Talk:Scouting America

handshake

The Boy Scout Handshake is the traditional shake, done with the left hand instead of the right.

Does this mean "traditional handshake"? The Boy Scout handshake isn't a normal handshake... -- bdesham

Never saw you defend your edit. Words in quotes are exactly what the BSA believes.

By traditional handshake, he means that you shake someone's hand like you normally would, only you use your left hand instead of your right. It feels weird. Anyways, I allways thought that the reason that the left hand is used (contrary to what the article says) was because of something to do with Lord Baden Powell's expericence in Africa (I heard it at a Scoutmaster's minute like 6 years ago). I did an internet search and came up with this: http://www.lrtroop55.org/html/lord_baden-powell_.html (The part I'm talking about it roughly 1/2 way down the page). So, is this true or is it just some story? Either way, I think it would be good to mention it in the article. --Will 18:50, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Go ahead and put it in, but only as an alternative explanation. FWIW, I've never heard that story. --Smack (talk) 05:07, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

From what I was told, the reason why we shake with our left hand because the left hand is closest to our heart. There is another website that discusses the left hand theory, at http://www.scouttroop511.com/boy%20scouts/scout.handshake.htm. Zscout370 (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

joining pages

Hey, there is a Boy Scouts page as well which seems to cover much of the same material as this page. I think it would be a good idea to say that "the BSA is a Boy Scouting Organization based in America, and that it is similar, but differs in these ways.... "etc. etc. This might be a good idea, maybe not, but one worth consideration. Narcissus 00:44, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

You propose basically to make this page a subpage of Scouting. I don't think that that's a good idea, because global Scouting is a loose confederacy, with scores of member organizations, so it's difficult to generalize. I've added a prominent reference to global Scouting to the opening paragraph, but I doubt that any further modification is warranted. -Smack 06:18, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

rank definitions

"The Senior Patrol Leader (SPL), and then his Assistant Senior Patrol Leader(s) (ASPL's), are the highest ranking boys in the troop. PL's and the SPL are elective positions. APL's are appointed by PL's; ASPL's are appointed by the SPL with the advice of the Scoutmaster. "

From my experience in scouting, SPL and APL are not nessecarily the highest ranking scouts, and ASPL's can be elected, as can APL's, depending on the troop. There is some leeway in that, it seems.

Lyellin 05:12, Dec 31, 2003 (UTC)

There are also Junior Assistant Scoutmasters, which are usually reserved for those with Eagle rank. These may be considered higher ranking.

The official publications, such as Junior Leadership Training Handbook state that. I'll dig mine out and confirm... --Jiang 06:05, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I'll search for mine as well... *laughs*. JASMs are normally use (again, in my experience), for those kids who are Eagle, but not 18, or those who are not nessecarily around all that often, but are older, 17, 18 or so, so that they have a leadership position while not always being around. Lyellin 15:37, Dec 31, 2003 (UTC)

From the Junior Leader Handbook:

SPL - "The senior patrol leader is elected by the Scouts to represent them as the top junior leader in the troop."

ASPL - "The assistant senior patrol leader is the second-highest-ranking junior leader of the troop. He is appointed by the senior patrol leader with the approval of the Scoutmaster."

APL -"The assistant patrol leader is appointed by the patrol leader and leads the patrol in his absense."

I guess it's official... --Jiang 15:37, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The confusion arises from the conflation of two different definitions of "rank." Perhaps a clearer wording would be "The Senior Patrol Leader (SPL), and then his Assistant Senior Patrol Leader(s) (ASPL's), are the top boy leaders of the troop." - Seth Ilys 15:45, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The term we're looking for is "leadership position" or something to that effect. -Smack 22:13, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Exactly...people allways get "ranks" and "jobs" mixed up. That being said, the SPL is usually at least a life scout and the ASPL a star. Generally, an SPL is supossed to plan things and give orders (where to set up tents and stuff like that). When it comes to being in charge, he is higher than all the other scouts , even if they have a higher rank.--Will 18:39, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it's a chain of command thing, not a rank thing. SPL's rank can be lower than ASPL's rank, etc. --Myles Long 18:47, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It is more of a chain of command, though from my experiences, the SPL is a Life or Eagle Scout. The ASPL is a Star or higher, while the PL and APL are first class or higher. We, the troop, picked the SPL, while the SPL chose his assistant with the OK of the leaders. We tend to follow the BSA guidelines. But I do think it should be called a leadership position than rank. Zscout370 (talk) 17:15, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that's true. PL/APL must be First Class or higher. I believe in my troop, SPL was often Star or Life. Usually, the previous SPL was the new ASPL, but that wasn't always the case. On the rare occasion that we had an Eagle still in the troop (most of our members who earned Eagle did so at or immediately before their eighteenth birthday, making them ineligible to continue to be Boy Scouts after that), he was usually the JASM. But you're definitely right; it's a leadership position, not a rank. --Myles Long 22:30, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Most people who receive Eagle Scout usually leave the troop because of college or other scholing. I was asked to be an Assisant Scoutmaster after I turned 18 (I had my Eagle for a few months). I did so, but college got into the way of everything. We had a JASM in our troop, but only the Scoutmaster can choose him. One thing to also mention, I counted at least seven Eagle Scouts on Wikipedia (Jaing, Myles Long, myself, Tuff-Kat, Cavebear42, Dismas). So we start a Wiki Troop or something? Zscout370 (talk) 23:19, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

controversy

"Since the Scout Oath includes the phrase "to do my Duty to God and Country," many people are confused why atheists would want to join the Boy Scouts."

Reading that sounds HIGHLY POV, highly judgemental. Any way to add it so that it does not have that tone? I don't personally think it needs to be in there- no quotes to back it up are in the entry, and a person can form their own ideas with the information presented. Lyellin 04:45, Jan 3, 2004 (UTC)

Clearly POV. You were right to remove it. The person who added that bit might consider that atheists would want to change the oath - not so confusing after all. -- stewacide 04:54, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Having been an atheist at the time of getting my Eagle (since become Quaker), I KNOW there are reasons to be a Boy Scout that does not tie to Duty to God. Just glad someone agrees on the correctness of removing. Still new and nervous. Lyellin 04:59, Jan 3, 2004 (UTC)

Don't be nervous, that was a good call, and the talk page is definatly the place to put it. Gentgeen 06:48, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I would like to note a number of things that, though I did not immediately find anything incorrect, I saw that the way several instances were worded, a non-scouter could misunderstand several elements about scouting. In addition, in the controversy section dealing with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and its involvement and support of the Scouting Movement, I found the wording to be particularly unclear. As both a member of this church and a very active BSA member (hence my wiki name), and one who recently went on a varsity crew trip to Canada, may I offer an alternative for these sections? Will post them beneath this note as I have the time. I apologise for any programming mishaps that may occur when I type them into the discussion page. New to Wikipedia =) -- Eaglescoutguy

• 1. To replace paragraph 7 of the Controversy section. Reason? I do not think it adequately explains my church's views on Boy Scouting. My church is also referenced only in the controversy section. Two bits of incorrect information were also given, that the LDS church funds the Scouting organization there (it does not fund the organization, but it does sponsor individual scouting troops composed and lead by its members, thus being inherently non-homosexual in nature. A slim difference, but notably important in resolving a seeming inconsistency.), and also that the LDS church funds the Girl Scouts of the USA. To the best of my awareness, my church no longer funds nor sponsors Girl Scouting groups. A few individual members that I know do support the Girl Scouts, but not the church as a whole, due to its tolerance of homosexual leadership. This may lead to the confusion here.

(Text offered to replace paragraph 7 of the Controversy section, the one dealing with my church's involvement in scouting)

"One of the major contributors to the BSA, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, may have had some influence in the BSA's policy with regards to homosexuality. This church has throughout the BSA's existence supported the organization both financially and by providing many members of the BSA. However, this church threatened to remove its support of the BSA if this policy is removed. Some people have found this strange, noting that the LDS church currently sponsors scouting troops in Canada, while the Scouts Canada organization permits homosexuals to join . While this seems inconsistent to some, church members note that the only troops sponsored in Canada are composed and based off of the church members in the area, thus being inherently non-homosexual in nature. This church is against homosexuality in Boy Scouting because of its beliefs against homosexuality, noting a desire to ensure that their children's troops are not led by people who's beliefs directly contradict their own."

• I am addin a version very similer to your own in place of the other paragraph. My main reason for wanting to be proactive on this is because i believe that you are right in saying that the LDS church does not support the GSUSA, as the article currently implys. The status of the Canadian scouts hardly seems relevent to me on this page but i will go ahead and leave intact. Cavebear42 17:26, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What does In both cases, the troops sponsored are composed of the church members in the area, thus being inherently non-homosexual in nature. mean? Is it supposed to claim that there are no gay Mormons? Is there a source for that? I've met two gay Mormon adults active in the Boy Scouts. Tuf-Kat 00:29, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, on reviewing the section, I think you are right in saying that the status of the Canadian Scouts is irrelevant Cavebear42, now that the controversy regarding said scouts has been cleared up (hopefully). TUF-KAT, I think I need to clarify. First, the term Mormon, when used to refer to someone's religion, most often refers to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, but also refers in many times to other churches as well, with far different beliefs than mine. That sentence of mine is supposed to claim that there are no actively gay members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, a subtle difference. As I'm 15 years old, I don't know how to word the paragraph to clearly say this, if it needs to be given in the article at all. Support: http://www.mormon.org/question/faq/category/answer/0,9777,1601-1-60-1,00.html. (LDS Church official website page) Part of this page essentially means that if a member with gay inclinations pursues those inclinations (becoming actively gay), means will be taken against him. If he doesn't act on these inclinations, he can go forward like all the rest. Oh, by the way, should we remove the Scouts Canada section of that paragraph? Should I clear my first discussion post/edit? --- Eaglescoutguy

No opinion on Canadian scouts, but I disagree with your claim. The two people I know are indeed actively gay and also members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. The other churchgoers are not aware of their active homosexuality. The link provided doesn't claim that there are no active gay members, only that gays who act on their urges are "subject to the discipline of the church" and can not "go forward" as other members do -- there are gays whom the church doesn't know about, and even if they do, it isn't clear that "discipline" means kicking them out. Tuf-Kat 19:35, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

• True followers of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints belive that marriage is a sacred covenant ordained by God, between a man and a woman. There are homosexual members that church leaders don't know about. If a member is found to practice homosexuality and does not stop and repent, they are disfellowshipped or excommunicated.
• "Mormon" was originally a derogatory term used by those who ridiculed the church. It was somewhere along the lines of calling a black man "nigger". These days it's not that offensive, but it is not a very appropriate way to address the church, though some members refer to themselves that way. There are also 'branch off' churches that go by that name, so using it can cause confusing.

I'd also like to say that another reason the BSA doesn't allow homosexuals is the same reason you don't boys and girls in tents together. I'm not sure if that's offial, but I'm sure it's there.

Online sources: Offial statement about the law of chastity | Article about church discipline by Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve -Jobarts 06:07, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

To anonymous user 164.58.83.66: Please stop removing information from this page. If you continue to do so, I will ask that this page be protected. I do not object to your first couple of modifications, but the removal of useful information is unacceptable. --Smack 22:05, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Wikibook mertit badges

Over at wikibooks, I have begun a project to create a guide to earning BSA merit badges, just in case anyone is interested in helping. (Mammal Study, for example, has already been started) Tuf-Kat 00:34, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

Meritbadge.com is a good resource. -Jobarts 06:12, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Balance and proportion on the gay/atheist issue

The Controversy section is important, needs to be there, and is pretty good. But I honestly do not think that the controversy over gay and atheist membership is such an important defining characteristic of the BSA that it deserves to be mentioned in the introductory paragraph. I suppose one could say that the BSA has long maintained that Scouts should be "reverent," i.e. adhere to traditional American fuzzy deism; and has "clean," i.e. adhere to traditional sexual morality. But I don't think this has been a major preoccupation of most scoutmasters in most troops at most times. Dpbsmith 12:37, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't think it belongs in the intro. I just found the edit before mine to be excessive. --Jiang 20:29, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It also wasn't factually accurate, as the Learning-for-Life and Exploring Divisions of the BSA don't have any religious or sexual orientation requirements. Those divisions (for 14-21 year old boys and girls) allows the units to make such decisions for their own membership. Gentgeen 21:12, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I think we ought to divide the controversy section into three parts - historical controversies, the atheism issue, and the homosexuality issue. crazyeddie 21:56, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps; perhaps not. Some important points (i.e. BSA vs. Dale) apply to membership disputes in general, rather than to any specific controversy. However, the section is certainly long enough that some of the details relating to particular issues could be split off into subections. --Smack (talk) 23:21, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

BSA doesn't try to keep out atheists. Some atheists want the Duty to God part of the oath taken out, but I think that if a being is non-existent, you couldn't have any duty to it, so no matter what you do you won't fail in that duty. I don't think I know any atheists personally, so if any of you see this, I'd like to know what you think. I'm not sure how to best represent that point of view in the article. Thoughts? -Jobarts 06:50, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Scouts as a melting pot?

Speaking as someone who's not terribly partial to the Scouts, one of the things that strongly impressed me about the Scout troops I have encountered, particularly one my son was in, is that they have really, truly appeared to be very broad cross-sections of the local population. The troop included Scouts from a really wide range of income levels, ethnicity, and religion. Planning for camping trips was truly complicated because we had to get kosher foot—not because of our several Jewish scouts, who didn't care, but because of a number of scouts—I'm afraid I don't know their exact ethnicity or religion, but I think they were from India—and their religion had some dietary requirements which were not exactly the same as kosher, but their parents accepted kosher as "close enough." Plans were complicated by the need to coordinate, not only with the familiar holidays and the Jewish holidays, but Eastern Orthodox holidays, Seventh Day Adventists, and I don't remember what-all.

Assuming this is true of Scouting in general, is there any way to document this in the article in a suitably NPOV way? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:01, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Interesting. I can't say this of the Scouts in my area. Some 20-30% of the general population is of Asian origin, but the proportion in the Scout troops is much lower. Latinos also seem to be underrepresented. --Smack 21:02, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't really think you can say this, and I'm a big fan of scouts. One thing to keep in mind is that a SIGNIFICANT portion of scouting (something like 20%? But that's off the top of my head), are Latter Day Saints. That unbalances religion very quickly IMHO. I think that individual areas may be a melting pot type, particulary in some cities (I'm thinking philly and NY here, from personal experience), but in general it's not as common. Lyellin 07:28, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

The LDS church uses BSA as a youthgroup. This does significantly sway the religious affilations as a whole. At the same time, these LDS units are not mixed with the non-LDS units. It's not like they church is saying, go join the Scouts. They are starting their own units, providing their own guidence and using BSA as an outline. Does this make the camporees, jamborees, and other multi-unit events heavily LDS? Yes. Does this in any way effect the mix of ethnic or religious affilitations in non-LDS units? No. Just observation. Cavebear42 17:19, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Boy Scout director charged with having child porn

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7326932/

Time to start forming a new section.

Not really. First of all, though by all indications the allegations are likely true, he hasn't been convicted. Second, an incident involving a single Scouter, no matter how high-placed, is not significant on the scale of the BSA, which includes tens of thousands of adult leaders. --Smack (talk) 00:52, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

if he in indicted, it might make him a candidate for his own article and this info could exist in it. Cavebear42 17:57, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

He pled guilty to a charge of possession and distribution of child pornography on 30 March 2005. I doubt that owning child porn and being a Scouter would in itself be worthy of an article. - Nunh-huh 06:13, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)