BDPT00

I didn't say we were there yet, but the bigger we allow government to get by raising taxes and spending our money as if it were their own (because they know what's good for us), the closer we get to what I'd consider to be socialism.

And maybe I should restate it a little better what it means to "work for the government." Anyone who is paid by my taxes "works for the government," but let's not forget that there are also a lot of people who "work the system." They're paid by taxes, too, and they vote.

BDPT00

Haven't read everything here, but I'll tell you what I think makes this country lean too close to socialism: When more than 50% of our voters work for the government. Our government keeps getting bigger and bigger, and the people "on the take" are more interested in even bigger government by way of tax increases. Why shouldn't they be? If you work for the government, you're better off if the government gets more voters. You're voting yourself a raise every time taxes are increased.

Pretty soon, the government will own everything ... including our banks, businesses, homes and property. We're getting there.

BDPT00

I can't think of a positive reason for putting OA status on the boards. I think what would be noticed and pointed out is 'who's First Class and not in the OA.' Is that the objective?

BDPT00

Our lodge is doing training soon. I'll attend, and I'll be sure to reaise the question.

From where I stand, "guaranteeing parents and guardians the opportunity to observe any Scout activity" does not equal encouraging them to observe ceremonies.

I think we need a new verb.

BDPT00

*** Why would one do that? Is it a secret that they're there?

I don't encourage non-members to attend.

BDPT00

My hypothetical concerns are not overblown at all. After trying several differnt models we now just split the patrols by age. Year after year, the youngest patrols win competitions because they work much better as a patrol. Many of the older kids take a whole week to finally fully participate ... they spend too much time being cool and posturing. They don't care, or don't really want to be there, and they want to make sure everfody knows it. If being cool is part of they're tryin got accomplish, they really don't have anyone to impress, so they finally come out of it. Throw in a few girls, and I don't think the posturing would ever stop.

As some would say, YMMV.

BDPT00

I have no concern with how the girls will feel. They'll be fine. My issue is taking a program that has worked for decades, and is considered to be the top leadership training a council can offer its troops' youth leadership ... now sprinkle in some made-up terminalogy and a few girls, and we'll just see what happens. Good idea? Bad idea?

Qwazse and Eagle92 and I are all speculating. Hasn't somebody out there done this? I'd like to hear some real stories ... successes and failures. What works? What can make it better, or is it already the greatest idea to come along since the 70s? What will you change for next year?

BDPT00

Someone had mentioned in another thread something about 18-21 year olds taking NYLT. I don't think that should happen. They should go to Wood Badge instead. However, that's a totally different subject ... should they take Wood Badge as a youth participant? I don't like it. As a dual registered adult? OK. Anybody have experience with that?

A question regarding NYLT: Are we supposed to assume Venturers know how to camp and cook? When First Class Scouts participate, we know the answer to that. How about Venturers?

I'd like to hear some war stories regarding NYLT. How differently did the boys behave with girls around? I've seen kids open up by the end of the week, and get totally involved. Won't sing at first campfire, but love it by the end. Did that still happen with Ventureres around? A lot of times the older kids spend the whole week posturing. They're too cool for it. How do they behave with girls around? Can they ever forget about how cool they need to be, and just have some fun?

In the classroom, how do 13 year old boys and 17 year old girls participate together?

And what about the generic terminology? (no patrols, crews, Scoutmasters, etc)

BDPT00

It certainly happened here, and it may depend upon your definition of abuse.

BDPT00

It's the elephant in the room.

Good points raised. Sadly, most of my experiences with Venturing leaders is listening to complaining about feeling left out. I don't know what else they have in mind, but I know they like to whine. They can do whatever/whenever/wherever they want, so go ahead and do it!

BDPT00

Interesting question ... interesting responses.

When we deal with legal and/or ethical issues from afar, we seem to know what to do. I see a few black and white answers, but I haven't seen anyone say they'd call Immigration and have this guy arrested.

When it comes to youth protection issues, we all seem to think we know what we would have done, right? When it comes to Penn Stated, we would have all done the right thing, right?

These are exactly the kinds of questions we should pose to our Scouts. We do it in NYLT (I don't use what's in the book, but rather make it more realisitic and difficult).

Ask your Scouts this same question. Listen to their answers. This is how we teach Ideals.

BDPT00

Nobody is forcing them to join an organization they don't buy into.

Go join somthing else. The GSUSA is still trying to recover from the same bone-headed move.

Take a stand!

BDPT00

Is that relevant?

BDPT00

Why would a Venturer take IOLS?

BDPT00

No, it's not enough said.

You're referring to some religions, some lodges, and some parents. That's the problem. It's always about somebody, somewhere.

I think it's a non-issue, and people posting on that other thread want to make an issue out of it.

Yes, it's enough said in this thread.

This secrecy thing is being blown way out of proportion, and isn't based in reality. There are no secrets. Those making the issue out of nothing seem to think there is ... somewhere by somebody, but it's always somwwhere else by somebody else.

I've never experienced a problem, and I doubt they have either.

BDPT00

How often do we have to entertain comments from non-Wood Badgers judging what they know nothing about?

BDPT00

I hope you're not implying that I've said something negative or that I've attacked a religion. Certainly not my intent if that's the way it looks.

BDPT00

Exactly. No problem here.

My hunch is that if a particular religion has an issue with the OA, they also have an issue with the BSA. I'm familiar with some of those religions. I'm not familiar with any that approve of Scouting, but not the OA.

My problem? A few posters who feel it appropriate to attack a Scouter who doesn't embrace their opinions (in the other OA thread).

BDPT00

Thunder and Seattle,

I'm really curious. When you conduct an Ordeal ceremony, how many non-member guests are in attendance?

And here's a hypothetical question: Little Johnny's dad is doing his Ordeal, and he plans to come back next year for his Brotherhood. Johnny is doing his Brotherhood this same weekend. Dad would like to view his son's ceremony, and get some nice pictures to take home to Mom, so she can put them in Johnny's Eagle scrapbook for his upcoming ECOH reception table. Any advice for Dad?

I know what advice BrotherhoodWWW would give (and so would I). What would you say?

BDPT00

"selfless service to other's is not the OA's only goal or practice."

*** OK, I'm listening. What else is there, unless you're referring to the cheerful part of it? What part of anything anywhere in the OA is intended to brainwash an innocent young mind? These baseless arguments are 99% pure speculative rubbish. I'm being generous, giving 1% if somebody actually has a credible issue.

I'll wait here.

BDPT00

I agree with Old OX. The OA and its ceremonies should not be open to the general public. It looks to me as though people are looking for absolutes. Regarding the clergy wishing to see what we do and what a ceremony entails ... absolutely ... invite him/her to come and see. If a parent has issues ... absolutely ... allow them to be a spectator. Others? No.

We don't invite the public to view Wood Badge presentations. We don't encourage parents to observe NYLT. We don't allow mom to sit nearby as Johnny is doing his Vigil None of these things are secret; they're private moments for those participating. Maybe we need a differnt word ... "secret" seems to bother people.

BDPT00

When our national flag is raised and lowered, the bugle call is "To the Colors."

BDPT00

Forward march, halt, and about face are ridiculous commands to use for Scouts. A flag is called the colors, not the color. I'd trash whatever you're using (if this is it), and start over.

BDPT00

Hawk,

Neither would I. (although I've seen it done)

What I'm referring to is gaining 2 or 3 awards for the same service. I've seen it for DAM, SB, and Vigil. Could just as easily include the Venturing award ... all for the same service.

Much less likely to happen in the service, of course, but it can happen. If I'm not mistaken, Alexander Haig received the DFC and the DSC for the same mission.

Do I mind? Not really, as long as others who are worthy also get recognized.

BDPT00

If they are worthy and nominated, they'll get the proper recognition. Now they'll get one award instead of two for the same service.

BDPT00