Re: Transformation of Exploring
Nathan Alan Beauheim (beauheim@CAE.WISC.EDU)
Sun, 15 Feb 1998 11:53:34 -0600
I don't know where to add comments, so I'll put them up here.
Wow! This is quite a change. However, it seems to me that this change is being
made for the wrong reasons. It's one thing for National to respond to the
Chicago lawsuit. They should. However, this seems to me to be a cheap way out
(in moral terms). Rather than using the lawsuit to examine the foundations on
which scouting is based and why some people might find these wrong or
objectionable (Note: I am NOT passing judgement on either side of the Chicago
case or any other issue related to the 3 G's. If you want to find out what I
think personally, email me off the list), National seems to be trying to find a
way around the court decision. In doing so, they seem to be just shifting
things around, without really doing anything productive.
Maybe this will turn out to be a blessing in disguise. But, I don't think we
should dismantle a perfectly good program, divide it into two pieces, make the
name awkward (Venturing? Give me a break.), and trash what we've been working
on since 1935 and seemingly just started to get right again; just because it's
the easiest way to avoid lawsuits. "PROTECT OUR CORE TRADITIONAL PROGRAMS FROM
LEGAL CHALLENGES"! This is riduculous. Girls, Gays, and Atheists will continue
to sue to try to get into BOY SCOUTS. They don't care as much about being an
Explorer or a Venturer, THEY WANT TO BE BOY SCOUTS!
That's my opinion. Your's may (and probably will) vary. Again, I'm not passing
judgement on of the 3G's, nor do I want to get into a debate on this forum on
them. Let the shots fly.
Four Lakes Council
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City