fred8033

We'll have to disagree. No one is defending the indefensible. This is about being realistic and comparing to other similar organizations at the same time. If BSA is to be hit so hard, then perhaps the better answer is to tax every home owner $10,000 and create a fund to payback for all the past occurrences through schools, police, sports, etc and handle this all at once. This was not a single organization. This was a societal issue.

This article explains why I am not as upset with BSA as others. The above cases are from 2019 !!!!!! Two decades after SCHOOL mandatory reporting laws. At least a decade after the nationwide law suits started. Happening with professionals who's job is to teach our kids. One school district had 450 reported in one year. Only 130 of the 450 had completed investigations. 36 resulting in end of employment. 300+ not investigated yet and 100 not substantiated. Imagine looking at those 400 cases 50 years later after most people are gone ... the organization would be liable for damages on something you can't defend and using laws and liability that was not on the books yet. ... but I suspect we can't find paperwork / documentation to trigger the lawsuits as a tracking path was not kept from years ago. BSA was far from perfect ... as were ALL organizations ... but it had a reporting process ... and tried to track people ... and people were often notified that the person should not be re-registered. I'm further betting that many of these cases were not perused by law enforcement at the time. I'm also betting many parents and involved people choose not to pursue. If BSA can't be held up as trying to do it's best ... who can ? If BSA is going to be destroyed by the past being judged by today's standards, all organizations, cities and government groups should be forced into bankruptcy.

I agree in that I think the use of Indian lore teaches our scouts many things in many directions. It also raises awareness of the native american cultures. ... BUT ... when it's used as a weapon against us, it's time to ditch it. We will have lost something special, but we lose far more in perception and membership if we keep it.

Sadly, this is less about right or wrong. It's about avoiding bad marketing and focusing on the value of the program. The reason to keep is more tradition. BSA can do fine with a different style of ceremony and leave the Indian lore behind. For me ... I'm German and Catholic. I get offended by the Packers cultural appropriation of cheese and beer.

Are X people allowed to imitate Y people? Yes, but you need to pick your battles, time and place. Protesters have chosen to make BSA's practices a public issue. IMHO, this is not a battle we want.

There are several local troops that do very meaningful ceremonies. Lights are dimmed. Candles are lit. Words of reflection are spoken. IMHO, that's exactly what an OA ceremony should be. Sadly, the rest is out of place in today's society.

This issue will not go away. Though I don't see the harm and I could easily counter-argue from many directions, it's non-productive. Society has changed. Kids don't watch cowboy and Indian movies anymore. Whole generations are losing connections to our past. ... The key problem is protesters will always be using BSA to prove their point at BSA's expense. .... IMHO ... We can come up with our own ceremonies that are just meaningful without using Indian lore. ... Sadly, our scouts will lose out by being less aware of our countries Indian past, but so be it.

Agreed. I was referring to inside the unit. Inside the unit, the COR should be almost invisible. Almost invisible to the scout. Maybe, the COR takes a seat the at the unit committee meetings, maybe. Outside the unit, yes. The COR "should" be actively representing the unit to the sponsoring or and the council.

That's what I was thinking. If money is recovered, it would go back to the non-profit (or an equivalent non-profit). In a way, it could financially help the NRA. ... Unless this is all a publicity stunt. ... I just can't see the NRA dissolved. This appears like the AG is more concerned about damaging the image than applying law.

I'm not a NRA fan, but the charges seem reasonable, ... BUT ... Dissolving the non-profit (aka NRA)? If the top officers of a non-profit are effectively embezzling funds for their own purpose, then it's right to prosecute. BUT, the original non-profit has been around for almost 148 years. The intention of donors / members is well understood. So, the result of successful prosecution should be the returning of the funds to the non-profit for their original non-profit purpose. Even the idea of returning money? Much of the money has been legitimately spent or won't be recoverable. Every member gets $10 back of their original $45 membership fee? I seem to remember that the intention of the donor (aka member) is to be honored when it's difficult to resolve such complexities. So, if NRA can't be fixed, another 2nd amendment defending non-profit should be funded as honoring the donor intentions. Or, simply replace the top NRA leadership and keep the long-standing non-profit running.

Know that ... You have a right to ask what the concerns are. You have a right to tell the EBOR (district and council) there are certain adults you do not want sitting on your son's EBOR. I have seen a few occasions when adults target specific scouts. In those cases, we have let the district / council advancement chair know there is history and the scout deserves a clean EBOR opportunity. Note that after the council certifies a scout to have an EBOR, it's hard for the EBOR to say no to the scout.

IF AS WRITTEN ... that's justification minimum to never have that adult sit on another EBOR. It's justification from district to either say that EBOR is null and void or to take other action. IMHO, as soon as a volunteer utters those words, they should be removed from the EBOR. Period.

We can disagree. Most CORs won't do anything. The CC and SM should. But parents absolutely have the right to stand up for their kids when their kids are wronged.

Adults often volunteer for positions to get one-up on someone else. It's sad and it's 100% wrong. Unit commissioners have no place injecting themselves into the workings of the troop they are mentoring. I would submit a complaint directly to the council leadership. ... IF IT IS AS YOU REPRESENT ... he should be removed as a commissioner. I'd argue he has the wrong attitude and he went after a scout. It's an indicator he should not be a registered scouter ... but that's up to the council. Send a direct, specific, concise statement (incident and history) and send it to the the council scout executive, director of advancement and the council commissioner.

Beautiful pictures. How were the bugs?

BSA is a great organization. I'm very sad to hear this.

I agree. I might have been a bit to quick to state. I found the statement funny. "There are no uniform police." ... Many of us have defended or advocated for scouts when they are confronted by self-appointed uniform police. The advice is correct though. Focus on a good experience and get out and doing things. Uniform is not required.

LOL ... Ideally, I agree with you. Reality, many adult leaders think there is one. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/510784(19)_Scouts_Uniform_Inspection_Sheet_WEB.pdf

I need to hire a personal professional editor. I re-write, but I never clean up.

I was going to post this response with T2Eagle ... I agreed with the earlier comment that it's not really a PLC decision ... ideally. I'd add on ... even if the unit has an official uniform ... I'd applaud a patrol that wants to form it's own identity. A patrol is the fundamental unit of scouting. SO ... if a patrol wants their own specific hat, go for it. The patrol is the fundamental unit of scouting. We want strong patrol cohesion. We want other patrols to admire and want to be like other patrols. It raises the bar. So, if one patrol wants a specific patrol hat, I'd really like to support then and NEVER push back that it conflicts with troop standards. The flip side should also be looked at. What happens to patrol / scout initiative if they take the energy to discuss / decide / want and we as adult leaders push back or even just say it needs to go to PLC. I fear I'd be doing a disservice to patrol identity and scout excitement for the program. I fear I'd also be telling them one thing and then delivering another. We want strong patrols with patrol identity and scouts that take initiative and get excited for the program. ... This is something that should be met with excitement and not worry that much about.

This is right up there with can the patrol vote to have an official pencil color. Sure. Your patrol. Why not.

It's okay to feel strongly. We're in very emotional times. Everyone of us can easily pull ridiculous events from daily news. For me, it's the constant resistance to police these days. Protest in public opinion and fight in court. Don't add pressure on them as they their immediate job. For me, the title "scoutmaster" carries little long term weight and has a lot of baggage due to mis-interpretation. ... But, that's me. And it's not the biggest battle.

Good point. Interesting. I still remember 35+ years ago watching a play with James Earle Jones, "Master Harold and the boys". My concern was always about the nuanced implications of words. I've never been that concerned with PC, though I do try to be PC. ... or at least stay quiet at those times. ... My focus was more on the nuanced implications of "master". The term "advisor" is much much much more closely aligned with my vision of the adult contact for a troop. Even "coach" is not as close as many see the coach putting the players on the field and the coach calling the plays. ... It's not the biggest battle, but I think it's an important one. Our young scouts and their experiences are constantly affected by adults that over step their bounds and it often destroys the youth's experience and the youth's passion for scouting.

This is a whole topic in itself. When the scoutmaster is not available, troops do need to find an ASM to assume the role. BUT the ideal is there is one person at the helm scoutmastering the troop. The rest is done by the youth. Doesn't matter if it's a 10 person or a 100 person troop. That's the ideal. In reality, I had a great experience for about 12 years with one man as the scoutmaster. The troop has several ASMs, but the SM was clearly the SM. The ASMs had their individual roles supporting, but were not "scoutmaster".

State laws do apply. Federal laws are significant though because they were often the driving force to change state laws. The early example is the the 1974 CAPTA law would withhold federal funds given to states if the states did not pass laws. That is how federal laws often drive state changes.