Boy Scouts Dual Charter

[cap235629]

The cases stated above go to the rights of the BSA to exclude membership from a person or group of people.  It is the basis for the whole argument about who follows whose rules.  Read through the actual cases rather than the brief synopsis I have given and you will see more in depth argument and ruling.  The membership requirements and leadership requirements are the same for a Boy Scout Troop, Cub Scout Pack and Venturing crew as I previously posted.

See the attached charter agreement that is the LEGALLY BINDING agreement between the "host" organization and the BSA.  Pay particular attention to what each group is agreeing to.  Specifically the part about selecting leaders according to BSA policy.  No where does it state that the BSA will abide by any group who is requesting a charter's rules, only that they will respect them.  It is up to the requesting party to adhere to the BSA regulations, not the other way around as I have previously stated.

Our squadron is in the process of dual chartering and I made it perfectly clear what we are agreeing to.  The squadron has at least one known gay member so before we discussed it with the cadets, we discussed it amongst the seniors and weighed the benefits vs. the downside.  I recommend that this be done before a decision is made.  We then put it to the cadets to vote on it.

As far as the 12 and 13 year olds, they would not be able to participate in Ventring activities that would be prohibited under CAP regulations as they cannot be a member of the Venture crew until they turn 14.

I am not going to spend any more time defending this as I have stated my case precisely.  With this, the defense rests....LOL 

If you have any questions please feel free to PM me.

I do however reserve the right of rebuttal.

[Nathan]

The cases stated above go to the rights of the BSA to exclude membership from a person or group of people.  It is the basis for the whole argument about who follows whose rules.  Read through the actual cases rather than the brief synopsis I have given and you will see more in depth argument and ruling.  The membership requirements and leadership requirements are the same for a Boy Scout Troop, Cub Scout Pack and Venturing crew as I previously posted.

Only true when the Boy Scouts have full authority to approve or deny members. With dual charters including CAP, that is not the case, therefore, your cases are irrelevant.

See the attached charter agreement that is the LEGALLY BINDING agreement between the "host" organization and the BSA.  Pay particular attention to what each group is agreeing to.  Specifically the part about selecting leaders according to BSA policy.  No where does it state that the BSA will abide by any group who is requesting a charter's rules, only that they will respect them.  It is up to the requesting party to adhere to the BSA regulations, not the other way around as I have previously stated.

Read this one, it's important.

I don't see anything where it says that the BSA members will approve leader applications according to BSA policy. I see where it says BSA members will approve leader applications. Nowhere do I see in this charter that BSA policies have to be 100% enforced in the selection of leaders in the dual charter program, nor do I see where gay members (as stated in this charter) are excluded from leadership positions.

As far as it reads, the BSA must merely approve leader applications. Because this is a dual charter, it is accepted that the host organization (which is the one to select the leaders in the first place) will have rules that others do not. In this case, CAP's rules are that their regulations take precedence. With that, if the BSA leaders approved of that (and therefore of the charter as a whole), it is not even illegal (per this contract) for them to approve a member legal by CAP regulations but not by BSA regulations.

The only place you may have a point is where it says that CAP will screen for "BSA Leadership standards", but once again, since CAP has regulatory jurisdiction in ALL Venture crew joint activities, I would imagine this applies more to a charter where this is not the case.

Thanks for showing it. I couldn't find it on Google.

Our squadron is in the process of dual chartering and I made it perfectly clear what we are agreeing to.  The squadron has at least one known gay member so before we discussed it with the cadets, we discussed it amongst the seniors and weighed the benefits vs. the downside.  I recommend that this be done before a decision is made.  We then put it to the cadets to vote on it.

I am certainly hoping that you are talking about voting as to whether or not to participate in the venture program, and not whether or not this gay member would be allowed to participate.

I am not going to spend any more time defending this as I have stated my case precisely.

I do however reserve the right of rebuttal.

What's the difference, exactly?

[RiverAux]

Hmm, I can't see CAP signing an agreement that totally invalidates the way CAP squadron commanders are appointed.  It is not up to the CAP unit and the parents of its cadet members to select the leaders. 

[cap235629]

The CAP commander is the Organization head, not necessarily a leader in the BSA view. 

Look at it from this perspective.  The Pastor is the head of the church, the church sponsors the troop/crew, the Pastor chooses 1 person to be the Chartered Organization Representative to act on his/her behalf (this person is the first REGISTERED adult) who then organizes the committee who then screen and choose the Scoutmaster/Crew Advisor.  Just as the BSA does not choose a Pator, it has no say on the Commander. 

Now substitute Commander for Pastor and you can see how it works.  The Commander is not required to register as a leader.

Hope this clears it up.  Also there is not a special "Dual Charter" agreement, the BSA ONLY uses the one I posted.  So if the unit is dually chartered, someone signed this form on behalf of the CAP Squadron.

[RiverAux]

The squadron commander also has TOTAL control over what positions are filled by members under their command and there is no provision in the regulations that lets any member of the unit, much less non-CAP members (parents of cadets) choose who is in charge of an activity. 

[cap235629]

Never implied there was, all I am saying is the Commander has to choose someone who meets the standards of the BSA to be a leader.  Think of the committee as the Command staff of the unit and it might make more sense.  The Commander or his representative has final say and approval authority.

[RiverAux]

all I am saying is the Commander has to choose someone who meets the standards of the BSA to be a leader. 

That may be what you're saying, but the document you posted says that a committe that includes parents of members chooses the leaders. 

[Nathan]

And, once again, so long as CAP retains control of all regulatory power (which HAS to be true, otherwise CAP isn't allowed to participate), then the "standards" become much more flexible. If the leadership standards for the BSA conflict with the leadership standards set forth by CAP, then CAP's win.

And luckily for us, the contract you provided says that the BSA leader only has to approve. It does not say that the BSA leader has to approve according solely to BSA regulations. With that in mind, the BSA leader, according to this contract, is quite free to approve a gay member, because the contract states that CAP would have full screening and selection authority.

It really comes down to this. We are given the authority, as the host organization, to screen all applicants for eligibility according to the standards of both organizations. If the two organizations collide, then the decision is in the detail. If our regulations say that CAP members are ALWAYS CAP member first, then CAP leadership standards trump the contradictory parts of BSA regulations. If the BSA disagrees, then the union is off; CAP regulations do not permit CAP to permenantly forfeit hosting priviledges.

With that in mind, CAP has screening authority, according to the contract. When we screen CAP members, per CAP 52-16, we screen them FIRST as CAP members, then as BSA members. CAP screening takes priority. And luckily for us, since the BSA leader only has to approve, but not specifically approve toward BSA regulations, then CAP wins the deal. If the BSA tries to block a member due to sexual preference alone, it would violate the membership authority clause of our regulations. So the charter doesn't happen.

And so far, the BSA hasn't been willing to let all the good of a CAP-BSA union dissolve for one tiny issue like this. With precedence on our side, I'm not sure how much more argument you have.

[Major Lord]

Nathan, I think a good analogy to CAP's relationship with BSA is that of CAP and the Air Force. CAP has a very open recruitment policy, and is indifferent to age, gender, sexual preference, sexual practices, and affiliation with organizations that may support the violent overthrow of the U. S. Government. The Air Force would deny membership, and/ or terminate or imprison you for things that CAP members practice with impunity.  Although we are affiliated with the Air Force, its clear that we are not Air Force, and never could be given the way we do business. A narrow exception has been carved out of regulations of both organizations, with both organizations in many ways agreeing to look the other way.

Curiously, the DOD non-discrimination policy, which we are not bound to but have agreed to support, voluntarily prevents us from supporting organizations that do discriminate on the aforementioned basis. By our own non-binding rules, we have prevented ourselves from supporting the Air Force and the Boy Scouts . It has been said that the ability to cope with ambiguity is the mark of genius.....

Major Lord

[cap235629]

Nathan,

You seem to be avoiding the most critical part of the agreement with your arguments.

In order to be a Venture crew the squadron must comply with BSA's leadership standards.  BOTH standards.  The is a difference between the words MAY and SHALL.  Shall in mandatory, MAY is voluntary.  While members of CAP MAY be atheists and homosexuals, it is not mandated that they must be to be a member.  It is however mandated by the BSA that leaders SHALL NOT be homosexuals or atheists.

The defining paragraph of the charter agreement is clear and I quote:

"Select a unit committee of parents and members of the chartered organization (minimum of 3) who will screen and select unit leaders who meet the organization's standards as well as the leadership standards of the BSA"

It is plain to see that a leader in the Venture Crew must meet the standards to join CAP in addition to the BSA requirements.  The BSA will not issue a charter to a unit that does not agree to this.  Argue all you want, it will not change facts.

[Major Lord]

Bill, perfectly said.

Major Lord

[Nathan]

It is plain to see that a leader in the Venture Crew must meet the standards to join CAP in addition to the BSA requirements.  The BSA will not issue a charter to a unit that does not agree to this.  Argue all you want, it will not change facts.

And the fact is that CAP MUST maintain regulatory control over the relationship with the BSA. The charter works right up until CAP says it doesn't work. In terms of membership, think of it this way. If a gay member was perfectly eligible for CAP membership, it would be mighty difficult legally for CAP to discriminate against that member for his or her sexuality, regardless of the omission in the discrimination policy. Using that logic, it really isn't hard to figure out the rest.

The BSA so far hasn't complained, and as I said, I know of an openly gay member who became a Venture Crew leader with absolutely NO objections from any BSA unit they worked with in the whole wing. If there were any objections, they didn't matter legally enough to become an issue. You can't be the only one to have these issues, right? We assumed that the BSA handled their problems internally. Either that, or nobody really cared to begin with (which, in an abstract sort of way means that the rule is enforced as much as rules against jaywalking).

I don't forget the fact that the charter was likely written for all of the organizations that the BSA works with, but when working with CAP, it's like adding a 0 on there. They can say what they want, but at the end of the day, it's going to be CAP's decision as to who they let through as leaders, because CAP leaders are going to be the ones who are running the joint activities 99% of the time. All it means is that the CAP-BSA relationship is far different than any other relationship the BSA has, because CAP REQUIRES us to be in charge. Our regulations come first, and as I said above, if the ONLY reason we have to discriminate against a member is sexual orientation, then it's going to be CAP having to fight the legal battle when push comes to shove, not the BSA.

With that, it means that CAP officers are in charge of CAP cadets. The CAP officers are judged as CAP officers before BSA members (since they are, according to regulations, more CAP than BSA), and if the BSA wants to fight back, they are more than welcome to withdraw. But so far they haven't, and at the end of the day, the nature of the relationship ENSURES that CAP can have the, "It's our way or the highway" attitude, NOT the BSA, as you seem to think.

If I was ACTUALLY barracks lawyering this, I could state that because the BSA prohibition against atheists (and homosexuals), the member would be protected by CAPR 32-9 1-1 b, where members will not be denied participation or eligibility for ANY CAP activity on the basis of, among other things, religion. Based on the wording, it doesn't have to be the member's religion, either. And so long as the Venture activity is still at least partially a CAP activity, the Supreme Court rulings still have no effect on our members, because, of course, regulations dictate that they are CAP members first. So what exactly is the moral guidance behind the BSA's decision to exclude homosexuals?

But that's barracks lawyering, right?

Just for reference, can you please post the BSA regulations specifically excluding openly homosexual members from leadership? We do need to make sure that if the wording on the contract says "leadership standards", then we should at least be able to look at the written document which defines them.

[cap235629]

look here for your answers, I am done.  I guarantee that if BSA knew the name of the member you speak of, they would no longer be a member of the BSA.

http://www.bsalegal.org/litigation-222.asp

In closing, I ask respectfully that this thread be locked because I am getting dizzy from all of this circular motion

[CadetProgramGuy]

and I request that it remain unlocked, as long as we can get off the Gay issue, and get back to the pro/cons of dual charter and hear some of the things that we are doing together.

Not everything can be a Uniform issue or IG issue.

You dual charter units out there....How is it working?

[whatevah]

I'll leave it unlocked for now. Nathan, the regs are clearly against you, as you have to comply with both regulations to participate in BSA stuff per the charter agreement.  Talk with your wing reg/legal folks about this and work up the chain.   Any further discussion on this topic will be deleted, along with the prior posts.

[CadetProgramGuy]

Thanks!!

[CadetProgramGuy]

Gonna bump my own for a minute.

CAP had a ranger program, venturing has a ranger program, are they even close to one another?

[Spike]

CAP had a ranger program, venturing has a ranger program, are they even close to one another?

Don't we still have a "Ranger Program"?  Venturing from my understanding and from looking at the materials is more in line with what CAP Rangers should be doing, as apposed as to what they are doing (i.e. eating bunnies, walking through the woods, eating bunnies, getting thrown in stagnant water, eating bunnies, walking to the top of a hill to watch Hawks, eating bunnies and of course eating bunnies)

They do share basic map reading, and basic land navigation.  Other than that I would opt for Venturing....over CAP's Ranger Programs. 

This is my opinion.  My Opinion may differ from your opinions, but we are all entitled to opinions.  So don't bash me for hating the Ranger Program in CAP, and I won't Bash you for loving the Ranger Program.....OK?!?!   :angel: