skeptic

We can let the craziest of us here fall into the ocean, instead of continuing to ride the Pacific plate like they do now.

Probably Pack. Guess most scouters would be only required to do the first two, as they likely lived there a while. Still, one more cost to absorb which will put a damper on some volunteers, whether in scouts or otherwise. Be interesting to see how they would even police such a thing though; would almost need to be voluntary in many instances. Scouts of course are supposed to have registered leaders, so I guess they would be easier to check on.

How about hanky pankey?

Gee is what you say when you are incredulous. Haw is what you say when you do not agree with the mule headed person with whom you are verbally fencing.

A Scout is Reverent. No stipulation as to where or how. How hard can it be?

A Scout is Reverent. Will be leaving soon to participate in our unit's annual Scout Sunday ritual. The scouts usher and greet, along with parents, while I am the litergist for the service. We also run the between services coffee gathering. This year we again have an official cub pack to join us. Hope my voice does not give me issues, as have a bit of the infamous stuffy head and heavy chest. Interesting how this small annual activity does so much positive in our unit relationship with the church.

Here is the link to the photo taken of the circle. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153137114904248&set=p.10153137114904248&type=1

There was a memorial service and burial today of a long time scouter who served on camp staff for about 30 years as range master. Also was a Marine that fought in the Pacific. His memorial required the LDS church facility to add extra space, and about a third were scouters. Some came from states away to honor him. At the cemetary, after the main service, we formed a scout circle around the casket on its stand and sang the Scout Vespers, the campfire tradition by the staff at its close at our local camp. A very moving tribute to a fine man.

When we refer to grade issues, can you be more specific? While getting all A's or A's and B's is commendable, getting C's is not the end of the world, especially if the average is higher. And frankly, even a D, if the boy tried but simply did not get it is not a reason to panic. Part of the problem with many of our youth is this thing called grade inflation, or the idea that average is bad. All this does is put more pressure on many, to the point where they hit a mental wall. Sometimes, maturity will mend it all. While I was in the top of my class with what was then called college prep, I really did not do overly well my last two years, especially in math and science; and my first two years of college at a community college I managed only a 2.01 GPA. After a year working and four in the service I went back and made the dean's list and eventually got my teaching credential in California with close to a 4.0. Do what you can to encourage the scout to "do his best". But as noted by others, try not to add more pressure. We are only seeing this from your description, so our comments should be taken in that perspective. Good luck.

Found this piece in the Los Angeles Times to be interesting and bit humorous. I particularly liked the ending comments; " giving this new version of PC the respect it deserves warrants a whole new term. So what have we got? Insatiable aggrievedness? Compulsive didacticism? Sanctimonious kneejerkery? Any of those would beat political correctness. Because PC's been beat." http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...03-column.html

With the ongoing drum beat about various generational groups, I continue to feel left out. I thought maybe I was missing something, but still have not found "my" generation to have a spot on the generational time line. Speaking with a gentleman over breakfast yesterday, born a year before me in 1943, he has noted the same thing. The boomers are always noted as starting in 1946 after the wars, and there is another group, the greatest generation that covers those up through 1940 or so who mostly fought in the war or contributed somehow. Those of us born from 1941-1945 seem to have simply been ignored. Should I be offended; especially in this day of taking offense at any tiny perceived slight? All of us had parents that went through the entire depression and war years, and grandparents that likely did also, but also remembered the previous century and WWI etc. We learned to be thrifty with things in general, not to spend money we did not have, respect adults, period, that school was important and you best not get in trouble there, that personal integrity was a virtue and hard work got you a better place in life, that the indigent more often than not needed a hand up, that manners were reflective of your upbringing, and lots of other things that seem to have lost traction or gone away almost entirely. Oh, and Boy Scouts for the most part were perceived as a benefit to the community, even if you were not involved directly, and they were respected for their efforts on behalf of community and country.

Not long after I became a SM, I had similar problems at times, and it was very frustrating. That was in the late 70's. I was on visit to my parents and asked my dad about it, as he had been involved with my brother and me in the 50's and early 60's. He just laughed and said that it was a problem back then too. Some people simply are not willing to go outside their personal focus unless seriously prodded. And, they get away with it because we do not make it obvious we need them to help. Of course, there are a few that are simply takers, and you will be lucky to have their kids regularly; and those often are the scouts that are most in need of direction in their lives. Still, if you do not ask directly, many will assume; and you know the story about that word.

Years ago we rode bikes up the coast to Summerland just the other side of Carpenteria. About a 20 something mile ride. One of my senior scouts, who at the time was about 18 and either just starting college at USC or finishing high school, was the leader, since he had done the ride a few times. I was only vaguely familiar with the area, though I did know somewhere nearby was a secretive small beach with "options". Anyway, we stopped along the bluff, and the young man pointed out the trail down to the beach and suggested we go down. Another adult stayed with most of the boys and a few of us climbed down. We only walked about fifty yards around a point when I realized where we were. As I made us hastily retreat, the young man is hysterical. Worse, I hear voices on the bluff; a couple of the younger boys had found a top side view and were hollering something to the effect of "turn over" as the other adult up there is trying to get them away. Looking back of course it is pretty funny. But I learned another lesson. "Make sure you know where you are going in detail, and do not trust a teenager's judgment." On the other hand, the only people there were probably well over fifty, or very weathered younger ones. Fortunately, I did not have any overly upset parents on return. Of course, that was in the early 80's before hyper sensitivity was the vogue.

Hey M'; can you please give us a rest from your excessive pride in causing issues with BSA and public schools. We have heard this over and over for way too long. You certainly are not impressing anyone, only making yourself seem vindictive and spiteful. Of course, I know you could really care less; but it is simply tiresome.

If our "purpose" in life is to do everything in our power to denigrate those with whom we disagree, and feel that ONLY our beliefs and thoughts have validity, then in reality, "we have no purpose, only an existance".

Ah yes, yester-year, when vanity and fear were seldom an issue and all males shared facilities most places and nobody seemed worse for wear. Kids took real showers in school too; and they were group stalls. Can you imagine?

I completely do not understand the continued bigotry towards the LDS in Scouting, and outside of it. But, if all scouts are brothers, then those that have an issue with LDS units and their members are not very good scouts and scouters. So they often go home on Saturday at council and district events. So they have some unfamiliar program elements. Why is that an issue outside of those in those units? As LeCastor says, it is shallow. And often, the perceived problems are built on things that happened years ago. Locally, our LDS groups have become much more involved, as they have an umbrella of units so to speak in districts, so the individual Stake units can act together for many activities. My understanding is that this comes from higher up, as they have realized the drawbacks of units being too small. Whatever, just because the approach is different does not make it any less Scouting connected.

" The Klan was essentially a home-grown terrorist organization. I suspect we could name others as well if we wanted " I consider gangs that prey on neighborhoods as home grown terrorists; and I do not understand why we do not respond to them the same way we do to those from the outside.

While I understand that this is theoretically a place to discuss political and religious issues, but I have always thought it was still a Scouting related board. If that is the case, then at least a modicum of adherance to tenets of Scouting would apply, The test would be whether or not you would wish to expose your scouts or other young people to what is said. If not, then it probably does not belong here. There are other places where crude, vitriolic, and hateful language can be aired. One would hope this is not one of them. Just my personal opiniion, but I would think that most regular readers and posters here would agree there ARE limits, even on this specific forum.

I'm concentrating on delivering program to my units. Great response.

Jason; it is something volunteers would do. Scouting IS a volunteer run organization in its basic form, and always has been. Any well run unit or even council is dominated by strong, giving, volunteers who push the success with their time and often major resources. The less involved the pro's are in the important program elements, the better in most cases.

Review individuals for Eagles do not have to Eagles themselves, and the board does not have to be made up only registered scouters. Matter of fact, it is often recommended that at least part of the board be specifically non-scouters. Am also not certain that the "board" which you described would even be proper. [h=3]8.0.0.3 Composition of the Board of Review[/h] A board of review must consist of no fewer than three members and no more than six, all of whom must be at least 21 years of age. For further specifications, see"Particulars for Tenderfoot Through Life Ranks (or Palms),"8.0.2.0, and "Particulars for the Eagle Scout Rank,"8.0.3.0. Unit leaders and assistants shall not serve on aboard of review for a Scout in their own unit. Parents or guardians shall not serve on a board for their son. The candidate or his parent(s) or guardian(s) shall have no part in selecting any board of review members. Based on the above, I would think the process was not followed, and it should have been negated by the council, and redone.

I still am trying to figure that out!

Since we are supposed to be apolitical within the unit, probably would not do that here.

So, let me get this straight. Over the past year or two we have had regular rants and such about how National does not support and encourage "boy led". Now, when they have published in Scouting an article doing just that, we continue to complain. Granted, there is room for clarification and fine tuning, using some of the material earlier developed by B.P. and GBB; but, just the fact that the idea of "boy led" is being nationally recommended should be celebrated. Maybe we need a bit of instruction on taking the positive and making it grow, rather than finding the proverbial "half empty" glass. Just a thought.