Hawkwin

We finished the year with two. Looking forward to actually having the two girls make their own Den/Patrol decisions. They have scheduled a meeting for tomorrow night via Hangout video chat to work on some of their AOL requirements. Next week we finish out Build It with our professional.

Last weekend my Den Chief son taught my Webelos daughter how to tie the bowline knot and she then in turn taught it to her pack (Camper #5) while on an overnight campout (her first time to sleep in a tent).

My daughter continues to (unprompted) comment about just how much more she is doing and learning in Scouts compared to her other organization. Massive confidence boost for her too.

Hey Mods, since this thread was started on my tangent, I think it has long run its course (and then some).

1 hour ago, Gwaihir said:

but non the less, show me your compromise on pedophila.

Each state government determines that "compromise." What is legal and permissible in your state may not be in another. The "compromise" was allowing each state to determine for themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America

1 hour ago, 69RoadRunner said:

I'm really starting to get the feeling that people who want to destroy the Boy Scouts from within are now in top leadership positions.

 

No, the original story popped up on biased click-bait sites and is being falsely advanced by the Chairman of the Board of Trail Life - a competitor to BSA.

This policy of WOSM has been around since 1999.

I didn't see anyone mention wet wipes. Come on all you old(er) men, you know you use them (like I do).

2 hours ago, Saltface said:

Seat belts and life jackets don't curtail the adventure.

Ha! You state now but it would not surprise me if some state in the future required all minors to wear a life jacket in any pool deeper than 4'.

36 minutes ago, gblotter said:

His LDS granddaughter could always be a Scout. It's called Girl Scouts USA.

They tried that and hated it. Troop fell apart multiple times - an experience I share.

Again, this guy, much like me, travelled to another country to get his granddaughter into Scouts. I would imagine he put some considerable thought into the decision.

18 hours ago, gblotter said:

That idea was actually proposed by some of our Scouts - just continue the troop but with a different chartering organization. While that sounds fine, I doubt we could find enough adult support without the push of the church behind it.

For my own personal situation as Scoutmaster, I will exit BSA on 12/31/19 over disillusionment with the girl decision. The needs of boys now bow before the god of inclusiveness, and that feels like a betrayal. It's time for me to make way for a new kind of Scout and a new kind of Scouter and a new kind of Scouting.

We got our second girl tonight in our Den. She is the granddaughter of a 40 yr LDS Scouter from the next county over. He has more ribbons on his shirt than any other scouter I have encountered. He stated that he has raised many Eagles both with in his family and of course in his Pack/Troop experience. 

He indicated that probably only a few families in his Pack (he is a Den Leader currently), will be continuing past 2019 but he is doing EVERYTHING he can to ensure his LDS granddaughter can be a scout.

I found the dichotomy very interesting but did not press for deeper details.

26 minutes ago, The Latin Scot said:

I won't require it of my families for a couple of years at least. But I will miss the diamond blue patch!

Does that mean you are sticking around post LDS divorce?

Hope so.

36 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

OK, I know officially starting June 11 2018,  all Webelos are SUPPOSE to be in the tan and green uniform. Me personally, I'd stay in a "vintage" blue Webelos uniform until he completely out grows it, or crosses over into Scouts, BSA. A Scout is THRIFTY

I moved my scouts over to tan ASAP as I saw it as a way to both differentiate them from cub scouts and as a way to better prepare them to be (Boy) Scouts.

But I am still thrifty; daughter now wears son's old tan shirt.

1 hour ago, allangr1024 said:

 What would it take to bring all of these divergent pieces of the old BSA back together again?  

TIme and probably a generation or two.

53 minutes ago, Treflienne said:

Of course "Gold Award", at first, had the problem that no one had ever heard of it.  And I don't think that it has fully overcome this problem.

And, it is sufficiently bland that loses any significance with those unfamiliar with it. The entire Bronze, Silver, and Gold Award line need to be rethought. I asked my daughters GS troop if they will be working on their Bronze award (it appears it has to be done as a troop instead of as an individual - another difference) and was told that it was "a lot of work and maybe next year."

Turn the Bronze into the "Bronze Badger, the Silver into the "Silver Lion" and the Gold into the, "Golden Artemis."

TO echo what @cchoat stated above, perhaps create a new award in her honor?

When I was in college in a business fraternity, I wanted to recognize a few members for outstanding contributions to the organization. We did not have a standardized award for such recognition so I created such and named the award after the first recipients. Every year after that, someone else would be eligible to win the award(s) for outstanding contributions to the local chapter. Since it was not based on a specific elected position, anyone was eligible but it was peer approved. Could even make it something that could be worn as a temporary patch (ClassB to the rescue).

20 years later, those individuals still take pride in the fact that there is an award named after them with their college fraternity and everyone that receives it, gets to learn a little bit about the legacy of the recognition.

2 hours ago, gblotter said:

But if morally straight is entirely dependent on personal faith and individual interpretation, does the term mean anything at all?

As it pertains to morals, there are many defining entities. Each family creates their own definition. Each school, college, and workplace creates their own. Your local community has certain mores that it loosely follows, each faith (and you might even say each individual congregation) has their own - and of course BSA has one. In most cases, there is probably significant overlap - probably to the tune of 95% or better. Things like don't lie - it isn't against the law to lie (in general) but most people likely find it immoral to do with any frequency.

In my household, we don't have swear words. There is no such thing as a "bad word." While as parents we don't use such words in front of our kids, we also don't believe in giving words inappropriate power over us and others. If one of my kids where to use a so-called swear word (not happened yet), we would discuss the idea that it may not be appropriate to use in that setting - Words are not bad, just maybe not appropriate for the setting. Other households and faiths likely feel very differently. We may have different morals on that specific topic.

I think this issue and a few others are the 5% where there may be more disagreement - and just because I may not share 100% of the same morals as someone (heck, I don't even share 100% of the same morals as my wife), doesn't mean we can't both enjoy BSA together. Again, we have far more in common (the 95% noted above) than we differ.

One of the things I was taught in church as a kid is that all sin is equal. If that is true, then all sins of the flesh are the same. My sin is not better or worse than anyone else's. That view has allowed me to not judge those that may view some sexual behaviors differently than I might. Heck, how many divorced Scouters do we have in BSA? In how many faiths is that a moral violation and a sin? We don't ban Scouters based on that sexual behavior. For those that profess to follow the Gospel, there is more than one reference against such.

 I would personally focus more on what brings us together, the 95% of things we have in common, than the 5% that might make us differ. I think BSA will be much more successful if it does the same.

24 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

it's just an example of how adults impose morality.

Barry

That is my quibble. Earlier you state lead by example, for which I fully agree, but we don't get to impose our morality as it pertains to membership. You don't get to exclude a scout from membership based on your own personal and religious morality and more than an Orthodox Jewish scouter would get to impose their morality on scouts as a barrier to membership for not following their religious dress code while not in uniform.

1 minute ago, David CO said:

Which brings us back to my previous statement. You can't have a moral code in a totally inclusive group. It's just not possible.

The moral code is for the scout, not for the scouter to impose on the scout. This is where there is no religion test when it comes to Duty to God. The scout is asked if they did it, not if it meets the specific requirements that the scouter would like to impose on the scout.

Additionally, we have a very strong moral code. The Oath and the Law well define our code. It simply doesn't demand a specific behavior regarding sex. We can certainly have a strong moral code even when it doesn't cover ever single thing a scout might encounter.

Again, we don't have a moral code as it pertains to premarital sex. That doesn't mean that the individual scout is absent their own code (based on their faith) regarding such. Just means you don't get to exclude them from membership based on it.

4 minutes ago, David CO said:

No, it isn't. BSA is requiring that units accept gay youth. That is no latitude at all.

 

Yes, because to do otherwise is to allow YOU to impose your morality on scouts.

We should no more allow that behavior than to allow another troop to tell their applicants that they MUST pray five times a day while facing Mecca or otherwise be deemed immoral and excluded from membership.

Quote

Or maybe we could remember the Scout Oath and Law when commenting on a Scout Forum

1 hour ago, David CO said:

BSA has, in effect, declared that homosexual conduct is morally straight

No, removal of a specific ban is not the same thing as an affirmative statement that something is morally straight. There are many things we don't outright ban that many faiths would believe are immoral behaviors - like premarital activities and consumption of alcohol. BSA doesn't ban either of those - but then not every faith believes such behavior is immoral. Could toss in "swear words" in that bucket too - not a banned behavior.

Morally straight is and always should have been in line with your personal faith - which is why we don't have some long code of behavior that either bans various activities or states that others are allowed.

One of the coolest stories from last year:

First all-Muslim Boy Scout troop in northeast Ohio camps, serves and prays

https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2017/12/14/first-all-muslim-boy-scout-troop-in-northeast-ohio-camps-performs-service-and-prays/

The more shared experiences we have, the less there is to divide us.

Eagle still seems to work for Yale:

In getting accepted to Yale, his Eagle Scout project video was ‘a difference-maker’

https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/04/19/getting-accepted-yale-eagle-scout-project-video-difference-maker/

Quote

 

Justin had the perfect response. He shared a four-minute documentary about his Eagle Scout service project. He led volunteers as they built a monument to honor veterans.

The video proved even more powerful than a well-written essay.

 

Eagle and he helped vets and still got into Yale. Hope still exists!

54 minutes ago, mashmaster said:

Goodbye

Considering the decision to allow gay scouts was over four years ago, and the poster's professed statement that their children will never be a part of such, then they have likely been gone for over four years, but something compelled them join this forum for the first time yesterday.

12 minutes ago, LegacyLost said:

Evangelical leader Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, called on all of the faith to leave the BSA completely last year. I concur, and so do many others.

Franklin Graham also said:

We are under attack by Muslims at home and abroad. We should stop all immigration of Muslims to the U.S. until this threat with Islam has been settled. Every Muslim that comes into this country has the potential to be radicalized—and they do their killing to honor their religion and Muhammad. During World War 2, we didn’t allow Japanese to immigrate to America, nor did we allow Germans. Why are we allowing Muslims now?

Not really a voice that would in any way represent BSA's openness to people of all faiths and races.

1 minute ago, ItsBrian said:

But let’s say - a beneficiary contact for someone’s Eagle Scout project. Should there be two adults since it’s scouting related?

If I understand you correctly, you are asking if you were going to help your local park and you have contact with the park manager via email, if two adults should be including in the communication?

While I think it is a great idea (and not just for YPT reasons), we don't have any authority to require the park manager to take YPT and it would be an unnecessary burden to require it.

1 minute ago, ItsBrian said:

Never said they had to. I’m talking about the one-on-one. They don’t specify it only apply to scout leader and youth. It could be for any adult and youth member for all I know.

I don't understand your distinction then. No non-YPT trained adult should be interacting with scouts in any official capacity. Even MBCs (who are not registered) must take YPT.