DuctTape

would be a lot easier to just expect adults to set an example by not engaging in sexual conduct on scout trips. Where one sleeps does not change this. I have shared tents with straight men, straight women, gay men, gay women, most I had no idea of their orientation since it did not matter, we were sleeping, not engaging in sexual activity. Thus it would be better to make the rule only prohibiting adults to share tents with scouts. The only exception is a parent/child, though this should be discouraged to promote the scout's independence.

In general I think more of the scout skills type mb's should have pre-requisites. Perhaps not the full 1st class rank, but the sections pertaining to that skill. One of the commonly discussed issues here is scouts "forgetting" or never truly learning, or one-and-done, etc... The idea of having these skills as a progression which (if required) to fulfill in order and the previous being a pre-requisite of the next provides a system by which a scout will demonstrate their experience multiple times, over a period of time thus strengthening and growing each time. This would provide the scout a more enriching opportunity and decrease the complaints of one&done, etc... It would not eliminate, but at least the system would not encourage it. And lastly it would be consistent with the original goal of scouting for boys to learn to do things for themselves and others.

They should just make it 11, and get rid of the grade level and arrow of light nonesense. New marketing for cubs, "These go to eleven."

I am still smh at the fact when it was asked whether the original memo was legit, someone in the position of knowing did not simply say "yes".

The Wolf Patrol by John Finnemore was a good one. A digital version is available. Years ago in a used book store I picked up a copy of "The Black Wolf Pack" by Daniel Beard. Also a copy of Beard's "Shelters, Shacks, and Shanties". I concur with Stosh's commentary.

To be the contrarian voice, it was the president himself who stated on the campaign trail that he was pushing for a ban on muslims. It was his own words which the courts used in striking down aspects of his executive orders. For others to claim it isn't about religion are ignoring what the president himself said he was going to do. One of the president's advisors, Guiluani admitted on tv that the president asked him how to legally implement a muslim ban. As stated by the judge in Hawaii, “significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus driving the promulgation of the Executive Order and its related predecessor.â€

Let the boys decide. If the newer boys are all together without any older boys, then an older boy should serve as a troop guide to help the new patrol leader best serve his patrol. The older boys should be encouraged to set the example, and to provide help and guidance especially at troop meetings.

Candy. While the environment will steal heat, and dry clothes will help slow heat loss (wet clothes will exascerbate heat loss), clothing, sleepings etc... do not generate heat. The only way to do that is vie calories and sugar is rocket fuel. Candy will be an easy way for boys to stoke the furnace.

A Scout is helpful. It is obvious that help is not being provided by someone with specific knowledge of the subject, and instead is obsfucating (might need to go look that one up as well). That is unfortunate.

Translating differences require an agreed upon definition. The difference between kill and murder really comes down to whether the killing was ethical. This now begs the question and demonstrates the non-absolutism of the commandment itself.

If one is a leader, they have influence. Assuming one is a leader, then we can measure their effectiveness as a degree of influence. But the converse is not necessarily true which is Stosh's point. If one has influence, they may (or may not) be a leader. Reaching a certain threshold of influence does not determine a leader.

If a hoax is clearly ridiculous to serve as a joke, then I do not see a problem with it. This however is actually a change many of us would see as desireable, clearly NOT ridiculous. Which means it is not a joke, and not funny.

As an aside, last summer I spent two weeks in the Quetico (North of BWCA in Canada). The number of other paddlers is a mere fraction of that in the BWCA. Awesome fishing too.

The issues being discussed as classical scouting, are the focus on the outdoors, the requirements etc... These are not the membership changes nor about being "pc". Discussing camping requirements and other outdoor program issues, need not delve into politics.

Perhaps it is a bit too early in the morning for this comment, but I would rather the scouts are "uniform in spirit" meaning they act, behave, and think like Scouts when walking around outside of scouting activities. I would gladly sacrifice knee high two-toned socks for scouts to "do a good turn daily", or swap the necker for "help others at all times". The scouts helpfulness and service to others without reward or recognition is, IMO, more important, and to connect with a different thread exactly what BP meant about "practical religion".

I completely agree. The adventure starts small for scouts and scouters. As both grow and learn, the adventures increase.

Adults do not need to have the camping experience as a youth as a pre-requisite for helping boys plan and lead their own adventures. The adults need to be willing to learn and courageous enough to accept the next level of adventure. The adults can grow and learn as well. After 1 or 2 years any adult will have gained significant experience. If I was mentoring a new SM with zero outdoor, camping, or scouting experience I would give him a copy of my BSA Fieldbook. The first one. The "pow wows" are a linear progression of adventure using the patrol method. It is almost a "boy scouts for dummies" play by play.

The actual line from the 1911 handbook is (in part), "to promote the ability in boys to do things for themselves and others."

I always go back to the line in my 1911 Handbook, "Scouts is where boys learn to do things for themselves".

IIRC, the majority of of CO's beung religious orgs is relatively recent after schools stopped beung CO's after Dale, etc... I seem to recall that "friends of..." was a very popular CO at one time as well. I am sure someone with access to bsa history will either confirm or correct me.

There was always an ebb and flow with rural, urban, suburban, etc... I am a huge proponent of the outdoors personally and in scouting. However I still see the outdoors and the related activities not as the goal or even focus. I keep myself grounded to the the focus written in the first handbook for boys, BSA. The purpose of scouting is for boys to learn to do things for themselves. The out of doors is the location, and the patrol method is the means. If boys weren't interested in animal husbandry as a merit badge, but are interested in nuclear science then it makes sense to adapt mbs to the boys interest. The lack of adventure I see is not in activities or fun but the decrease in the amount the boys are doing themselves. A zip line is fun and all, but what did the boys learn to do themselves beyond planning the menu for the day trip. I am not suggesting that zip lines, etc... have no place. My point is the adventure is the boys deciding to do something, figuring out how to do it, and then doing it. Thus the lack of adventure to me is a result of well-meaning adults planning, organizing, fundraising, etc... I will probably get flamed for this last comment, but I think part of that is the fault of chartering organizations who use scouts for their own goals instead.

I thought this mom's idea of the Santa disclosure was fantastic...http://www.today.com/parents/santa-real-handling-santa-talk-your-kids-t105765

The difference in opinion here is based upon each starting from a different premise. There are two main premises which are at odds with one another. Premise 1: All gay, transgender, etc... is a choice made by the person. Premise 2: All gay, transgender, etc... are not choices made by the person. We are arguing conclusions without first agreeing on an original premise. I highly doubt that agreement on the two contradictory premises is coming anytime soon.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I am not advicating for more adults to be involved in running the program, only as logistical resources. This also maintains a pool of potential future SMs. With many patrols, working independently of each other there will be a time when all these patrols choose different outings for the same weekend. This is where having a cadre of other scouters becomes necessary. Not a larger pot of coffee, but 5 smaller pots each 50 miles away.

More adults are necessary to be drivers to events, and if more patrol based trips occur more adults are needed to have 2-deep on the separate events occurung simultaneously at different lications.