Eagledad

Giving the scout a job is a good idea. I had a scout once like yours and when I thought nothing would work, I asked him to build us a Troop Web site. It changed him completely and he eagled three years later. Barry

You will always have scouts who want to test the system, typically younger scouts. The growth part for the scouts is developing respect for the youth leaders. Adults interjecting does not help develop that respect. What you have to do is teach skills to control the situation. That usually works best after the youth leader had a frustrating experience. Our troop works kind of like jblake's in that we teach the leaders to quietly ask the scouts to stop their behavior. If the scout continues, they are then quietly asked to leave or visit the SPL or SM, depending on the situation. In this case, the SPL simply ask the Scout to be escorted out by the SM. The SM usually gives the scout the phone so he could call his parents and explain why they need to pick him up early. What you would typcially see in our troop meeting is the SPL ask the PL to take care of the problem and the PL ask once. If the scout continues, the PL ask the scout to leave. Once in a while a scout will make a scene while not leaving, that's when another patrol leader or older scout will help the PL escort the scout away from the group. The point was always dealing with the problem quietly and moving away from the group. You don't see the adults get involved unless requested. Our scouts got so used to this style of control that they automatically went looking for SPL or SM and confessing their behavior. The SM usually sent the scout back to the SPL and the SPL sent them back to the PL who would talk to them later. It worked pretty well. But developing your PLC and older scouts to respond as a team instead of watching one leader struggle usually squashes bad behavior pretty fast and quietly. Barry

My dad is a health insurance salesman and he is really struggling right now. He's very liberal and was excited for the new healthcare program, but now admits healthcare is more in a mess than ever and people are scared. But, he said, the biggest problem he is seeing is folks are just plain tired of talking about it. They just want the discussion to go away. That's what concerns me, folks are just plain tired of hearing about the BSA and leaving or not joining is the easiest way of staying out of the conversation. As I said before, other scouting organizations in North America took big hits when they changed their policy to accept gays, and athiest for that matter. However, I've been wondering if the BSA drama could help those programs now, or make it worse for everyone. Is youth scouting in general on it's way out leaving it to local sponsors to use as youth programs? Barry

>>You forgot "cheapskate Jews" and "lazy blacks" in your insulting stereotype.<< Athiest is an insulting stereotype? Barry

>>In MY example, the scout changes his god's mind the next day. << Impossible, God is unchangable. Man is flawed and changes her mind all the time. >>Other people can have gods whose minds get changed by humans, and you can't say otherwise.<< That's not god, that's the alter ego trying to beef up insecurities caused from being raised by angry atheist fathers. Scouting can help that kid. Barry

>>Yes, how is a made-up god an "untouchable source of moral direction" when the scout can just change his god's mind the next day?<< God's mind didn't change, the scout's understanding of god's wisdom changed from his daily experiences of life. That is why the BSA program is such a great experience. Barry

Now admitting? Hmmm. Merlyn, red is not blue, it will always be red. Barry

>>You still aren't getting it; I'm not addressing the BSA, I'm addressing YOUR rationalization for the BSA's exclusion of atheists, which can't be right because the BSA doesn't exclude other people for the same reasons -- only atheists.<< How is that different from my morning coffee analogy? Hey Merlyn, the BSA doesn't care whose god the scout uses, even if he make it up along the way. It's that simple. I can see how putting a omniscient rock obove an athiest could be degrading, but as I asked before, who is to say the rock doesn't speak? You need to make up something new for the BSA to look evil. Oh sorry, I mean, mean. >>Uh, nobody said "incapable". I'm capable of sticking peanuts up my nose,<< I'm sure you are, but that comment wasn't a reference to you the athiest, it was in reference to NJ who believes god created the universe and then packed out. Does that make NJ a diest? Barry

>>I think what he is saying is that believing in God (or a higher power, Supreme Being or whatever) does not necessarily mean that you believe that God prescribed moral laws for mankind.<< No NJ, what he is saying is the BSA is hypocritical to give God all the credit when some foks just make it up during their morning coffee and pass it off as god's. And I agree except that the BSA doesn’t pick any particular god. They leave that up to the scout. >>So if the BSA policy on religion was founded on the basis that you say it is, I don't belong in the BSA either. But it isn't.<< I’m surprised by the ignorance and pride of that statement because I assume you to be an educated man. I doubt even Merlyn agrees because it’s been the reality of American culture until recently and part of the BSA since the beginning. You probably also think it was a mere coincidence the BSA put God first on the list for who the scout promises his duty in the Scout Oath. I can only imagine your ignorance is from a lack of education on American Judeo/Christian history. That you don’t agree with the BSA is fine NJ, but to suggest the BSA didn’t do it on purpose is like saying red was never really red, it’s blue. Admittedly I don’t understand how someone can claim god was powerful enough to create the universe but is incapable of a relationship with man. Barry

It's not a "false" reason because whose to say the rock isn't omnipotent, certainly not the BSA. God is the perfect creator of all things and unchanging, so by default he is the final authority on morality. Atheist have no moral source leaving them to make it up as they go along. The BSA wants boys to learn to be followers of the oath and law, not creators. Without God, morality defaults to the guy with the biggest stick. Barry

Of course I have an answer, but as you can see, my computer is struggling with this new reply field.

>>Well no, you are missing my point entirely

My wife asked this very same question this morning, so it must be on the minds of a lot of people. It's the same concern a normal parent would have about they teenage son or daughter camping in the same tent with scouts of the opposite sex. Fact of the matter it is all about sex at this age and if a scout is sexually attracted to anther scout, that can be cause for concern. We live in a litigious world and I can see traps all over this. I guess we start with how other countries deal with it. Barry

Ah Merlyn, you're on a boat without a rudder at the mercy of moralities turbulent waters. No better peace than your hand on a tiller to navigate yourself around the guys the big sticks. The BSAs answer to your direct question is treat others with the same chacater as god. In this case, trust, loyal, serving, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave clean, and reverent. That is the direct answer to your direct question and peace in the world. By the way, I have a rudder you can borrow. Barry

The BSA doesn't use "a" god, it uses "your" god, Merlyn. What does your god say about your food cravings. Barry

>>]"Without some untouchable source of moral direction, there would be no platform to build a program of moral decision making." The BSA DOESN'T USE ONE.<< Sure they do, it's god. And the BSA gives guidelines to interpret god's morality, Oath and Law. Barry

>>In my opinion, BSA should become inclusive of agnostics and atheists, but should not let them off the hook about this "Duty to God" thing. << They already do as you stated later in your post. Just about any scout willing to listen can stay in the program up until he says "I tried but can't do it". The issue is allowing atheist adults who already made the choice. Great post overall. You said it best with "character and morality are taught and formed by the family, community and faith, and reinforced by the choices we freely make in life. This is at he core of the scouting program". Without some untouchable source of moral direction, there would be no platform to build a program of moral decision making. Barry

>>Existing boy-led troops have a huge asset that they may not recognize they have. They have a natural way to teach incoming youth (and adult leaders) how a boy-led troop runs – a self-sustaining process. I am still having trouble getting this going.<< I really like your wording here, a Self-Sustaining Process (SSP) is one of the great virtues of a successful “boy run†program. In fact it’s probably a good measure of a successful boy run program. The main obstacle for creating a SSP type program is the adults not really trusting that the scouts can do it. Adult fears are the biggest contributors to limiting growth of a boy run program. The way we tried to get past that mindset was by following the philosophy of the adults training themselves out of a job. Scouting isn't so much about just training scouts to just be independent, but developing them with a level of skill and character that the adults can trust them to be safe. While watching your troop at the next troop meeting, ask yourself if you think the scouts could run the meeting without any adults attending. Could they lead a five mile hike? Could the SPL lead a PLC without any adults? If your answer is no, those are places where the limitations of scout independence can be expanded. Create a program where the adults don’t have to show up for the scouts to have a program. It may be that while your scouts are following the motions of running the program, the adults are still filling in enough to keep the program moving forward. The result is the scouts aren’t truly relaying on each other to get from A to Z. You won’t get a self-sustaining process until the scouts start looking ahead to improve their performance or at least maintain the program in the future. We adults tend to look at training younger scouts to get them ready for leadership months or years down the road. Does your SPL do that? Does he fill small leadership responsibilities with inexperience scouts with the purpose of developing them for the long future? Does the SPL use leadership training to fix deficiencies in the leadership corp? By giving scouts independence in their responsibilities, they learn the weight of responsibility and develop pride in the accomplishments of hard work. Their pride doesn’t want to see their hard work wasted, so they try to continue their performance by replacing themselves with qualified mature scouts. Another big problem I find with most troops that can’t get to the SSP program level is that the adults don’t expect or train the scouts with good management habits to run meetings and control the groups. They get only enough training to get by with the help of adults, but not enough to perform completely independent of the adults. In most cases, the adults just don’t know the skills themselves and get by with intimidation of being an adult to control group behavior. You will find that scouts in a SSP troop are taught skills of controlling behavior without using intimidation and practice basic fundamental management skills to maintain high performing activities and meetings. You only have to let a new SPL lead his first PLC meeting without adults in the room for 15 minutes to understand the importance of those skills. Also, don’t ram a boring program on the scouts, be creative and make it more fun. If scouts consistently dread some part of the program, change it. Our SPL leads a PLC every week 30 minutes before the Troop meeting because we found most scouts are more attentive for 30 minutes every week than 2 hours once month. Adults too. Your older scout problem is very common and indicative of your problem of trying to build a SSP program. It is my observation over the years that the main problem with troops that have bored older scouts is the program isn’t mature enough for them. I believe 70% of all troops are boring for older scouts because their basic program is wrapped around first class skills development and advancement. Oh sure they include a few non-first class skills activities like rappelling through the year, but on the whole the weekly, monthly and yearly programs are themed around a first class skills and advancement. Older scouts have the maturity of young men that require adult level mental and physical challenges to be stimulated and feel satisfied with their decisions. Physical and mental challenges for most troops end around 13 year old scout maturity. No wonder older scouts quit at 14. However, adults don’t see this problem and feel older scouts should still enjoy the program because of the camping and adventure. They also expect the older scouts to teach the new scouts first class skills because it’s logical for the older scouts to teach the younger scouts. And they are right, but when the older scouts keep repeating the same activities of first class development, they find themselves without any challenges to stimulate their intellectual and physical growth. They need adult level challenges in the program. That doesn’t mean high adventure. The main cause of boring programs is that the adults still view young adults as boys. We have to start treating scouts as adult equals, not as boys or even sons. I remember one of our 16 year old scouts who drove strait from work 30 minutes after the meeting start frustratingly challenged one of our adults saying “my ASM dad comes in late from work all the time and the adults don’t hassle him about itâ€. He was right. We were treating the mature scouts differently than the rest of the adults. That was very profound and made an impact on us. We strived toward an adult attitude change of treating scouts as adults. We challenged ourselves to quit focusing on self- discipline of follow rules and instead give work toward giving scout the independence to challenge themselves in the program. We were a boy run troop, but I could see we were trying to push adult dreams on the scouts. We tried to make a paradigm shift to pushing scouts to follow their own dreams. And that is when it seemed our troop growth accelerated in all areas. We started thinking of scouts as equals and treated them as such. The SPL was given a key to unlock the doors for our troop meetings and lock it after everyone else left. If he didn’t show up, the meeting had to go on outdoors. Our Troop Quartermaster owned a set of keys to the troop trailer and storage room, which could only be open by him even if an adult has a spare. Do you really need adults at the PLC meeting? If you think you do, than your adults haven’t matured to the level the program is capable. The older scouts know how to do it. Independence is key to a SSP program. That’s easy to say, but it is very difficult in this culture when adult fears prevent the scouts from practicing true independence of their ideas and decisions. It takes practice for the adults. It takes time and thinking out of the box, but once you start down that path, your program will mature to the next level toward a program with a Self-Sustaining Process. Sorry this is long, it’s kind of hard to explain in a few words, but I hope you get the point. I love this scouting stuff. Barry

>>I have not heard of one that was highly attended and had a great program being shutdown.

>>Major corporate supporters have withdrawn financial support. and this impacts my Pack, Troop and Crew in exactly what way????

I think the big difference of the 60's was that we couldn't play cowboys and indians for hours on end seven days a week. That's what kids do today. I think it also hurts membership in scouting. We played in all kinds of weather in the 60's. You don't see them hardly out at all today. Barry

>>I don't believe personally that violence in movies and video games has much to do with it. One of the main reasons we didn't have those problems back then is that guys like the ones in Sandy Hook and Aurora were locked up back then. Same reason you didn't have a lot of homeless people wandering around mumbling to themselves. But they got rights and we got shooters.

Union gatherings aren't welcome on my side of town, that's why the meeting was on your side. Now I know why. Barry

>>Clearly the BSA has become more conservative and National much more autocratic than in my days in scouting.

Pretty cool program, but more of just another after school club. I couldn't find anything about how it fosters morality. Barry