Eagledad

>>I'm sure there are cases that could be argued to disaprove allowing the scout to do the badge, though for the life of me I really can't identify one.

Yep, some folks messed up. Usually the SM catches all the flak for the mistakes other adults (like the AC) make in doing this scouting stuff. I agree with NJ, doesn't sound like leaders working as a team. Barry

>>After I sent him the link to the Guide To Advancement, he read the section on "active" pretty thoroughly, and was working on an argument that justified his not participating on outings.

Guy, have you called Eureka? It's been a few years, but they replaced our poles for free. Also, there are some custom pole makers out there that will make reasonbly priced aluminum poles for weight and shorter sections that fit in packs. Use the fiberglass poles on nonbackpacking campouts and save the aluminum for backpacking. Barry

>>If we ran our packs/troops/crews/ships/whatevers this way, they'd fall apart (and we all have seen this). So why do we allow for our districts and councils to be this way, at least on the volunteer side? And why do many of us perpetuate the myth that, really, everything is totally functional?

You might even get some cooperation by encouraging (allowing) the scouts to use the smartphones or smartpads. Barry

>>BSA's intent and intended processes is debatable because of that messed up documentation. BSA does intend some level of "approval" but it's the most minimal level ever implied by BSA. So minimal you can essentially view it as not an approval, but more documentation of a conversation between the scout and the SM.

>>Publishing a current MBC list is one of the District Advancement Committee's primary responsibilities. If they are not doing this, what ARE they doing???

>>The SM and I talked about it last week -- his inclination is to hold the Scout to the two more outings that he originally agreed to, and then if the Scout wants to approach the appeal with National, he is free to do so.

>>Fine, but that's no reason to not sign the card. Strictly speaking, the scoutmaster is not "approving" the scouting doing the MB.

>>Carry one yourself! Explain what you put in it, See if you actually use it yourself. Explain the benefits of them, if the boys find them to be helpful, they'll use them. If it's just one more "top down" directive and they don't "get" why they should use them, they won't.

I took the attitude to never assign the MBC because I wanted the Scout to be incharge, so we had discussions. If we felt a counselor wasn't the quality that we wanted for the scouts, we took them off the list. If the scout found a counselor he wanted tht wasn't on the list, we ask the person to come in and fill out an application and get some training. That gave us the time to kind of do an interview and learn more about the person. I never forced a scout to not use a counselor, and I never had one use one that I didn't think was good for the job. Barry(This message has been edited by eagledad)

I guess I've never had that happen. We discuss the counselor he decides to use and I sign the card. I'm not sure why the scout would change. However, I'm also not sure I would know about it if he did change. Our MB Cards don't require a second signature by the SM. Once I approve his choice, it's out of my hands. Barry

>> How many youth really make good, thought out decisions about things that may not involve them in a few years without outside input. Actually, most of them ... If they've had to put up with the crap most adults have foisted on them for at least a season of camping!!!!

In the begining, we adults wanted better patrol boxes because the old ones were wearing out. And our troop was basically starting new all over, so it seemed appropriate. An old Eagle donated A LOT of money and spend a lot of time building us some the best patrol boxes anyone has ever seen. They could be used for tornado shelters if they were a little bigger because they are some stout boxes now. Three years later our troop wanted to experiment with becoming a backpacking troop, but there was some adult concern the Patrols would not want to leave the boxes behind. So we asked them to experiment for one campout without the boxes and see how it went. You would have thought we gave them $1000 to leave those things home. They hated those boxes and we have been a backpacking troop for over 15 years. I wished we would have included the scouts in the decision process at the begining. That money used for the boxes would have gone a long way to the SM retirement fund. Barry

>>Allowing same-gender couples to get married does not affect the marriages of your children (or mine), or their children, or ours.

We've had a few counselors that I would say have an aquired taste in their style, but power hungry isn't how I would decribe them. I know folks on the forum like to raise the "Adding Requirements" flag a lot, but I find the opposite of counselors not wanting to do enough to be more common. As has been said, once we learn a counselor's style, we pass that on to the scouts so they can make the choice. I will admit that I have taken a counselor or two off the list because I was not comfortable with their behavior. But that was more of a temperment issue, not a power hungry issue.

>>How does calling it marriage affect your marriage? So I'll ask in this forum - how does same sex marriage or calling same sex marriage by the word marriage personally affect your marriage?

>>My rule is that if there isn't a youth to head up the project, we won't do it. That's not as tough as it sounds. Usually all we need is a youth willing to talk up he project at meetings.

>>Beavah, my point about "natural law" is that it is invoked to justify anything, so it is really not worth much more than "in my opinion." If it were applied in a consistent way, it might have some value. But it you have your "natural law" with certain elements, and someone else has their "natural law" with some different elements, what good is it? And if you are referring to me as one of those who merely "dismisses" it, that's not the case. I have heard and read more than enough about it to conclude that it isn't really useful.

>>They also stated the party positions Republican tradition man and woman marriage. Democratic Anyone can be marriage.

>>I figure it can't be because they wanted to choose an easy or pleasant life for themselves. It must be because this is just the way they are. And maybe this does, as suggested above, fit in with "natural law."

>>But Barry, that is not the public reasoning that the BSA is giving for their policy. It is not money, it is not members. Their reasoning is the "role model" issue (morals to some).

>>Then Barry, why doesn't the BSA follow the Scout Law and Oath and state the reason we have this policy is because we don't want to risk a membership decline? Yeah, that doesn't sound very good. How about - the reason we have this policy is because the vast majority of our charter organization members believe this.

>>Barry, BSA already did this when they allowed blacks to join. Everyone said it would die. It doubled its size. It doubled again. And again. And again.