The point of view “Boy Scouts is for boys” is an opinion on the BSA’s decision of letting girls in. My take on this is “why throw out 107 years of tradition” like Rik said, and I would have to agree. It’s called Boy Scouts for a reason, it's not called both scouts or something like that. In some countries “co-ed troops do exist and are successful” that is only on the positive not the negatives, but there is a way to stop this, go to Change to sign a pation to stop them. Now with that out of the way, let's focus on the negatives of the article/rant. I think most of us were taught not to bring up religion in a conversation, but the author put it in there anyway. I mean  it is a part of the oath, but still he shouldn’t that into this. He should only focus on the main problem.