In reply to IanHarrison:
I think Coel answered most of the points you raised in your last few posts.
> I would suggest that once the media starts to get involved, they take one side & "raise awareness" to such a degree that the organisation is "forced" to change its position.
But "the media" are not some unified mass. For example, I strongly suspect the readership of the Telegraph and probably the Times will agree wholeheartedly with your stance. The red tops don't care about religion or scouting much, the Guardian would probably side with me. The papers are rarely all in accord, especially on an issue like this.
> But those other children were in other countries, George is the only one in the UK the report mentions. You seem to be assuming that these other countries made their changes because of "pressure" from scouts or media in those countries, do you have any evidence for this?
They don't decide to change or keep their policies by flipping a coin. If they changed their policy, they surely had a reason to? My guess would be that they realised that Muslim boys share all the important values of the scouting association, and at the cost of a slight re-wording, they could open up the movement to a large group of boys who would otherwise be excluded.
> Your arguement suggests that if secondary school children in 20 countries around the world don't have to wear school uniforms then we must have the same dicussion here in the UK and ban them.
No. That would be a specious argument, and I think Coel and I both said above (when you asked a similar rhetorical question earlier) that that is not the argument we're making.
But if I felt that school uniforms were somehow immoral (I don't); and if the pro-school-uniform lobby said that it would be totally against the principles of the school uniform movement to allow children not to wear school uniforms; and if in other countries the school uniform movement had actually changed the rules to allow children not to wear school uniforms; then I would point it out.
More importantly, I don't understand why you seem to think that a few people having a discussion will necessarily lead to a ban? It's still up to the school uniform lobby to decide what to do.
> The governing body for scouting seems to have a realistic view that although scouting may be applicable in most countries, it may need ammendmant in others. You might like to consider this, are their scouting organisations in Mouslem countries & if so do they allow girls?
I believe there are scouts in Muslim countries and I believe there are Muslims boys in scout troops in the UK. I don't know if there are specifically Muslim branches of the scouts. I also don't know if they allow girls in scouts or if they have Guides instead, or if they have neither.
Remember that we only allowed girls into scouts relatively recently. Ask some leaders on here, but my impression was that was simply because it's difficult to send mixed groups of teenagers camping without them shagging.
> By the way which other countries & what has eached changed the wording to?
I don't know, I was going by responses on this thread.
> On reflection your are correct, it does not preclude you from being open minded.
Thanks.
> I do however wonder what comments you or Coel would make it your prediction was shown to be wrong.
Mine would be "that's a real shame. I had more faith in the scout movement".
> The problem is that young George wants to join but can't because of his strong beliefs, so he can't change it from the inside.
> This leads us to another question does he, you or I have the right to require changes an organisation while not being a member of that organisation.
Only the law could possible "require changes" from an organisation, not a person. And certainly not George. What power does he have?
> Lets say George was a scout & had reached the tender age of 14 (I believe this is the age they go upto Venture scouts), would you agree that the Scouts must change their age limits to allow him to remain within his scout troop if he wished?
No.