. 
In general women are more accepting than men. 
So it follows that the BSA is less liberal than GSA.

I am sure your anecdotal incidences will show women and men equally interested in hearing about outdoor organizations. Especially if they are catered to them specifically. However, high school and colleges around the country have many more boys involved in sports and outdoor activities than women. I am sure if you looked at outdoor rental equipment and sales, most would be men, not women.  

Best Regards,

Donovan

--- On Tue, 2/3/09, Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] BE OUTSIDE!
To: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
Cc: "Ralph Nielsen" <nielsen at uidaho.edu>, "vision 2020" <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 3, 2009, 10:41 PM

Donovan:

I'll try to address each of your points below.
1.  My point about Chartering Organizations is a simple one.  When you
are selling a product you try to design it to be desirable to your
customer.  If the customer changes their desires, the product is
likely to change to match.  Pretty much Sales 101.

2.  You state the BSA is not about religion.  The organization would
seem to disagree.  I think they would say that they are about religion
in so much as it is an element of character building.  They believe in
the importance of religion, but don't endorse any particular religion.
 Regardless of their logic, I support an organizations right of
self-determination.

3.  "BSA is run by men who are less secure in their sexuality than
women who run the GSA."  Not quite sure how to address this one.  I've
worked for and volunteered with the BSA, my wife is a GSA troop
leader.  I can verify that on the personal level we both seem to have
the same level of security.  Seriously though, do you really believe
that?

4.  I might agree with your point about girls being less likely to
join an outdoor experience.  But, my personal experience indicates
otherwise.  As part of my job with the BSA I would regularly invite
large groups of kids to join.  Since I couldn't separate the group by
the sexes, girls would also hear my talk.  I almost always had just as
many girls wanting to join.  In fact, I got in the habit of taking GSA
materials to give to the girls.  I also think the MASSIVE difference
in participation levels is evidence that there is more going on then
what you posit.
-----------------------------
"Most Chartering Organizations are churches.  The top threeare the
Methodist, Catholic and LDS churches.  In my opinion, the BSAtook its
stance because it sought to best represent its customerswishes.  You
want the BSA to change its policies?  Great-get thechurches to change
their beliefs."So if they
 discriminate against Muslims or Atheists, we need to convince the
Christian Churchesto change their policy too? Your logic doesn't
compute with me. The BSA is about outdoors and character building, not
religion or sexuality so it shouldnot be adopting the policies of
Churches.I would imagine the reason the Girl Scouts doesn't
discriminate as much as BSA has more to do withthe fact that BSA is
run by men who are less secure in their sexuality than women who run
the GSA. I would imagethe reason that their are less troops in the GSA
is because girls are less likely to join organizations that are
outdoor and sports related, just as boys are less likely to join
certain things like pottery and gymnastics. Best Regards,Donovan

2009/2/3 Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>:
> Darrell,
>
> I want to reiterate, that I do like the Boy Scouts, it is a great
> organization, but I disagree with it on this issue, vehemently.
>
> We are not going to agree on the tax issue, obviously. I don't think
any
> organization that discriminates on the basis of religion, race,
disability,
> sexual orientation, and in most cases gender (some exceptions here), and
age
> (some exceptions here), should get public funding of any kind, or any
> reduction of taxes.
>
> The fact that BSA doesn't include sexuality in the book for the kids
and
> teens is irrelevant since the policy of the organization is to
discriminate
> against a particular group of people.
>
> "Now this is an interesting-and very debatable-point.  Should the
> government only support organizations that fit into specific
> philosophies?  Should govt provide a defacto endorsement via
>  funding
> of some ideologies over others?  If so, whose?  Who chooses?  By what
> criteria?"
>
> Yes, the government should set certain standards for what organizations it
> gives to.
> The Red Cross, yes, the KKK, no, the Aryan Nations, no. If the Boy Scouts
> inherently believes
> that being gay is contrary to its mission, fine, but it still should not
be
> allowed to ban gays
> from its organization if it takes money from gays and lesbians.
>
> If the Boy Scouts of America discriminated against Blacks, or LDS, or
> Catholics, instead of
> gays, would you be making the same claims and justifications for their
> policies?
>
> "Most Chartering Organizations are churches.  The top three
> are the Methodist, Catholic and LDS churches.  In my opinion, the BSA
> took its stance because it sought to best represent its customers
> wishes.  You want the BSA to change its policies?  Great-get the
> churches to change their beliefs."
>
> So if they
>  discriminate against Muslims or Atheists, we need to convince the
Christian
> Churches
> to change their policy too? Your logic doesn't compute with me.
> The BSA is about outdoors and character building, not religion or
sexuality
> so it should
> not be adopting the policies of Churches.
>
> I would imagine the reason the Girl Scouts doesn't discriminate as
much as
> BSA has more to do with
> the fact that BSA is run by men who are less secure in their sexuality
than
> women who run the GSA. I would image
> the reason that their are less troops in the GSA is because girls are less
> likely to join organizations that are
> outdoor and sports related, just as boys are less likely to join certain
> things like pottery and gymnastics.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Donovan
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 2/3/09, Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] BE OUTSIDE!
> To: "Ralph Nielsen" <nielsen at uidaho.edu>
> Cc: "vision 2020" <Vision2020 at moscow.com>, "Donovan
Arnold"
> <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
> Date: Tuesday, February 3, 2009, 7:41 PM
>
> Donovan:
>
> I have several poinbts below.
>>
>> Donovan Arnold donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
>>
>> Mon Feb 2 23:20:00 PST 2009
>> Roger,
>> Boy scouts does take public money.
> As you know, I disagree with you on this point.  As a 501c3 nonprofit,
> they do not automatically receive any tax dollars.  Yes, as you've
> pointed out, that status does mean they aren't paying as much as a for
> profit business.  That is for a reason-because they meet the IRS
> definition of a not for profit business.
>
>  In doing so, they SHOULD NOT be allowed
>> to discriminate
>  against teenagers and staff because of their sexual
>> orientation.
>
> Now this is an interesting-and very debatable-point.  Should the
> government only support organizations that fit into specific
> philosophies?  Should govt provide a defacto endorsement via funding
> of some ideologies over others?  If so, whose?  Who chooses?  By what
> criteria?
>
> Or, should it set-up broad criteria, and if an organization meets
> them, it is eligible for potential grant funding or non-profit type
> status.  Regardless of its ideological stances in other areas.  You
> can probably tell what I believe...
>
>> If you disagree, you disagree. But I think it is wrong.
>> I also think any organization that discriminates against children,
teens,
>> and staff on the basis of sexual orientation, disability, and race is
> wrong.
>
> The BSA does not discriminate against children, nor does it
> discriminate on the basis of
>  disability or race.
>
>> Children cannot escape the discrimination because they have to attend
> public
>> schools with their peers that are also  in this social organization
that
>> teaches being like them is wrong.
>
> Actually, none of the BSA books teach anything regarding sexuality.
> Now, an argument can easily be made that they are teaching via the
> stance the organization takes.  But, the books and program as it is
> written and utilized by the kids don't address those issues.
>
>>What does this do to the self esteem of a
>> teenager in a small town when all the boys his age are BS but he
cannot
> join
>> because he is gay? Teenagers have a difficult enough time fitting in
with
>> the group without adults creating additional meaningless divisions.
>> Comparing religion is not the same, IMHO because religion relates to
>> following a higher power of the State, the Boy Scouts is
>  not.
>
> This last is actually a VERY interesting point.  You are correct that
> the BSA is not a religion.  Nor does it endorse any specific religion
> (I've known Scouts that were Catholic, Protestant, LDS, Jewish,
> Unitarian, agnostic and-I think-Buddhist).  Most major religions in
> the USA have endorsed the BSA over the years.  Have you ever wondered
> why the BSA took their stance on homosexuality?  I think it is a
> direct result of how their organization is set-up.  Most people don't
> realize this, but THE BSA DOES NOT OWN ANY TROOPS.  Yes, you read that
> correctly.  Rather, they serve as a licensing agency.  Troops are
> owned by the BSA's customers, called Chartering Organizations.  This
> could be any local civic group (though not a governmental agency-the
> BSA has no troops with governmental agencies).  The Chartering
> Organization owns the Troop, along with all of its assets, and agrees
> to abide by the policies of the
>  BSA (It also gets to vote on said
> policies).  Most Chartering Organizations are churches.  The top three
> are the Methodist, Catholic and LDS churches.  In my opinion, the BSA
> took its stance because it sought to best represent its customers
> wishes.  You want the BSA to change its policies?  Great-get the
> churches to change their beliefs.
>
> Others have pointed out that the Girl Scouts do not emphasize religion
> at all.  Again, I believe that goes back to how the two different
> organizations are set-up.  The GSA does not have this "Charter
Org"
> concept.  Which is the better way?  In my opinion, the BSA way is
> vastly superior.  It results in better volunteer support, longer
> lasting troops, and more youth in the program.  My evidence for this
> claim comes from my 8 years of professional experience in the BSA.
> Locally we have about 65 different BSA groups in Latah and Whitman
> counties (almost one in every town), and
>  are serving over 40% of boys
> in elementary and Jr High.  About 1200 youth are involved.  The GSA
> has a few troops in Moscow, Pullman, and Colfax.  I don't know the
> number of youth in the program, but it is around 400.  They serve
> about 5% of local girls.  I know of BSA Troops that are over 80 years
> old.  I've never seen a GSA troop over 10 years old.  The national
> picture is similar.
>
> Sincerely,
> Darrell
>
>> Best Regards,
>> Donovan
>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>               http://www.fsr.net
>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the
>  communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090203/d50b4f8a/attachment-0001.html 