That's been our experience too. There's even a troop near us that has a girl in it, because as she quite rightfully points out, "Girl scouts are dumb and I want to be a boy scout."

Boy Scouts president calls for end to ban on gay troop leaders (+video)
Christian Science Monitor Cristina Maza - May 21, 2015

The move could be a step toward ending a policy against gay leaders that has increasingly divided the Boy Scouts.

Isn't there some irony in this announcement being delivered by former Sec of Defense,
Robert Gates, who did almost everything he could to avoid/delay the end of DADT in the military.

Maybe he has changed his mind ... ya think ?

So, today may yet be another day...

Boy Scouts Are Poised to End Ban on Gay Leaders
NY Times - ERIK ECKHOLMJULY 26, 2015
But...
Here in Oregon, and I suspect elsewhere too, these exclusion policies of the BSA
resulted all local Scouting groups to be excluded from the United Way fund-raising network.

I had hoped that if the Scouts formally changed their ways, they would get back into United Way.
But this hanging on to "exceptions" may still be reason enough to keep them out.

Simply put, these religious groups need to get over their bad selves and
come out of the dark ages when it comes to public organizations like the BSA.

How do packs/troops choose leaders? Eons ago in small town New England, the Den Mother/Scoutmaster job was left to any sucker person who would take it.

In practice, that's my experience too. However, on paper, the charter organization approves all leadership. So theoretically, the church running the troop could require the leader to be straight. All the packs/troops I've been involved in have basically just rubber stamped what the troop parents came up with.

That's still the case, for the most part, as far as I know.

OF COURSE the chartering organization will

"... allow church-run units to pick leaders who agree with their moral precepts."

duh. The only change I see is that the decision to NOT permit / choose an adult who is gay cannot now be laid at the feet of the national organization "Sorry, rules are rules". The policy doesn't say homosexuality is a qualifying characteristic, only that it is no longer a disqualifying characteristic. I'm ok with that. I think it's still possible that bigots who are homophobes will object to a gay candidate for leadership on the grounds that they don't like gays.

I'm not sure how that's different than some vague "Thanks for your application, we don't see a good fit here, no thank you." y'know? I may well be speaking from a position of a white cis male, but it's the only one I have. But I don't think that a troop should be obligated to accept all applications for leadership positions.

I have been involved with Scouting for about 20 years as an adult and for a little while as a kid. I know gay scouts, I know gay adults. I know gay scouts who've turned 18 and been disqualified to transition into junior adult leadership positions *because of this rule*, which was a stupid rule. Now that's not a problem anymore. Though I know they exist, I haven't met any publicly vocal homophobes. For our Troop and Crew, it means that the choices we've been making all along no longer illustrate the stupidity of the national policy.

I readily admit I don't know shit about the scouts, but I don't understand the term "Church Run". Does the church sponsor the troop, provide meeting space, pay for activities/expenses? I thought a troop was self operating, chartered by, and only answering to a regional council... and of course helicopter parents. ;)

Who enforces this, the regional council? How to they even know? Does someone complain? Do they scan facebook looking for signs of the gay? I mean there's rules against jaywalking, but in most places you'd have to be run over for it to become an issue.

The courts pay attention when someone files a suit alleging discrimination.

Parents of gay children paid attention when their child was blocked from joining.

Other non-profit organizations that are competing for contributions
via United Way really pay attention when $ is distributed.

Donors to organizations like United Way pay attention when they decide
how much and to which organizations they want to contribute to United Way

United Way officials pay attention when contributions drop for these reasons.

Each unit (troop/pack.etc.) has a charter organization, which is usually a local church. The charter organization "owns" the unit. Is the legal owner of the bank account and all equipment and approves all leaders. Often provides meeting and storage space. Does not usually fund the unit. In my experience, the charter organization is usually pretty hands off. But if it wants to flex its muscle, it has a lot of muscle to flex.

The district, council, and national scout organizations help to administer the program, do training, plan regional events, run camps, etc.

Here's what I cribbed from BSA's website about chartering organizations:

OUR unit, Troop and Crew 100, is chartered by "The Parents Club" (I might be missing the name a little bit, sorry). Basically, the parents of the scouts in the troop have come together and created the charter them/ourselves. We have a Chartered Organization Representative, and that person is key in creating the other moving pieces as the quote describes. In practice, it is the parents that organize the business end of the troop and the troop's activities like rent on a meeting space, planning fundraisers, etc. As for the operation of the troop, that falls to the scouting leadership and to the boys and girls themselves.

Your question about how is a rule like the one recently reversed enforced is a good one and your instincts are correct. It's impossible to enforce unless both sides get publicly dug in about their respective positions. Here in Seattle, there was a church that chartered a troop that refused to dismiss an openly gay scout leader last year. The BSA revoked the church's charter, effectively ending the troop. Some key facts in this ugly episode was the public knowledge of the leader's sexuality, the church's refusal to dismiss him, and some unknown (to me) butthurt parent that complained. I find it difficult to express clearly how the rule is stupid beyond "homophobia is stupid". In an explicitly declared situation like the one linked to above, it's easy to see how the (stupid) wheels would turn. But absent such a declaration by a gay leader, enforcement would seem to fall into the witch hunt/spanish inquisition territory. That's bullshit.

glatt and Happy Monkey's remarks about accepting help from those willing to give it are true in my experience too. And I sincerely believe that "the gay" has fuckall to do with the quality of a youth leader. Homosexuality isn't taught, it's not contagious, it's not an indicator of pedophilia, none of that bullshit. Being gay doesn't make or break a good leader, it's irrelevant, just as heterosexuality is irrelevant. The rule was irrelevant, except when it interfered with units trying to provide a quality program for young people and stupid people invoked this stupid rule.

Thanks you guys. I'm getting an edumacation and beginning to understand the back story of the changes going on in the BSA and the laws. I think I'm getting a handle on the roots of how politics got so fucked up. :haha:

This was the basis for the BSA denying any responsibility for leaders who abused kids up until the mid 80's. They argued that it was the chartered partner's responsibility to vet leaders. The problem was that the BSA national HQ would keep records on leaders accused of abuse but not step up to disqualify or report them to authorities which left the abusers free to move to another unit when they need to. There were many lawsuits against the BSA in the 20 years or so leading up to the change of position on leadership. The BSA instituted new training called "Youth Protection" to help units, partners and other leaders protect kids from abuse and cull out abusive leaders. There is a book called "Scout's Honor" which details the history of abuse in the BSA.

I was a very involved volunteer in the BSA from 1980 to about 2000 when I pretty much quit. I started as a Tiger Cub leader when my oldest son wanted to join at age 7. I held just about every position in his and his brother's pack and then later in the troop where I was an assistant SM. I was on the District Committee and earned the District Award of Merit. I was on Council committees and was awarded the council's highest award, the Silver Beaver. I think when I left I had 10 or 11 square knots which are the BSA awards for various things. I even attended the World Jamboree in Chile in 1998 where I was on the international staff as one of the photographers. 2 of my 3 sons are Eagle Scouts.

I got tired of the BS. BSA was always preaching that they were just there for materials and training but in the end it kept coming down to increasing the number of units, membership and selling subscriptions to Boys Life. As District Chairman I saw many instances of our District Executive (the paid guy with BSA) making up numbers for "ghost units" that really did not exist. I saw a lot of behind the scenes stuff that turned me off.

At the World Jamboree I saw how other Scouts from around the world were more inclusive. They allowed co-ed units and a great variety of members with no prohibitions on anyone. The US BSA is one of the few that still uses the church sponsored model which I think has been part of the problems.

After the SCOTUS ruling in BSA vs Dale I just decided to put my energy elsewhere.

Although it is a step in the right direction, the "new" policy of the BSA with regards to religious groups
will be continue to be a stumbling point across the breadth of Scouting in the USA.
... not just a policy issue, but a legal issue and a financial issue.

The following article is a pretty good discussion, starting with the LDS church,
and continuing with other legal, religious, and social leaders.

Mormons hint they may bolt Boy Scouts
CBS/AP July 28, 2015, 4:08 AM
But...
And over the past few years...
.

With merit badges in corporate raiding, labor abuse, buying elections, and baptizing long dead people. http://cellar.org/2015/shades.gif

That is when BSA membership dropped significantly. Even some more 'religious' churches (such as Anglicans) discontinued their BSA association.

BSA recently decided that religion and BSA rules should not be imposed on anyone's sexual beliefs. That makes righteous (which also means hateful) religious leaders (who also ignored pedophilia) to become resentful.

I actually know a (former) gay scout leader who was dismissed.

I will ask him to comment. Hope he is willing. I think his input would be relevant here.

This topic came up once or twice around the adult campsite at Scout camp over the last couple days. The consensus seemed to be that everyone was relieved that the controversy is behind us and that it won't change anything about what we do.

Sexuality was never a part of Scouting in our troop before and it still won't be going forward. But we added on our to-do list talking to the church that is our charter organization to see if they care one way or another what kind of leaders we get. We suspect they are fairly liberal and won't have objections to bringing on any one of the thousands of gay adults banging on the door offering to take on volunteer work for the troop. ;)

Gay adults bang doors? :confused:

Back doors.

Touché. :lol2:

@Glatt, I understand your immediate focus is on your own particular troop.
But saying the issue behind you seems a dubious notion.
You then say your to-do list is to contact the church to see how they feel.
What will you do if they are not as “liberal” as you may hope ?

The problem is that religious tenets are the domain of a church, but differ among various churches.
But if Scouting's leadership and/or volunteers must conform to the tenets of the sponsoring church,
it loses the open-to-all perspective. And to hope this is not important to each specific church,
look to the response and recent political actions of the LDS Church.

I do understand the necessity of screening volunteers and leaders.
But IMO… if rejecting all openly GBLT adults from Scouting in local units is based on the religious tenets of it’s sponsor,
then Scouting can no longer legitimately claim to be meeting it’s other important goals.

On the other hand, when it comes to “protection of youth”, I think Scouting has recently tried to deal with the issue.
I’ve read the policies about arrangements for sleeping, toilets, showers, cameras, smart phones, etc.
And all of this seems to me to be genuine efforts to set appropriate standards.

But at this point, I doubt anyone can document that gay men are
any more likely to molest or sexually abuse than heterosexual men…
whatever definitions are used for the men or inappropriate sexual activity.

The research data on this seems very complex and limited, often being criticized
based on it’s assumptions, it’s political orientations or religious beliefs, or study design.
So statistical rigor seems to be lacking…

To Wit: Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/facult...lestation.html

Scouts get pwned
 

Well, I'll be very surprised and disappointed and I don't know what I'll do. I was using sarcasm before to point out the there are very few potential leaders stepping forward to take on the work of of being a volunteer. There have been exactly zero gay leaders kicked out or blocked by our troop in the past and I expect that number to remain zero. But I'd be very disappointed in this church if they took that position against gay leaders. I don't know if I'd be disappointed enough to take my boy away from his friends here and for me to leave my friends too. I'll report back. I probably won't know for a month or two. I seriously doubt they will ban gays though.

Don't tell the you're gay. :lol2:

First they won't conform... then they will ... but really, they won't ....

Mormon Church Will Keep Ties With Boy Scouts Despite Objecting to Gay Leaders
NY Times - ERIK ECKHOLM - AUG. 26, 2015