eisely

I think that I found this piece by Henthoff in the electronic Washington Times. I get the impression that he is writing for that paper regularly now. Go figure.

I don't know if having a specific boy scout ceremony is the way to go. Presumably you have some religious affiliation of your own. Weaving boy scouts into the ceremonies that are part of your religion is probably the way to go.

We had a rather shocking event in our troop about three years ago. A dad in the prime of his life keeled over in his front yard and died. He was a parent in our troop, and had been an adult advisor on the Philmont crew just the previous summer. He had not been a career scouter (too young), but he did support the troop in a variety of ways, and was well regarded by everybody. Many of the boys and other scouters, self included, went to the rosary and funeral mass in full uniform and paid our respects that way. When one of the boys on the Philmont crew who played the trumpet played taps at the rosary, there wasn't a dry eye in the place.

The column below appeared in The Washington Times. Nat Henthoff would probably be offended if you called him a conservative. He used to write primarily for The Village Voice many years ago. The list of organizations opposing the boy scouts contains a few surprises, but not many.

Cut America's Boy Scouts a break

Nat Hentoff

A year ago, the Boy Scouts won a vital First Amendment victory in the U.S. Supreme Court, which declared that the Boy Scouts right of free association enabled them to remove James Dale from a leadership position after in violation of the Boy Scouts principles publicly declared his homosexuality.

Since then, the Boy Scouts have been treated like pariahs around the country. Cities have barred them from schools. In some places, police can no longer sponsor Boy Scouts programs in areas where kids have no other after-school activities. And "public-spirited" private organizations have stopped funding Boy Scout troops.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) affiliate in San Diego as George Mason University law professor Peter Ferrara noted in the Weekly Standard "is suing the city to evict the Scouts from Balboa Park, where they built and have long operated excellent camping and recreational facilities open to the public."

The national ACLU, in one of its excursions into extreme political correctness, opposed the Boy Scouts when Boy Scouts of America vs. Dale went before the Supreme Court. In doing so, the ACLU, which was founded to protect the First Amendment, ignored Supreme Court precedents. One such precedent states: "The First Amendment guarantees the . . . freedom to associate or not to associate." It is the "freedom to identify the people who constitute the association, and to limit the association to those people only." (Democratic Party of U.S. vs. Wisconsin, 1981).

Should the NAACP be forced by the courts or by the ACLU to allow adherents of white racist organizations to take leadership positions in the NAACP? Should disability-rights groups be compelled to have disciples of Dr. Jack Kevorkian in leadership roles?

In a significant Florida court decision, the Boy Scouts First Amendment rights have been upheld after they were evicted from the Broward County public schools. The court said that once school facilities are open to other organizations, they cannot be denied to a group because of its views.

Now, Rep. Van Hilleary of Tennessee has successfully introduced in the House an amendment to the large-scale education bill called the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. His amendment requires schools that receive federal funds to give the Boy Scouts the same access that they provide to other groups.

Says Mr. Hilleary: "Denying the Boy Scouts equal access to schools cuts against court precedent, the Bill of Rights and common sense. This amendment effectively ensures that schools wont be able to discriminate against the Scouts or force them to go to court to have their rights upheld."

The Hilleary amendment passed the House by voice vote, and a companion amendment by Sen. Jesse Helms passed last week. But on the House floor, during debate on the amendment, Lynn Woolsey of California presented a letter opposing the amendment. It was signed by a long list of organizations. Their names reveal how pervasively political correctness has infected Americans who cherish their own right to associate with like-minded people, but would allow local school boards to deny that right to the Boy Scouts. This is a list that exposes how much education in constitutional rights is needed in our schools and school boards. Among those on the list opposing the Boy Scouts are the following organizations:

The American Association of School Administrators; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; AFL-CIO; American Federation of Teachers; Anti-Defamation League; Council of the Great City Schools; Leadership Conference on Civil Rights; National Association of School Psychologists; National Association of Secondary School Principals; National Council of Jewish Women; National Council of La Raza; National Education Association; National PTA; National Rural Education Association; National School Boards Association; National Womens Law Center; NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund; People for the American Way; Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations; United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries.

These are good, decent people, and they desire diversity but not the diversity of viewpoints that is guaranteed by the First Amendment. They do not understand what Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day OConnor has emphasized:

"Protection of (an) associations right to define its membership derives from the recognition that the formation of an expressive association is the creation of a voice. And the selection of members is the definition of that voice."

The Helms amendment passed the Senate on June 14, along with another amendment prohibiting discrimination against any youth group, including the Boy Scouts, on the basis of viewpoint on sexual orientation. Both amendments support the First Amendment.

Pedophilia is a different but related issue. The BSA policy is not based on a threat of pedophilia, and in fact states that BSA does not equate homosexuality with pedophilia. Nevertheless the threat is real and bad things do happen. The article posted below is about a nineteen year old girl scout leader in New Hampshire. Apparently the incident occurred in February of this year. This is interesting because it is the only incident of which I am aware where female on female pedophilia is alleged. It is also interesting because the Girl Scouts nationally have a policy that does not reject membership by homosexuals, and the girl scouts are often held up in the media as a counter example to the boy scouts of enlightened policy. Neither this story, nor anything else I have seen about this incident, says whether or not this young woman was "out of the closet" or whether any cognizant Girl Scout officials had any knowledge of the young woman's sexual preferences before this incident.

The irony is that homosexual pedophilia is normally carried out by adults who are not out of the closet. The fear expressed by many is that, if the ban on homosexuality among scout leaders was lifted, this would become an open invitation to those inclined towards pedophilia.

Another thing about this article that is worth noting is that the incident took place in a locked closet. This is not unlike a camping environment. In my mind a camping environment is more susceptible to these kinds of things because of the intimacy of the camping environment contrasted for example, to youth team sports.

Bottom line is that pedophilia is a problem for all youth groups, not just scouts, but is not the foundation of BSA policy.

Girl Scout leader pleads

innocent in child sex case

By PAT GROSSMITH

Union Leader Staff

A Manchester Girl Scout leader is charged with soliciting sex from a 12-year-old girl during a group sleepover last February at St. John the Baptist Church parish hall, 107 Alsace St.

Mindy Lorenz, 19, of 40 Debbie St., entered innocent pleas yesterday in Manchester District Court to two misdemeanor counts of endangering the welfare of a minor.

Bail of $3,000 personal recognizance was continued, and trial was scheduled for July 23.

A condition of bail for Lorenz is that she have no unsupervised contact with any female juvenile. Lorenz, according to court records, is unemployed, but she told Judge Norman Champagne that she had previously been employed in day care.

Neither the Girl Scout group nor the parish hall is specifically identified in court records.

And Lorenz is not identified as a Girl Scout leader in either court documents or a press release issued by the police department.

Sgt. Lloyd Doughty, community information officer, said it was not necessary to identify the place or the group in the court documents.

The moment the Girl Scouts were made aware of this they took the appropriate action, Doughty said. Lorenz is no longer a scout leader, he said.

Were deeply concerned over the report and are cooperating fully with the authorities. An official investigation is underway to determine the facts. Because this is a legal issue, the Girl Scouts cannot comment further other than to say our first and foremost concern is always the health and safety of our girls, said Missy Long, director of programs with the Girl Scouts Swift Water Council.

Lorenz has resigned as a Girl Scout leader, Long said.

All adults involved with Girl Scouting with Swiftwater Council are carefully screened. We make every effort to ensure all volunteers fully understand and accept our policies prior to accepting a position, which include safety standards such as more than one adult being present when Girl Scout activities are conducted, Long said.

Police allege the incident took place on Feb. 18 between 10 and 10:30 p.m. in a dark, locked room, according to the sworn affidavit in support of an arrest warrant by detective Scott Fuller.

The girl told police that Lorenz engaged her in a conversation with sexual overtones. Lorenz asked her to fool around for $100, Fuller wrote.

Lorenz then allegedly kissed her on the mouth.

Lorenz, when interviewed by Fuller, denied offering money for sex but admitted to telling the girl about her own sexual experiences with another woman, according to court documents.

Lorenz told Fuller that she offered to help the girl if she wanted to experience a sexual encounter with another female.

The offer, Fuller wrote, was to the effect if she ever wanted to try it, she should do it with someone she knows instead of a stranger and that she (Mindy) would be willing to help her.

Fuller wrote in his sworn affidavit that Lorenz also admitted to kissing the child.

The kiss, Fuller wrote, lasted between 15 and 20 seconds before they were interrupted by another person knocking on the locked door to the room.

The Rev. Leonard Foisy, a retired priest who lives in the churchs rectory, said that Boy Scout and Girl Scout troops use the parish hall for various functions.

The Manchester Boys and Girls Club, he said, also uses the hall Monday through Friday for a satellite program.

This may not have been as resounding a victory as seemed upon first impression. The follow up news stories were also somewhat confusing. Apparently, after the Helms amendment initially passed, Barbara Boxer (Democrat - California needless to say) immediately got another amendment introduced and passed weakening the enforcement mechanism of the Helms amendment. So there were two votes on this issue in the Senate, not one. The difference between the Senate and House versions will now go to a conference committee. Who knows if this element of the legislation will survive at all?

This is a long post but well worth reading. The tragedy of our modern era is that so many have lost faith in even the concept of virtue, and that scouters, coaches, big brothers, etc. end up playing the role of inadequate surrogate fathers to so many. Scouting as a movement is a partial antidote to this. One wonders if Mr. Dreher has ever heard of scouting. Keep the faith and have a great father's day weekend everybody.

Pawpaw's World

What is manly virtue? Are you embarrassed to ask? He doesn't have to.

BY ROD DREHER

Friday, June 15, 2001 12:01 a.m. EDT

At bedtime, as night falls over Brooklyn and my toddler Matthew has said goodnight to Moon for the umpteenth time, I turn off the bedside lamp and tell him it's time to sleep. Then I turn the light off, he rolls into the crook of my arm, cranes his head so he can whisper in my ear, and says, "Pawpaw."

This is my cue to tell my 20-month-old son stories of his grandfather, my own dad, who lives with my mom ("Mammy" to Matthew) in Starhill, a south Louisiana enclave where the only sounds at night are crickets and bullfrogs, not sirens on the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway.

Matthew's grandparents visited a couple of months ago, and he fell hard for them. Especially Pawpaw, who shares the boy's enthusiasm for graders and forklifts and things that go. After they went home to Starhill, Matthew kept asking for them ("Mammy! Pawpaw! See more!") and at bedtime wanted me to tell him real-life stories about Pawpaw.

So that first week after Matthew's grandparents left, we followed Pawpaw's adventures hunting squirrels so his family would have enough to eat during the Depression. We joined him in the rodeo, riding bucking bulls and wrassling steers. We followed Pawpaw into the Coast Guard, and rode out a hurricane in Mobile Bay lashed to the wheel of his 40-foot cutter. Then Pawpaw piloted a dinghy in rough seas, outmaneuvering a shark to complete a mission to change a buoy's light bulb.

Then I told Matthew about the things Pawpaw did when I was little. Once I saw Pawpaw catch an egg-stealing chicken snake by the tail and crack him like a whip, snapping the varmint's head off. I told my boy about the hunts, when Pawpaw took me into the swamp and showed me how to stalk whitetail bucks and other game. I told him about how when the Mississippi River flooded, Pawpaw would set lines in the backwater for catfish but often snared snapping turtles, alligator gars and fat black water snakes instead.

You can imagine how thrilling this is to a little Brooklyn boy. But the other night, when Matthew's deep breathing told me he was asleep, it struck me that I hadn't thought about these things in years. Here I was rediscovering my father's life through telling stories about him to my own son (a startling number of which end with the cooking and eating of a wild animal). As a child, none of this seemed extraordinary to me at all. It's how most men lived in West Feliciana Parish, and indeed some version of this rural saga is how a great number of Americans lived until a moment ago.

Truth is, it's more pleasurable to me in the telling than it was in the living. I was a bookish kid who longed for the big city. Though I idolized my dad for his courage and omnicompetence, I always knew I would find the meaning of my life and vocation elsewhere. But telling these stories to my son about my Southern boyhood, I'm discovering a poetry of place I hadn't noticed before, or at least resisted.

Admittedly, this is nostalgia for a world that has largely gone. West Feliciana Parish is rapidly becoming a suburb of Baton Rouge, with domiciles for Dixie-fried bobos springing up like mushrooms in erstwhile cow pastures. Cable television monoculture is everywhere, as is the same social breakdown you see in big cities (do you suppose there's a connection?). Sic transit gloria mundi, y'all.

So why do I keep thinking about the South these days? "Lanterns on the Levee" romanticism has never appealed to me, yet as I think about the childhood my son will have here, I can't help reconsidering the good in what I rejected.

It bothers me that Matthew won't have his Pawpaw around to be a friend to him. He won't have taken in the smell of tobacco, bourbon and dried gumbo mud flaking off hunting boots that is my father's aroma. He won't know what it feels like to stand in a duck blind, chilled to the bone and anxious to the fingertips, waiting for the mallards to swoop in.

More important, it troubles me that Matthew won't have Pawpaw as an example. As a new father, I am grasping for a way to articulate manly virtue for my boy in a way that doesn't feel phony. It's impossible to imagine speaking of "manliness" or "virtue" in the world I inhabit now, filled with well-meaning, highly educated men and women who would have to put ironic quotation marks around those words or die of embarrassment.

Am I this way too? I worry about that. My dad never does. Those words mean something to him. More Stoic than Christian, in the classic Southern tradition, he is neither a soft man nor a decadent one.

By "soft," I mean men like--well, men like me, who make our livings from our minds, not our backs, and who are shielded by our very urbanity (or suburbanity) from the rigors of life that rural people cannot avoid. There comes with that hardness a certain realistic moral stance toward the world and what it owes one--and what one owes it.

By "decadent," I mean ironic detachment and radical doubt masquerading as sophistication, a cast of mind that cannot produce righteousness because it doesn't believe righteousness exists. As C.S. Lewis said, "We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings to be fruitful."

I am to raise my son in an urban culture dominated--indeed, in my social and professional milieu, overrun--by men without chests. Well, my Louisiana dad has a chest, and the habits of the heart that beats beneath his breastbone are ones I want to instill in my boy.

Matthew will learn what it means to be brave and true from his father, to be sure, but the experience seems attenuated for a city kid. And he will be immersed in a permissive culture that corrodes the moral structure his mother and I will try to build. For all the drawbacks of the rural South, a man can raise a family there knowing the seeds of faith and virtue he plants in his children's hearts will have a less hostile environment in which to grow.

And there's one other thing. The other night, as Matthew lay sleeping next to me, I wondered where his life's journey would take him. Please God, I prayed, never let him live too far from his daddy. Please let me be a part of his life. Then it hit me: That has been my father's prayer every night since I left home for school 18 years ago, then went on to a career in the East.

"Oh where have you been, my blue-eyed son? Oh where have you been, my darling young one?" I used to hear Bob Dylan sing those mournful lines years ago, while in college. Years later, with my own baby boy nestled in my arms and thoughts of my own faraway father, aging and in declining health, heavy in my heart, I finally knew what they meant.

Mr. Dreher is a columnist for the New York Post and a writer for Touchstone magazine.

I too am uncomfortable with the federal government using funding as both a carrot and a stick to push other levels of government in different directions. Educational policy is not the only place where this happens. I suppose it depends on whether or not you agree with the particular policy objective. Certainly liberals cannot consistently complain about this use of federal power based on the notion that federal power simply should not be used this way. Too bad. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

For a pure compact emergency kit, I would also consider a "space blanket." This kind of kit is probably more appropriate for day hikes, day trips on rivers, and things like that. A backpacker is already supposed to have this stuff available. I also always carry some toilet paper. The very first outing in which I participated as adult leader was a Webelos day hike. One kid got diarrhea, and we were not prepared.

I agree that GPS and cell phones are important safety backups, but they should be left in the pack until needed. Walkie talkies are similarly useful backups, but also are more like toys. I would prefer to rely on non-electronic means of getting around and communicating, but I would be derelict if I did not avail myself of such safety tools.

Speaking of electrical things, sorry to hear about the wheel chair Paul. Myself, I am going in for eye surgery in July so I can once again read my map and my compass.

There was an interesting piece in the Wall Street Journal today about golf carts being adapted for more rugged outdoor use. I was intrigued to read about a pheasant ranch in Kansas that makes it possible for wheel chair bound people to hunt using this electrical tool. Clearly there is no a priori reason to reject such tools if they help people do useful and enjoyable things.

There was a scoutmaster in our town who had no legs whatsoever, and did everything but the hiking. What an example for scouts!

I am stunned and amazed that this actually passed the Senate. Assuming the amendment survives conference, and Bush signs the legislation, this may actually become the law of the land. This just popped up on the internet this afternoon.

Way to go Jesse!

Senate Backs Scouts Despite Gay Rights Protest

By Adam Entous

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate voted on Thursday to punish public schools that deny the Boy Scouts equal access to their facilities, drawing fire from gay rights activists protesting the youth group's policy of excluding homosexuals.

Conservative Republicans said the legislation, approved 52-48 as an amendment to a far-reaching education reform bill, would protect the Boy Scouts and its nearly 5 million members between the ages of 11 and 17 against ``discrimination'' by school leaders unhappy with the group's policies.

Democrats countered that the amendment, which has already been approved by the House of Representatives, smacked of ``gay bashing'' and would undermine local authority.

Under the amendment, pushed by North Carolina Republican Sen. Jesse Helms (news - bio - voting record), public schools must provide the Boy Scouts with equal access to school facilities. Schools that fail to do so could lose their federal funding.

The Boy Scouts deny membership to any ``avowed homosexual,'' saying homosexuality violates the Scouting oath to be ``morally straight'' and the Scouting law to be ``clean.''

On a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court last year upheld the Scouts' policy, ruling the private group had the right to set its own moral code and espouse its own viewpoint.

The Boy Scouts, who also exclude atheists and agnostics as leaders, argued they had the right to decide who should join their ranks and that forcing them to accept gays would violate their First Amendment right to freedom of association.

Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota warned that school districts could be forced to give the Boy Scouts ''special privileges or lose thousands, perhaps millions, of dollars in federal aid to education.''

DISCRIMINATION

Senate Republicans cited nearly 10 cases of discrimination against the Boy Scouts by public schools.

In November 2000, the Los Angeles City Council voted to cut the city's ties with the Boy Scouts, saying the group's exclusion of homosexuals and atheists was discriminatory.

``I don't know quite how to react to the fact that in America now even the Boy Scouts seem to be under attack. Is motherhood and apple pie next? Is there nothing sacred any more?'' said Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi.

Gay rights groups protested the amendment, calling it anti-gay and unnecessary because the Scouts have never lost their right to meet in public school facilities.

``The only thing it accomplishes is sending out an anti-gay message,'' said David Smith, spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign.

Senate Democrats said the amendment could end up benefiting white supremacist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan. ``Senator Helms, in trying to pay a tribute to the Boy Scouts, has opened the door wide for mischief from every crazy group in America,'' said Sen. Richard Durbin (news - bio - voting record), an Illinois Democrat.

More than 90 million Americans have joined the Boy Scouts since the organization was founded in 1910. It now has nearly 5 million members between the ages of 11 and 17 and nearly 1.3 million adult leaders.

I don't want to create a false impression that belief systems are unimportant. This ground has been covered amply in other threads. While I think that the belief systems underlying scouting and most religions are at least as valid, and likely far more valid, than belief systems based on denial of god and hedonism, the mutual rejection of each others' belief systems by the participants on both sides of this argument make rational discussion difficult at best. This is why I emphasize an argument based on evidence and scientific interpretation of that evidence.

There are many things that science cannot solve, such as ultimate causation. However, I think that scientific argument has not been seriously tried in this debate so far, and that science has something to offer.

Thanks for the tip on the news story. I am definitely going to look it up. Maybe your bears are just smarter and stronger. Or perhaps they are evolving opposing thumbs and an ability to use tools.

Rooster7 you are correct I think in pointing out that, even if there were incontrovertible (spelling?) proof that homosexualtiy was not a choice, it would not necessarily mean that BSA policy should be reversed. Your comparision with alcoholism is apt. We now know that some people are genetically predisposed to alcoholism because of the way that their systems matabolize alcohol. That does not mean that we ahould all embrace alcoholism as a good thing.

Pedophilia is a separate but related issue. BSA takes the position that not all homosexuals are automatically pedophiles. The data support this position. One wonders what would happen if all legal barriers to adults having sex with minors were lifted, and all barriers to homosexuals being in BSA were lifted. Personally, this is not an experiment I am willing to undertake.

As far as I know, no scientific body has officially bought into the premise that there is a "gay gene." While both the psychiatrists and the psychologists no longer officially view homosexuality per se as an illness demanding treatment, neither discipline offers any explanation for why some people are homosexuals and others are not. As far as I know, both disciplines attribute homosexuality to a variety of potential causes, without singling any single cause out above all others.

My primary point is that the question of genetic determination of sexual orientation is a very legitimate question. It behooves people of good will on both sides of the question to seriously examine what little evidence has been put forward and try to arrive at conclusions in a scientifically unbiased way. My hunch is that the evidence will not support the hypothesis of genetic determination.

The difficulty arises for youth organizations such as scouts when the advocates of current policy come across as appearing to refuse to even consider the argument about choice versus pre-determination based on evidence. I think we can win this argument, but the approach has to be based on facts. The more rational elements of the gay community and the popular media will not give scouting a serious hearing if we rely simply on a contradictory belief system.

Rooster7 touches on what to me is the most important point in this debate. Recent polling in the United States reveals that the population is largely split on the view of whether or not homosexuality is a choice, or whether or not people just are that way. In the gay rights movement, it is taken as a proven scientific fact that homosexuality is not a choice. Based on the casual reading I have done to date, the science behind this claim strikes me as ambivalent at best. I intend to do more serious reading on both sides of this issue. My own view at this time is that, pending some really convincing evidence that homosexuality is not a choice, I will continue to treat it in my mind as a bad choice. Thus I agree with rooster7 in terms of the current policy position of the boy scouts. If homosexuality is a choice, I, as a parent and a scout leader have both a right and a duty to choose the role models I put in front of my own sons, and the sons of others entrusted to me. This is not equivalent to teaching homophobia. I don't think that the scouts are teaching homophobia, and the current scout policy has it right, based on the presmise that homosexuality is a choice. In the meantime I will continue my personal search for more and better information.

Ditto for jmcquillan's post. I don't think I have ever seen a troop with an identifiable chaplain, but chaplain's aides are quite common. I would think that, if your troop has a broad membership, some parents of different denominations may even object to a chaplain, unless the unit is quite homogeneous in its approach to religious belief. I like the idea of having a chaplain's aide seeking outside advice from an expert.

As an aside, it's a comment on the times to note how some adult scouters respond to the god question in scouting. I just came off of a weekend of adult leader training run at the council level. The course director, who did an otherwise totally admirable job, reacted quite negatively when I suggested in an off hand way that we might do scouts own just to kill time Sunday morning.

Fairness in camporee competitions, and the judging of them, is a whole new thread. One could probably get as much feedback on this as one gets on a posting on the gay issue. Our own district has a long way to go in this, but I haven't spoken up because I don't want to get asked to do camporee. Just not ready for that.

Be that as it may, some kind of minimal ability grouping, such as "all new boy" patrols just for camporee competitions, makes a certain amount of sense. It adds an extra layer of complexity to administer, but where I have seen it done, I think all the boys feel better about the entire camporee.

I am neither an insurance guy nor an attorney. Are you concerned about insuring against loss while in use, or loss while parked in storage, or both? Is liability insurance an issue?

It would seem to me that liability coverage would be provided automatically by the owner of any vehicle towing the trailer. Likewise the property itself while under tow, is probably covered by the policy of the person doing the towing. Potential towers need to talk to their own insurance agents about this. Liability while in storage may seem to be a non issue, unless fuels or other dangerous items are stored in the trailer.

This leaves the question of property loss when it is not being towed, either at a camp site or in storage. Economical coverage ought to be available with a reasonable deductible from some kind of general agent. This the troop itself is probably not a legal entity, it is not obvious to me how the troop could actually buy insurance in its own name. You need to talk to both a lawyer and an insurance specialist, and your council.

Finding a meaningful role for eagles under 18 is tough. A venture crew is one possibility. Such scouts are seldom interested in conventional leadership positions in the troop and probably should not block other scouts from those positions anyway. I have seen some troops with eagles serving as patrol leaders, but that is a rarity. One option is offering a "junior assistant scoutmaster" position. As I recall, the youth has to be 16 years old for this. In one troop I was in, a dedicated teenager eagle took on this role very effectively for a year before he graduated from high school and his family moved. He was a tremendous asset to us.

Apparently this legislation is still very much alive as of June 7. The legislation has now passed the House of Representatives and it is up to the Senate. Those who care should contact their U.S. Senators right away. More information can be found on a conservative web site called "grassfire." I am not endorsing grassfire, but merely informing you of its existence.

Those who have read the novel Catch 22 may remember what happened to the soldier in the hospital who saw everything twice. Let's hope that Rooster7 avoids that fate.

I am not aware on any restrictions on who can wear a campaign hat and who cannot. If you want to wear it, wear it. I am more disturbed by the requirement that volunteers purchase an expensive hat that will seldom be used.

As a bona fide veteran I applaud your willingness to have your troop participate in these events. As a scout leader, I think it is a mistake to make rank advancement contingent upon participating in a single activity or event that determines everything else as far as scout spirit is concerned. "Showing scout spirit" is an often overlooked, ignored, and difficult to measure element of rank advancement. I think some flexibility is in order. You run the risk of turning these kids off on scouting altogether.

A problem in hiking and backpacking can arise when people move at different speeds. Some people simply have longer strides than others. Some are more eager to simply get down the trail. This can create a safety problem when people get separated on the trail. I can recall two instances when the the fast hikers took the wrong turn in the back country. One time it took hours for the group to get back together. The most recent incident I was able to correct quickly via walkie talkie before people got out of range. I am interested in others' views on this subject.

First of all, do you consider this to be a problem?

If it is a problem, how do you deal with it?

I can think of a variety of potential solutions: Prohibit slower hikers from participating in activities. Put the slowest hikers in front and prohibit anyone from passing them. Have the slowest hikers start earlier. Have the fast hikers simply carry more to the extent that loads are a factor in speed. Establish ability groupings for trek participation.

I am sure there a lot more ideas out there in cyberspace. This has become very important for us and I am interested in suggestions. Thanx in advance.

Eliminate all competition? If national is trying to eliminate competition, why does it sell all those fancy ribbons and streamers? Makes no sense to me.

The US Supreme Court upheld the right of BSA to discriminate based on the first amendment, I believe. Sexual orientation is not protected in any federal legislation although our recent ex president made discrimination on this basis in civilian employment matters by federal executive branch agencies against policy by executive order.

The issue arises in a state and local context because many states and local governmental bodies have either statutory protections or other types of policies regarding sexual orientation in place. In fact, both the Dale and Curran cases against BSA, brought in New Jersey and California respectively, were based on state statutes prohibiting such discrimination by businesses. The narrow issue that was litigated was whether or not BSA is a business.

Where a school district has a policy against such discrimination, it can become a grounds for denying access to facilities by BSA if the district chooses to press the issue. The most prominent case in this area of which I am aware is ongoing in Broward Country Florida. The county school district there issued an edict last fall evicting all scout units from its facilities. The district lost in federal court, but the district may be successful in forcing scout units to pay for access, while others get free access.

The Helms amendment would not by itself outlaw such actions by a school district, but would make such districts ineligible for federal funds.