Zahnada

I'm putting together a little packet of information on Low Impact/ No Trace Camping for scouts. Does anyone know of any really good online resources for this? thanks.

The "Agnostic Boy" topic quickly turned into a religious debate. Rooster partly described his experience about how he found religion. Such topics truly interest me and I would like to know more about all of your religious experiences. I think we can all agree that religion is quite possibly the most powerful force in the world and guides the lives of many. Yet there are hundreds of different religions. Some are very similar and some are very different. The question I pose is: How did you find your religion? Have you kept the religion you were raised with? Was there a specific moment

Welcome to the forum kcolarusso. My first post was ripped up by some people in here. I remember being attacked for one quote in one post that I even explained later in the same post. Goes with the territory. Unfortunately, I cannot offer much assistance because I know next to nothing about the Gold Award. And I think that statement probably explains a huge difference between the two. Everyone in the country knows about the Eagle Scout Award. I say I'm in scouting and they automatically ask if I'm an Eagle. There are expectations of a person who is an Eagle Scout. Even with all the recent

Ever get the feeling you're about to walk into the middle of a firestorm and you won't be able to leave? That's how I feel as I write this response. Bob writes: "And what does it say of the people who were responsible for teaching you right from wrong?" I won't ask for a retraction of the statement, but I really hope the conversation does not follow this track anymore. I know that present actions of a person are linked to their parents and their childhood teachings, but there is still no need for this. This is entirely my opinion, but to bring a person's parents into such a disc

I'm starting to agree with Hops. This topic was interesting to me, but the novelty wore off around the time when Dan and Ed were comparing their "stones." This whole thread has deteriorated into nothing but personal attacks. Frankly, it didn't start off far from a personal attack. I consider the accusation that Fat Old Guy is really Yaworski to be a personal attack if there is no actual evidence besides some language style and a distast for Bob White. There is nothing about Scouting in this topic and it's an argument that will make little headway. All this has become is a thread for people to

"Eagle is not the end of the scouting experience, but really a springboard to other fascinating scouting venues. Don't quit now!" Great quote, rlculver415! And how true! Eagle is just something on paper you can take with you. It's a physical representation of all that scouting offers that can be recognized by the rest of society. However, these scoutmasters seem to be taking it a bit too seriously. A scoutmaster should never act as "The Keeper of the Eagle Award" where a scout must overcome obstacles to obtain it. Eagle should just be something that's achieved on the route to a grea

Mark, You need not worry. I have had disagreements with nearly everyone on this forum. I know that you've argued against me at one time or another. But I still consider you one of the most "courteous" members and I feel that your good intentions flow from your posts. This can be said about many members, but I just wanted to put your mind at ease.

I must agree with what most of you have said. These discussions get us nowhere. Neither side is willing to give any ground and I believe all points and opinions have all been said (not heard, mind you, but they have been said). So I posted this completely unscientific poll to determine why there is some cyclic nature to the gay issue. Luckily, the favorite response is that people don't care either way. Yet, there is nearly a tie between those who feel BSA will change by their own decision and those who feel BSA will never change. This is why we continue to argue and debate. If ever

Yak Herder, Thank you for your thoughtful comments. Scouting is a great way to bring people from different walks of life together. While we disagree on politics, we do agree that scouting is a wonderful organization and an amazing experience for the boys. I would like to say that I am fortunate to never have had to "mask" my views. Luckily the issue has never come up around the boys and really I never talk about it with the exception of this forum. Although I may sound pessimistic, I have noticed that my scouting interactions have not changed in the slightest due to the controversy.

I don't have a problem with any of those responses.

I guess this leads into a question to ask of Yak Herder, Bob White, and Rooster. I hope for an honest response (which I do not doubt you will provide). Do you consider a person like me to be an undesirable element in scouting? I know that none of you know me personally, but you know my views. While I would never discuss these opinions in front of the boys, it is very obvious that I do not agree with the BSA policy on a number of issues. If you had the choice, would you want me in your troop and interacting with your son? I hope you answer honestly instead of something like, "

Bob White wrote: "Don't kid yourself. The Democratic National Committee in 2000 asked the local BSA council to provide an Eagle Scout honor Guard to present the nation's flag and lead the Pledge of Allegiance to open the Convention. Then the thousands in attendance waited for these boys to enter and on national TV boo'd them until they left. Thousands of adults ambushed these boys and you think they want what is best for scouting. They want what is best for their personal political agendas. They want to gain public acceptance threough the aknowledgment of the BSA or they want to shu

"Dale knew what to expect. He did it to start the media ball rolling." I don't know about this, Bob. There are many stories about the situation floating around but it was my impression that he loved scouting and hated to be kicked out. I heard that he was seen at a gay rights activity. It's not like he announced it to his troop and was trying to get removed from the organization. But as I said, there are many stories floating around. Anyone else care to back up one side or the other? In any case, I feel it's important to note that not everyone who is gay or supports gays wants to cre

The gay issue has surfaced in force recently and there are many new voices in the forum. I'm curious as to how people view the outcome of this controversy and if they feel all this banter actually may serve a purpose. So the actual question: What will the future hold for BSA's position on homosexuals in scouting? I'm sorry to limit it to 5 answers, but that's all I'm allowed. If you want to answer it a different way feel free to respond.

Actually, Bob, I think we agree on much of your post. However, I must agree with Mark in that this debate will soon deteriorate in "quibbling over details." And the main detail is: What is considered "policy"? While there may have been a vague policy ("Scouts must be moral") or an implied policy ("Gays can't be scouts") there has never been a written in stone policy on the issue that takes away large portions of interpretation. Such a stated and written "position" on the "policy" now exists. I consider such a strong change in vocalizing a "position" to be a change in "policy." But now we've mo

Well, Bob, I believe I answered your question and it is now your job to prove me wrong. Quit beating around the bush and answer my challenge. I think it's obvious that I don't know what the written policy was before all this recent discussion because I believe there was none. So enlighten me! You argue that policy hasn't changed in 90 years. Offer me the evidence that you so strongly desire! Show me a passage from the past that openly states, "BSA will not allow gays." Stop asking the questions and start giving some answers to defend your side. If you can prove it (which there is a good chance

Bob White, I can't help but feel I'm walking into a trap, but I'm very curious as to where you're going with this, so I'll bite. On the BSA's website, under "Press Releases" there's a statement from June 28, 2000 that sets the policy that the BSA adopted because of the Dale Case. It says: "We believe an avowed homosexual is not a role model for the values espoused in the Scout Oath and Law." Now, Bob, I know darned well that you know this information. You've quoted it yourself on numerous occasions. So now that I have taken the bait, you are free to make your move.

Bob White, Sometimes I wonder if you actually read my posts. Of course there is a policy change. The change is the fact that what once was implied but never stated is now written law. The policy change is the fact that there are concrete rules (which their concreteness may be debated) that say "No Gays!" I'd call that a pretty big change. It's even stated on BSA's website. Why can't I find differences from past scout handouts or books? Because, as you have stated, there is no mention of the subject. It's a change because of previous ommision. So naturally there is a massive change i

Bob, Both of my previous points can and do co-exist. Let me start with point 2: BSA hasn't changed. Very true. It's what I agree with you on. You'll be hard-pressed to find changes in BSA values in the various handbooks. The values haven't changed. I'm not debating whether this is a good thing or not. There's a thin line between consistency and stagnation. Now for point 1. The values haven't changed, but the policy has. There are now written rules about gays saying that they are not moral enough to be scouts. The fear is that this policy change can create a value change for scouting

Bob White, I agree with everything you said. BSA's values have not changed during its history. As you said, the lack of evidence to the contrary only serves as reinforcement of the truth. I fully believe that if a scout were to publicly come out of the closet in the past, they would receive the same reception as they do today. In fact, they would probably be treated much worse than scouts today. So therefore, BSA is not completely intolerant. I would like to add two side-notes to what I've said. 1. The fact that there's a written "law" and consequences for homosexuals should be

Bob White, I think you misread this passage of Questioning's last post: "Now for a scout who comes to a scoutmaster about orientation the SM needs to deal with it not by telling him it is right or wrong but by guiding him to his parents and not kicking him to the curb." I'm very tired right now, so it's possible that I'm the one misreading it. However, I interpret this to say that the Scoutmaster should help the scout discuss this issue with his parents. The problem with the BSA policy is that it gives people a dehumanizing view of homosexuality. The boy is then abandoned or kicked "

Bob White, You've made me laugh again. I don't know if we've ever had a conversation where we've accurately represented the each other's opinion. I checked your link on the Trail's End Popcorn thread. My comment towards you in that thread was directed towards the issue of fundraising in general and not specifically the popcorn. So once again, we have our conversations crossed. In any case, I did not mean to offend you in my previous post and it is unfortunate that you took it that way. I guess we are born to disagree. How unfortunate.

One of the few rules of this forum is that there are to be no personal attacks. I think the negative nature of this conversation stems from some rash decisions made by both sides. Bob White started out with a very harshly worded comment. We should always give our fellow scouts the benefit of the doubt. A better response would have been "Am I right in assuming that you're saying______?" This brought on a strong counter-attack that focused on Bob White personally. This is a big no-no for any intelligent conversation. Of course, I can see how Bob's comments warranted a strong come-back, but

"How has scouting influenced or affected other areas of your life?" (ie. school, sports, etc)

I was wondering, where does everyone here draw the line between a "learning experience" and "setting the boys up for failure"? In a boy led troop, the boys should have the ability to make decisions and live with the consequences. Do the other adults in here need to restrain yourselves from interfering in such decisions? An example: What if a patrol decides to go on an extended outing without using a duty roster? They tell you, "Don't worry, we'll do the work as it needs to be done. Everyone will help." As experienced adults, we know that it hardly ever works out that way. Do y