acco40

Yes it is true - that the announcement was made at LLSR that coffee was off-limits to youth and the reason stated was that National made that call. On a related note, the new camp director pitted Coke against Pepsi for the best deal (Pepsi won out) and about ten new soda pop machines have now populated the camp (much to my displeasure). On another related note - another "National policy" was announced that all medications had to be held and dispensed by the health officer. This was not stated in the leader book and much machinations ensued. Personally, I don't drink coffee but the overwhelming majority of our SAs do. I've stated to the youth that they can drink coffee if they produce a note from their parents allowing it. It is not just the caffeine that is an issue but some of the boys and hot liquids don't mix.(This message has been edited by acco40)

I'd be interested in ratios. Scouting is THE male youth program for the LDS church. They make up a much larger percentage of Scouts than their numbers in the US population. I'd like to see the percentage of Scouts who are LDS and the percentage of scouts who have passed away on outings. I do believe the high concentration in Utah and surrounding community play a big part (i.e. mountains, high country, etc.).

For us, Scouts use the troop owned tents (Eureka Tetragon 9s) and Scouters use their own. Reasons - a uniform look, no squabbles about his tent vs. my tent, etc. Bad points - like the "projects" the tents are sometimes not taken care of properly because they are not "mine." Our solution - each tent belongs to a patrol, not the troop. If the patrol abuses the tent, the patrol has to live with it. Now, I know of troops who "allow" Scouts of Star rank and above to bring their own tents. This is viewed as a perk (and save the troop money) and is well received by the Scouts. I don't think there is a real right or wrong answer on this one. Our adults have their own (I bought a Eureka Tetragon 11 to fit in) to save money.

NJ, Rooster & others - I think it boils down to this - is the judgment that "being gay" (or more correctly an avowed homosexual - I still have not seen a definition of what that means) is "wrong" (i.e. not suitable for adult role models, not "clean", etc.) a "traditional value" such as trustworthy, friendly, cheerful, etc. or is it a peculiar belief of certain religious organizations? NJ - you seem to believe that it is a tenet of certain religions (maybe the majority?) and therefore with a claim of being non-sectarian, the BSA should not use this particular "quality" as a qualifier for membership. Rooster - you seem to believe that it is a basic "traditional value" and therefore, should be included in the basic value system of the BSA. Am I close guys? My complaint is that "traditional values" is a marketing slogan. It has a lot of "goodness" panache. I'm guessing that such things as separation of the races, dueling with pistols, male only voters, etc. doesn't come to mind when most think of traditional values but why not? I think that as soon (if ever) the major contributors to the BSA (Catholic Church, LDS Church, majority of FOS folks, etc.) change their minds on the issue the BSA will follow along.

Make sure you go well after Jambo.

Good post orennoah, however, when aScout has only one uniform shirt/shorts etc. and is supposed to wear it daily to evening meals, chapel service, OA ceremony, opening & closing ceremonies, etc. finding the time to wash and dry is difficult.

You are all now allowed to view the "It happended to me" video.

"How does a boy know whether he has exercised poor judgment or made a poor decision if it is not on the official list? All good decisions must be on the "do" list, all poor decisions must be on the "do not" list." That must be one heck of a list! How about some real life experiences: A boy does not bring rain gear? He gets wet when it rains and regrets it. A boy brings rain gear. It is "severe clear" the whole time and he regrets having to carry along such a useless item. Now what should go on the list? Check the weather report before going out? Always be prepared? How about make your decision and live with your decision.

Argh! That bothers me FScouter. Scouting is not supposed to be a "Father Knows Best" program. We should be providing a safe, secure environment for the boys and allow them to exercise poor judgment! As long as it does not jeopardize health or safety - let it go. Making decisions is too difficult for boys? I really hope that that was written tongue in cheek and you really didn't mean it. If you meant it, how does your troop operate without an SPL or PLs?

gavvin - while an activity shirt does not make a (an?) uniform, one may be in uniform while wearing an activity shirt. And as BW stated, "Outdoors, in uniform, the hat stays on while you use the scout salute for the program you are representing."

The real question is what of volunteers who have great charisma, attitude and accept what they perceive the program to be (but it isn't). Some will vilify that individual, others will complement him.

Some values we should pass along, some we should not. During a SM meeting for our contingent Jambo troops the discussion centered on what "not to bring." Almost immediately, a few suggested personal electronics equipment (MP3 & CD players, gameboys, etc.). "Why?", I asked. "Because we don't want the boy to spend all day in his tent playing video games. If his parents paid good money to go the the National Jamboree, he should participate in that!", they all chimed in. "I guess we should ban books then.", I stated. They all thought I was nuts. "But what if spends all day in his tent reading?", I asked. See, we are making value judgments on what entertainment is appropriate. What we should be teaching the Scouts is how to make intelligent decisions. Now, a GOOD reason to ban personal electronics from place like summer camp is that it is not a good idea to bring valuables to camp. Good judgment yes, but a rule? having a favorite material item "disappear" is a great teaching tool (sometimes called the school of hard knocks).

If age has a big factor on brain development, has any research been done on those who have been "born again?" Sorry, I may have to "moderate" myself!

Teens have brains? As the parent of two, soon to be three, my research has shown that they do not. A man has been having terrible headaches. He and his wife visit the doctor. After much analysis the doctor proclaims - I have good news and bad news. "Tell us the bad news first", says the wife. "Well sir, you have inoperable brain cancer is the bad news; the good news is that science has progressed far enough that we can perform brain transplants now," the doctor proclaims. "How much would that cost?", the couple asks. "Well, a male brain is $500,000 and a female brain would cost $10,000", the doctor states. The husband, smiling smugly at his wife asks, "Why the big price difference? Is the male brain that much better?" The doctor then states, "Oh, no. The male brain is so much more expensive because it has never been used before."

Oops, my brain is not working (duplicate post).(This message has been edited by acco40)

OGE, not to pick nits, but your "murder" usage is a pet peeve of mine. Murder has a legal meaning, not a moral one. Abortion is NOT murder - in most states, in the early trimesters. It may be considered wrong, immoral, unethical, killing of human being, etc. but is not in fact murder (i.e. it is legal). Just like killing in war is usually not murder (not all killing in war is considered "legal"). So the term "state sanctioned murder" is, IMO, a misuse of the English language. The phrase, "state sanctioned killing" is a better phrase.

Nice post. I have a couple of issues with the article, all minor. One, they talk of Americana but in reality Scouting is world wide and not a US phenomena alone. Second, "who is in training to become a Boy Scout master at the center" made me laugh. Yes, long ago the "master of scouts" phrase was once used but the above statement sounds like something out of Yoda from Star Wars.

Earning 1st Class rank in one's first year is a goal. A highly achievable goal for an enthusiastic Scout who is a member of a troop with focused troop meetings, monthy outings, good leaders (adult and youth) and a supportive committee. Also, (I'll take the BSA's word for it), Scouts who earn FCFY are more likely to stay in the program and earn Eagle than those who don't. The problems with setting a goal (either by the Scout, the patrol, the troop, or the national council) is that for those who don't make or meet that goal sometimes get defensive. The problem with the BSA's postulate is again, it doesn't show cause and effect. My hunch is that boys who earn the Eagle rank are more than likely to have earned FCFY. Now, a well structured program that has advancement as one of its methods (ring a bell anyone?) helps a boy achieve the real goals - character, citizenship, as well as mental and physical fitness.

Nice post! The OA rep needs a friendly SM to help him promote the OA. The OA can improve the camping program of the troop and unfortunately too many SMs just see the OA as a competing program for "their" youth.

And to stir the pot a little more with respect to the "is it genetic" question comes this humorous take a a recent scientific finding - Fruit Flies Prove Homosexuality Caused by Scientists by Scott Ott (2005-06-03) -- Experiments on fruit flies have revealed conclusive evidence that homosexuality is caused by scientists, according a report in the journal Cell. The startling findings, by a team of researchers at the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, proved that when scientists alter a single gene in the female drosophila (fruit fly) it abandons natural relations with males and begins courting other females. "For years we've wondered whether homosexuality was genetic, environmental or just a choice," said an unnamed scientist from the research team. "Now we can definitively state that it is a choice. In 100 percent of our tests, the determining factor in homosexual orientation was the choice of a scientist to activate or disable individual genes." The report received almost universal praise in the scientific community, because the difficulty in converting an insect to homosexuality indicates that laboratories will likely have an abundant supply of fruit flies for years to come. ________________________________________________ And now (this is acco typing) come a politicized account from the Daily Kos: ________________________________________________ In what may be one of the most important studies to examine the genetic base of homosexual behavior, the New York Times reports that researchers have, by manipulating a single gene in a fruit fly, made genetically female fruit flies mimic male fruit fly mating behavior and vice versa. When the genetically altered fruit fly was released into the observation chamber, it did what these breeders par excellence tend to do. It pursued a waiting virgin female. It gently tapped the girl with its leg, played her a song (using wings as instruments) and, only then, dared to lick her - all part of standard fruit fly seduction. The observing scientist looked with disbelief at the show, for the suitor in this case was not a male, but a female that researchers had artificially endowed with a single male-type gene. That one gene, the researchers are announcing today in the journal Cell, is apparently by itself enough to create patterns of sexual behavior - a kind of master sexual gene that normally exists in two distinct male and female variants. In a series of experiments, the researchers found that females given the male variant of the gene acted exactly like males in courtship, madly pursuing other females. Males that were artificially given the female version of the gene became more passive and turned their sexual attention to other males. "We have shown that a single gene in the fruit fly is sufficient to determine all aspects of the flies' sexual orientation and behavior," said the paper's lead author, Dr. Barry Dickson, senior scientist at the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology at the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna. "It's very surprising. "What it tells us is that instinctive behaviors can be specified by genetic programs, just like the morphologic development of an organ or a nose." This is almost definitive proof that homosexuality is significantly, if not totally, a genetic trait. Homosexuals and homosexuality, in other words, are no more "unnatural" than someone who has red hair or someone who is exceptional bright. Homosexuals and homosexuality are, in fact, an integral part of mankinds natural, god-given if you will, diversity. Why is this finding so powerful? Experimentation. Most studies of homosexual behavior in the animal world are, so far as I'm aware of, observational studies. Even studies of human twins, perhaps the best observational method one can use to examine the role gentics play in human behavior, struggle against the natural limitations of observational studies. Direct manipulation through controlled experiments is the gold-standard in science, and these scientists have clearly shown that with the flip of a switch they can turn fruit flies "gay". Is this hype? Consider the response of some scientists: The results are certain to prove influential in debates about whether genes or environment determine who we are, how we act and, especially, our sexual orientation, although it is not clear now if there is a similar master sexual gene for humans. Still, experts said they were both awed and shocked by the findings. "The results are so clean and compelling, the whole field of the genetic roots of behavior is moved forward tremendously by this work," said Dr. Michael Weiss, chairman of the department of biochemistry at Case Western Reserve University. "Hopefully this will take the discussion about sexual preferences out of the realm of morality and put it in the realm of science." This is why the right hates science. It uses rational logic and rigorous empiricism to investigate and understand issues of importance. The right relies on emotion and myth, not rationality. ________________________________________________ Again, the Daily Kos article is a mix of reports and opinion. If you want to see the article with better formatting see: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/3/03328/99670

Vatican City or not, Europe is not as religious as the USA, in a traditional sense. Heck the "holy rollers" left Europe because of religious persecution to come to the US. That is a fairly well known fact. Some countries, like Poland, it is difficult to separate religion and nationality.

Hold on, this gets a little obtuse. A few weeks ago I took my daughter, a junior girl scout, to an all day event. Being "politically correct" the GS labeled the event "Me and My Guy" - mostly a father daughter event but a few grandfathers, uncles, mom's boyfriend, etc. were present too. Anyway, we had a great time - she enjoys fishing (I tolerate it) and after a dozen or so fish were caught and released, kites made, lunch eaten, games played, etc. we called it a day. I picked up my daughter's patch (I still don't understand the Girl Scouts advancement) and went home. I guess I forgot mine because later in the week, I received my own patch in the mail. Because I have a little rebellion in me, I think I'm going to wear it as a temporary patch (right pocket). My daughter, who get dragged to many a Scout meeting, will be thrilled. So no, I won't be wearing a "rainbow" knot, but I will have a patch with "Me & My Guy" embroidered on it with a picture of two frogs, holding hands.

Your son's "leader" is empowered and should be willing to listen and sign-off completed requirements. Now, in every troop, that proverbial "leader" may be the SM, a Troop Guide, his PL, the SPL or ASPL, any boy who has mastered that skill, an Instructor, etc. But beware, it differs in every troop. In our troop, I utilize NSPs (new Scout Patrols) and unfortunately we do not have any Troop Guides. I have an SA (Assistant Scoutmaster) assigned to every patrol. Right now, we only have adults signing off on requirements and I prefer to have the SA assigned to that patrol and/or me (the Scoutmaster). We used to have youth signing off on requirements, and may do so in the immediate future, but we had a few too many "demonstrate water rescue" type requirements signed off in the church basement. When a Scout shows initiative, reward him. That said, on one of our most recent outings a boy came to me right before dinner to go over a requirements "set" (multiple related ones). I said how about after dinner. Right after dinner he wanted to play by the waterfront. After that, he wanted to play capture the flag. The next day, his mother gave me a tongue lashing because I did not accommodate her son's wishes.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Like some of our Scouts, some Scouters get trained just to get their ticket punched so to speak. They got trained so that they can get that coveted 'trained" patch and earn a training square knot. For those, it will be difficult to get them to go to training again. On rare occasions, cost may be a factor. Although I'm a big believer in training, it is not a panacea to all of Scoutings ills. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Let's see. I'm a 14 year old boy just discovering my sexuality. I think I may be gay, something I wondered about for many years but the older I get the more sure I am of my sexuality. Now, being only 14, I've never engaged in any homosexual (or heterosexual for that matter) behavior. Fast forward two years - Boy am I glad I made Eagle! My parents are so proud. So is my Scoutmaster and I respect him very much. I try my best to follow the Scout Oath and Law but I'm puzzled. I believe sex outside of marriage is wrong. But the state I live in will not let me marry a male but I know some states and other countries will. I also know that the BSA does not allow avowed homosexuals to be members on their organization - and they have the legal right to do so. But I want to live in a monogamous relationship with someone I love. Ihave not met that person just yet, but being only 16 I don't worry about that too much. I want to be trustworthy - honest with myself and others, always tell the truth. Can I and still maintain my membership is this fine organization? I want to be obedient and follow the rules of the BSA. I try and find a legal definition of "avowed" but I just get conflicting answers. Can I talk to my to my Scoutmaster about my dilemma? Will he boot me out of Scouts? What should I do?