KublaiKen

If one believes we are trying to fix the past, then I would agree that is impossible. But I don't think that's in the intent or execution of what is happening today; I believe we are taking the lessons of the past and trying to fix the present, which includes quite a bit of downstream impact (intentional and otherwise) of many decades (centuries, societally) of very bad policy and practice. And a valuable tool in identifying and eradicating (or mitigating) those ills is asking the people who suffer from them what they think.

I don't think it's enough to say that following the Scout Oath and Law will resolve these issues. I joined Scouting in 1975. The last segregated council was integrated in 1974. That means that for the first half of its existence, segregation was permissible in the BSA. That means either the Scout Oath and Law permit segregation and are inherently flawed, in my view, or they were ignored/misunderstood across the board by the entire organization for over 60 years. Having affinity groups that can point out such blind spots is a net gain, in my view. Integration doesn't mean homogenizati

I'm not sure I see the real harm in that decision being "taken" from the youth; they already don't decide membership requirements. Having said that, I am not at all opposed to keeping single sex units, but I would view them as transitional to where it is obvious BSA is headed.

It seems to me as though BSA is adding a new rule (or propagating it for the first time) that works to further silo units when we should be trying to be more ecumenical, both among the units and programs within BSA and without. I was just discussing a joint camp out with a neighboring Troop and now I wonder if it could even be approved. And it would hardly be competition with corporate, since our District only does one camporee a year. It's knee jerk, but I don't like the rule.

(If this is off topic, please delete it, Moderators!) When I read about the bankruptcy and the chain of events that caused it, I know for certain that if instead of being one of the single greatest parts of my youth, and now my parenthood, Scouting had been the single worst thing to happen to me in my life, I would never be be to able to comport myself with the grace towards the movement that @ThenNowand the other victims demonstrate here. I appreciate that and respect it, and am grateful to them for sharing their perspective.

And if there were a shot (or two shots) that could prevent one from dying (or minimize the danger/damage) from car accidents, lightning strikes, snake bites, or drowning, would anyone be arguing about taking it?

If this topic is inappropriate or in the wrong area, please move/delete it, and I apologize. I have a bunch of bamboo on my property, most contained, but not all. I have read online some of the pros and cons of burning bamboo, but I was hoping for "real world" input from a community of experts. My son, who is one more example of the adage that inside every Scout is a pyromaniac waiting to emerge, has volunteered to burn it when it is dry. He would be burning it in an above-ground, free-standing fire pit, if that matters. Yes? No? I'm crazy? What sayeth this forum?

Upon rereading, I see that. I think what was confusing was the comparison with screening adults; in this context, the only screening we do for adults is to exclude them from the program. It is single sanction.

I think you've jumped in the deep end of victim blaming and then failed to tread water. Blaming a child victim of sexual molestation or rape and saying the antidote is to keep them out of the program instead of fixing the environment is a non-starter across the board, at least for me.

I live in the 7th most diverse city on the U.S. (three of the six ranked above us are our neighboring cities). My son's Troop has a couple of Hispanic/Latino kids (same family), a few Asian kids, three bi-racial kids, and one Black kid (my son, from a transracial family). We are right in downtown, such as it is, and don't come close to matching the racial and ethnic breakdown of the schools, soccer teams, track teams I've coached, etc. Scouting is missing large and growing populations.

I've noticed that all the Scouters with more knots than I have are braggarts and know-it-alls. The Scouters with fewer are greenhorns who can't really tell me much. The Scouters with the same number usually have the wrong ones or put them in a dumb order. Once I saw a guy with the exact same ones that I have and in the same order; I figured he probably just knows somebody at council.

The solution to what? Not getting an answer? Is the solution that being a member of the upper echelons is the only way to get the answer, or that those now holding these upper positions will never give the answer, so you need new people and are recruiting them? This issue came up last weekend when we were camping with a brand new Scout and his dad, and it was awkward telling him that tenting with his own son was a YP issue, especially given that less than a month ago when he was the AOL Den Leader it wasn't. Short of me taking on yet another volunteer role, this time in the Service T

Got it. Although, to be clear, I didn't mean your specific scenario as much as a general idea that BSA created a certain rationale and expectation but now says it is inappropriate to mingle with another unit. I think of all the many, many reasons I keep National on my speed dial </sarcasm>, telling them that boy and girl Scouts are working together will be the last reason I tell on somebody.

Wasn't that one of the things BSA touted when they opened Cub Scouts and Scouts BSA to girls: that families now could have a shared activity instead of two or more? That only works if they are meeting/camping at the same place and at the same time, or you are still driving multiple places on multiple weekends, etc.

Sorry, I'm confused. I just meant that the program he proposed was the program as it existed when I was a Cub Scout during those years: no Lions, no Tigers, three years, AOL was extra.