Kahuna

Absolutely not, as far as I'm concerned. Boy Scouting is about the last bastion of all-boy activity left. This isn't Europe. Boys are under assault everywhere because they can't act like little girls and be nice. Helicopter parents already ensure that you have to get far away to get them out their clutches and let them be boys. I am and have been for a long time a Sea Scout leader, so obviously have no problems with girls in the program for the older boys. We have Venturing, we have Sea Scouting. Boys who feel the need at that age to be more social can get into those and stay in Scouting. In s

I tend to side more with the "splitting the baby" line of thought, which worked for Solomon, but usually not for these kinds of issues. If the resolution doesn't pass, they'll be in bigger pudu than they already are. I recall that Wayne Brock said at the All Hands meeting something to the effect that, regardless of the decision made, we'll be revisiting it in a few years. I'm glad that youth members won't have to worry about not getting Eagle, but sad they'll be kicked out at 18 (or 21 in Venturing and Sea Scouts, they are still considered youth). That should be interesting. How will they hand

This is really making me crazy. I see posts on the forum page from yesterday, but when I go to the page, the last discussion was in February.

I think that this was pretty clearly a political statement by a couple of Republicans as a response to the ACLU suit. Both actions, IMHO, are pretty silly. That being said, this is a huge problem for many religious conservatives. You simply cannot win a political argument by quoting scripture. It doesn't fly with most people and there are generally civil arguments that can be made.

For the record, as a practicing Buddhist, Buddhism does not require belief in a Supreme Being. However, there are Buddhists, like myself, who do so believe. BTW, The Buddha was not a deity nor is he "worshipped" as such by Buddhists. The question for a sincere Buddhist Scout or Scouter would be whether you can accept the DRP and recite the Scout Oath and Law without compromising your beliefs. I and many others can, as can people who are members of no religion. Don't forget, one does not have to be a member of any religion to be a member of the BSA. And then, there's always the Universal Life C

1. The first prerequisite is that there has to be "equal" as well as separate -- which was never the case in the example you mention. I think the conservative churches and other organizations who remain in the traditional programs will have the resources to keep up with LFL Scouting. 2. The separation would be totally voluntary, and doesn't force anyone to be separated if they don't want to be -- which was never the case in the example you mention. If gays or lesbians want to remain in the traditional program, they can, under the same conditions as exist now. If someone who doesn't care

I fail to see a "Velvet Revolution" option for Scouting. It would be confusing to the public, not to mention the Scouts. The use of facilities and activities coordination boggle the mind. No, I think we must decide on one standard (no gays) or the other (local option). Either decision will cause problems and cost members, but we need a starting point to go forward from. LFL Cub Scouts? Really? I'm not ridiculing, I'd just have to be convinced that it even might work. Personally, I think the local option is the only thing that makes sense at this point. The God issue will also arise in tim

Agreed. A no-brainer, not that it matters to lots of professionals.

I am truly saddened to hear of his passing so suddenly and at such a young age. He was one of the real old-timers on here and, as many have said, always the voice of reason and calm. He will certainly be missed. Thank you, Terry, for giving us this sad news and information about OGE.

I can post now, but I still am not seeing the latest posts listed on the main page. Today it says there was a post in this thread last night, but I can't see it.

I agree, but I think at this point they are considering everything and hoping an answer will fall from the heavens.

I'm still getting missing posts and unable to start a new thread. Something is still messed up here.

As others have pointed out, we already have "local option" insofar as COs can pretty much limit leadership and membership, so I don't see much difference. As to summer camp and camporees, I don't see the issue. In the first place, if you go to one of those today and observe how different the units are in conduct, membership, uniforming and leadership, you can see vast differences. We also take our boys to public places like theme parks, water parks and other public venues where the dangers of some kind of actual molestation are much greater than they would be at Scout camp. National shoul

Just thought I would update this. Alec has a new season out on YouTube with some cold weather adventures and now has his own website at http://www.alecinwilderland.com/. He lives not far from Dallas; the BSA should recruit this kid. He's already a children's survival instructor in a county organization.

You have a point, Peregrinator. I think since the case was based on the core values of the BSA, it would extend to sponsors who still interpret those values as the BSA did in Dale. We're sure to find out over time, since someone will bring a suit somewhere.

I realize that some sponsors may have concerns about discrimination suits, but as a practical matter, the Dale case established that the BSA (and therefore its COs) is a private organization and may set boundaries on membership. Local option would not change that. Which is not to say there might not be test cases, but those are possible under current BSA rules.

Good to know that the USN will keep the crackerjack uniforms around. I've seen stuff on the introduction of the service khaki, which is apparently an optional uniform, indicating that's what would replace the whites and blues. They have gone to a blue cammie (woodland) uniform as a work uniform. I've seen sailors here wearing them around in the daytime. Funny how all the services have now not only allowed but encouraged the wear of cammo just about everywhere, including travel on commercial aircraft. Before I retired in the mid Ninties, we had just been allowed to go into a 7/11 or Publix on o

While it's certainly true that Sea Scouting has problems bigger than uniforms to worry about, one of the issues the committee was undoubtedly concerned about was the coming lack of a source for white/blue "crackerjack" uniforms. The Navy no longer uses this uniform and there will come a time when the surplus and thrift shop sources will dry up. There is just no question that the "tar flap" is plain ridiculous and should never be seriously considered by any unit. The necker is okay, if you're into that sort of thing.

Thanks, Cambridgeskip. The voice of experience is always welcome (and, hopefully, calming to some).

I'm afraid you guys are exactly right. This was a very ill-informed move on the part of the BSA. All of us are hanging by our thumbs now and fielding questions we don't have the answers to.

. . . sound of crickets.

Beavah: without getting into the validity of the Republican conservative values of Chuck Hagel . . . Did you see any of his confirmation hearing? This guy is clearly not competent to be SecDef. He fumbled, he was unprepared, he did not know things he should know, he absolutely refused to defend his stand on "the surge" in Iraq. Is this a guy we want in charge of the most important department of our government in a crisis? If you haven't seen it, you should go over to YouTube and type in "Chuck Hagel confirmation hearing." If you still think he's the right guy, I wouldn't know what to say in an

My apologies for multiple duplicate posts. My browser apparently went bonkers and kept trying to put that post up. Mea culpa.

My apologies for multiple posting. Apparently, my computer locked up on the post and kept putting it up. Too late for me to edit or delete. Mea Culpa.