From: mayne@sync.cs.fsu.edu (William Mayne)
Newsgroups: rec.scouting
Subject: Re: Proposal? (girls, atheists, sexuality)
Date: 1 Apr 92 17:12:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: mailer.1992Apr1.121231.20526
Reply-To: mayne@cs.fsu.edu
Organization: Florida State University Dept. of Computer Science

In article <1992Apr1.151441.24125@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> mpb@troy.uucp (27331-bunz) writes:
>
>The thing that is being overlooked in many of the discussions is in the
>way that the BSA is organized...
>(For example, if a Jewish Temple sponcered a unit, they
>would allow a protostant to join, but would be every bit within their
>rights to not allow the protostant to cook cheeseburgers for dinner
>on a unit camping trip.)

I doubt that chartering organizations have that much control over
policies, but I welcome information from other informed scouters
to confirm or deny. A troop sponsored by a Jewish temple might
ban cheese burgers on campouts, but I believe that on important
questions other than the rights of atheists and homosexuals the
BSA does have some non-discrimination policies which must be
accepted. I doubt that the BSA would allow the Arian Nation or
KKK to sponsor an troop which as a matter of policy excluded
blacks, or that Protestant church which accepted a Hindu scout
in its troop would not be obligated to respect his religious
beliefs. The cooking requirements for ranks would have to be
modified for vegetarians, as specified in the Scout Handbook,
for example. In fact if the non-discrimination statements in
BSA policy mean anything at all I believe that chartering
organizations are required to accept qualified applicants from
outside their own organization - qualified by BSA standards,
not their own. Hence the troop sponsored by a Baptist church
must accept and on some specified points accommodate the Hindu.
At least I hope this is true.

This is not just another flame against BSA policies, but an
attempt to clarify in my own mind. If I am wrong please be
specific as to how and why.

> The Chartering Organizations then have
>a Chartering Organization Representative (COR) that is allowed to VOTE
>on issues at the District, Council, and National level.  It is the
>COR that has the power to set and change policy, NOT someone sitting
>in Texas.  So, where does this lead us?  I'd assume the main place
>that people that wish to change BSA policy should go would be to the
>Chartering Organizations, and their governing bodies.

But this is like saying that as a citizen of the United States and
a resident of Florida I get to make federal and state laws. I do
get to vote and have some enfluence on laws, but if my views don't
prevail in the political process I am bound by the laws handed down
by Congress and the state legislature. Someone sitting in Washington
or Tallahassee does have the power to change laws. Someone sitting
in Texas does have the power to change BSA policies, and chartering
organizations are bound by those policies.

If what you say is true then the troop which announced that it would
not discriminate against homosexuals, presumably with the approval
of its chartering organization, would not have been threatened with
expulsion from the BSA.

>Anyway, to change the BSA, you've got to change the organizations
>that OWN the units, and vote on policy.

Not necessarily. I can petition Congress directly for a change in
the law. Sometimes that is more efficient than working my way up
from the grass roots. The same applies to organizations like the
BSA.  It is possible to work from the top down as well as the
bottom up, at least to the point that chartering organizations that
do not want to discriminate should not be required to do so.

Bill Mayne
Newsgroups: rec.scouting