Eagledad

I agree and I think it is a wrong unscout-like behavior that can verge on bullying. I expect adults should be capable of carrying on an honest mature discussion without insinuation and derogatory dialog. Long term influence of a mind should be a result of logical processing of facts or reason, not intimidation or knee-jerk expressions of emotion. I also believe these techniques are why this forum has such a low active membership the last few years. Barry

All good points, thank you. Still I am curious, would you please ask you friend his opinion of god in scouting and if he has ever referenced the subject to a scout. Around here religion is part of life and not a scary thing. Not even to atheist parents, of which we have had several. I have worked with scouts of many religions including Wicca, but again it wasn't a problem because it is personal to the scout and his family. We only need to mention that spirituality is part of the oath and law and let them figure it out. Barry

Some here have a different agenda than having a reasonable discussion on the different subjects. It seems popular lately to make up analogies or use rare examples for the purpose of categorizing whole groups in a negative light to make their own point look strong. If it were really that strong or valid, it would stand on it's own without having to demonize others. I realize that many times we react to quickly our emotions instead of patiently thinking out a more plausible response that doesn't attack others. But if we can't live by the guidelines of the law here, how can we set the example in front of the scouts? Barry

Of course, but should advice or policy be given to the rare extreme actions, or the common scenario. For every one bad example, there are a thousand good ones. So it's not fair to categorize the general population from the example of one. Even worse is to categorize from fantastic made up analogies. I have seen a lot of EBORs, I have never once seen a EBOR where a scout wasn't given the highest respect even when he was marginal in his answers. These board members go into every review thinking they will pass the scout and have zero intention to push him in a corner. They do a good job with honor and should be respected as such. Barry

Are you sure about that? Ask him and report back to us to how he advises duty to God. Matt, part of the question depends on age, maturity and life experiences. Ask a 11 or 12 year old if he understands duty God and reverence. Their general answer is something to the tune of "I don't know". Depending on the answer, a good suggestion is refer to ask his parents. Then ask him what they said at your next conference. God is a personal thing instilled and/or supported by the families, so families are the place for him to ask questions. For the older scouts, ask them how they view the spiritual part of the oath and law to their scouting experience. They usually have pretty good answers once they have time to think about. As for scouts who aren't sure, be careful not to confuse "I never thought about it" with "I'm not sure there is a god". Even kids of atheist parents haven't really thought about it. Again refer them to their parents or maybe even the scout law if you know parents aren't available. If you ever run into that one scout who doesn't believe in any higher power or whatever, don't be the one to remove him because these things change in us as we experience life. I don't really think anyone would, I have yet to meet a SM who said they would kick a scout out for not believing in god, That is the real world. Still, their is that requirment, so instead meet with the whole family together and explain that some kind of acknowlegement of spirituality is a requirement for Eagle. At some point the "scout and his parenst" must make a choice to how they want to deal with that. The naysayers here color this issue as a scary monster waiting to jump a scout and make him cry, but in reality it's one of the easiest subjects for adults because you aren't looking for any specific answer. We just are guides toward reflecting to their experience of the oath and law. However, don't ignore the subject completely because he would feel ambushed at the EBOR. It is strange to me that folks take this to the dark extreme, but I take comfort in that many of the forum participants here are not typical of the real world scouters. Still, from my experience demonstrating Scouting Spirit is the number one cause of families deferring to Council and National for their son's Eagle when the unit refuses to approve the scout. Scout Spirit is pretty important, but I found that usually the blame of these differences are caused by the SM because they neglected guiding the scout on the subject. That is why it is important for the SM to be thorough in reviewing a scout over the years along with the BOR. They are a check on each other and can save a lot of hassle from the scout who doesn't appear worthy and shows up at the SM's door with a lawyer. Scouts should get a review of all the points of the law and oath sometime in his scouting career. Barry

With all due respect Morzart, I can't read your stuff. Anyone who goes off ranting about scout leaders looking to "ambush" scouts is not quite right to me. I've been around this scouting stuff a long enough to know what is real and what is made up. I admit my weakness of lacking patience, so you'll have to forgive me that I am not giving any credence to your ridiculous hypothetical analogies which contribute absolutely nothing to the discussion. I enjoy intellectual discussions, but I'm a bit pragmatic and rather start from a practical starting place of common reason. Not far out extreme what-ifs intended more to get attention. Have you ever been to an EBOR? Have a great scouting day Barry

Sexual orientation (as you suggest it here) has little to do with living the oath and law? God is not a specific requirement, but living the Oath and Law are. A good Scoutmaster reviews and guides the scouts in how they are living the Scout Spirit. If the scout isn't guided during his experience, then you end up in the situation just mentioned where the scout risk not meeting minimum expectations. Now you may personally not like those parts of the law and oath that refer to spirituality, but it behooves all scoutmasters to listen and guide the scouts in their personal experiences. That is not to say the scoutmaster is prying into how the scout is reverent or his duty to god. It is inquiring to the scout's expectation and his personal thoughts toward his expectations. Many times a scouts expectation is doing nothing more than being open minded, which is fine. But it is better for the scouts to know where they stand early in his life so that they have a chance to ponder that part of the scout spirit attributes and relating his thoughts in front several adults in a board of review. Barry

Well I can't see the problem. A SM was always supposed to check on a scouts progress in his rank requirements as well as his scouting experience, so how does this change it? How does it change the question? And, if a SM is of mind to take this a step to far, they will do it anyways for the reason I just stated. There is no change for the leaders that I can see. Barry

Very common really. In the normal world, 95% of the population is passive and doesn't want to rock the boat. That makes it easy for an overly dominating person to take the reins of the program. What follows is that families that don't like the leadership leave while the rest find their quiet place in the program. I am sure most units on this forum are the same because to some degree just about all organizations follow this rule of nature. In most cases the dominating leaders use all the resources to units best advantage, so they don't appear dominant. It is when a unit gets that dominating personality with a more self-serving agenda that units have problems. I was asked to help several of these types of units when I was on the district committee. It is very difficult for a unit to follow a leader who lacks some kind of leadership head characteristics because they by nature will step back when a person of stronger character steps up. That is why I asked about the SM. If it is not in him to step up, nature will push the CC to lead. I've seen this happen with ASMs, CORs, and even unit commissioners. The problem isn't so much these personalities stepping on toes, the problem is the unit lacks the personalities in the right positions to hold aggressive personalities back. Barry

Truth of the matter is that most units are led by the dominant adult. It doesn't matter what their position title is, their personality will drive or intimidate the adults to follow. The best way to get the CC to back off is for the SM to tell them to do it. If they need help, contact the DE and ask for advice and help. It's hard to say how they will answer the request because DE's are human too, some are wise, some are strong, and the rest aren't. Tell us about the SM. Barry

Lots of speculation, lots of hand wringing, I believe it is only about numbers. The gay issue painted scouting as a conservative god support program. The populous let the liberal culture draw the line and the result is there is less tolerance for tolerance and mixing of ideals, especially quantifying moral behavior (which is the purpose of scouting). The BSA found itself not satisfying anybody, so it has to pick one side or the other to survive. You only have to look at history of scouting to see where siding away from God will take the program. National is in survival mode now. Personally I don't see the new directive changing anything, at all. It's just written words being more blatant in the program's support of god. It's marketing. Barry

Approval is rare, so it likely hasn't been approved in your council. I'll give you an actual situation: Council with a weak OA program takes over a Council with a strong OA program. A few troops were not happy, so they asked to be moved to another Council that was actually closer. Requests were denied. Ask your friend how often these request come up. Even more interesting are the reasons they ask. Barry

Requesting a change of district or council happens a lot more than most realize because people are fickle and come up with all kinds of reasons to change. These request are rarely approved, but it does depend on the circumstances. Barry

Maybe it's our area, but I have never seen what many call Troop method around here. But I've noticed that with some folks on this forum, troop method is anything that appears adult run. In my opinion, same age patrols are by nature more adult run, but I would never call them troop method. Barry

I'll agree with that. A few years ago I met someone who was close to many of the pros at national and his take on what they were trying to do was go full a head on age based patrols as well as split the troop at age 14. The introduction of NSP, Troop Guides and 1st Class in 1 year was the beginings of that goal. Along with that, folks just don't realize what allowing women leaders into the program has done to it. Ignoring the political correctness aspects of it, women forced a huge dynamic shift just from lack of scouting experience as a youth. All the changes in training introduced in 2000 were a result of that dynamic shift. I feel that National's goal of that time has been interrupted because the troop split was put on the back burner, but I honestly don't know where National wants to go in the future. I think the murkiness you describe is partically on purpose and I don't feel that that National has the best intentions for the BSA vision and mission. I think progressives have a lot of influence and it just a matter of time before the resistance from the old timers will fade enough for them to change the program into an after school program like the YMCA. Of course that is just my conspiracy theory based from watching the changes over the years. But, I've said several times that less than 25% of adults joining the program today have a scouting experience. The time is not so far away of when there aren't any scouters who remember the true patrol method program. The numbers are working against us, so it is inevitable that the foundational drive for the program will come from this culture, not the last. Barry

Ya, there's no bias in that post. Shesh

I think the question would be a little easier if the people who express themselves were held accountible to the laws. We have laws against damaging property and more importantly, injuring and killing individuals. Let's start with those abuses of freedoms, then maybe the question of expression etiquette will be a little more clear. Barry

I guess we have different ideas of optional because the BSA doesn't allow any options for 1. or 2. My point all along is that if you can't find BSA support for what you are telling others to do, likely you are off the reservation and possbily leading others to fail. Barry

This statement reminds me of a scoutmaster on this forum that once said SPLs are only used by Scoutmasters to maintain control of the patrols. It is narrow minded thinking that turns off open minded seekers. It seems that many of us are in more of a hurry to define bad scouting practices than explaining how to develop good scouting. Even more we seem to commit to defining all programs into single hypothetical examples. I admit that I'm a little impatient with theories being supported by scary hypothetical examples. SPL is the focus in this discussion, but I've seen the Eagle abused just as badly in this forum. It seems there is a lot of opinions for what a scout has to accomplish to earn an Eagle, much less be respected as an one. And yet, what does the BSA have to say on the subject. I used to be really critical of National of how they guided adults in training and manuals, but Looking back from my experience of working with hundreds of scouters, the BSA actually does a pretty good job of allowing "options" while still giving a solid frame work to start. I still have issues with them, but watching the new generation of adults coming into the program, I have a respect for present and coming challenge. I say all this because I think this forum does a lousy job helping scouters improve their program. It used to be one of the best. But we as a whole now come off arrogant and hostile. Arrogant in that we think we the smartest person in the room, and hostile in that we are condescending to those that don't seem to agree with us. A couple folks here seem to even take pride in attacking members for even being part of the group. Heaven help a parent ignorant to scouting seeking some guidiance. We have driven off those who really need the help and limited the ideas to only those willing to stand against criticism. We are eating our own and will eventually have nothing left. The membership numbers show it. Barry

I fully agree, but they still had an experience that trumps most adults today. 50% of new leaders (give or take) are women. And, I have found that more than 50% of men coming in today had very little if any scouting experience (at least in our area). These adults are the future of the BSA scouting program. And as I said earlier, when we start telling these adults to not use the program given to them and instead follow ONE scouter's unusual approach to working with their sons in the woods, well the advice can have the wrong effect. If we really care for the future of the program, we have to accept the program that it is and not be so prideful that our style or "options" make or break the program. Integrity comes from humility of experience, not pride of protecting personal ideals. Barry

Thanks, TAHAWK, your are kind of making my point that the BSA does give guidelines to how the program runs. If you haven't seen and haven't seen any post lately about poster who don't like the SPL, you aren't reading enough. But I think it is the everything is optional that I really like. There are some here that have a my-way-or-highway approach and that is the problem. When I was asked to start teaching adults, a very wise scouter sat me down and told me that expressing personal opinions the defy the material that is being lowers the integrity of the teacher, not the program. I am known as the boy run patrol method guru in our council, but this guy knew that passion would drive more people away than convert. Adding additional information and philosphy that compliments the course material goes a lot farther than saying that using an SPL makes your program troop-method. That is a silly statement biased on limited ideals. It certainly isn't the "everything is optional" way of mind. Barry

Based on whose definition of leadership qualities? Not every scout is going to agree on leadership qualities and they certainly aren't going to agree with the SM. Who is going to teach what? Barry