Jump to content

Issues & Politics

In answer to many requests, we established a separate forum for these topics. Those not interested can skip this forum instead of spending time reading unwanted messages to identify content.

2581 topics in this forum

    • 62 replies
    • 11249 views
    • 0 replies
    • 1005 views
  1. REI weighs in

    • 5 replies
    • 215 views
    • 12 replies
    • 366 views
    • 268 replies
    • 12571 views
    • 25 replies
    • 935 views
    • 186 replies
    • 16712 views
    • 3 replies
    • 395 views
    • 19 replies
    • 916 views
    • 97 replies
    • 4615 views
    • 19 replies
    • 786 views
    • 62 replies
    • 2150 views
    • 51 replies
    • 2734 views
    • 181 replies
    • 6467 views
    • 11 replies
    • 452 views
  • LATEST POSTS

    • In that case, I’m glad that by doing such things I can please the people I care about and offend the ones I don’t. 
    • Nor I.  But that's not the requirement.  Background check or not, they can only stay 72 hours if not registered..
    • I just push straight throught the patch, using a rather skinny needle and also a thimble if needed.  If the needle starts to flex, back off and try to push straight.   I don't think I have ever broken an hand-sewing needle,  though I have broken lots of sewing machine needles.
    • I have no problem requiring all parents who spend a week at summer camp to take a background check, but BSA should differentiate between parents that may be frequently around youth vs scout leaders.  I would like to see a separate form that would allow a background check at no cost to the unit.  No need to make up positions for these parents or have them take YPT or charge a fee for staying overnight at camp for a few days. I completely understand BSA requiring the background checks as state and local laws are being implemented left and right increasing the requirements. In addition, there have been a flood of lawsuits against various youth organizations.  The judgement/settlements are massive.
    • I’m not a professional. I’m an old time retired scoutmaster with passion for the traditional patrol method program. I’ve been very critical of the recent changes, including admitting gays and transsexuals. Not because I have phobias, I believe I’m more compassionate for these kids. But National is putting volunteers in the position of encouraging behaviors that these youth may regret when they mature into adults. I don’t believe accepting girls 14 and younger is good for the program because it will take away from the boys at a National level. It doesn’t matter if some troops are totally male, National will have to direct the whole program as mixed genders.  Girls and boys don’t mix well in a patrol method type program before reaching puberty because boys generally think in the big world picture while girls are very detailed oriented. Patrol method works for boys because they are forced to build habits of working details. Girls, by instinct, won’t let them do that without heavy adult interference. None of that works well in a patrol method program. But, I’m also pretty good at looking at things pragmatically. What I posted is an honest assessment of what I see coming based from observations of the program and National for the last roughly 50 years. Troops will become adult run after school camping programs and eagle factories. The addition of girls will bring in more adults without a scouting experience, and those adults typically push advancement the hardest over the other methods. They can’t help themselves; they don’t know how to do the other scouting stuff very well, but they know how to follow a checklist. It’s human nature. Barry  
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×