David CO

1 hour ago, 5thGenTexan said:

I dont guess its any secret to anyone here that I am nuts.    

That goes without saying.  You're a scouter.  

40 minutes ago, MattR said:

 

• It doesn't take many bad actors before we all suffer.

 

Tell me about it.  Have you seen what passes for television lately?

39 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

This is me.  Early 80s.  CM who is hanging me upside down is my dad.

Oh, the humanity!  Hang on to that picture.  If BSA survives the current round of lawsuits, you might be eligible for the next round.  Maybe in 10 years.  This may be your retirement plan.  

4 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

He then proceeded to ask if "Scouts" want them to have fun or just take our money.

No question about it.  They just want to take our money.

51 minutes ago, skeptic said:

Evolution of the program will hopefully soon realize the foolishness of no coed.   

Heaven forbid that there should be any foolishness in scouting.  But that is exactly the point.  Boys need to have a program where they can act like boys without being called out for it by the women and girls.  Boys need to act foolish once in a while.  Best that they go out in patrols, deep into the woods, away from all civilizing influences, when they feel the need to act foolish. 

2 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

So which political issues is it OK to support as a unit function?  In the last four years, Scout troops have marched for gay rights and , open borders.  Scouting in Uniform have attended Trump rallies.  BSA officially and expressly endorsed Black Lives Matter.  Rules not enforced are not rules.

I think it is OK for scout units to attend just about anything.  They just have to be careful not to imply BSA support of the social/political cause.  No uniforms.  No logos.  No press releases saying BSA Troop 123 attended the rally.  

BSA is fighting for its life.  I think they have chosen the worst possible time to oppose and oppress the Chartered Organizations.  BSA has alienated its staunchest supporters right when it needs them the most.

12 minutes ago, gpurlee said:

His definition of church "ownership" of a true Scouting ministry was (1) church adults actively involved in the Scouting program on a regular basis, (2) the church including the Scouting program in its budget just like its youth group and (3) the involvement of youth connected with the church in the Scouting ministry. 

I agree with that definition.

1 hour ago, vol_scouter said:

I have been involved in my council since ~1990 and have been on the Executive Board since 1994.  

This is a problem, both at national and council.  There is no accountability for board members.  BSA is in bankruptcy.  The entire board should be retired and replaced.  The people who led BSA into bankruptcy should be held accountable.

3 hours ago, elitts said:

 it's just TOO easy to briefly run afoul the no one-on-one contact rule

A school principal recently told me that she prefers to employ teachers who live somewhere else, in another town, and commute to work.  It is too easy to accidently run afoul of the rules when you live, work, play and pray in the same town.  

I wouldn't be at all surprised if BSA tried to instituted a YP policy saying that adults cannot volunteer in the same town where they live.  We can't have scout leaders bumping into scouts outside of official scouting activities.

16 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Okay. I’ll stop, but you started it...

It's Sunday.  Hardly anyone comes on the forum on Sunday.  The moderators aren't around to prod us into getting back on topic.  Feel free to bloviate.

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Oh, gosh. I hope the book doesn't contain all prospects for unintended omissions 

I am old-time Catholic.  I still believe in sins of omission.  I don't worry much about holding up the line.  Purgatory has a very large waiting room.  My fear is that it has Musak.

9 hours ago, ThenNow said:

I went to sleep thinking about this last night and don't sleep much as it is.

I lose a lot of sleep too, both literally and figuratively.  I often look back on my teaching, coaching and scouting careers and wonder if I did the right things.  I thought I did.   But I wonder.

There was little expectation of privacy in scouting during the post-WWII years.  This carried on through most of the 80's.  Did this contribute to the problem?  I don't know.  I would like to think it didn't.  But I don't know.

When I meet my final accounting, I hope that I don't learn that any of my actions and decisions, or inactions and indecisions, contributed, directly or indirectly, to any instance of child sexual abuse.  

I am not going to quote anyone specifically, since many people have commented about how the lawsuits are unfair to current and future scouts. It is unfair, but no more unfair than the national debt.  They are going to inherit that too.  They will also inherit all of the nation's infrastructure.

It is important to remember that our kids didn't build any of these camps.  They inherited the camps.  Past generations built them and paid for them.  The generations that built these camps are the same generations that allowed the child sexual abuse.  They are paying for it.

After the bankruptcy, current and future scouts will be starting anew with a clean slate.  It will now be up to them to build their own futures.  I wish them luck.

28 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

Sorry to go off topic for a moment

Let me just add that it is not against the rules to require singing as a normal part of the program.  It is only against the rules if it is used as a punishment or humiliation (hazing).  Asking the scouts to sing hymns at church services, for example, is not hazing.

2 hours ago, ThenNow said:

In fact, enhancing and improving YPT is one of the key non-monetary requirements for the TCC to recommend approval of a Plan. The BSA knows that, but utterly blew it off in what they filed. Zippo. This is the sort of nonsensical, arrogant non-negotiating negotiation strategy that infuriates us as survivor claimants. 

How important are non-monetary requirements in this bankruptcy?

1 hour ago, MattR said:

The school districts, too, can give lip service to this subject because of whatever government protections they have.

Lip service?  I think that is a little unfair.

51 minutes ago, skeptic said:

So, will the sensationalist media grab these and run, leaving BSA in the shadows?  

I really don't think this is media driven.  The BSA bankruptcy isn't a major story.  The media barely mentions scouting.  It's a non-story.  Even if BSA is wiped out, it will be briefly reported on page 5.  Not a headliner.  Nobody cares.  BSA isn't going to be invited to do interviews with Oprah.  

2 hours ago, skeptic said:

Yes, even one is too many, but we live in a real world.  Please explain to me how are we ever going to make that number zero?  How responsible is the secondary overseer when the actual perpetrator purposely avoids the barriers?  

I think we have to assume that perpetrators will purposely avoid the barriers.  That's a given.  The real difficulty comes when it is the victim who purposely avoids the barriers.

To some extent, we need to treat child sexual abuse prevention in much the same way as we do suicide prevention.  We can't expect the victims to always cooperate.  We have to act in the victims best interest, whether they choose to cooperate or not.

1 hour ago, skeptic said:

The just released article about youth sports makes BSA look like angels.  Should they too be wiped off the map?  

There is a big difference between youth sports and scouting.  If a private baseball program gets wiped off the map, the YMCA or Park District can fill the void.  Baseball is not uniquely tied to just one organization.  The boys will still get to play baseball.  

Many people feel that BSA is unique and irreplaceable.  Wipe out BSA, and scouting is gone forever.  I disagree, but I know many people feel that way.

No matter what happens, I don't think WOSM is going to let go of the American market.

14 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

Could the Debtor (the BSA) reject Council franchise agreements in SOL states (twenty I believe)?

Any things possible.  I think it would be a big mistake.  Once cut loose from any responsibility to defend national in  the lawsuits, those councils would quickly point the blame at BSA for everything. All the dirty little secrets would become public.  Lawyers would have a field day.

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

I hope you are not taking its lack of content aimed at prevention as inference that such training and adoption is somehow invalid or unnecessary. That kind of assumption flies in the face of scientific analysis, basic common sense, and serious intellectual curiosity. Also, nothing could be further from the truth, imho.

It is enough for me that you acknowledge the fact that a major program on child sexual abuse does not go into the concept of "grooming".  I think the inference is clearly there.  You are free to disagree.

2 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I'm dead serious. 

No you're not.  

10 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

is the program/course you teach preferable in content and presentation, such that you want to package it and make it available to all?

My class is much better than anything I have seen in BSA.  BSA would never have it, since it presents many points of view and includes a lively discussion.  

1 minute ago, ThenNow said:

The puzzlement goes not only to the subject of training, but why you persist in Scouting rather than start your own venture. 

I have been asked that question several times on this forum.  It isn't my choice.  If it was my choice, I would have the diocese pull out of scouting.  

13 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Thanks for the info.

My family and closest friends call me Rhino. (Not RINO, btw.) I am an accomplished public speaker, though that's somewhat irrelevant to the overall question of whether this would add value.

Since I have yet to see any BSA training session that had any value, I would have to say no.  But who knows, you might be the first.