Leaderboard

Question: Don't all three pictures show them not paying to go see the game? (stealing) While everyone paid for their seats.

The mistake was getting involved in the debate. Introducing this a few years caused frustration without gain. Now, removing causes frustration without gain. ... Scouting needs to focus on paddling a canoe and cooking over an open fire; not the politics of the left or the right.

I really question that statement. Is it fully true or only true within boundaries? ... If I read the explicit requirements, I really have little problem with them. If I read the larger societal discussion of DEI, I begin to have larger issues. My two big issues are ... #1 the badge was reactionary to a specific place-in-time and the content is redundant with the whole scouting program. The whole concept of the badge was at the heart of scouting. We did not need an explicit badge that was a known larger political firestorm. #2 In my 20 years of troop scouting, the number one criticism scouts had of merit badges was wasted time. Four citizenship merit badges? Five if you count Family Life as Citizen in the Family. Sure scouts didn't have issue with the content, but I'm pretty sure they had problem with their time being wasted. The lesson learned here is BSA should avoid short-term politics and focus on the long-term goals. Scouting teaches character and responsibility thru outdoor adventures. That has never changed and it's hard to argue. Leave the political stuff (membership, orientation, gender, politics, etc) to our character partners. Scouting has an outdoor structure to develop youth. The rest is outside world noise.

I am definitely not a fan of the current administration, but I think everyone should keep these changes in prospective. 1. I find few scouts who advocate for our current list of Eagle required merit badges. We have far too many citizenship MBs and most of them are already covered in school. I didn't have an issue with Citz in Society, but I also found little value with the badge. You can still guide your troop in the spirit of the badge. 2. Transgender scouts are still allowed in the program. I was scoutmaster of a troop with a transgender scout and there are various challenges you have to navigate. I didn't allow them in female bathrooms, I made sure they were in a three person buddy group, I didn't let them tent with a female, etc. I still made sure they could participate and told them to let me know if anyone gave them crap. The changes would essentially align to how I ran the troop which I think is appropriate. 3. I don't think anyone would argue against the military benefits. Perhaps they would like to push further but so far, I think scouters should move on to figuring out how to keep meetings fun, how to encourage scouts to fully embrace the patrol method and the other key aspects that scouters engage in every day and week.

Breaking people out into different groups does not solve the problem. Since the beginning of the movement we have used things such as uniforms to make it easier for everyone to blend in together. We're supposed to be on the same team; however, it would appear that we're not. Special interests have been trying to create special sub groups for a long time and it has repeatedly floundered or outright failed. We've had all these other groups, and all these other groups are barely hanging on. If all the trans kids wanted to be separate they could be, over in Rainbow Scouts; if all the hardline religious scouts wanted to be separate they could go join Trail Life or one of the other church based youth groups. As bad as things are in Scouting America, the other groups are worse and they are all an example of how division into sub-groups only weakens the opportunity to youth. We don't need separate groups, what we need is equal opportunity and a focus on the true mission of the organization. Notice that no one is being kicked out of Scouting America; Hegseth didn't demand it, Roger Krone didn't say anything about that in his letter. What is clear is that in order to maintain millions of dollars of support from the military we have to re-align towards the military; that is what was clearly said by Hegseth and Krone. I think that's the real problem here, that's what people are really angry about but too cowardice to state. The scouting movement is born from Western military tradition, and scouting in America just got it's wake up call.

I never understood schools or anyone hiding something this significant from parents. If the parents are abusive, then department of family services, police, courts can play their role. It isn't up to the school to decide this. I enjoyed talking with parents and sometimes surprising them with what I saw from their kid (a quiet kid became an active leader, a troubled youth giving good advice to a younger scout, etc). It was one of the joys of the job to surprise parents by sharing what was going on, sometimes some tough conversations, .... I can't imagine hiding something from them.

When I first took over in January of 2025 I saw myself staying as Scoutmaster for at least a year or two after my youngest aged out. He turned 18 this week, and I'm stepping down. I'll be taking on the role of Eagle coach instead. The biggest challenge was time, made worse by the lack of parent involvement in the actual running of the Troop. Of those who were willing to volunteer time, I'd say about 80% of them only wanted to be in an administrative type position - committee member, advancement chair, service chair, etc. Of those who were ASM's, one never came camping even on the trip they were in charge of organizing, and one needed to be hand-held through everything to the point it was faster and easier for me to do it myself. (Crazily, this parent is an Eagle, yet can't cook a meal or put up a tent that isn't their own.) Anywho... it's been great, and awful, and everything in between. God bless those of you who are in this role. I figured I'd share the message I sent to our Troop after the latest political issues, because I think it's a message that's needed no matter what we're facing, but didn't want to clutter the other thread. Although I have just one more week as your Scoutmaster, I wanted to issue a statement of support for ALL our scouts, our friends, and our families. I wholeheartedly believe in the overarching mission of Scouting, which is "to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law." That doesn't change how we are meant to treat others, no matter what is said by outside individuals or administrations. Trustworthy and Loyal means a scout can be relied upon to act with understanding, Kindness and Courtesy in their interactions with others. Scouts should strive to be non-discriminatory and Helpful to everyone around them. In short, the same principles that Baden-Powell espoused when forming this organization still stand today. Do your best to continue to be the amazing young people that you are.

This theme has appeared often over my time here on the forum, and it almost alway comes back to reality of lives and responsibilities outside of the program. Early in my long tenure, now fiftyish, I was visiting my parents and mentioned my frustrations to my father, the man that in my youngest years worked three jobs, one full time with a long drive to and from. Anyway, he looked at me and laughed. He said something to the effect of, "nothing new". Then he asked if I thought that all my scout brothers' parents were involved as he was. He was on the committee in a number of jobs, as actually was my mother for the time. She had been a denmother for my brother. He told me a couple of stories that matched mine like a Polaroid almost. Then he told me that if it was important to someone, they somehow would work at it and often find the time. But also he told me that life could wear you down, and that Scouting involvement also could, and likely would.

By coincidence, there is an article this morning about schools being sued for hiding a student's trans name and not telling the student is behaving in a trans lifestyle. There is no doubt that trans folks and their parents are becoming known as victims of their environment, and they are lashing out at whoever contributed to that environment. The main issue with schools is that they are keeping the students' trans identity secret from their parents. There is no surprise; a teacher on this forum admitted this was going on in a trans discussion several years ago. I understand the compassion for these youth and their struggle with their behavior, but the BSA should not have put unit leaders in the position of making these kinds of choices. Now we're learning that councils are defying national guidelines and continuing the practice. Unit leaders are unknowingly in harm's way. The trans issue is really just one of many issues that unit leaders have to face when scouts ask them to hold secrets from their parents. Our SM was threatened with litigation for holding information about the scout's behavior from the parents. He had been warned by the more experienced leaders. about the practice. But he continued because he felt it built a trust that he could leverage to change a scout's wrong behavior. The idea is noble, but misused. By the way, I found in my SM training classes that most scout leaders agreed with the idea; after all, we are in the business of building character. However, many leaders, including our SM, learned the hard way that the trust of the parents is just as important as the trust of the scout. What many folks, teachers, scout leaders, coaches, and so forth forget is that parents have the ultimate responsibility of raising their kids. They dictate what their kids learn about life for their future. Everyone the parents entrust with responsibility for guiding their kids through life's lessons and skills is just one resource to help them develop their kids into the kinds of adults they want them to be. I used to teach in leadership training to imagine the character of a youth as a puzzle. Each piece of the puzzle is part of the team that parents use to help develop their kids' character. Each puzzle piece is a teacher, band leader, coach, piano teacher, scout leader, and other influences. But, in most cases, one piece isn't more significant than the other. So, while the Scout Master has a great title and a lot of influence in the unit to change a scout's character, the reality is the SM is only one person among a large team that parents use to help develop their kids' growth into adulthood. The parents are the team leaders, and there has to be trust between the team and the parents. This idea goes for a lot of situations that unit leaders find themselves dealing with. Trust me, scouts are very creative in making bad choices. But a trusting relationship with parents actually gives scout leaders more room, not less, to work with the scout. I can't remember how many times I told the parents of an issue, only to be followed by asking them to give us a couple of weeks to work with their scout. If that didn't work, then it was time to get the parents more involved. My teacher son uses the same approach with his students. Sorry for the long post, but a leader's trust between scouts and parents is very important for me because I have observed many leaders finding themselves in a mess, simply because they wanted a one-on-one trust with the scout for leverage to influence the scout to change. Scouting is hard. Open dialogue and trust between the scouts and parents make it a little easier. Have a great weekend. Barry

So... we actually have a transgender scout in our Troop, sort of. (They're still registered, but have let me know they will not be continuing with the program.) This scout is male, biologically, but asked to be called by a female name and be referred to as she/her a couple years ago. We met as a committee, at the request of the parent, to decide what we were going to do. All but one of us felt that the right thing to do was to keep the scout as part of our Troop. Since the scout had the support of the parents, that was enough for us to honor the request for name and pronouns. One committee member felt the scout should look into the local girls' Troop. It ended up being such a non-issue. Our scouts made the name switch pretty much instantly and never gave it another thought. They were all still friends. There were no snide remarks. There was no bullying and no asking why the scout didn't switch Troops. They all just went on with Troop business like usual, with one exception, which was that the scout started to tent separately. (Something many of our older scouts choose to do anyway. Hammocking has become a 'thing' with a couple of them.) That was a pretty good lesson for me, watching how our scouts handled it.

I served Scouting multiple decades without that recognition. Later in life, I was blessed with success in the markets and large retirement pension, and so made a donation to our local council endowment. Was awarded SB that same year. Coincidence?

In my council the SB is just another good-ole-boys club award. A few years ago a person got the SB who was not even position trained, never did anything other than make up his own non-sense, had to be removed from a committee due to incompetence. There is a very active volunteer scouter in my council who has a group of about 20 of us (this year, the number varies by year) trying to get him the SB for several years and we can't even get any feedback as to why he keeps being denied. And councils and national wonder why volunteers take their time and money and walk away from the program.

Here is my motive: I have my own opinions, but I would never foist them on the rest of the Troop. In January 2017, when BSA said they would allow transgender boys in the program, we presented the issue to the Chartered Organization (CO). The CO (in their regular meeting with the Institution Head (IH)) said they would fully support allowing transgender boys in Troop, but they left the decision up to the parents and the leaders who are doing the job. We then had an "all hands" meeting with parents. About 35 attended, out of 70ish. We presented the choice to them, and the decision was unanimous... we would not accept transgender boys into the Troop, as this did not align with the way they wanted their boys raised and educated. (In back room discussions, several families let me know that if the group chose to accept them, they would leave Scouting.) In October 2017, when the opportunity arose to create a separate girls Troop (starting 01 February 2019), we presented our CO with the option. The CO (in their regular meeting with the IH) said they would fully support a girls Troop. We then had another "all hands" meeting with parents. About 35 attended, out of 70ish (basically the same folks). We presented the choice to them of 1. Remain a boy only Troop 2. Start a girls Troop and share "committees" and gear for support 3. Keep boys and girls programs and support separate (if someone else started a girls Troop there) They chose #1. Last fall/winter, after BSA ended the "pilot" mixed Troop, and gave the option for Troops to be combined, we, once again, informed our CO of the development. Once again, the CO gave support, but deferred to the Troop adults actually doing the work, and parents whose responsibility it it to safeguard their child's upbringing. Once again, we met with parents. And, once again, they chose to remain a boy only Troop. Our parents run the spectrum from left to right. When the decisions actually "hit home", and would affect their won sons, it was amazing that, unanimously, they chose to go the way they did. Their was no dissent, and no one felt offended nor decided to leave the Troop because of these decisions. I stick to the program, and let parents make well-informed choices for their Scouts. They all appreciate the transparency, and the acknowledgement that others may believe differently. Although it has not happened, our collective approach, if a transgender boy applied to our unit, would be to welcome them to Scouting, but steer them to another Troop more suited to their situation. (And we have good rapport with that other Troop.) Our Scout Executive was perfectly fine with this approach.

And they are watching people playing a competitive game where the best players have been selected based on their abilities. Everyone does not get to play, because everyone is not equal in that endeavor. How ironic...

Noone was move vocal then me concerning the re-develement of the ceremony aspect of the OA. I just watched the national presentation ( you go Emma) concerning the new Ordeal ceremony. I admittedly changed my mind. The national Chief and Vice Chief have a great plan to introduce the new material and I think it looks pretty good. I am personally excited th participate in this endeavor and put my whole support as this transition moves forward. Sure I'll miss the AIA aspect and will have fond memories but I encourage all members get on board and support the positive changes.

I might add to your comment the concept of true service and community involvement, often integrated with that outdoor element. It often seems some of the most laudable services revolve around outdoor protection and rejuvenation, along with access improvement.

HUGELY AGREE ... I almost wish there was a opt-out if we know the scout already had it covered in school. ... Wasting scout's time kill the program. ... Doing a MB on a topic covered in school makes scouting look 2nd rate (and wastes the scout's time). ... Citz of society was the 5th badge if you count Family Life as Citizenship in the Family. ... There are just too many class room badges and not enough active badges.

Or it could be that standards for advancement have been lowered? Once upon a time, the standard was "master the skills" and "the badge represents what a Scout CAN DO (sic) not what he has done." Those come from old handbooks and advancement guides. Now the standard is "A badge recognizes what a Scout has done toward achieving the primary goal of personal growth. " Sadly I have been to a camp, where they gave away MBs. Best example were the Scouts given Canoeing MB, but could not paddle in a straight line on a troop trip to save their life. I had a Scout's family member tell me they bought the MBs by going to that camp. Or how about all the MBUs popping up where you sit in class and get a MB? Sadly my own kids, after they aged out, told me some of the stuff they didn't do for MBs they "earned" from MBUs. And don't forget the online MBUs. What FL council awarded over 18000 MBs during COVID from online MBUs?

Our Scouts lose by not going through the requirements of the Citizenship in Society merit badge. Let's go through a few of them (quoting from https://www.scouting.org/merit-badges/citizenship-in-society/ ) This exercise requires Scouts to learn the denotations of each of these terms so to become a better human being: Identities (this is not just pronouns; it also has to do with religious and ethnic identities as well) Diversity Equality vs Equity (they are DIFFERENT) Inclusion Discrimination Ethical leadership (a fish rots from the head down, as does an organization and a government) Upstander (we don't have enough of people doing this) Image source: https://www.diffen.com/difference/Equality-vs-Equity I'm not sure of anywhere else in the Scouting program makes Scouts think about these particular scenarios. I grew up with classmates making fun of disabilities with jokes like "What do you call a man with no arms and no legs who floats in the water? Answer: Bob". Our current President ridicules women ("Quiet piggy!", "grab them by the p*ssy", "she had blood coming out of...whatever", "we're going to have to bring the women's team",...need I go on? ). That "go back home where you came from" statement...gee, why does that sound familiar? These scenarios force a Scout to mentally prepare for situations where they WILL come up in the future, making it easier to do the right thing and stand up for whomever is being attacked. We ask Scouts during Boards of Review what they'd like to change about the Troop. A few times now a Scout has mentioned that older Scouts are not always being welcoming to the younger Scouts. Requiring Scouts to THINK about welcoming in newcomers -- and making sure all Scouts feel they can be full participants -- is very important for the cohesion of the Troop. Or to quote Atticus Finch from To Kill a Mockingbird: This is why I feel Scouting America's executive leadership has sold out to the current Presidential leadership. By removing the Citizenship in Society merit badge -- and not transplanting these requirements into other merit badges, the Scouting America executive leadership has effectively stated that the requirements of the merit badge HAVE NO MERIT. And that's just wrong.

Please understand that Scouting America (founded 1910) and "Girl Scouts of the United States of America" (founded 1912) are two entirely separate / disconnected orgs - both of which are offshoots of the current "The Scout Association" (founded 1907 by Baden Powell) in the UK - formerly "The Boy Scouts Association" until 1967, when THE ORIGINAL PROGRAM dropped "Boy" (https://www.scouts.org.uk/) Let me repeat that year: 1967. Almost 60 years ago. If Scouting America created their own version of "Girl Scouts", then GSUSA would sue Scouting America into the ground. They are 2 different orgs with different agendas. Scouting America has decided to follow the path the ORIGINAL scouting org started almost 60 years ago to NOT divide people based on who they are, but to include EVERYONE equally as "Scouts". Even BSA allowed Girls to join Explorers as far back as 1971!!! They didn't create "Boy Explorers" and "Girl Explorers"... they were just "Explorers", like now we're just "Scouts". This has been the state WORLD-WIDE since the 1960s: - Scouting America is a member of the WOSM: World Organization of the Scout Movement (that purple patch we wear) (https://www.scout.org/) - The Scout Association of the UK is a member of the WOSM (purple patch) - Girl Scouts of the USA is NOT a member of the WOSM, they are part of WAGGGS - they don't wear the purple patch (https://www.wagggs.org) WOSM was originally "The International Conference of the Boy Scout Movement", but they ALSO dropped "Boy" in 1961 - 6 years before the ORIGINAL PROGRAM dropped "boy". WOSM is NOT a "boy only" international group, and hasn't been for 65 years. Chances are, this is when you were very young or before you were born. This is not some "new democrat party woke conspiracy" that many conservatives try to imply (unless the conspiracy started in the 60s in England... I suppose?). It's part of the world-wide Scouting movement's values to INCLUDE EVERYONE, rather than DIVIDE PEOPLE.

That's simply untrue. In Hegseth's own words:

The main issue was that this was another classroom badge, do it in at Merit Badge U in a few hours. Overall it was an empty suit. While nothing egregious against basic goals, it was not challenging and was a check the box. Nothing to accomplish, no measurable items, just feel good writing. It was smoke and mirrors to say "Hey, look how progressive we are". Remember the requirements: 1. Before beginning work on other requirements for this merit badge, research the following terms and explain to your counselor how you feel they relate to the Scout Oath and Scout Law: identities, diversity, equality, equity, inclusion, discrimination, ethical leadership, and upstander. Lot of buzz words here, no real meat or challenge, no actual answers, and if challenged one might be cast as racist or worse (not sure there is worse) 2. Document and discuss with your counselor what leadership means to you. Share what it means to make ethical decisions. (a) Research and share with your counselor an individual you feel has demonstrated positive leadership while having to make an ethical decision. (It could be someone in history, a family member, a teacher, a coach, a counselor, a clergy member, a Scoutmaster, etc.) (b) Explain what decision and/or options that leader had, why you believe they chose their final course of action, and the outcome of that action More here, but lot of feel and again, no real challenge here, it is basic writing and rote answers 3. Consider ethical decision-making. (a) Think about a time you faced an ethical decision. Discuss the situation, what you did, and how it made you feel. Share if you would do anything differently in the future and if so, what that would be. (b) List three examples of ethical decisions you might have to make in the future at school, at home, in the workplace, or in your community, and what you would do. Share how your actions represent alignment with the Scout Oath and Scout Law. (c) Explain to your counselor how you plan to use what you have learned to assist you when that time comes, and what action(s) you can take to serve as an upstander and help other people at all times. Again, lots of touchy feely - feel good stuff , but as with all the requirements, no real challenge here, it is basic writing and rote answers. I am sure the ChatGPT answers were great 4. Repeat the Scout Oath and Scout Law for your counselor. Choose TWO of the following scenarios and discuss what you could do as a Scout to demonstrate leadership and your understanding of what it means to help others who may seem different from you: (a) Scenario 1: While at camp, a youth accidentally spills food on another camper. The camper who gets spilled on gets angry and says something that is offensive to people with disabilities; their friends laugh. What could/should you do? (b) Scenario 2: Your friend confides in you that some students in school are making insulting comments about one of their identities, and that those same students created a fake social media account to impersonate your friend online and post messages. What could/should you do? (c) Scenario 3: A new student in your class was born in another country (or has a parent who was born in another country). Your friends make rude comments to the student about their speech or clothes and tell the student to "go back home where you came from." What could/should you do? This is a basic HR opinion test recycled or really bad training video out take, not overtly terrible, but if this is our core mission, these items could be included in other existing merit badges 5. Document and discuss: (a) Ideas on what you personally can do to create a welcoming environment in your Scouting unit. (b) An experience you had in which you went out of your way to include another Scout(s) and what you did to make them feel included and welcomed. (c) Things you can do to help ensure all Scouts in your unit are given an opportunity to be heard and included in decision-making and planning. Not a terrible requirement, but again, could be included in other existing merit badges 6. With your parent or guardian's approval, connect with another Scout or youth your own age who has an identity that's different from yours. (This means a trait, belief, or characteristic different from you.) (a) Share with each other what makes the different aspects of your identity meaningful/special to you (b) Share with each other ONE of the following options: (1) Option 1—A time you felt excluded from a group: What was the situation? How did it make you feel? What did you do? Did anyone stand up for you? What did you learn? Would you do anything differently today? (2) Option 2—This imaginary situation: You're attending a new school and don't know anyone there yet. You notice they dress very differently than you do. At lunchtime, you decide you'll try to sit with a group to get to know other students. People at two tables tell you there is someone sitting at the currently empty seat at their table, so you end up eating by yourself. Discuss: How would that make you feel? What could the students have done? If that happened at your school, what would you do? (c) Discuss with your counselor what you learned from the discussion with the other Scout or youth. The weakest requirement, as if used in the broad definition "who has an identity that's different from yours", basically that is anyone that is not in fact you. We each have a unique identity. The MB writers could not bring themselves to actually challenge Scouts to find someone of different gender, race, or nationality. 7. Identify and interview an individual in your community, school, and/or Scouting who has had a significant positive impact in promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion. If you feel your community, school, or local Scouting group does not have such an individual, then research a historical figure who meets these criteria, and discuss that person with your counselor. (a) Discover what inspired the individual, learn about the challenges they faced, and share what you feel attributed to their success (b) Discuss with your counselor what you learned and how you can apply it in your life. Self promotion and shameless support of the DEI cycle, let's applaud the program we are stoking 8. With the help of your parent or guardian, study an event that had a positive outcome on how society viewed a group of people and made them feel more welcome. Describe to your counselor the event and what you learned. Not a terrible requirement, but again, could be included in other existing merit badges 9. Document and discuss with your counselor three or more areas in your life outside of Scouting where you feel you can actively provide stronger leadership in: (a) Making others feel included. (b) Practicing active listening. (c) Creating an environment where others feel comfortable to share their ideas and perspectives. (d) Helping others feel valued for their input and suggestions. (e) Standing up for others. A feel good requirement, no actual measurements, just self promotion and support of the DEI cycle 10. Discuss with your counselor how stereotyping people can be harmful, and how stereotypes can lead to prejudice and discrimination. Share ideas you have for challenging assumptions and celebrating individuality. A feel good requirement, no actual measurements or documented achievements, just self promotion and support of the DEI cycle 11. Scouting strives to develop young people to be future leaders in their workplaces, schools, and community environments. As you look at your current involvement in school, your family, Scouting, your job, and/or community, think about how you can have a positive impact in diversity, equity, and inclusion. (a) Describe your ideas on how you can and will support others with different identities to feel included and heard at your school, workplace, and/or social settings in your community. (b) Explain how including diverse thoughts and opinions from others with different identities can: Make your interactions more positive. Help everyone benefit by considering different opinions. (c) Give three examples of how limiting diverse input can be harmful. d) Give three examples of how considering diverse opinions can lead to innovation and success. As with Req 7, basic self promotion and shameless support of the DEI cycle, let's applaud the program we are stoking

The core issue is trying to do activities with kids ranging in age, size, and maturity from 5 year old kindergartners to 10 or 11 year old fourth and fifth graders. Scouting really forces all these ages together at pack meetings and other events and really doesn't work too hard at differentiating them as much as you would typically see in other environments like school, sports, etc. A too broad age range is also sometimes an issue at troop levels. Scouting asks volunteer adults to supervise situations that people who supervise children professionally typically try to avoid. Lions were not a helpful addition to this mix but National did it anyway for membership and marketing reasons. The lawsuit shouldn't be a surprise and I'm sure there have been plenty others.

From the Youth Application: "Parent Agreement. I have read the Scout Oath and Scout Law, and I want my child to join Scouting. I will assist them in abiding by the policies of Scouting America and the chartered organization. I will: • Serve as an adult partner while my child is a Lion or Tiger." The parent has some supervisory responsibility in this, at least for their own child. ----------------------- Also there: "Mandatory Reporting All persons involved in Scouting must immediately report to local authorities any good-faith suspicion or belief that any child is or has been physically or sexually abused; physically or emotionally neglected; exposed to any form of violence or threat; or exposed to any form of sexual exploitation including the possession, manufacture, or distribution of child pornography, online solicitation, enticement, or showing of obscene material. No person may abdicate this reporting responsibility to any other person." This verbatim message is also purveyed through SYT and the Guide to Safe Scouting. All registered adults present are mandatory reporters... this is one area I think paid professionals, COR's and volunteers mutually fail at... discussing what this means and what their responsibilities are. The basic mentality I see is that many people think SYT applies only to sexual assault. ------------------------------------- From the Annual Health and Medical Record (which parents must sign): NOTE: Due to the nature of programs and activities, the Boy Scouts of America and local councils cannot continually monitor compliance of program participants or any limitations imposed upon them by parents or medical providers. ----------------- And there are many questions here... -- What is an "indoor snowball fight"? See G2SS Prohibited Activities #15. Activities where participants shoot or throw objects at each other, such as rock-throwing, paintball, laser or archery tag, sock fights, or dodgeball https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss07/#b -- Was this "violence" or was is a rough-and-tumble game where a large kid fell on a small one and hurt him? This may have been perceived initially as an injury due to the activity, rather than "violence." -- Were the Scout leaders actually negligent? I can see something like this getting out of control and an injury happening really fast. They will have to explain the "indoor snowball fight" vs Prohibited Activities list, though... that is where a claim of negligence would have grounds -- OK, the "Scoutmaster" (probably means Cubmaster or Den Leader, but OK) was outside... but were there two other registered adults present? If yes, kind of a moot argument there. (That he was rumored vaping is moot... he/she could have been in the bathroom for all we know.) "All Scouting functions, meetings, and activities should be conducted on a smoke-free basis, with smoking areas located away from all participants." Was he vaping in an area away from participants?? If so, and any two other registered leaders were present, this argument falls away, too... --------------- I relayed in a post sometime back... our SE told volunteers (at a type of fireside chat) that National's patience with volunteers violating policies was wearing thin, and there are elements within the organization who advocate not defending volunteers who do, or offering settlements based on their non-compliance with policies. This one will be interesting. Like @skeptic says, "Follow the rules people" And like @Eagle1993 advises "Just get excess liability insurance and follow BSA policy and you will be fine." , which would be great legal advice, too, if he were lawyer ------------------- From the G2SS (key overall points underlined) GENERAL INFORMATION When it comes to the safety guide, here are some important points for you to remember: Know the Guide—All participants in official Scouting activities should become familiar with the document and applicable Scouting America program literature or manuals. The guide is a resource as well as a summary of the materials provided by Scouting America. Know the Law—Be aware that state or local government regulations supersede Scouting America practices, policies, and guidelines. Know the Risks—The Guide to Safe Scouting does not cover every possible activity, but it provides guidance on how to evaluate risks and proceed safely if explicit requirements do not exist. Check out the Activity Planning and Risk Assessment section. Know the Restrictions—The document includes a list of restricted or prohibited activities. Know the Limits—The document contains age-appropriate guidelines for activities. Find out which and when certain activities are appropriate for particular age groups. Know the Program—The guide points to other Scouting America program documents such as Safe Swim Defense, the National Shooting Sports Manual, and additional program materials.

I would expect it would apply to any similar law nationwide. The specific lawsuit is California, but now anyone can sue a state with similar laws and likely win at District, probably fairly quickly.

It is. I remember seeing it. 2/3s of the councils gone if memory serves.

The transgender scout in my unit staid in. Earned Eagle, went to Philmont and now in College. Parent was a leader so that helped. The main odd thing was that the scout dressed as a 1950s housewife.... It's like they changed genders and decades. They were treated well overall. I checked in frequently. One leader from another unit told her "I don't get this gender thing, but you do you.". The scout loved that response as they know most don't understand but at least they were kind enough to let them live their life. As you said, single tent, only gender neutral bathrooms, buddy group changes. I was asked but didn't wear the pride knot, I think that hurt a bit. It is a bit complicated to manage, but it is manageable.

I would just say to avoid putting yourself in legal risk, follow BSA rules and regulations. I was told, by a lawyer, I could be sued if a kid caught COVID during a scout outing. "I'll sue the BSA, national, council, CO, committee chair and scoutmaster and let the judge determine who is liable." Just get excess liability insurance and follow BSA policy and you will be fine.

More than everything, lack of parent volunteers will damage this program. I took a similar step a few months ago .. it is sad seeing the change over the last several years. Went from more than enough parents willing to camp and lead outings to crickets.

Fully agree. I understand my council knows they will merge with another council; however, that council is not in great shape financially and likely needs to close a camp or two. My council is holding off on the merger so they aren't blamed for the camp closure. I'm sure there are many similar stories, so national will have to step in. During the bankruptcy a small/secret meeting was held by a fee national leaders. Their PPT slides were reviewed in court but never added to the docket. They included recommendations for a major reduction in councils among other ideas. It is needed and hopefully coming.

Rural units are struggling due to young parents moving to metro areas to have consistent work. We have a very geographically large rural council in my state. They are fighting demographics which is not their fault. Where I am at the further you get from the big city the more socially conservative the people are; this VERY rural council decided to jump into the fight against Hegseth and pop off about DEI publicly. I expect that they will hemorrhage several hundred youth and adults before the end of the year and accelerate their march towards being merged out. Sometimes these council leaders need to shut up and just let all the arrows hit national. We're going to have mega sized councils regardless; we actually need them. The administrative infrastructure and overhead of Scouting America is a pre-technology based structure that is BLEEDING funding away from program. National needs to force mergers, tell councils they need to embrace remote work and tele/video conferencing. Every DE should live and work in their district, not at council HQ. Every council HQ should be a tiny hole in the wall or a cabin on the council camp used as basically a logistical hub to feed the districts.

Well done. Barry

It's just prideful political temper tantrums. And, more litigation for the youth organizations as young maturing adults realize they were steered toward accepting being a trans person. Doctors and hospitals are already being sued, but eventually they will go after organizations that encourage the youths to continue a lifestyle that led them away from their biological origin. Schools are already in the crosshairs. This is the child abuse of our present culture. And, ironically, women's equality. Barry

I'm happy to see so many Councils putting out statements these last few days basically saying that they will not check birth certificates and that all youth are still welcome in Scouting. Once again, local has to do what National doesn't. Can't say I'm all that surprised, really. But it's nice to see so many Councils supporting our youth members, ALL members.

The current group of professionals and key volunteers know how (in some cases) to raise money. Grow program, not so much. Sad part is they are raising money on the nostalgia of the BSA, not the current BSA No real effort being made to add units or expand the program. Lots of excuses as to why membership decline, just no real honest effort to make updates so people (families) may want to buy what is being sold

Nope Citizenship was taught pretty well for decades primarily in the outdoors

Not necessarily. I see a local team play and there are outfield grass you pay to watch from. You watch through a chain link fence.

I get the sentiment of the opt-out idea, but in practice it's not a great idea. It would be abused. Also... if it's covered in school - it should be that much easier to knock it out for Scouts, and the refresher doesn't hurt to know that "An Eagle definitely covered this topic". That's my $0.02.

Scouting really didn't/doesn't need the West Point Camporee or Jamboree to deliver program though. Both events serve very few scouts in the scheme of things. I think the potential loss of the Eagle Scout promotion and pay upgrades was likely much more consequential, especially since attaining Eagle is the single most important marketing point for the US program. It's a potential benefit noted in almost all the marketing materials and is positioned as almost a Good Housekeeping seal of approval from the U.S. Military of the scouting program. That, and the ability to operate units on US bases were likely the biggest items on the table.

Review the recent history of BSA, and you can make the same statement about their other major policy changes. And all of these changes, I would argue, have not been about what is right. They have been about money. This one is no different.

My wasting tech skills are showing. Oh well. I continue to find it odd that the discussions on the MB going away basically are rehashing the gripes when it was put in place. I said at the time that I thought it was simply unneeded if we were using the simple concept of Scout Spirit as part of their reviews, and also as leaders doing our best as well. IF the rank review, the thing called the SM Conference touches the review of Spirit, then it is a regular review of how well the Scout, and frankly, many adults understand the concepts. But I am old, and still considered Woke by a few, whatever that actually means

One of my local Scouters posed a good point to consider. BSA went to court to avoid militarism in the early days and pushed many early groups out, absorbing them or just letting them dry up, so to speak. But, the cooperation of the Government and military with Scouting has been a mainstay of the program ver the years, and not just at Jamborees. Support for many early Sea Scout groups was directly related to naval bases and the Coast Guard. But it was mostly symbiotic in that the Scouts got contact and excitement, and the military groups got opportunities to work with larger groups in organization and staging, and so on. Indirectly, the selling of War Bonds was part of this as well. Of course, most interactions were peripheral much of the time. Tours and on-base campsites were often available at larger installations. Our troop, for years, camped annually at Edwards and also went to Air Shows there on those camping weekends. All went away with 9-11. A concern has been noted that we need to seriously consider what a merit badge for Military Service might entail, but it is a bit dicey on the surace, and I would not want to see something that could put pressure in some manner to join.

Read this and see if you agree with your previous statement. https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2014/12/03/individual-scout-accounts/

If giving away 2 million in free memberships is cheaper than paying for things like the West Point Camporee and JAMBO it's still a win for scouting. Not really, there is no such thing as "ball in our respective courts" in a franchise based organization. Councils, districts, and units either align to the national program and directives or eventually get burned. I would suspect that if the national debt is retired at the end of 2028 as planned we will see significant changes in how national responds to all of these rogue councils doing their own thing. Right now national is too busy trying to keep the house from burning down to worry about the outhouse.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but lawyers work FOR their client, they are not the client. Lawyers give advice based on their evaluation of the law, and just about any other factor, legal or not, they believe relevant, limited only by their creativity and wisdom. (The "other factor" component of the lawyer's advice is immeasurably more complex than mere legal reasoning. The law part is easy.) What a client actually does, that is, what we see them do, is not a reflection of the quality of the legal advice given. The client could have followed lousy legal advice, or rejected superb legal advice.

Yeah, this is really bad (if true). If you're going to solicit large donations for an endowment, there's a professional and moral obligation to ensure they're protected to the fullest extent. Beyond the endowments, there has probably been a working-class family in every council who gifted their own modest estate in order to have a new health lodge or shooting sports range built at their favorite camp. And now that camp is gone. I'm just glad they're no longer here to see their life's work squandered.

For me the issue was a two point problem. First of all the Citizenship in Society Merit Badge requirements for Merit Badge Counselors were the most stringent and only MBC leadership requirements universally enforced in scouting. To council the merit badge you had to have your MBC training complete prior to the special MB train-the-trainer session, and you had to sign a special contract above and beyond the MBC requirements attesting that you would not add to, remove from, or steer, or alter the merit badge materials. A fine process; however, no such process for any other merit badge. The fact that national knows that the merit badge program is compromised with unqualified and incompetent councilors and did nothing to improve or ensure quality control on the rest of the merit badge program pissed me off. Second of all the Citizenship in Society Merit Badge itself is the only merit badge without a test of knowledge or skill. As structured the merit badge simply did not have the legs to stand on to be considered a merit badge and never should have been in its structure and condition entered into the merit badge program. This is the weak minded straw argument of the left. No one, not even Hegseth or any of choogy boys have said they want to kick girls out. What has been stated publicly and everything that has leaked has literally only been about concerns about political indoctrination and deviation from the true purpose of the program. Trans kids have always had this dilemma. Scouting Americas policy has always been that registration must align to gender within the confines of the state and federal laws governing the geography of the area of the unit. This argument is a nothing burger, this is a no change. NOTHING IS CHANGING in regards to this for anyone in Scouting America. This right here is actually part of the problem that Hegseth and his toadies are rallying against. The mission statement of Scouting America has somehow deviated quite a bit from our congressional chartered purpose [which is]: That the purpose of this corporation shall be to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in Scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods which are now in common use by Boy Scouts. Our membership is down to 1946 levels. 50 years of experimentation and deviation from the core mission of the program led us from a membership peak of 4 million scouts in 1970 to 821,000 scouts in 2026. With the doors open to male and female scouts our membership should be at a new record level, not collapsing towards mediocrity. Trying to push all of these other things, secondary mission statements, tertiary vision statements, derivative after derivative after derivative; all these watered down straying from the roots things are what are killing this organization.

So you want to kick all the girls out? Maybe you'll get your wish. Scouting America bent the knee and now we can only wait and see how they'll pay for it. Today's demands aren't the end of the list for Hegseth, and Scouting America showing this kind of weakness only opens the door for him to demand more and more and expect to get his way. I guess when that happens, we'll see if there is any bravery left in that building in Irving.

The scouts never had issue with them, only the parents.

I have no problem with having the Merit Badge. I did have a few issues when this all started: 1. It was a knee-jerk reaction to the George Floyd episode. Without having all the facts about what happened, BSA glommed onto the hysteria that developed in our country. And, in doing so, I think BSA diminished the standing of Scouting in the eyes of most. 2. The original leaked requirements were ideologically (and thus politically) charged agendas, and not appropriate for Scouting. These were, thankfully, revised to the current product. 3. They could have taken the revised requirements and sprinkled them into other existing merit badges or rank requirements. Or simply expounded upon current requirements in the program which, if emphasized, would address the issues at hand in a more fulsome manner. Were the real issues at hand getting watered down in other aspects of BSA's program? Yes. But, there was no need to create a new merit badge. And, in doing so, (creating a new badge), the real message BSA sent was that our program was not sufficient, and that it somehow had to change. Bad message, in my book. 4. They made it required to become an Eagle Scout. Again, the hidden message in doing this was that the Scout Oath and the Scout Law were not good enough. I count it a great victory for common sense that this has been axed. As a counselor, I, too, guided many Scouts through this, and made it a worthwhile endeavor for them to focus on some issues that all societies face, and how we as Scouts and Americans can help to strive for a "more perfect Union." I'm going to have a beer to celebrate. P.S. I would support keeping it as an optional badge, with a name change...