Bando

A good friend of mine growing up did his Eagle Project at a local school. Built a bunch of picnic tables, planted some trees, put up some barbecue grills, a whole bunch of pretty awesome stuff. It was beautiful.

The next year the school district bulldozed all of it to put an addition on the school.

You're telling me they didn't know when the kid was doing the project that's where the addition was going to go? lol It was pretty amazing. I hope this kid doesn't have any trouble with his paperwork, this is just about the most bizarre thing I've ever heard.

What would happen? The BSA would look a whole heck of a lot more like the rest of America than the current, evangelical/conservative/Mormon-dominated organization it is today.

The BSA digging in its heels on issues of sexuality only moves it farther and farther away from a lot of boys it should be reaching. Gay rights is our generation's civil rights movement. It's a generational issue. I'm thinking a lot of you who were coming of age in the 50's and 60's felt a little differently about racial inclusion and civil rights than your parents did. In 40 or 50 years, we're going to be looking at the current landscape of America, where gays and lesbians are treated as if they're going to attempt to have sex with anyone at any minute, where they cannot serve in the military, can't serve as a scout leader, can't marry their partner, and wonder "just what were we thinking?" It's the "Colored-only" drinking fountains and theater sections of the modern day.

It's time for the BSA to realize that pandering to the fears and anxieties of the most conservative portions of their membership further alienates it from an America that is largely becoming more inclusive of the LGBTQ community. What would Baden-Powell think of an organization that doggedly hung on to a set of beliefs that alienated large portions of its funding, its access to public schools, many other chartering organizations, and most importantly, the trajectory of society itself?(This message has been edited by bando)

I don't know about religious affiliation, but a cursory perusal through the Eagle Letter where they show the pictures of NESA scholarship winners seems to indicate a certain demographic dominance. Not a whole lot of non-white faces in the lot.

I would be personally quite disappointed if the BSA were to associate themselves with the American Heritage Girls. I was also dismayed that the AHG had a display at National Jamboree.

A Scouting group that opens the statement describing itself with "A Christ-centered..." is not the appropriate organization for the BSA to align itself if it intends to provide a coed program. Sorry.

Don't forget the How Book of Cubbing and the How Book of Scouting, both fun resources for activities with the kids that stretch their imagination and creativity.

Frankly, I've found a lot of great ideas I wanted to do on my own as an adult in the original 1910/11 handbook and other period publications. Those Dan Beard boat plans are really quite cool!

Anybody else seen the first episode of LOST? Jack sews himself up after disinfecting the wound with an airplane mini-bottle of vodka.

Yes, it's TV, but not outside the realm of possibility in a disaster situation that a bottle of booze could come in handy. Although one would have to choose for which "good" you'd want to use it.

"Bando, you are the one talking about criminal acts."

You were just the one who posted about a SM being dropped off by his partner, then equating it to a SM being dropped off by an underage girlfriend, and a SM murderer getting out of prison.

So, in fact, it's you talking about criminal acts in equality to homosexuality. And I don't think anyone said there's a single person making the call at National, despite you repeatedly bringing that up.

Whatever, I don't want to turn this into a personal debate. Agree to disagree.

"[Homosexuality] is a different immoral act."

By whose standards? Why should the BSA be defining moral standards on sexuality, which is not a part of our program in any way, and something that is not universally defined as immoral by membership? And equating it with a criminal activity is not an acceptable rebuttal, as homosexuality is not a crime.

"Now, you all can flail away at that notion, but have you looked in the book section of your local Scout Shop lately? You'll find dozens of books on faith and Scouting...yep all Christian. Not one single item on any other faith."

Not to mention the long-running comic strip adaptation of Bible stories in Boys' Life every month. Go figure.

And who was pumping money from all over the country into California to support Prop 8, moreso than any religious group, and instructed its wards to both volunteer and donate specific amounts of money to ensure it passed?

LDS.

Hrm...

"Most Scout parents are on the same side as the LDS."

Is that right? I'd love to see where there is any statistical proof of this. Honestly, in my neck of the woods, I don't think that's a linchpin for anything with our parents. As long as their boys are having a great experience in our troop, I don't think anything would change, gay leaders or no. I think there's more a resentment that this issue is starving our organization through both public perception and traditional sources of funding.

Personally, it makes me pretty angry this is even an issue at all, and that National is willing to sacrifice elements of support and funding that would make our program stronger in order to make a stand on an issue that is largely irrelevant for our boys.

And, really, I would love to see any evidence that a gay scout leader would make a kid gay, or would somehow make his scouting experience less than it is now. The boys feed off of the homophobia of adults. If we're accepting, and teach acceptance and tolerance, we make better young men. That doesn't mean we necessarily have to accept things we don't agree with, but we must prepare our kids to live in a world that doesn't look as homogenous as our organization projects it to be. Remember, in their adult lives, they're going to encounter all kinds of people. Gay, straight, monogamous, not monogamous, Christian, atheist, pagan, the list goes on and on and on. Whether we like it or not, our society is moving progressively towards a model where we are encountering a wider variety of socially and religiously diverse individuals and families than ever before. That's America.

We have to ask ourselves what our organization looks like, and how that compares to the rest of the world around us. Let's face it, the BSA gives off the attitude of a largely white, right-leaning, paramilitary organization. It hasn't always been like that, and it doesn't have to be that in the future. There's room for every race and creed in scouting, but the fact of the matter is that through issues that pertain largely only to adults and our insecurities with the world around us, we're shutting the door on a lot of kids and parents who would and should be attracted to our program. This isn't a problem in the rest of the world. Why is it here?

LDS has a big stake in that issue. And it's troubling that such a major stakeholder of our organization largely operates as an independent unit within it while so strongly determining the policies of the units outside it by holding their large influence over our heads. Good on them for embracing scouting as they have, but it's on National that they've been allowed the leniency and influence they hold. "Non-LDS" and "LDS" should not have the vastly different connotations in relation to program and attitude as they do.

If this ever becomes an issue, I just know it's jac-shirt season!

A nice alternative might be what some call "Turkish," "Greek," "Armenian," etc. etc. coffee. It's common pretty much everywhere in the general middle east/Balkan/Caucasus regions, and was designed to be made over things like campfires. Basically, if you have a middle eastern store around you, you'll be able to find a Turkish coffee pot, to make it. Or you can order one online. Here's a video on how it's done:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hm-WhTRE-74

The video isn't that great, but it'll give you a visual. Basically, the most important thing is to go to your grocery store and either buy Nescafe, or if you can grind the beans at the store, turn the grinder all the way to the right (on most coffee grinders) to the "Turkish" setting. This will give you a very, very fine powder.

Then all you need to do is put about 3 or 4 tablespoons in the bottom of the pot, toss however much sugar you want in, fill almost to the top with water, and put it on the fire. Let it boil, take it off, put it back on, boil again, take it off, put it back on until it boils again, take it off, and then pour into your cup. Be careful not to let it boil over. It's thick, it's strong, and it'll keep you kicking for a good long time. Better than 6-8 cups! Probably more weight effective, too.

Just got back from my local council shop, it looks like they've sent out all the surplus Jamboree merchandise from the Trading Posts to all of the council shops operated by National. They had the bottom of the barrel stuff, the arena show wands, the goofy felt hats, tumbler glasses, but they also had t-shirts, one very small belt, participant hats, and participant patches. Not to mention those incredibly overpriced bags of gummies! And other stuff I'm forgetting. Just thought people might want a heads-up.

Additionally, it looks like the surplus stuff has shown up on ScoutStuff, too.

This just makes me think about a friend of mine and what happened to his Eagle Project. He built pilings for barbecues, planted a bunch of trees, and built some picnic tables for a park next to a local elementary school. All with the consent and cooperation of the school district and school administration. Great project.

Then, I kid you not, less than one year later it was ALL bulldozed over to build an addition to the school.

Benefited the community as a pretty nice parking spot for half a new school.

National must approve all patch designs, correct? How difficult would it be to compile all the electronic files (or scan those submitted in paper) and put together a quick and easy PDF or something to send out with this year's patch designs?

Either that or have Jamboree security heavily enforce against those visitors who bring in fake patches, like the Avatar set or the Facebook game patches that showed up at the end of the week. I never saw a participant with credentials behind a patch blanket of fake council issues, they were always visitors.

Like I said at the beginning of the thread, there needs to be greater emphasis by National to force councils to pare back their patch sets. There's no need for a few dozen unique patches for a council. None. And it only encourages these people making fake sets.

I always think of the best adult leader parents as the ones for whom I could not figure out which one was their kid if I didn't know them very well. There's a lot of dads who bring their son to the meeting, and you don't see them together until they leave.

evmori, VigilEagle, the point is not that Camping is an Eagle-required merit badge today, but rather that for a period of time in the 1970's, it was removed from the list. An omission that was later corrected. So, yes, at a point in the BSA's history, you could theoretically have earned Eagle without going camping. Whether that ever actually happened is debatable.

I really wonder how many people who loudly espouse anti-homosexual views have ever known a gay person. And not a casual acquaintance, I mean had a close friend who was gay.

For me, I truly believe this to be a generational thing, with the social acceptability of homosexuals to come out and live their lives more openly as opposed to living extremely under the radar in previous decades leading to more people having more exposure to openly gay people.

I'm a younger Scouter. As for me, I had two gay roommates in college, and one of my closest friends is gay. Most of my heterosexual friends are similar in this regard. We think nothing of it. Our parents' generation, however, that's a different story. I really think there is no way to change someone's opinion other than to provide a way by which they can see what everyday gay people are like. Too often they view the gay community in the extremes as they see in the media, or as portrayed to them through stereotypes put forth by any number of sources, most notably from the Church. That's like viewing the heterosexual population through the lens of the Girls Gone Wild commercials on cable TV and Cosmopolitan Magazine. For us, gay people are a part of our lives, and while we may not always approve of the activities or activism of portions of their community, I think a lot of us wouldn't approve of a lot of the activities or activism in the heterosexual community, either.

The argument is not about we think something is "natural" or "unnatural." At the end of the day, we only have control over our own decisions and how we mold our own lives. I'm heterosexual. I'm confident in that regard. And I know I will find someone who will make me happy and provide companionship for the extent of my life here on God's green earth, and it will be a woman. If someone else feels that for them that person will be of the same sex, who am I to judge or intrude on their ability to be equally happy and complete? I have no control over their impulses, nor really do they, as I think our generation is also fairly confident in the fact that homosexuality is not a choice but rather a genetic inclination.

There's an old Russian proverb I always like to cite when someone gets really riled up about issues of homosexuality, whether or not it's natural, whether sexual relations between same-sex couples is acceptable in modern society: "What, were you standing next to the bed with a candle?" Why do we care so much about what happens in someone else's bedroom? Why can't we be comfortable with who we are and be less interested about how others find that same confidence?

jet, what's the difference between a sports team or a band and Scouting? Scouting is predominantly an individual at-your-own-pace activity. Yes, there's patrols and team work when camping or learning a skill at a troop meeting, but that's pretty much a non-factor at a Court of Honor, which honors individual achievement. A scout misses that, he's only missing out on receiving his own awards and essentially being a spectator for others.

On a sports team, he's a member of a unit, where missing a practice means tangible detriment to the rest of the squad. Same goes for a band. There are consequences on the many for the absence of a few. And if a coach is worth his/her salt, they're going to have tangible punishment on a youngster for missing a practice or a game to go pick up some patches at a Court of Honor. That's a no-brainer. And as adult Scouters, we have to realize and deal with that.

Scouting isn't the same as other activities. And, yes, sometimes it takes a back seat to things like sports and music, but if you're running your program correctly, you're not punishing a youngster for having many interests and activities, and you're providing incentive for him to stay in Scouting as much he can while budgeting his time with his other adventures. Why punish him?

And don't forget the BSA knew for -two months- he would not be coming, yet kept the charade up that he would be coming until the rumors started going around AP Hill during Staff Week that he wasn't coming and then sneaking it in the Leaders' Update that it would feature a speech by Robert Gates. Then they went from there by having the President's face on the Patch of the Day. And then quietly made it known, through some random spokesperson, that the President had indeed notified them 2 months before that he wouldn't be coming following the Wednesday Arena Show. That sounds like quite the way to rile up the folks instead of giving them the actual story and reality ahead of time. How many kids would have not been quite so disappointed had the lack of POTUS been revealed when it was known he wasn't coming? Or was it better for the BSA's party line of "he doesn't support us!" to let the charade go on?

So, no, it's not like the President called up Bob Mazzuca at 10PM Tuesday and said "Yeah, no, I've got a date with Barbara Walters tomorrow morning. Say hi to the kids!" He was likely never scheduled for anything in the shows, and that was made abundantly clear by the BSA playing his video-taped message as intermission filler on Saturday night. Because Ted Nugent and random b-list celebrities deserved their 1-minute slots of video board time in the actual 100th Anniversary show more than the President of the United States did.

Again, Duty to Country, indeed.(This message has been edited by Bando)

"Unfortunately Bando, all consumerism is local. The three American made cars I have owned, the AMC, the Buick and Ford all died before 75, 000 miles, the Honda, Toyota and Nissan went over 100,000 before they were sold and I never heard back from the owners."

Well, we've recently put two Pontiacs into the ground at 200,000 miles each, and just purchased a new GM car made end-to-end in Lansing, Michigan. And also have a 25-year-old Mercury at 100,000 miles, and expect to get another 50,000 out of it. But anecdotal evidence only goes so far, and it seems you're already convinced American cars are inferior. I'm not going to change your mind.

It's far too easy for people outside this region to say they think the American auto companies deserve whatever they get. But when I look at an entire economy which depends on the auto companies, whether it be businesses who depend on auto business, medical and legal people whose clients are predominantly auto, even down to brick and mortar small businesses... You don't see that. We do. We see empty storefronts and freeways that don't have rush hour anymore. Growing up in Michigan, it was rare that I knew anybody who didn't have at least one parent who worked in an auto or auto-dependent field. Everybody here has a stake in what happens to the auto industry, and we care that our government would do what it could to make sure those jobs had a fighting chance of staying in the United States instead of passively letting things die and watch another country's workforce gobble it up. If the United States is serious about at least maintaining what little portion of our industrial economy we have left instead of becoming a complete and total consumer economy, it's in our interest to save our auto industry and help it revamp into a viable and sustainable entity for the future. Yes, mistakes were made, but that's how you learn and retool, right? I don't think we want to see an America where we don't even make our own cars anymore. And it's far too simplistic to say that GM etc. aren't building cars in America and the foreign companies are, because that's far from being a blanket, accurate statement.

So, yes, we get a bit defensive when people take almost pure glee in talking about buying foreign cars and following it up with snide remarks about how the American auto industry was poorly managed, or how car x, y, or z they bought at some point in time didn't hold up, and then rub it in our face that our region deserves what we get. "I say let 'em crash!" OK, thanks for the support. This matters to us. And bailing out the auto industry meant bailing out more than a couple big corporations. Buying an American car isn't so much patriotism as it is an investment in your own economy, ensuring that America actually produces instead of just consuming.

I remember when the high cost of BSA uniform items was explained by the excuse that it was the cost of making them in America.

Now the shirts are made in China and Bangladesh, the socks and shorts in China, every single patch is made in China... And they're the -exact same price-, if not more expensive. Explain that, National Supply...

Also, those of us in the Midwest thank you for continuing to buy foreign cars. Really helping our bottom line. :\

Sorry, that's pretty far-fetched.

"Unless there was a very good reason to have missed (neither band nor football practice count as good reasons), they can wait until the next COH."

Why aren't those good reasons? Sorry, I don't follow your logic at all.