quote:

---

Douglas S. Smith Jr. was charged with one felony count of having photos that show "minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct."

Sources in the U.S. Attorney's office told NBC that Smith was expected to plead guilty.

The images were of young boys and the investigation started in Germany, the sources added.

In a statement Tuesday, the Boy Scouts of America said it had no indication of prior criminal activity.

"We are dismayed and shocked to learn of the charge," it said. "Smith was employed by the organization for 39 years, with no indication of prior criminal activity. He was not in a leadership position which involved working directly with youth."

---

We just got an e-mail about it. I don't know any of the people involved. Blech.

[ March 29, 2005, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
 

---

Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
 
Crap.
 

---

Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
 
You work for BSA, right?
 

---

Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
 
Yes. National headquarters.
 

---

Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
 
I told ya! I told ya! Them there queers just ain't to be trusted.
 

---

Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
 
What a scary picture!

Sure, we don't want any agnostics or athiests, but this guy's okay running our organization.

*I apologize, that is a cheap shot, please take it in the spirit of irony I saw in it....
 

---

Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
 
That stinks.
Somehow you gotta hope it’s not true.
But if it is, you hope he’s put away for good. Look at the guy down in Florida who should have been in jail but wasn’t and killed that little girl.
 

---

Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
 
It's not a cheap shot - it's not even a shot, Erik. He was ousted as soon as the charges were even spoken of. Obviously, not it's not okay.
 

---

Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
 
There are a lot of very good people in the BSA, so I hope this one person doesn't tarnish the entire organization.

I had heard about this yesterday on the news, but didn't think about how it might affect you LJ. Hopefully it doesn't affect your office in a bad way.

Farmgirl
 

---

Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
 
True enough.

Edit to add: I guess it's my own bitterness talking. I'd like my son to get the benefits of the scouts as I did, but when they find out about me....

Oh well. I wouldn't want them talking about that stuff anyway.

Maybe I can find a good martial arts program for him....

[ March 29, 2005, 02:57 PM: Message edited by: Erik Slaine ]
 

---

Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
 
I know some people who work for BSA, and I've always been impressed with them.

This is a shame, but it sounds like BSA immediately took action, which is good.

I just hate that there are people out there like that at all. It really burns me up to hear of children being exploited.
 

---

Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
 
I'm so sorry, Kat.
 

---

Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
 
Thanks, CT, but I'm not personally affected. I don't know anything more than what is reported in the article, and I haven't met the person in question - different department. It's bad for kids exploited along the way, and it's bad for BSA in general. I think they handled as best as possible under the circumstances, though.
 

---

Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
 
I know. It's just another downer, and on some days dealing with such things hits you harder than others. I was feeling for the "oh, CRAP!!" part of you.
 

---

Posted by ludosti (Member # 1772) on :
 
I read about this earlier this morning. It's such a sad thing. I thought about making a thread about it, but didn't want it to seem like "Hey Kat, check out the perv you had working there with you!". I guess I'm glad you didn't know the guy.

[ March 29, 2005, 03:20 PM: Message edited by: ludosti ]
 

---

Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
 
Heh. I didn't have any idea until I got the e-mail, then went looking for a news article to link.

You're so sweet, CT.
 

---

Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
 
It truly sucks. Child molesters purposely seek out jobs or volunteer jobs that are around kids--so that they can find victims.

It isn't the fault of the BSA, they're just one of those organizations.


 

---

Posted by dread pirate romany (Member # 6869) on :
 


I get so angry at kids being abused.
 

---

Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
 

quote:

---

I told ya! I told ya! Them there queers just ain't to be trusted.

---

quote:

---

Please tell me you were being ironic. I'd hate to have to once again point out that homosexuality and pedophilia are two very separate and very distinct phenomena.

---

I admit that I tend to ignore jebus when he's being ludicrous like this, but I am ashamed that none of us called him on that already.
 

---

Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
 
I don't understand WHAT is going on with jebus lately.
 

---

Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
 
No Karl, I was being dead serious.
 

---

Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
 
In that case,
 

---

Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
 

quote:

---

I don't understand WHAT is going on with jebus lately.

---

I think he's on the down-side of his psychosis cycle.
 

---

Posted by Uhleeuh (Member # 6803) on :
 
I haven't noticed any changes in Jeebsy lately. He's being his normal, Jebus self. I think you guys just take him too seriously.
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
I hate to say it Eljay, but I'm not surprised to hear a mule bray.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
The comment is in poor taste, particularly when a number of people do believe the two issues to be intertwined.

Unless of course, Jeebus happens to believe this. In which case, I refer you to my earlier comment.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
 
Oh, I wasn't surprised he said it, T. I feel bad that I just dismissed it instead of saying something. Because it is incredibly inappropriate and offensive, and the fact that it probably is so on purpose doesn't mean it should just be ignored.

And Uhleeuh, he claims to be serious, how else are we supposed to take him? Like a child who shouldn't be held accountable for his own actions?
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
I think the "like a child" part, at least, is accurate.

But I think most children are accountable for their own actions, if in a more limited sense.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
I'm pretty sure it was meant as an attack on the Boy Scouts.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Uhleeuh (Member # 6803) on :
 
I'm not going to pretend to know what Jebus thinks or believes, but I didn't read it as him being serious. I took it to mean two things: 1)that some people will make the false connection between pedophilia and homosexuality and 2)as a comment closely related to what Erik Slaine said above, only replace agnostics/athiests with homosexuals. I could just be misinterpreting, it's been known to happen.

And Eljay, Jebus is a sarcastic guy and I'm pretty sure that was another case of it. But like I said before, I could be wrong. Take him as seriously as you would like.
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
*grins* Pick your fights Eljay - if I got into a proverbial scrap every time someone said something that offended me, I'd never be able to afford bail.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Oh, I don't think Jebus was serious, either, I think he was immature.
 

---

Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
 

 

---

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
Uhleeuh, just because jebus is often over-the-top sarcastic doesn't mean he should get a free pass for his offensive comments, does it?
 

---

Posted by Uhleeuh (Member # 6803) on :
 
No, I don't think he should be able to go around offending people but at the same I happen to think he was making a comment on the organization-which has policies I find much more offensive than Jeebus' comment, but that's not the topic here- and not on homosexuals or homosexuality being wrong/evil/pedophiles/etc...so, I honestly don't think taking it at face value is a wise move. *shrug*

edit: I took Jebus' comment as supportive of homosexuals. But it's all in the interpretation.

[ March 29, 2005, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: Uhleeuh ]
 

---

Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
 
See, T, for me it's a question of manners. This particular issue is not one that affects me too much personally. It does affect KarlEd and Telp personally, among others. So I would consider it the gracious thing to do to comment on the inappropriateness of this first, so they either a) didn't have to or b) know in advance that they are supported here, and can comment without feeling alone.

Not that I think either of them would need that support. But it's always nice to have it, and, like I said, it's the kind of way I want to act. Proper manners.
 

---

Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
 
Thanks Eljay.

In retrospect, I should have just ignored it like everyone else. My first instinct was to do so. I didn't listen.
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
I don't know why you're aggravated Karl - if someone rather flippantly suggested I was a pedophile, I'd be a little incensed too.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
 
I don't understand why anyone takes Jeebsy seriously when he makes remarks like that - he is well known for being sarcastic.
 

---

Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
 
I'm sorry, Kat.

-o-

I read the comment the way Uhleeuh did: support for homosexuals and criticism of the BSA, phrased sarcastically.
 

---

Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
 
My second thought was that it might have been meant ironically, that's why I worded my first post the way I did. Jebus replied that he was serious. It's very possible that he was still being ironic or just trying to stir something up. If the former, a smiley might have helped. If the latter, I'm sorry I took the bait.
 

---

Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
 

quote:

---

It's very possible that he was still being ironic or just trying to stir something up.

---

Yeah. Both, I think. No smilies, because it isn't about you, it's about how riled up he can get people.
 

---

Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
 
KarlEd, I would say Jebus was definitely being ironic.

That's his style.
 

---

Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
 
When in doubt, ignore jebus.

[ March 30, 2005, 12:11 AM: Message edited by: AntiCool ]
 

---

Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
 
Good advice, AntiCool. Works for me.

Katie, I'm really sorry about that. I don't think it's the organization's fault that this stuff happens.

But my boys will never be scouts. Not because of one incident like this, but because several former boyscouts of my acquaintance have told me they were molested during scouting activites, and strongly suggested against letting my kids join.

Maybe I just happen to know every single molested boyscout personally, and it isn't that common, but the fact that I have come in contact with several... I choose to take it as a warning from the universe at large directed at me and my boys personally.

I was a girl scout for many years, so I know scouting can be great, but they can learn most of that stuff from their dad and they have other social outlets.
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
I'll chime in with - I had a mixed experience with Scouting, but that was because of other Scouts and not the adults.

As a general rule, we always had at least three adults on any particular excursion, all of them parents of kids in the troop itself.

But you have to do what feels right for you Olive - and if you're not comfortable with the notion of your boys in Scouts, go with it.

That said, I had fun mucking through the woods, white-water rafting and rappelling - even if my dad told me to jump out of a window with a rope that wasn't tied off. But that's another story.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
 
We muck about in the woods, go rafting and stuff as a family anyway. But yeah.
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
*grins* I thought as much.

Considering my family, it was safer to go with a group of similarly inept people to blunder through the woods.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
 
What really annoys me is all these stories tend to make people paranoid (not that I'm saying that's wrong - when our children's safety is concerned we should always err on the side of caution) and then they begin to think ANY person who works with kids must be a pervert.

My cousin is an elementary school teacher. He decided to major in education, was intending to be a high school coach, and yet when he did practicums with the elementary ages he found he really enjoyed working with the younger kids.

His principal has to reassure parents every year when their 1st grader is assigned to a male teacher that he is, in fact, a good teacher who has never had any trouble. Funny, they don't call up and ask the principal if he's done a full background check on the female teachers.

So these jerks who take jobs with proximity to kids in order to molest them, make life much harder for good, decent men who want to work with children. And sadly, many kids need positive male role models in their lives, but men feel discouraged from it because people are always looking at them sideways if they say they volunteer or work with kids.
 

---

Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
 
I understand that. Though I dn't think I've ever questioned the motives of any of the male teachers or volunteers at the elementary school (I'm a reading mentor volunteer, too).

For me, though, this decision is just about listening to the messages that the universe sends my way, reading meaning in coincidence. May be stupid, but I prefer to listen.
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
Better safe than sorry, at the end of the day.

Of course, you will have to let them fly at some point Olive.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
 
Yeah. I'm still debating when to let them go to the restrooms in restaurants and airports by themselves.

My take on it is that Robert is okay in the restrooms most places by himself, if we are within sight of it. He'll probably be shaving before I'll let him out of my sight at Hartsfield, though (j/k, though maybe not by much )
 

---

Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
There's no indication that this guy molested anybody. Not that pornography is a victimless crime, but in my opinion there's a large difference. I am curious however, about whether he distributed pornography or merely recieved it. I haven't seen a clear indication of what happened.

As far as boy scouting goes, I'm very much in favor of the program. If the rules are followed, your boys should be very safe. The BSA policy on "two deep leadership" is a pretty good defense against molestation. Teaching your children some basic safety tips (covered by BSA requirements somewhere along the line) adds extra security. And finally, since any BSA unit needs adults to keep it running: VOLUNTEER YOURSELF, and you can keep tabs on your kids that way.

Of course, I haven't been a member for a number of years, since they don't want me. But you can't take the scout out of the boy, as they say. I just wish the current leadership would wise up and figure out a way to bridge the gap. Their old publications said that Scouts were supposed to defend people of different religious belief, including those with "no religious belief at all."
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Glenn, hypothetical question for you:

If Scouts did not prohibit atheists, nor require them to say the "to God" portion of the Promise, would you feel comfortable participating or allowing your children to participate in the Scouts if there were non-denominational prayers (as they are usually implemented in the U.S. - inferentially to the Judeo-Christian (and possibly Islamic) conecptions of God, if not explicitly so) at most or all of the functions? Assume respectful silence were required of those not participating in the prayer.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
 
I don't think he molested anybody. I think it's a shame that this will probably completely ruin his life.

Honestly, I'm not opposed to scouting. I think BSA's policies suck, though that probably doesn't have much impact on the program.

But, no. Not this little gray duck.

Besides, with my boys' other interests, it just doesn't seem necessary. I understand, though. If I had daughters, I'd be very involved in Girl Scouts, I bet.
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
Without knowing the exact nature of the material, I'm willing to err on the side of caution and rule that someone with child pornography presents an unacceptable risk to the safety and well-being of children.

The argument can be extended to all forms of porn, but I will also remind you that most forms of porn are legal and someone willing to risk the considerable legal and social penalties to collect illegal and taboo porn is not someone I want in close proximity to the subject of his fantasies.

Because, at the end of the day, I don't really need to be able to buy a PlayBoy. The articles were never that interesting.

If, however, I was buying "Snuff Bunnies Weekly," I think most people would be concerned and rightly so.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
Dag,

That is precisely what I did. Earlier in my life, I simply didn't notice the religious elements of scouting. They just were. They were not intrusive. I still think that the religious requirements are too minor for either side to make a stink about.

Later on I heard that a boy and his father weren't allowed to join because they refused to sign the application, I agreed with the scouts, on the grounds that you don't try to change the organization from the outside. I was a scout, and I felt that the scouts had always accepted my state of belief, so I didn't think there was anything I needed to change.

But when I heard that the BSA had kicked out two agnostic boys who were working on their eagle rank, I hoped fervently that the courts would side with the boys. I felt like the organization had kicked me in the teeth. I was still in scouting, and so was my son. I didn't leave scouting then, but I reduced my participation, and tried to lay low. Eventually I heard such things coming from the national leadership that I just couldn't contintue. My son's troop still tried to get me to participate, but eventually I dropped out entirely. I still support the Boy Scout program, I think it's the best program of its kind in the world. I just don't like the hunted feeling of being part of an organization that publicly states that I can't be a member.

As far as the guy with the pornography goes, I think the scouts draw the line in an appropriate place also, but I have some sympathy for him. I have very little sympathy for molesters.
 

---

Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
This is partly to bump the thread because Dag asked the question and I'd like to know what he thought of my reply, but also to clarify:

I can't say whether I have sympathy for this particular man, because I don't know the circumstances. I'm not sure I can put it into words, but I can imagine circumstances where someone was tempted by available pornography and succumbed to it, rather than actively seeking to seduce children.

Does that make any sense?
 

---

Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
Actually, rereading Dagonee's question, I can go further.

There were times when I helped scouts to work through their understanding of the religious requirements. Also a time when I helped a scout plan a religious ceremony at a camporee. This last was toward the end when I was pretty self conscious about religion in scouting, so I think I might have done a better job of it if I'd been freer to discuss my belief with him.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Glenn, thanks for bumping it. I missed this somehow.

That seems like a reasonable position to have. My take is that there are organizations who can have an organizational belief or position ("there is a God") without requiring that every member subscribe to it. It depends on the organization and how central the belief is to the organization's stated purpose. It also depends on whether membership implies professing the belief and whether the manifestations of that belief exceed the person's comfort level.

To make an almost absurd example, it wouldn't work if the organization were a Church. But the Boy Scouts allow contradictory beliefs amongst its members, so I'm not sure central the tenet is. I do think the Scouts are about much more than just the activities, but teaching teens how to discuss their very different beliefs in a useful and respectful manner seems like an important part of their mission.

quote:

---

I just don't like the hunted feeling of being part of an organization that publicly states that I can't be a member.

---

quote:

---

I can't say whether I have sympathy for this particular man, because I don't know the circumstances. I'm not sure I can put it into words, but I can imagine circumstances where someone was tempted by available pornography and succumbed to it, rather than actively seeking to seduce children.

---

I might be able muster a very little sympathy for him going to jail for so long in those circumstances, but if I set policy for an organization that worked with children, I would still fire them even if they just succumbed to available temptation.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
Like I said, I think the scouts draw the line in an appropriate place. So we agree.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

 

---