Stosh

Hmmm, a 40 year old male can date an 18 year old Boy Scout leader, but if they are registered in Venturing, they can't. Yeah, that makes perfectly good sense to me. Same for a sophomore in college dating a freshman in high school. That works okay for Venturing. Nothing like a good hypocrite laced discussion to get the juices flowing and having a debate where rules are made up as one goes along. Stosh

Hypocrisy used to be a negative thing when I was growing up. Now it's the norm. While we all knew it was hypocrisy, we didn't spend anytime trying to defend it the way people do today. Maybe it's nothing more than political correctness of not offending hypocrites....... Since day-one, the 18-21 age of Venturers was wrong. Since day-one denial of consumption of alcohol by 18-21 was wrong. Either one is an adult at 18 or not, this hypocritical half-way definition is and always has been a joke. The 18 year old issue came about because society didn't like the idea of sending our children off to war, but certainly wasn't going to really let them be "adults". Stosh

The political correctness of judging by one's opinions (even legal opinions) is just one more step in the wrong direction for us all. I always assumed that judges based their opinions on the Law of the Land. That assumption went out the window in our country when politics instead of Constitutional Law ruled in America. I don't know if Pandora can ever put that back in the box given today's decline in American thought, PC or not. Stosh

Along with the Foxfire books, the Mother Earth News (now on the internet) is a fantastic resource. Off the Grid works too but tends to be more sophisticated with it's suggestions. Stosh

This is the same kinda crap that justifies how a young soldier just back from a tour of a foreign war can't come home and have a drink at the American Legion post with his buddies because he's not 21. In other less sophisticated cultures than ours, young men and women are already well into family by the time their counterparts here in the US are even eligible to join Venturing. But our well thought out modern culture thinks nothing of having their young men and women live in the parent's basement well into their 30's and 40's. Stosh

Nothing messy about it, BSA has been involved in a hypocritical double standard for over 10 years and now has to do a mad scramble to justify what they have done. There's no amount of lipstick that's going to make this pig look good. Stosh

Not a problem as long as one sticks with science in a STEM discussion. Stosh

I would think that the the money in the treasury belongs to the CO and they should have a say-so in the process. With that being said, it would be rather advantageous with all the changes of committee personnel, an annual reporting of the unit budget to the CO would be an honest way of letting the CO know how the group is managing their money. Stosh

And while Richard Louv has penned a provocative number of books and is regarded by many as being skilled in a number of different mediums, his degree training is in journalism. His work is observable, and the conclusions he draws can be retested and proven and thus he is considered quite knowledgeable on the subject of nature and the development of children in our society. So his work is scientific, not theological in nature. Excellent book by the way. Something every SM should have a basic understanding of. Stosh

I'm not against exposing our youth to true nature, legitimate science and a whole ton of proper teachings. I don't mind people citing people like Muir as a source of inspiration either. However I would prefer citing Jules Verne before I would give credit to Charles Darwin for a source of legitimate inspiration. Whereas Verne has been recognized by the BSA as worthwhile for boys, Darwin never has. Verne's SCIENCE fiction has pretty much all come true over time. 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea is a classic example of science fiction theory becoming reality. Since Darwins theories can not be replicated in a laboratory nor has it ever been witnessed in nature, it cannot be defined as science. Let's go with theology instead, Darwin was indeed trained in that. If it's theology, then maybe one ought to be a bit reverent towards others' beliefs and not fall victim to Darwinism as a legitimate science. Scientology might come out sounding a bit scientific, but in reality it too, is theology, not science. I'm a naturalist too. Never spent 5 minutes in a classroom learning anything scientific about becoming a naturalist, but according to the tract taken by Darwin, I am theologically trained and spend a lot of time in the woods. Maybe I ought to write a book about something I know nothing about, too. After all, copying the works of others is in vogue now-a-days. Yes, Darwin's father sent him to Edinburg to study medicine which he had no interest in and dropped out. Then he went to Cambridge to study theology which he did finish and was awarded a degree, the only one he earned. I will admit Darwin might have had an interest in being a naturalist by hobby, but as an educated scholar in the field? Not valid. If one can't wrap their minds around what Darwin was up to... "As a result of his observations in and around South America while on the Beagle, however, plus the reading of Malthus shortly after his return to England, Darwin very quickly became a theistic evolutionist. This phase did not last long either, and he soon was a thoroughgoing materialist, or at least an agnostic, long before he published his Origin. In his autobiography he testified: "I had gradually come, by this time [that is, by 1837, just after his experience on the Beagle.] to see that the Old Testament, from its manifestly fake history of the world...was no more to be trusted that the sacred books of the Hindus, or the beliefs of any barbarian." (Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, with Original Omissions Restored, Nora Barlow, ed. (New York: Norton, 1969), p. 87. The editor was Darwin's grandaughter.) This thread obviously speaks to religion, not scientific naturalism which every boy should have a handle on, but leave the theology out of it. Stosh

The 5 year trip where his aristocratic friends procured him a job on the H. M. S. Beagle as the Captain's "companion and naturalist" even though he had absolutely no training whatsoever as a naturalist??? Darwin only recorded the findings of the real naturalist on board the Beagle at the time. After all he was a trained theologian which he later used as a means to try and discredit Christianity with his "Theory" of evolution which he accumulated up from the writings of others including those of Aristotle, Socrates and Plato. Darwin's only training was in theology, nothing in the world of science. I really won't go so far as to give him any credit as a naturalist. P. T. Barnum would have been proud of him. Stosh

Charles Darwin a naturalist? Really? Stosh

It's not just kids in nature, all of society has been isolating themselves from "the elements" Insulated homes, leak-proof roofs, screens on windows, A/C so no windows need to be opened, attached garages, A/C in the cars so the windows can stay up. Umbrellas AND rain coats, sun hats and parasols when it's sunny. SPF 15.... Enclosed patios? Basically all of nature is harmful. Only the crazies out there venture out into it as if they were Arctic or Amazon explorers. Parks and Recreation departments have been cut back to almost nothing. Used to be every city park had a warming house and ice rink, now the hockey players are indoors too. Used to be a blizzard would be needed for a snow day from school, now only the threat of one is sufficient. Thanks to global warming, even the severe sub zero temperatures are justification for a "snow" day. It is to this market BSA must try and sell it's outdoor program. This is why it has been giving up on it, too. Stosh

Follow the logic... I don't care one iota about PCism. It is nothing more than picking words that don't "offend" those who tend to be intolerant of the old nomenclature. I'm a native American because I was born in America, but because my heritage is mutt-European, people will be upset if I mark it down. I don't have PC rights to that title. A close friend of mine was born in Africa to missionary parents, but he gets hassled when he says he's African-American when his stereotype of blond hair blue eyes doesn't fit the PC definition. PCism tends to be noting more than a polite stereotyping and profiling of people. The argument doesn't hold water, but it is the hip thing to do in today's society in America. If one is not-so-polite with their stereotyping, then the person is a bigot, racist, homophobic, or any one of a number of non-PC titles that are free to toss around regardless of how hurtful they may be or even valid in nature. To sum it up for you Pack.... I don't participate in PCism because I don't spend a lot of time worrying about whether someone has a handicap, doesn't have social skills, has a different skin tone, or has some sort of deviation from some cultural norm du jour. It does bother me when people do however, participate in PCism and make grandiose gestures to pick some new terminology for their stereotype thinking it is so polite and unoffensive. As a matter of fact, I pretty much ignore the conversations when they get down to that level of hypocrisy. For those who wonder jblake47 is the name I registered under for any forum I am involved with. I am known on this forum and any other forum I have participated in as Stosh. It was a nick name given to me about 20 years ago when the forums were first coming out. So If someone calls me one or the other I don't have a problem with it and I don't lose any sleep over it. However, if one were to call me late for dinner, I would probably show a bit of concern as long as I didn't miss dessert. Stosh

Stick and stones.... I've been called a lot of things over the years by a lot of people, some nice, some not nice. But It's never hurt me. I normally can distinguish between the language meant to hurt and the language that seems to be everyday for a person. I can I just let it pass as not worth making an effort to challenge. Sometimes tolerance is an act of kindness in and of itself. I also find that people using offensive terminology really aren't interested in being PC in the first place and making note of it doesn't help the situation, doesn't educate the offender, and basically accomplishes nothing in the long run. If one must take a stand, do so on actions, not words. Stosh

Once one pays their debt to society, the punishment is over, unless one sets themselves up as judge, jury and executioner and adds punishment beyond what the law states. I have worked with people who have fallen into this category and the chicken/egg thing always results. 1) they can't get a job, their friends are limited, the stigma is always there to remind them and their only option is to skirt any possibility of rehab that isn't going to get one anywhere anyway. 2) Spend the rest of one's life looking for that one person who will give them a second chance. It's not that these people want to go back to the "old ways", but society keeps them prisoner regardless of whether there are bars and guards or not. Once these people are convinced that they will never be free, it's just a matter of time before they give up and go back to the system that will at least take care of them. I guess it all depends on how strongly one believes in "help other people at all times." Stosh

I have told my boys that the most important thing they do at a meeting is the opening and closing flag ceremony. Everything else is supposed to be fun. There's nothing wrong with the flag ceremony being fun, but it must be reflective of the importance and sacrifice made to be able to do the ceremony in the first place. Now we may be just a new troop of less than a year old, but everyone of the boys is capable of leading the flag ceremony. Unfortunately the boy-led thing is still a struggle in that just last week I insisted that every week a game to play must be part of the meeting! Stosh

It is my understanding that if there are multiple boys and one driver, even if all the boys are not a son. It is okay. I have a van that seats 5 extra people and quite often I drive five boys to an outing while another adult drives the rest. Never be one-on-one with a boy. Any time one is in a public place with "witnesses" all around, you are okay to be with a group of boys without the two-deep. YPT is for the protection of the adult in my book. I never want some kid to have the opportunity to accuse without me having some kind of back up, either my son, a trusted scout or another adult. Welcome to the forum! Stosh

What needs to be done to take care of one's boys is one thing, HOW that is done is up to the leader to figure out. If the world changes the leader must adapt. Whatever it takes to take care of your boys. All part of the training.... Stosh

I find that when I query my PL's it is always in the context of: "How's everyone in your patrol doing?" Sometimes one gets the, "I dunno." With that being said, they all know the next question is: "Is that your best leadership answer as to how well you're taking care of your boys?" It's is offered up with a smile. They get the point rather quickly and don't often repeat that process unless serious lapses in leadership have occurred. If I get that answer too often from a PL, then the follow-up is, "Maybe your APL could be helping you out on that, because they don't have much to do anyway and if they are going to be a PL some day, they're going to have to know how the leadership thing works. After all, he's your assistant, not just your fill-in when you're gone." All of these things are designed to draw the attention towards those whom they are supposed to be looking out for and away from themselves. I had one PL actually spell it out for me one day and blurt out, "If I'm looking out for everyone else, who's looking out for me?" I told him, "The SPL is supposed to have your back. Does he?" He said the SPL was always bugging him about advancement and things like that. I asked him that when I talk to the SPL should I tell him to back off or do more? He just smiled and the discussion was over. Stosh

I remember reading somewhere... "help other people at all times...." I think this might apply to the patrol method and if it is a foreign concept, that needs to change if the boys are ever going to get beyond TF in my book. Stosh

I thought that WAS the purpose of the patrols! PL's take care of your boys. Boys take care of your PL! SPL's take care of your PL's. TG's take care of the new guys. QM take care of your equipment needs, etc. Servant leadership is the key. If everyone is only worried about themselves, the patrol method and scouting will never succeed. Stosh

Scout Sunday should be no different than any other Sunday, except for what one wears...maybe. It would be nice to have the uniform on, but it's not necessary. Uniforms are not required for any scout activity and just because one wears one, doesn't make it an activity either. Stosh

Well, we're a new troop, our CO is a Christian church. I heard rumblings about doing something on Scout Sunday. Showed up in uniform (not my regular church). It'll be an interesting discussion next meeting on why I was the only one that showed up. Stosh