Eagledad

This reminds me of the current Girl Scout uniforms of a vest with patches. That has been the basic uniform for over 25 years, yet all the movies that use the Girls Scout image still show them in the previous green skirts style uniforms because nobody would recognize the organization in the present uniforms. One that comes to mind is the movie Dodge Ball. Barry

Of course there is no proof that gays are born gay and you don't have to be religious to consider the crime of encouraging a person to live a life they weren't born for. But if you want to go that trail, many other groups support your progressive thinking like pedifiles, bestiality, bisexuals, necrophilia, transexuals and on and on. Is everyone normal and should be allowed to be role models for our sons? Barry

Back when camporees were a big thing, our troop practiced every Saturday for two months. During that time, it was learned that the new guy (me) was a natural at tying knots, so I was given the task of inspecting every knot and lashing at every event that used ropes. I never had to tie a knot and the PL couldn't say done until I said all was good. That was a pretty big deal considering that over half our patrol of 12 was 14 and older. Our patrol took blue ribbons in knots and the chariot race. Barry

OK, but my point was there wasn't any clever plot by National to use boy-run over boy-led because of their approach to teach leadership. Honestly I think you give them too much credit. Personally my own definition of the differences between boy led and boy run are completely different than yours. So who should the BSA follow? Barry

Not true, I met one of the authors of the SM Training program and boy-run is just a term that has been used for years. There was no clever strategy to take over the world with it. In fact, their task of just defining it so 1000's of Scoutmasters who come from every walk of life would understand the intention of Boy run was the real challenge. Read the definition and you will agree it is quite vanilla in it's description. Barry

For the boys is it a full week of being left alone to make their own decisions. That means they take what classes they want to take and participate in the activities they want to participate. Younger scout tend take more fun activities than classes and the older scouts more classes than activities. New scouts have to learn to find their way and old scouts practice more of serving those around them. For the adults, it is a high impact week of patrol method. The scouts are in total control and really have to learn how to work with each other in accomplishing tasks as patrols and as a troop. That sounds so simple, but getting up late on the troop campout doesn't have the same impact of the whole troop arriving late for camp morning assembly. Summer camp usually polishes our scouts into a lean mean boy run program. It's pretty impressive actually. It is so much work on our SPL that we pay there way. Barry

Wow, a pragmatic none condescending explanation of the situation. Well done. Now how do I explain it to my liberal democrate atheist dad who doesn't believe people are born gay and are not good role models for boys? It's one of the few things we agree on. Barry

Hmm, a bunch of whining, but no real answers to LeCaster question about the present uniform. The difficulty of the uniform is the ages of the scouts in the program. New scouts are at the age they want to look like the older scouts, so the uniform is easy. the 13 and 14 year old scouts are going through a change where they are questioning their identity and no uniform is acceptable. The 15 and older scouts have little trouble with the uniform because they know the uniform is part of the program. So no matter what uniforms are selected, not all scouts will welcome them. So what then? First off I find the adults are as much of the problem as the scouts. The responses on this thread show how willing adults are willing to undermine the method as the scouts. That makes it more of an uphill battle using the method. to START, how the adults feel about the uniform shouldn't be important, how the role model making right decisions is the "Most" important. If the adult decided to protest the uniform by not wearing it correctly, the scouts will follow. And sadly the scouts will learn a lot of lessons from that example. No matter what the scout choose to do for themselves personally, the adults have to set the highest example. Scouts should always see the model for which they should aspire, not down to the lower. The adults are the primary method for setting the "Best" example. Also, adults should have a basic understanding of why the uniform is important in the scouting program. When a scout say the uniform is stupid, the adult needs to be ready for explaining how the uniform identifies each boy in the patrol as an equal partner to the team. From the outside, no boy is richer or poorer, smarter, or set apart from the group. For better or worse, the scout is an equal partner. "But I don't want to look like everyone else". The uniform give each scout their own personal identity that sets them apart from the group through rank, special awards, order of the arrow, and even outside troop activities like high adventure. The individuality the uniform provides allows the scout to be honored for his personal accomplishments within the scouting program and in the community. Any person with an understanding of scout only has to look at a scout uniform to know his experience and accomplishments. Of course there are many many more answers to guiding scouts on the uniform, these are just a few examples of helping guide a scout in a way of thinking for the value of the uniform. Of course as I said, some adults have to get past their own hang ups. Barry

I'm sure those definitions work for you, but the BSA only use the one "boy run", term with a broader definition. Right or wrong a listener likely doesn't use your same definitions. And many times you might hear the terms used synonymously in a discussion. Many of us who do (did) training try to use the same terminology as the materials provided by National to prevent confusion. And sadly to my wife's frustration, must of us don't read minds. LOL Barry

At least until a few years ago, the BSA used the term boy run. Barry

All Scout Masters will tell you that their troop is boy run, and they are to some degree. But a troop can only be a boy run as the SM is willing to let it be. I used to teach boy run and man my vision of boy run can be a tough sell. But the first question is what do you as the SM envision a boy run troop to be and why? What do the scouts get out of it? What the scouts get out of it is how you will market the idea. What you envision the boys doing is the frame work of reaching that goal. For me boy run gives scouts the true independence to practice making right decisions based off the Scout Law. I market it like this, character is easy when the adults make all the decisions, it become a bit more challenging when the scouts have to make the decisions. Scouts can become a lot less friendly, courteous and kind under the stress of trying cook dinner for a whole patrol or set up camp in the rain. My scouts are more mature than the average scout in leadership and making good decisions because they do so much more of it in our troop. Does that at least begin to answer the question, I may be way off track. Barry

The uniform is functional and a method. How important is the uniform depends on how it is used functionally and what you want our of the methods. Functionally the uniform is and equalizer that both hides and identifies scouts in the program. The poor scouts is equal to any other scout in uniform and identifies himself with patrol, troop and rank patches. All of these things are meant to prevent barriers in their goals to follow their dreams. On the method side, there is not method that challenges a scout to honor the expectations of being obedient than the uniform. If the troop expectations are full uniform and the scout shows up in jeans, well he made a wrong choice. How many wrong choices can a scout make before it becomes a habit. But don't misunderstand, telling a scout to get in proper uniform does not have the same possitive impact of the scout himself choosing to wear the uniform because it is the right choice. Many adults say wearing the uniform brings pride in being a boy scout. But I say just the opposite, how a scout wears the uniform shows how proud he is to be a boy scout. In fact, I learned that that 9 times out of 10, a scout who not in proper uniform who usually is in uniform has a big problem going on in his life. Made for some very good SM conferences. The main thing is you are going to haft to get in your mind is how you want the scouts to grow with the uniform. Once your figure that out, then you can answer your other questions. But get ready, the Scout Handbook explains proper uniforming. It's hard for me to explain to scouts that they can deviate from it. In fact, we didn't. That doesn't mean our whole troop was in full uniform. Many scouts made the wrong choice. Barry

Man is corrupt, God is not. So long as that is understood first by all, then at worst mans corruptness is temporary. But God as a consistent starting place is forever. I'm speaking pragmatically of course. Barry

I take Pascals quote as meaning even godly men can be self-serving; not confused or misunderstanding. But either way, God will always be the reference even a 1000 years later. That is not possible with man. Man is naturally corrupt, which means they as a source start out corrupt. It gets no better than God, It gets a lot worse without God. Barry

Yes, but the difference is man does it more often and more discretely because there are no hard set standards that are known by all that don't change with time. Man is fickle and changes at the drop of the hat. Man is not moral, God is. Barry

Better than man taking on the biggest stick. Even for atheist. Fairness is when the meek can hold the elitist equally accountable.

I don't think the author would disagree, but the problem is excepting a code that all will agree is fact. When we suggest there isn't a moral code of facts from a philosophical point of view and that is taken to the working level of the environment , we open the door to a general understanding of no moral codes of facts. So where does it stop? Merlyn says to have a strict code of morals, or suggests them as facts, results in tyranny (I think I said that right). But I think the author is saying without a concept of moral facts, tyranny will be the final result to prevent chaos. Barry Barry

Ah yes, the big stick. If the big stick is God, then the fact is equal to all including community leaders and elitist. Most important the leaders and elitist. Barry

I understand, that allows a great deal of room to maneuver around the facts. Until you are a victim of course. And I think that was the authors point. If everything is an opinion, the result is a lawless society. Barry

If God sets a standard of behavior, its a moral fact. That you don't agree with it doesn't make it less. If the guy with the big stick puts you in jail for what he says is a moral crime, does it really matter if you agree. The fact is you are in jail for the crime. Barry

oooh, thanks

Ah, bob and weave, I get it. You changed the subject, not me. Barry

What part of that is sarcasm? Those are the facts. Barry