eisely

I am aware of two scouts in the past in the troops with which I have been affiliated who were home schooled. Why do you ask?

The most recent version of this amendment was SA574, short title "The Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act." Apparently this was killed by tabling on May 17. I don't know if Helms or anybody else plans to resurrect this.

The most recent post by yarrow seems to reconfirm concerns expressed by some, self included, about extremely young eagles. It is certainly true that behind every eagle stands a supportive family. Eagle is not intended to be easy. That was true of my middle son who pushed the envelope at the other end of the age spectrum.

In another thread I expressed concern about scouts pushing membership age ever younger. I still have that concern, and would go so far as to suggest a minimum age for eagle. Age cutoffs are inherently arbitrary. Scouting is no different than society at large in this regard. We have minimum ages for drinking, voting, and driving. The fact that some are capable of handling the responsibility of driving earlier than the minimum age, and just as many never handle their automobiles responsibly at any age, is not an argument against an age criterion.

In my mind the real test for the eagle rank is in the service project which requires a higher level of organizational skill. If mom is making all the calls to round up the requisite volunteers, can it be fairly said that the boy is executing the project in a manner consistent with the intent of requirement? There is a difference between parental prodding and assisting, and parental dominance to the point of taking over responsibility for a project (if that is truly what happened).

This is one about which I have mixed feelings. I am a poltical conservative, but Jesse is not my favorite Senator. Nevertheless he has put forth an amendment to the current education bill working its way through congress that you may wish to contact your senator and representive about. I also am not a fan of the feds using funding to bludgeon local governments, but this time I will make an exception.

Helms Steps Squarely into Gays vs. Boy Scout Debate

Wednesday, May 16, 2001

By Steve Centanni

Email this Article

Stepping squarely between two of the moment's more implacable foes, Republican Senator Jesse Helms has introduced legislation that would effectively cut off federal funding to public schools that refuse to allow Boy Scouts to use their facilities because of the group's stance on homosexuals.

Via an amendment to the education bill now snaking its way through Congress, the North Carolina senator is proposing to cut off federal largess to any school or educational agency that denies equal access to the Scouts or any youth group because of their "leadership criteria" or whether or not they have an "oath of allegiance to God and country."

In recent months, school districts in North Carolina, Florida, New York and several other states have restricted the Scouts' access to campus facilities, saying the group's ban on homosexuals violates the districts' anti-discrimination policies.

Such moves have become commonplace since last year, when, after a lengthy legal battle between gay rights groups and the Boy Scouts, the Supreme Court ruled that the Scouts, as a private organization, have the right to ban gay scoutmasters.

Helms said the purpose of withholding the money is not to hurt the schools financially but to force them to change their policy of undercutting the high court's decision.

"Those who demand everybody else's principles must be laid aside in order to protect the rights of homosexuals' conduct, they go on and on like Tennyson's brook," he said. "These radical militants are up to their same old tricks when targeting an honorable and respectable organization."

But one gay political group, the Human Rights Campaign, said it's Helms who is acting like a radical militant. The Boy Scouts already enjoy First Amendment protections, the group says, and Helms is trying to create special protections for the Boy Scouts by helping them in gaining access to school facilities.

A Senate vote on the funding issue is expected later this week.

Fox News' Sharon Kehnemui contributed to this report

Did she also tell you that neither you nor I know how to spell sulfur correctly?

I hate to come across as negative, and I am not there to judge first hand, but I am very skeptical of thirteen year old eagle scouts. Certainly the young man's ambition and drive are to be applauded, but I doubt that he has gotten the maximum benefit out of his experience to date. What will he do next? I am reminded of the attitude exhibited by some scouters and scouts on the trail who treat each leg of a trek as a race to the next camp site. They miss a great deal along the way. Ask them what they have observed or passed through and they give you a blank look. Hopefully your thirteen year old will be able to really appreciate what he has done.

Mike,

The fact that you have used sulpher in back country inhabited by bears and have lived to tell about it suggests that maybe it makes no difference. A sample of one is better than no sample at all.

Hmmm. Dealing with bugs and dealing with bears can create conflicts. We always place all "smellables" in bear bags, canisters, or lockers. At Philmont they advise using no sun screen or bug repellant on one's body after about 3:00 PM. I wonder if sulpher attracts or repels bears?

OGE,

I never doubted that you had a sense of humor. The answer to your last two questions is yes and yes.

I probably need to amend my original post to comment that some MALE scouters I know would probably be in favor of abolishing Mother's Day.

The following piece was lifted from National Review Online. Political Correctness has been raised to new levels! Or is that lowered? Actually a few scouters I know would probably favor abolishing Mother's Day because then we could cram another outing into May without taking any special grief from our wives. Trick Question: Without peeking, what does the fourth commandment command us to do?

Apparently Mother Goldberg referred to in this piece is the same Lucianne Goldberg who advised Linda Tripp to tape Monica.

My School Bans Mothers Day

The self-esteem brigade marches on.

By Jonah Goldberg, NRO editor

May 8, 2001 12:45 p.m.

et me tell you a story about my days at the Rodeph E-mail Jonah

Printer-Friendly

E-mail a Friend

Sholom Day School.

When I was in first grade, my mom used to draw a whale on my brown paper lunch bag a reference to the fact that my name is Jonah (my brother Josh got a trumpet). It was a cute little whale. It had a little water spout coming out of its back and it was usually smiling. When I got to school, I would put my lunch bag in with all the others in a corner of the room. At lunchtime, designated kids took turns distributing the bags and lunchboxes to their rightful owners. It was always clear that mine was the one with the whale on it, even when my name wasn't there. The other kids thought it was cool and so did I.

And therein lay the problem.

The school called in my mom for a meeting and asked her if she could please stop putting the whale on my lunch bag because this was unfair to kids with less pictogram-friendly names. Sure, the little Irvings and Bens could have drawings on their bags too, but a little froggy would have so much less meaning for Irving Greenberg than my whale did for me. And besides, a little frog didn't clarify whose lunch it was anyone can have a frog and that wouldn't get little Irv his cold knish any quicker.

In the self-esteem arms race (where arms are definitely for hugging) I had an unfair advantage in that my whale made me more special than the other kids. The school felt it would be best for everyone's self-esteem if I were to sacrifice a little of my own. Momma Goldberg quickly weighed the pros and cons of the situation and immediately responded: "The Goldberg family whale policy shall continue. Tell the other kids to get over it."

Well, it now looks like Rodeph Sholom has finally gotten some payback. They've cancelled Mother's Day. Andrea Peyser of the New York Post reports that last Friday, Rodeph Sholom's Hebraic munchkins came home with an unusual note for their parents.

"I am writing this letter to inform you that after much thought and discussion this past year, we will not be celebrating Mother's Day and Father's Day," wrote Cindi Samson, director of the school's lower elementary division.

"At this time, these holidays are not needed to enhance our writing and arts programs," the letter continued. "Second, families in our society are now diverse and varied. We are a school with many different family makeups, and we need to recognize the emotional well-being of all the children in our school. Holidays that serve no educational purpose and are not vital to the children's education need to be evaluated in terms of their importance in a school setting, as the recognition of these holidays in a social setting may not be a positive experience for all children."

Twenty-five years ago, it was unfair that my mom put a little whaley on my lunch bag. Today, it's unfair to have a mom at all.

Rodeph Sholom is a liberal and increasingly expensive reform-Jewish day school (it now costs $15,000 for pre-Kindergarten and up to $20K for sixth grade a lot more than when I was a kid, including inflation). The parents are overwhelmingly Upper West Side Manhattan Jewish liberals. In other words, this is the place where they implant the microchip that forces you to take everything the New York Times says at face value (my Dad had mine removed).

"The reasoning was several-fold," Samson explained to the Post. "One is, it didn't serve an academic and educational need. Number two, families are changing. Some children were very uncomfortable."

First, this is simply a farce. As Andrea Peyser wonders, whatever happened to the solidly Jewish imperative found in the Old Testament to "Honor thy Father and Mother"? Presumably, the Fourth Commandment can be squeezed into some notion of a Jewish "education"?

Also, why wait until now? There were surely at least a few kids whose mothers had died before this ban went into effect. Isn't it far crueler to celebrate Mother's Day when only one kid is left out? And, besides, couldn't kids with two Daddies make up for their non-mommy status by having twice as much fun on Father's Day and vice versa?

More seriously, this exposes much of what's wrong not only with a certain brand of Jewish liberalism, but with self-esteem secularism more generally. My colleague at National Review Online, John Derbyshire, has written that, "in a civilized modern society, majorities owe a debt of tolerance to harmless minorities. But minorities also owe something to the majority: a decent respect for its tastes and opinions, and careful restraint in challenging them."

These days it seems everyone agrees that the majority owes the minority tolerance, but it's thought to be a bizarre idea that minorities should owe anybody anything. Some Jewish ACLU liberals have adopted the idea that any "exclusive" religious public activity is inherently immoral. They say Christians shouldn't "impose" their religion on others. I agree. But secular humanists, atheists, and religious minorities shouldn't impose their anti-majority biases on everybody else either.

The same analogy holds true for gays. Why ruin Mother's Day for everyone else? Besides, no one's doing the children of gay and lesbian couples any favors by teaching them that Mother's Day doesn't exist or that it's a mean, non-inclusive holiday. (We all know it's a scheme hatched by the international greeting-card cartel). Their self-esteem may suffer a fraction of a fraction of a percentage point as they watch a bunch of kids draw cards for their mommies. But, understanding they're different from the majority is a lesson they're going to have to learn no matter what, as the children of gays and as Jews.

Just as Jewish kids do far better in life when they have a healthy respect for Christianity, the children of homosexuals and homosexuals themselves would be well-served if they showed others a little respect too. Denying Mother's Day will not change the fact that most people have mothers. And if that hurts some kids' self-esteem, as Momma Goldberg would say, "get over it."

I recall using sulphur powder as a kid as a chigger repellant. I also recall that it worked. When I put up the original post I was wondering if anyone had experience with sulphur as a tick repellant. Concerning DEET, I also understand that it attacks many synthetic fabrics. Anybody have any experience with that?

Re: Mt Hood

I have never gone up Mt. Hood, but it strikes me as an outing that would require a lot of preparation. Mr. Hood is one of several major volcanic peaks throughout the Cascades. It lies East of Portland. Visit the Mt. Hood National Forest website for more information.

A lot of these peaks are not "technical" climbs, but they can be quite challenging with a lot of elevation gain in short distances. These peaks stand out very dramatically from the surrounding countryside because, unlike the Rockies, Sierras, or most major mountain chains in the lower 48, there is no gradual ascent into foothills, which themselves obscure the peaks. This also means that the trailheads are at low elevations relative to the crest. It looks like an outing I for one would love to do, but no one should attempt this without conditioning. Acquaint yourself with the symptoms and treatment for altitude sickness.

We in California are amply blesseed with backpacking opportunities. There are also good opportunities for extended Whitewater Rafting trips through commercial operators. The lower Klamath River in Northern California seems to offer more opporutnities for longer trips. We are less blessed with canoeing opportunities. One can also put together extended treks in the mountains of Southern California earlier in the spring before the Sierras become accessible. Probably the best outing within a short drive of the San Francisco Bay Area is at Pt. Reyes National Seashore. We took advantage of a three day weekend last November to do a 25 mile, 2 night trek there. It turned out to be more demanding than we anticipated, but a great trek. Pt. Reyes has the least defiled beaches I have seen in California. Needless to say, reservations are needed the instant the window for reservations opens up.

Very impressive site. I would suggest using somewhat larger fonts for the benefit of your older visitors (people like me), who tire easily from too much squinting.

Opportunities for patrol meetings can be created by setting aside one of your regular troop meeting nights just for patrol meetings at separate locations. A lot of troops try to have weekly meetings. It has been my observation and experience that it is often difficult to have really effective troop meetings every single week. In our troop we are now setting aside one of those meeting dates for patrols to meet. This does two things. It reduces the burden of putting together good programs for troop meetings, and it forces the patrols to try to get together and do what they do. This is not a result of laziness on the part of leadership at the troop level. The most effective troops I have known do this. We have supplemented this by assigning adults as "patrol mentors" to help out at that level.

Now that hiking and backpacking season are upon us, I am interested in people's views as to the most effective, least dangerous, and least damaging ways of keeping ticks off one's body. Open to suggestions.

A further word about the role of the committee chair, and the committee in general. I agree that the general role of the committee is to oversee and support the troop's program. Hopefully that is more than just rubber stamping everything that comes before it. I don't see the committee chair as having any special powers except in three areas. First, as presiding officer at committee meetings the chair is a first among equals. The other two items are where committee chair signatures are required. I believe that is on the troop chartering document (it has been a few years since I signed one), and on the Eagle Scout Application (or is it the Eagle service project plan?). This last item is where the rubber meets the road on service projects. The committee chair should exercise independent discretion here. However, all differences of opinion should be ironed out well before the application is prepared by the applicant and submitted for signature. The process for Eagle gives the chair more than just a pro forma role.

I believe that inspection forms are on the back of the one page flier that shows the positioning of insignia. These are usually freebies at your local scout service center. A complete uniform includes hats by definition. Personally I have never cared for the baseball style hats. They are useless for outings at the scout level. They are more important for Webelos since it is common to pin the activity badges onto the front of the hat. If you are attending a competitive event where uniforms are judged, I would expect to get dinged if hats are not worn.

I think it is a mistake to tie BSA policy to the teachings of any major religious grouping such as Christianity, or the beliefs and biblical interpretation of any particular subset within that grouping. BSA national seems to look at the issue this way as well, although that makes it harder to articulate a viewpoint. Not that I disagree with the Christian scriptural views on homosexuality as I understand them. These are important ideas that are taken very seriously by a lot of people. It is worth noting however that there are some branches of Christianity, and now reform Judaism, that think that homosexuality is perfectly OK. So scriptural interpretations can change over time.

I am not aware of any other major religious group outside Christianity that has a favorable view of homosexualtiy, or even thinks it is OK. OGE, perhaps you have some different knowledge on this subject you could share with us.

My objection to the attitudes exemplified by the event that I posted originally is the dedication to a purely hedonistic life style that I consider a dead end. There is little that is new under the sun. The attitudes of major religions towards sexual morality in general did not arise overnight, and have been maintained for centuries for good reasons. I would not presume to throw such things away lightly based on rather limited knowledge or what may be currently fashionable. It is one thing to be tolerant in one's approach to other adults in every day life. It is yet another to put examples in front one's own sons and other youth.

Jmcquillan makes a very good point about focusing on the parents when a boy is considering joining scouting. Expectations need to be set across the board.

Youth today are extremely fortunate in having so many worthwhile things to choose from. Thus Scouts has to compete for the time and attention of youth members and for volunteer time, since all these other activities also properly insist on parental support. If a troop forces boys to choose between sports in particular and scouting, it will lose a lot membership. A troop cannot accept low commitments from its senior youth leaders and patrol leaders on the other hand. We accept boys in our troop readily, but try to be more forceful about participation when it comes to leadership positions. We also do not purge people, but allow them to not re-up at re-chartering time. One relatively minor disadvantage of this tolerance is that it raises the bar somewhat for having a quorum on hand for OA elections.

Uncle Bob,

So glad to see you remembered to say "please." We may be mass murderers, but scouts are courteous.

Hey OGE,

As always, your comments are welcome. A difference I see is that the Jimmy Swaggerts of the world are renounced and fall from grace very swiftly once their antics become known. The only clergyman who has gotten embroiled in scandal recently to rise again swiftly with no obvious reform is Jesse Jackson, but then he is a somewhat special case. When religious leaders engage in bizarre behavior they are not applauded. I don't see that happening in the gay community.

By your reasoning, where is the lunatic fringe in the scouting movement?

Bob Russell makes two very good points. First, the straight community has its displays too, although probably nothing quite as outrageous. One need think only of the way sex is used advertising, the showgirls of Las Vegas, and Madonna masturbating on screen. (Remember when Madonna used to refer to the mother of Christ?)

Second is the question of judging a group by the actions of its fringe elements. I guess the unanswerable question for straights is the extent to which gay pride events represent just a fringe, or represent the attitudes of the larger gay community.

But we lose the larger point of the original posting, which is how the gay community can expect the straight community to accept it when these antics are put forward.

At the risk of inflaming opinion, I felt it was worth posting this article from an online source called The Onion. This is the first time that I have ever heard or read actual quotes of negative reactions to Gay Pride parades. Also note the use by one of the parade organizers of the pejorative term "breeders." In case you didn't know it, that is the term used in some homosexual communities to refer to heterosexual couples who conceive and raise children. Apparently this particular gay pride parade was just this last Saturday, April 21. Granted that all homosexuals are not like this, but are we wrong to continue to insist on no avowed homosexuals in scouting?

For those who are interested in the original article, with color photographs, you can visit the site at

theonion.com/onion3715/gay_pride_parade.html

WEST HOLLYWOOD, CA--The mainstream acceptance of gays and lesbians, a hard-won civil-rights victory gained through decades of struggle against prejudice and discrimination, was set back at least 50 years Saturday in the wake of the annual Los Angeles Gay Pride Parade.

Above: Participants in Saturday's Los Angeles Gay Pride Parade, which helped change straight people's tolerant attitudes toward gays.

"I'd always thought gays were regular people, just like you and me, and that the stereotype of homosexuals as hedonistic, sex-crazed deviants was just a destructive myth," said mother of four Hannah Jarrett, 41, mortified at the sight of 17 tanned and oiled boys cavorting in jock straps to a throbbing techno beat on a float shaped like an enormous phallus. "Boy, oh, boy, was I wrong."

The parade, organized by the Los Angeles Gay And Lesbian And Bisexual And Transvestite And Transgender Alliance (LAGALABATATA), was intended to "promote acceptance, tolerance, and equality for the city's gay community." Just the opposite, however, was accomplished, as the event confirmed the worst fears of thousands of non-gay spectators, cementing in their minds a debauched and distorted image of gay life straight out of the most virulent right-wing hate literature.

Among the parade sights and sounds that did inestimable harm to the gay-rights cause: a group of obese women in leather biker outfits passing out clitoris-shaped lollipops to horrified onlookers; a man in military uniform leading a submissive masochist, clad in diapers and a baby bonnet, around on a dog leash; several Hispanic dancers in rainbow wigs and miniskirts performing "humping" motions on a mannequin dressed as the Pope; and a dozen gyrating drag queens in see-through dresses holding penis-shaped beer bottles that appeared to spurt ejaculation-like foam when shaken and poured onto passersby.

Timothy Orosco, 51, a local Walgreens manager whose store is on the parade route, changed his attitude toward gays as a result of the event.

"They kept chanting things like, 'We're here, we're queer, get used to it!' and 'Hey, hey, we're gay, we're not going to go away!'" Orosco said. "All I can say is, I was used to it, but now, although I'd never felt this way before, I wish they would go away."

Allison Weber, 43, an El Segundo marketing consultant, also had her perceptions and assumptions about gays challenged by the parade.

"My understanding was that gay people are just like everybody else--decent, hard-working people who care about their communities and have loving, committed relationships," Weber said. "But, after this terrifying spectacle, I don't want them teaching my kids or living in my neighborhood."

The parade's influence extended beyond L.A.'s borders, altering the attitudes of straight people across America. Footage of the event was featured on telecasts of The 700 Club as "proof of the sin-steeped world of homosexuality." A photo spread in Monday's USA Today chronicled many of the event's vulgar displays--understood by gays to be tongue-in-cheek "high camp"--which horrified previously tolerant people from coast to coast.

Above: Members of the Laguna Beach Leatherdaddy Association make their final pre-march preparations.

Dr. Henry Thorne, a New York University history professor who has written several books about the gay-rights movement, explained the misunderstanding.

"After centuries of oppression as an 'invisible' segment of society, gays, emboldened by the 1969 Stonewall uprising, took to the streets in the early '70s with an 'in-your-face' attitude. Confronting the worst prejudices of a world that didn't accept them, they fought back against these prejudices with exaggeration and parody, reclaiming their enemies' worst stereotypes about them and turning them into symbols of gay pride," Thorne said. "Thirty years later, gays have won far greater acceptance in the world at large, but they keep doing this stuff anyway."

"Mostly, I think, because it's really fun," Thorne added.

The Los Angeles Gay Pride Parade, Thorne noted, is part of a decades-old gay-rights tradition. But, for mainstream heterosexuals unfamiliar with irony and the reclamation of stereotypes for the purpose of exploding them, the parade resembled an invasion of grotesque outer-space mutants, bent on the destruction of the human race.

"I have a cousin who's a gay, and he seemed like a decent enough guy to me," said Iowa City, IA, resident Russ Linder, in Los Angeles for a weekend sales seminar. "Now, thanks to this parade, I realize what a freak he's been all along. Gays are all sick, immoral perverts."

Parade organizers vowed to make changes in the wake of the negative reaction among heterosexuals.

"I knew it. I said we needed 100 dancers on the 'Show Us Your Ass' float, but everybody insisted that 50 would be enough," said Lady Labia, spokesperson for LAGALABATATA. "Next year, we're really going to give those breeders something to look at."

I couldn't sleep a wink last night, tossing and turning, and envisioning the next headline...

SCOUTING TRAINS AMERICA'S YOUTH TO BECOME HOMOPHOBIC MASS MURDERERS

Perhaps, with a bow to the ACLU....

SCOUTING TRAINS AMERICA'S YOUTH TO BECOME RELIGIOUS FANATIC HOMOPHOBIC MASS MURDERERS