Prairie_Scouter

Bob, >Who said anything about "just adherence to the text"? Well, I said that, Bob, in reference to your comments in the other thread where you said twice that leaders should "read the Handbook". I took your post in it's context to mean that it's your belief that everything you need to know to handle every program situation in Scouting is covered in the Handbook and the training. I think that that's expecting an awful lot from both. I know that you relish in taking a phrase out of the context of a post and proceeding to attack that, and then proceeding to denigrate anyone who tries to improve on the basic concepts as creating a "Rube Goldberg" invention. Also, you say that anyone who doesn't agree with something in Scouting "can't manage a real program" and is just hiding in the "smoke" by attacking some other issue. So, let me state, again, what I tried to say before. I think that the success of the program is not defined by just following what's in "the Handbook" and the associated training. The Handbook tells you, mostly, what the Scout has to do to gain advancement; the training is only as good as the trainer. What makes the program a success is the imaginative implementation of the program in a way that makes it interesting for the Scouts. There are plenty of resources to assist in this, and it's up to the leaders, and the Scouts, to decide which resources fit the makeup of their Troop. That has nothing to do with making up your own rules or anything like that. It's all about implementation. I think that if a leader who is confused, as you say, just follows the Handbook, and that is all they ever do, then that program is probably going to fail. I hope that that's not what you meant. Reading the Handbook and going to training is no more going to make a successful leader than reading the Rules of the Road and going to driver training is going to make a good driver. Does it provide a good foundation? Sure, if you take the time to read the material and you have a quality trainer. Beyond that, it's looking at the unique situation you're in. Some cars have specific handling needs that you have to take into account; some troops have a Scout makeup that requires a particular approach to the program to have it be successful. That doesn't mean wholesale changes. You don't change the basic mechanics of turning a car, but you may adjust the way you turn a particular model to account for it's handling. You don't change the basic Scouting program, but you may adjust how you present it to meet the needs of your particular troop. That's where the best leaders make their mark. Not by just reading the book, but by figuring out how best to present it to their troop, through their junior leaders. >The few rules that there are are very easy to fine and very specific. The program is about >what boys can do not about what they can't do, shouldn't do, or what you won't let them do. I think that that's the first time I've ever seen or heard anyone say that Scouting only has a "few rules". :-) We have whole sessions in our Council just on filling out forms and the rules that go along with them. Scouting has lots of rules, and for many good reasons, including safety and liability. And, the G2SS has lots of things that Scouts can't and shouldn't do. I'm all for friendly discourse, Bob. I've had several discussions with Eamonn, and others, where we have disagreed, and he's managed to make his very good points while remaining courteous and in context. I respect him for this. Bob, you and I, if you take a look at our posts in full context, agree on many things. It's unfortunate, I think, that you have displayed a desire to not only make your points, but also to attack the people who disagree with you on what I feel like is a more personal level. That really does take all the fun out of these discussions.

With all due respect, fellas, the remainder of Bob's post from the other thread makes it sound like all you have to do is open a book, and the world of Scouting will be a happy place. If it was only so. The Scout program provides most of what you need and is very good at what it does, but a critical piece is missing, and that's dedicated and creative leaders and parental support. It's the creative and wise implementation of the Scout program that makes it a success, not just adherence to the text. It's one thing to say "learn a square knot", it's something else to teach it in a creative and fun way that makes the Scouts WANT to learn it. As far as whether the Scout Law is something that covers all occasions, I can think of one thing that might be a bit more all-encompassing, and that's the book "Everything I Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten" :-)

Hmmm, interesting question. I wonder in some cases if we're talking about "contextualism", "Individualism", or just "flexibility". Depends on the item, but here's a thought or two. I have Scouts who come directly from sports practice to the meetings, so they are still in their sports gear. I'd rather have them at the meeting than take the time to go home, change, and then come to what's left of the meeting. For Scouts who just show up out of uniform, I'd rather still have them at the meeting, but if it starts to happen more than occasionally, I would sit down with the Scout and remind them of the importance of coming to the meeting in uniform. I guess where I'm heading with this is that, at least in my mind, being at the meeting and being able to participate is, within some subjective limits, more important than being in uniform. As far as other "enhancements" to the program, you can't change the requirments for things like a merit badge. If BSA has some timing rules for things like that, then that's what they are. You can't take a 50 mile hike award and say, in our troop, you have to have 100 miles to get it. As far as adding other items to the program, I suppose if it doesn't conflict with BSA rules, than it's ok to the extent that the Scouts accept it. What I mean by that is the effect on membership. Prospective Scouts will find out, and not join if they think it's "bogus". I'm all for a certain amount of flexibility to meet the reality of certain situations; your use of "contextualism", I suppose. Even that, I suppose, is somewhat subjective. For example, I won't change the requirements for a merit badge or rank advancement, but I don't see a problem with "flexing" the uniform requirement to some extent. I am sure that there are those who see no room for flexibility at all. And I'm pretty sure that at least in some cases, the BSA rules state that "these are the requirments; you can't do less, and can't make someone do more", or words to that effect. You can get a little carried away with the need to follow rules to the letter. Here is my favorite example. A few years back, 2 Scouts in our Council performed an act of heroism such that they qualified for a national Scout award. However, National turned them down because they didn't get the paperwork on time. In my mind, National preferred to turn away 2 deserving Scouts, great examples of the success of the program, in favor of their need to follow "the rules",which is, of course, their right. Ironically, my dad earned a military award during WWII, and it took the military almost 50 years to finally get it to him. But they did. Heroism shouldn't have a statute of limitations. Sometimes a little flexibility is a good thing.

Packsaddle, It seems that you're stating, as fact, that witchcraft, magic, and monsters don't exist? Did I read that correctly? I'm not saying that they DO exist, but I have no reason to believe that they don't, either. There are plenty of strange things in this world. scoutldr, In an earlier post you said that "BSA will never admit that Satanism and Atheism are the same thing". That's probably a good thing, because they're not the same thing. Unless you can objectively document that this kid is doing something contrary to BSA policy, you might consider just leaving him alone. As others have noted, kids will say things just to get a rise out of people. Now, if he said he was going to kill someone, in today's world you unfortunately have to take that at face value and report it, but a kid saying he's a Satanist? I don't know; I think I'd want to be really sure before I jeopardize his Scout career. If you're concerned about what he might do at camp, consider talking to him about his plans, and suggest that the other Scouts may not understand what he's doing; besides, practice of any religious practices unique to any particular religion would be contrary to the non-sectarian view of Scouting, wouldn't it?

I guess I'd like to know more about this "contract" you're talking about; doesn't sound like a part of BSA. And, I'd also like to know if this Scout has specifically said that he is practicing rituals to invoke the power of Satan. There are a number of "witch-like" belief sets; I'm not an expert on this; I'm more interested in what this Scout has said about what his belief set is.

It's still an issue funding. Owasippe was sold because they could not afford to keep it open, given dwindling attendance. If the sale is blocked by the zoning committee, then the Chicago Council still has the problem of how to fund Owasippe, which is why they sold it in the first place. The problem isn't solved by blocking the sale.

Piedmont, It sounds like you've done everything you can to help your Scouts succeed. Cub Scouting is run by the adults for the benefit of the Scouts. It's very hard for a Cub Scout to be successful without the support of their parents. So, not your fault. There's only so much you can do. It's especially bothersome when it's 1 Scout out of a group. I would sit down with the Scout and the parents and explain the situation. I'd make sure he understands that he can still move on to Boy Scouts and encourage him to do so. If you can figure out a way to politely word it, you might make the point that he did his best and that's all anyone expects, while figuring out a way to let the parents know that his not getting the AOL is more their fault than his. At our bridging ceremony, we've always isolate the AOL presentation from the bridging ceremony, just to make sure that the non-AOL Scouts don't feel "left out" of the ceremony in any way. Lastly, remember that Arrow of Light is to Cub Scouting as Eagle is to Boy Scouting. It's the highest award and not everyone is able to get it. Yes, most probably do, but I think it's still better to treat this as a special award, and not something that everyone expects to get. As someone else already noted, the program is more about "the journey" than it is about "the destination". Sometimes that's forgotten. Get some rest; sounds like you're doing as much as anyone could expect to help your Scouts succeed.

I haven't seen it in Eagle Scouts, but I've seen "withholding Scouts" as a sort of general punishment across the board. I've had several occasions where a Scout has had a problem at school and have his punishment be that he's not allowed on a Scout outing. I understand that the parents have to do what they think is appropriate, but I wonder why it always seems to be Scouting? Maybe they could skip a baseball game instead. I try to instill in the parents a belief that participating in Scouts might be a good way to help correct their son's behavior. It's probably true that Scouts, as a group, are better behaved kids. In addition, especially for new Scouts, holding them out of Scout activities means that they're missing those meetings where the initial ranks are being worked on, and missing those puts them behing the other guys. You really don't want that, especially at the beginning. Logistically, it means that we end up setting up special sessions to get those Scouts caught up.

I run full-screen, 1024 x 768

Packsaddle, There's a centerfold? Gosh, I never noticed, the articles are all so interesting. I don't think that there's enough information to make any kind of judgement from one tidbit like that. I'd be kind of hesitant about informing any Scout authority; not sure I'm qualifed to be the "morality police" for anyone. If he was ignoring Safe Scouting rules, that'd be a different story and something that can be judged more objectively. What if the magazine had been something like Gamblers Monthly? Or Dancing Weekly? Aren't those activities considered to be immoral in some circles? How does the head of BSA decide whether a person with a Playboy subscription is moral? The bigger question might be, how does BSA decide how ANYONE is moral enough to be considered eligible for BSA membership? Packsaddle, not only lunchtime, I gotta run home and finish my "duty to country", ie, taxes :-)

scoutldr, I think that the leader in the Confirmation issue you mention is stepping out of bounds. I don't believe the Catholic Church has any particular rules on when a person can or can't be Confirmed. If this young man is not prepared to be Confirmed, that should really be his decision. If a leader can start establishing standards for how a religion should be practiced, what's next? Checking to see how often the Catholics are going to confession? Ask the Jewish kids if they are observing the Sabath, and how? I think that's going down one of those "slippery slopes" we don't want to go down. It's probably more appropriate to let the parents be the Akela for that one, and if they're convinced that their son is wrong, then they can refuse to sign off the requirement. When I was a den leader, that was a requirement that we, as leaders, decided that we weren't in a position to make a decision about.

Hunt, Very good point, I think, and along the lines of what I've been trying to get at. Brings up a question or two or three in my mind... Is the BSA policy on gays based on a religious argument? If so, if BSA is going to be non-sectarian in their views, wouldn't such a religious argument have to be something that is universal across all religions? Or, is the BSA policy based on an interpretation of "morally straight"? If so, who decides what "morally straight" means? Or, I suppose, is it both? In which case, how do you reconcile an interpretation of "morally straight" with the many belief systems that are a part of Scouting?

EagleDad, I would, of course, never condone any sort of religious persecution in Scouting or outside Scouting. Not sure how you could read my post that way, but I apologize if that was inferred by something I said. However, I didn't say it was "likely" that gays would be bullied by the other Scouts, only that if we're going to be concerned about gays doing "something" if they were tenting with other boys, it's only fair to be concerned about the reaction of the other Scouts to having a gay Scout in their midst. We all aim to make our units a "safe harbor", but it doesn't always work that way. That doesn't mean we don't expect it, and make every effort to make it reality. Please don't make assumptions about my opinions of the overall Scout program or my expectations for the program based on my comments on one isolated issue. I've said on several occasions that the program for the local units is the best around, bar none. You can have a good program by just opening the guidebooks and using them. Becoming an excellent program is more about the quality and dedication of the leaders and their ability to interact with the Scouts.

I personally wouldn't have a problem with it. If a person passes the BSA background checks, that would be fine with me. In the real world of Scouting, for example, it shouldn't matter what organized religion you belong to, or if you even belong to one. Just doesn't come up. If the restriction on atheists and gays was removed, it shouldn't even be a topic of discussion. Are there parents who would have a problem if their SM was Roman Catholic and they were Jewish? Possibly, if the topic came up or if the leader pushed Roman Catholicism. But, a good leader wouldn't be making an issue of religion or lack thereof or their sexuality. I've talked with parents who only want troop with a male SM; they don't think that a female SM is a good "male role model" for their sons. If it was important enough for a parent to ask, then they could make a judgement on which troop to join the same as they make decisions based on program, size of the troop, etc.

Eamonn, Well, lets see, Scouting in the U.S. is almost 100 years old, so I guess that means I've got about 159 years to wait :-). Maybe my great, great, great, great grandchildren will witness the change. This is a great topic for discussion, but honestly, in the "real world" of Scouting, I spend most of my time trying to remember if I've got the tour permit turned in for my next outing (which reminds me......). The gay issue really doesn't come up in everyday work on Scouting (which we all know is 1 hour per week :-); I've figured what they really meant is "1 hour per Scout per week"). I've talked about it exactly 2 times with the adult leaders in the past, oh, 7 years, and that was at the prompting of another leader. I've never had a Scout bring it up. Nonetheless, I think the policy harms Scouting, although I know that many in the Scouting community don't agree, which makes it an interesting discussion topic. In answer to your question about what I'd say if a Scout asked me why BSA doesn't allow gays, I've thought about this quite a bit. I would tell them what the BSA policy was and what the BSA's rationale is behind that policy. Period. I consider a discussion on the "goodness or badness" of gays to be a discussion largely on religious beliefs, and I'd no more tell them whether they should be positive or negative on gays than I would tell them what I think about their other religious beliefs. We had a conservative Christian Scout in our Troop a couple of years ago who took the opportunity of a Court of Honor to start telling the other Scouts that they were in the wrong religion. I stopped that immediately and told both him and his parents that that had no place in a Scouting environment. It's one thing for the adults to kibitz about these kinds of topics and/or take action on their own, but I don't think it's something that anyone on either side of the issue should be doing "missionary work" with the Scouts. They're smart kids, they'll establish their own opinions, and don't need my help to do that. I agree with you that gays seem to be very popular for inclusion in TV these days. I don't think it has anything to do with diversity; I think the TV moguls see a chance to make some money and are jumping on it. I think it's balanced off pretty well with shows on the Discovery Channel like American Chopper (a personal favorite of mine and decidedly "not gay"). Boy, you have found some great places to eat, haven't you? I grew up in a neighborhood where having a fancy meal meant getting curly fries :-) Do you ever sleep? I just noticed the time on your last post. 2AM?!?! :-)

Eamonn, I think that most of what you talk about in other troops can be attributed to lack of training and experience. I was fortunate that I had an older son in Boy Scouts, so that by the time my younger son bridged and I became SM, I was familiar with the program and how it differed from Cub Scouting. Many new leaders, I think, consider Boy Scouts to be an extension of Cub Scouts. Beyond that, I think it's just a lack of doing the hard work required to get all things you mention in place; some leaders are not interested in that much effort, or able to provide that much effort for whatever reason. It's very difficult to read into the minds of the Scouts what their interests are, and then fashion the program such that it suits all of them. We have both a "regular" camping program that all our Scouts attend, and a "high adventure" component that's just for the older Scouts. Sometimes that's a different kind of campout, sometimes it's a ski trip, etc, but it's something you earn by doing the work to earn 1st Class. There's a wide spread of interests between 12 year olds and 18 year olds; keeping them all interested is not something everyone is successful at. Add to this the challenge that we do let the Scouts run the troop in every way we possibly can. We provide guidance along the way, but what we do, how we do it, and when, is up to them. I try to set them up for success, but after that, the chips fall wherever they may, mostly.

Eamonn, We can agree to disagree and that's fine and as it should be. I guess in the case of BSA, I think the program is too important to take a "take it or leave it" attitude, and so, I work from within, respecting the views of others, hoping they will respect mine and take them into account. BSA is currently a private organization protected by a Supreme Court decree. Laws change, courts change, attitudes change. Values don't, and shouldn't change, but how those values are interpreted and put into action can, and sometimes should. Tuna, caviar and spicy ginger? When do we eat?? :-) Torveaux, You bring up very good points. I don't expect BSA policy to change in this regard, really, but if it were to change at some point, I would expect that it would take several years until gays would be considered "just another Scout". And that's where you'd really need to get, both in regards to gays, and also in regards to girls, if they were allowed. Girls are allowed in Venture crews. I haven't heard about any "problems" in Venture crews. Maybe there's a place for them in other Scout units as well. Anyway, in addition to your concerns, I'd worry about a gay Scout being bullied by Scouts who have been taught socially to be somewhat homophobic. It certainly wouldn't be an easy transition. You know, the Civil Rights Act was passed 40 years ago, and minorities still aren't treated as equals in some areas. It takes a long time for attitudes to change, regardless of what laws we pass. If BSA were to change their policy on gays today, I don't think you'd see a sudden inrush of gay membership because it would probably be a long time before they would actually be "welcomed". Regards your comments on your daughter, my own daughter thinks the Girl Scouts are a "bunch of wimps" (they don't camp much in our area, mostly because of the moms); she'd be much happier as a Boy Scout (actually, as my sons went through Cub Scouting, my daughter did most of the same projects on her own; she's probably better qualifed to be a Boy Scout than many of the Boys! :-))

FScouter, Marge's comment may not have been about an expectation of changing the rules, but simply wanting the exec to hear the complaining parent, in person, in order to assess the best way to address the problem in the way of "approach", not "content".

Just for the record, to follow up on my previous post, according to the Scouting for All website (which is a pro-gays in Scouting organization), they reference the World Scouting website as saying that, of 152 national Scouting organizations, 2/3 either have no policy on gays, or have a non-discrimination policy. Snake Eater, this is a little bit different then me, as a kid, wanting to wear platform shoes because everyone else was. My point was to not simply follow in lockstep to other organizations, but on the other hand, if the majority of Scouting organizations, to which we are supposed to have a "link" and shared philosophy, are going down a different path, maybe that's something that BSA National should pause and consider.

shawnee, Sure, but we're having a bit of a problem with tuna right now, so you might want to just bring along some ham and cheese. :-)

Eamonn, I have a quandary with some of this. Maybe you can help clear this up in my head, since you do so well with your writing. I'm sort of torn on this. I can accept the "duty to God" in Scouting, and agree that, the way things stand, atheists are not able to be members. It's clearly stated by BSA and has been for a long time. I may not agree with the underlying principals behind it, but that's ok for my purposes right now. The gay issue is a little different for me. Disallowing gays isn't a "value", as such, it's a policy, and as far as I can tell, wasn't actually put into words by BSA until sometime around 1978. Maybe there was a prevailing attitude against gays before that, but there's nothing specifically stated that I know of; it seems to be taken as interpretation of various statements of Scouting, as opposed to something that was clearly stated like the Duty to God. Am I wrong about that? If I'm correct in that, then, well, policies can change, and sometimes should. We may be on different sides of these issues, but in our ways, we all want BSA to be the best that it can be. The fact that some may not agree with BSA policy is not necessarily a bad thing, while it will certaily appear that way to those who don't agree. BSA policies have changed over time to adapt to the needs of the organization and the society it lives in. By changing the policies on membership age, Scouting has been able to get it's message to younger boys, ie, the creation of Cub Scouting. By changing the policies on female membership, women are now able to fully participate in Scouting. In some countries, boys and girls are all welcome to gain the benefits of the Scouting movement. While there is always a delicate balance between what's good for an organization and what's not, any organization that falls back on a philosophy of "that's the way we've always done it" can be in danger of marginalizing itself to the point of irrelevence. Scouting is too good a program to let that happen. Regards "BSA as a political organization", ok, let's try this. Maybe not a "political organization" like the GOP, but maybe more like a PAC (Political Action Committee). PACs make their views known to legislators, try to get legislation passed to their advantage, contribute to candidates that agree with their views, etc. Wouldn't it be fair to say that BSA National is doing at least some of that?

>So Prairie Scouter, who do you understand to be the people who "run the store" of scouting. >Not who do you think it should be, or what your opinion is, but who do you know for sure >makes these decisions in the BSA? Bob, What I've been told is that there is a sub-committee, which reports to the BSA Board of Directors, that is responsible for establishing policy.

Luckily, I like the homemade apple pie so much that I keep coming back even tho I don't like their choice of vegetables. I keep coming back for the pie, hoping that while I'm there I can convince them to let us have carrots. :-) Ok, so, I'm not real sure where this analogy is headed anymore, but I like the tone a whole lot more than other threads I've seen. Thanks so much. OGE, I like your analogy of adding meat to a vegan shop and understand the implications. I guess it depends on who's running the store. :-)

Thanks, Snake Eater. Appreciate the positive comment. Eamonn, you're right, Scouting isn't a cafeteria where you can pick and choose what policy you and don't want to follow. On the other hand, if I frequent a particular cafeteria and the only vegetable they have it beans, I might take the time to try and convince them to adjust their menu a bit; it might be in their best interests to do that, since they could then attract customers who want something besides beans. Sorry, , a silly play off or your analogy, but the best I could in the short break between kid's soccer games today :-)

OGE, Among the many things that BSA does well is training. The training materials are first rate, and most instructors do a decent job of explaining the material to the new leaders. The first thing I always do when we get new leaders is get them signed up for the 1st available training. In addition to that, I make efforts to make sure that new leaders have mentors among the more experienced adults to help them learn their way. We do similar things with our new junior leaders. The hardest thing for some Cub leaders to do when they become Boy Scout leaders to learn to step back and let the boys charge forward, while keeping a loose hand on the reigns. It's a delicate balance that takes awhile to learn, and it usually has to be adjusted from Scout to Scout. Regardless of what the adults might think, in the eyes of the Scouts, Boy Scouts is about camping and outdoor leadership. In that area, I think that there is a lot of continuity across the local units. The teaching of outdoor skills is basic to Scouting, and while some skills, such as lashing, have become more interesting highlights than skills that actually have valuable everyday use, for the most part, the program does a good job of teaching the use of the most modern tools. And, I am always impressed by the importance placed on safety. Visit the rifle range and you'll spend 20 minutes learning safety and 10 minutes shooting. Very well done. So, depending on what part of Scouting you look at, I think there is a good deal of continuity, especially if you look at those parts of the program that are most visible to the Scouts.