Sentinel947

Bully-Scout calling the OPs son gay is probably not going to get sexual harassment charges. I think you are spot on when you say " this is not a boys will be boys." While boys engage in name calling and teasing as part of group dynamics, this is much more than that. But sexual harassment? Hard to tell from the OP

This happens more often than it should with teenagers. Clearly CC momma has a lack of empathy and her son does too. Coincidence???? Your son is right to move troops. I hope he stays active with this new troop and he seems to be making new friends. His "friends" in his old troop aren't his friends. A friend would stand up for his buddy if his buddy was being bullied. Clearly they don't. The SM shoulda realized that this is a serious issue. It's a hill worth dieing on. Doing right by the scouts matters more than staying SM to a manipulative CC. His son can finish Eagle in another troop. Ultimately it's not your responsibility to fix bully-Scout. As a final course of action talk to the SM but Your son should complete his move to the new troop. If CC tries to interfere with the board, your son should have the board in his new troop. Close the door, don't look back. Sentinel947

The topic of scouts friending adult leaders came up in a different thread. I feel like the topic deserves it's own thread. Does your troop have any sort of rules governing scouts friending adult leaders on social networking sites? Where does YP tie into this? What's your opinion? Does your unit use social media? Who runs it? Interested to hear what everybody's thoughts are. Sentinel947

Wasn't any of the mods as far as I know.

If it's the troops error, it shouldn't effect him the slightest. Ideally your troop should have BORs on a as needed basis, not scheduled for handful of specific times throughout the year. Overall your son should be fine. Keep us updated on the situation. Thanks for posting here! Feel free to comment anywhere else in the forum. Sentinel947

I agree with those who've posted above me. The Scout is young, and this is a wonderful chance to help the Scout correct a mistake. 12 years old is as good a time as any to learn to respect others.

Good luck. Building a new unit is a challenge and I hope you will be up to the task! If you are struggling with something feel free to create topic to get our opinions about it! That is why many of us are here. Yours in Scouting, Sentinel947

Basementdweller, your comment was unnecessary. All these "Unethical Leader stories" absent of the opposing view, need to be taken with a grain of salt.

That's why I think it's discrediting. Eagle Scout means something because the program is supposed to help build character. If it doesn't help build character than the title of Eagle Scout means nothing, and the program is a joke. It's stated aim is to help create good citizens. Obviously with this Eagle Scout, Scouting failed. It doesn't apply to us, but to the program, and that disappoints me. Maybe because I'm still young and idealistic. I'll get over those kinds of gut reactions in time. Yours in Scouting, Sentinel947

The checklist is to keep a Scout in the program so he can take and live with the Oath and Law. The assumption I'm making is that an Eagle Scout SHOULD have internalized the Oath and Law. When they don't, we have things like this. You don't seem to understand my argument that I made in the Respecting which Eagle thread the other day. (Emphasis added) ADVANCEMENT IS A MEANS TO AN END. The requirements, merit badges, patrol method and more are all means to helping make boys grow into good men. The rank advancement and earning Eagle is a small part of a process that if done correctly should have opened the door to an influence of the Oath and Law on the youth going through the program, whether they finish Eagle or not. The Checklist of rank advancement is important only in the context of keeping Scouts in the program. "Eagles are just people". I had to rewrite this paragraph a few times, because I think I set up strawman arguments on you. I totally agree with your statement. You and I are both Eagles. From what I can tell, we both earned it naturally, as an extension of the program. You are a Scoutmaster of a small inner city troop with your son. I'm a young ASM who still goes back to his hometown Troop to help out. We are both just people, but I'd say Scouting and our other influences growing up gave us pretty good judgment. Scouting and this young mans other influences in life failed him. "They are just people who are given opportunity." Aren't we all? Isn't that what Scouting is about? Giving opportunities to youth? Isn't that what Baden Powell wanted? We disagree on a few issues here, Basementdweller, but I do enjoy discussing these topics with you. Sentinel947

Sad. Obviously the whole Oath and Law thing didn't really factor into his life much. Brings great discredit to other Eagle Scouts who do what they are supposed to. Sentinel947

Earning ranks and badges is a means to an end. Not an end by themselves. Whether Eagle is a checklist or not is irrelevant. (I agree that it is) a scout progressing through the ranks is spending a minimum amount of time In the program. That time is our chance to instill the Scout Oath and Law. To be part of the Teenagers moral and citizenship development. If the program is fun and engaging, and outside factors don't take the Scout away, they'll stay for the duration of their teenage years. Eagle means something because we expect after a minimum of a year and a half (that's about the fastest Eagle can be earned right?) they've been exposed to the values by working with their peers and being mentored by friendly, wise, caring adults. Sounds to me the same reason why Scouting means something.... If our units churn out "bad" Eagles we've failed in our roles as Scoutmasters. I think the requirements are fine. If they are made subjective, there are immature Scoutmasters who will abuse that subjectivity. The Scoutmasters we have here are likely the Cream of the Crop (considering many of you are here to give advice to fellow Scouters) but I doubt that all Scoutmasters would refrain from abusing their powers. As for the Eagles who break the law, or are unsavory characters, it's simply impossible to say that all Scouts are going to be good people because they were Scouts. Influencing character is hard. Scouting can only do so much. All of our Scouts have influences in their lives and they only see us once a week and one weekend a month. Some bad influences get to greet them when they wake up or open the schoolhouse door. You certainly know this better than I do Basement. The Scouts in your unit have it much harder than I did growing up.

My hope is that even a 14 year old , having three years of Boy Scouts has exposed him to the Oath and Law and that he's internalized them. That's my standard for any Scout, Eagle candidate or not. I'm not judging their character. My original comment stands as written. Nowhere did I use the term judgment. I did say help form him into a man of character. Operative Word in the statement is helping. Scouting is only one part of a young man or woman's development into an adult. If a Scouting has failed to make an impression on a Scout by 14, something isn't right. I've got no issue with 13 year old Eagles or 17 and 11 month Eagles. I don't care. Don't you always say it's just a checklist anyways?

Did we succeed in helping form a young man of good character? That's my type of Eagle. I earned my Eagle and had drop and go parents. I turned out ok. Been aged out for a few years and I'm still active in my original unit. I don't think it matters. I wasn't the Scoutmasters son yet I always stayed after meetings and trips to help clean and organize. Good topic.

When I was a Scout my parents involvement with the troop was driving me to meetings. It was a double edged sword for sure. Ultimately I got my Eagle and never left the program. But it's probably advantageous to have a parent in the troop as well.

I'm hanging my hat on the fullness of Pope Francis positions. He is what every Pope before him was. As you've said "his spotlight" is aimed differently. I think we are talking past each other other. You are also putting words in my mouth. I don't appreciate that. I think we can agree Pope Francis's public words are a shift in focus from the Theology professor who was Pope before Him. But the Popes positions are Catholic positions, that happen to be shared by many liberals. My point on his time as ArchBishop is to point out that he Has in the past talked about those things. Even if he doesn't as often now. (Have you read Evangii Gaudium?) I think it's a great comprehensive look at the Mindset of the Pope in his own words.

Moose, look at the Popes time as Archbishop of Buenos Aires and his fight against the governments legalization of abortion. As I quip from time to time "News flash, new Pope is Catholic. Yes, Not all Democrats/Republicans hold all their beliefs in line with the party platform. I'm pointing out Catholic Teachings don't align with American Political ideas. It's incorrect to label the Church as Conservative or Liberal in a political sense. Individual Catholics might believe differently than the Church, but the teachings remain the same. Never seen a Local Church openly advocate for one party over another. Obamacares contraception mandate directly contradicts Catholic teaching. Not surprised in the slightest the Priests would be told to condemn it. The Church originally supported Obamacare and was a key faith partner in helping pass the bill.

Policy change hasn't affected my decision to stay with Program. Haven't heard about anything serious in my council. Will see the status of the Troop tonight during our first PLC and Troop Meeting of the New Year! Sentinel947

Moose: Your Priest probably isn't quite as liberal (from a Political Standpoint) as you think. Part of the culture war is Catholics come off as extremely Conservative Politically, when in reality, it's not so. Catholic Doctrine rejects extremes, Which is how Pope John Paul 2 can reject Communism and Pope Francis rejects unfettered consumerism and lack of concern for the poor. Catholicism doesn't fall neatly into American Political Spectrum tests as many pundits think it does. An Orthodox Catholic would agree with Conservatives on: No to abortion. That homosexual activity is a sin. (This doesn't necessarily mean social judgment of others or holding sinners at arms length.) No medically assisted suicide. An Orthodox Catholic would agree with Liberals: More assistance to the poor and needy. No to the death penalty. I can't really explain all of Catholic social positions in one post. I'd like to add some nuance to two of those points. Catholic positions on what is the proper role of government in terms of alleviating poverty is somewhat up to individual conscience. As a more "Liberal" (I'd say orthodox, but whatever) Catholic I believe the government does have a role in charity to the poor. The Church believes homosexuality is intrinsically against Natural Law but having homosexual tendencies doesn't make one a sinner inherently. We are defined by our actions. Some Christians like to make gays into a super sinning scapegoat of sorts. (Looking at you Fred Phelps....) This is explicitly rejected in Catholicism. I like Pope Francis's style. He hasn't changed any doctrines of the Church, despite some of the press's desires. His emphasis on Social Justice reflects where he comes from. I think he's right to emphasis Catholic Social Justice teachings, and I hope our American Council of Catholic Bishops do the same. It's been sorely neglected during the Culture War. Anything I've said can be found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I can pull citations if desired. Also Moose, I firmly agree with your CO about the ban and Scouting. I don't think allowing gays or atheists should stop Catholic support of the program. Just like a Church's other ministry's, non Catholics should be part of those things. Perhaps they become Catholic, or it simply gives them a better opinion of the Church and that's a win either way. Yours in Scouting, Sentinel

Goldmeer your lack of specifics doesn't really allow us to help you much. If you could provide more details that could help us a bit. -Sentinel947

I think it does, but since a couple people object, I'll leave it here. There's still some on point discussion.

Does anybody object if I move this to issues and politics? I think it clearly belongs there now.

First of all welcome to the forums. Secondly you are an ASM. This sort of issue needs to be handled by your committee chairperson. Arguably you don't want a ton of parents on the trips. But you do need them to drive. As far as a parents meeting goes, there doesn't need to be a committee vote. It's up to the Committee Chair and the Committee Chair alone. In my unit the CC and SCM encourage parents to volunteer for things. We rarely have issues where there aren't enough adults to conduct a trip. Perhaps the CC needs to more individually reach out to parents. Phone calls not mass impersonal emails. Volunteerism spawns more volunteerism. -Sentinel947

I agree with this assessment.

Nah, definitely not. "The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to get indoor boys to Eagle without ever walking into the woods with packs on their backs." Anyone who has ever witnessed a Wood Badger or adult Eagle parse our Congressional Charter knows that the words "backpack" and "hike" have no meaning without specific mileage requirements. Without the Journey system, all Scouting is Cub Scouting. http://inquiry.net/advancement/traditional/journey_requirements.htm Kudu your negativity is such a killjoy.