LongHaul

NJCubScouter, Yes it is former policy to exclude women. I was making a distinction between policy and program. Having the gay issue resolved with the same result as the female leader issue isn't very likely. I believe the decision to allow female leaders in Boy Scouts was not an altruistic nor purely consiliatory decision. It was based on the realization that there simply weren't enough male leaders to keep the store open. We either have women leaders or we gonna die. I saw it purely as a money/membership decision. Allowing some local councils to still deny membership to women was how National dodged the bullet they are being threatened with now over the gay issue.

Owasippe Scout Reservation Whitehall Michigan owned and operated by the Chicago Area Council We have three resident camps as well as a family camp. We also have a High Adventure Base which offers week long Backpack treks in the Manistee National Forest, a Canoe/Backpack combo, (walk some paddle some) and a week long Horse Trek, you rid'em you feed'em you care for'em. It's been around since 1911.

"You can delegate authority, but you can never delegate responsibility for delegating a task to someone else. If you picked the right man fine, but if you picked the wrong man, the responsibility is yours..not his." Richard E. Krafve, President, Raytheon Co. And my alltime favorite quote; "Character is power." Booker T. Washington

Yes, Bob, I do agree that I agree with 99% of the opinions and explanations you post. I think that our disagreement on PROGRAM may be definition rather than position. The "program" in my eyes are the things BP wanted to pass on to youth. The patrol method, boys taking charge and accepting responsibility, self confidence and determination, getting and staying in touch with the outdoors and their surroundings, and above all Honor. Having your word mean something. These are the things that CO's decide to use to benifit the youth within their sphere of influence. These ideals or purposes should not be up for change by whomever is in power today. As you stated in a post refering to your discussion with GreenBar Bill (green with envy, Yes I am) Scouting is a fluid movement. We chamge our APPROACH with the change in youth and the times but our PROGRAM should remain constant and the quality of the delivered program should be one of our primary concerns. How we teach changes, what we teach should remain constant. The exclusion of Gay leaders, just as the exclusion of Female leaders is policy not program and shouldn't be confused.

SagerScout, Where did you hear that the National Policy was to HATE gay men? I constantly hear about; DISCRIMINATION (negative conotation) HATEING someone with opposing view points AN LDS "CONSPIRICY" indicating intent prior to or in conjunction with chartering troops. I frequintly find that when someone lacks solid facts or when their positions is based primarily on personal belief that they tend to attack the person(here National) when they cannot attack the argument. I never have nor would I ever allow anyone to suggest to the boys in our troop that they should HATE, DISCRIMINATE (negative conotation) AGAINST, or CASTIGATE, anyone for their lifestyle or personal choices. I also wouldn't allow telling them that they had to ACCEPT everything someone tries to force upon them.

Whoa! Something happens at 10am and the boy is out of Scouting by noon? Whose decision was this? I had a very similar incident happen in the troop I'm Scoutmaster of now. I was CC at the time and we were at a District Camporee where our COR as in attendance. Having the COR,SM,CC and three members of the troop committee present we called the parent and asked that the boy be picked up IMEDIATELY and a meeting with the COR, Troop Committee, and parents was set up. This kid had brought lighter fluid along and set his arm on fire, on purpose! Some stunt he had seen on TV!! Our decision was that they boy had to have parental supervision present at all times, as he was a danger to himself and others. The parent withdrew the boy from the troop. This kid probably needed Scouting more than any kid in troop, taking it away from him should always be a last resort.

I'll open by saying I support the National policy in relation to gays, both as a right to decide who will be allowed to join and that gays are not acceptable role models. It's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. That is the point. This country was founded upon and by people who wanted to discriminate. (See Bob White's post for a proper definition so this post can be viewed in the proper context) This country was founded upon the belief that everyone has the right to choose who they will live and asociate with and that they had the right to keeep those with opposing views out of their community. Everyone has the right to do as they please as long as they do it SOME PLACE ELSE. Today we have group after group demanding the right to force their views on those around them. Let's face it folks there is now place else to go anymore. We have to live together, but we don't have to become of one mind. NJCubScouter writes "As I have said, heterosexuality is not a value, it is just what most people are." This begges the question "Do you think Homosexuality is 'an ACCEPTABLE alternate lifestyle? or a perversion (again grab the dictionary look up pervert) of the NORMAL sexual orientation?" Why should I be forced to accept any group which I believe is wrong? Again look up accept; Webster's New American Dictionary ACCEPT 1. to take(what is offered or given); receive willingly. 2. to receive favorably; approve 3. to agree or consent to 4. to believe in Why should I "accept" being forced to do something I disagree with just because it has become "politically correct." I want to draw a distinction between the attitudes of my leaders, as a youth, that homosexuality was something a person should be jailed for (grew up in the 50's/ 60's) and the attitude that I should "accept" homosexuals as "acceptable" role models for the youth in the Scout troop which I serve as Scoutmaster. Again to NJCubScouter, as to your reluctance to serve above the troop level, let me pass along something my Scoutmaster told me at a PLC when the question came up as to wether parental participation should be taken into account when deciding a Scouts eligability to attend outings. "Dad never drives you don't go" approach. (Again the sexist 50's) My Scoutmaster said "Never take it out on the boy because his father is an 'Anal orifice'". The man in question was indeed that and everyone was thankful he never came around because he was indeeed not a positive role model. The PLC was discussing options to improve parental participation. My point is don't deny the boys in your community (District) your input and influence just because National is in your eyes an "Anal Orifice". As has been said many times in these posts it has to be about the boys. "What's good for GM is good for the country." What's good for the boys is the road to follow. Don't short change the boys. You may not be able to change the attitude of National(adults) but you sure can influence the attitudes of the Scouts(young minds who will one day,God willing, be those adults). Bob White, as to your analogy of the church choir. This again begges the question "Who's church is it?" You feel it belongs to the ruling body some of us believe it belongs to the "parisioners". The "Church Elders" or the "Parish Priest" work for the parisioners, it's our church, they were selected to provide us with a service. In our instance it's the local Scout Troops not a transisent rulling body on some committee. You say that the chartering organization owns the "program". Yes they own the troop, as far as material possetions go and are leagaly liable for some of it's actions but PROGRAM. If you "buy" a McDonald's franchise you own the store yes but your still expected to sell hambergers not chicken on a stick. Chartering Organizations that have enough "numbers" to have a voice on some National Committee shouldn't be allowed to change a program which has benifited boys, in this country since 1911, in an attempt to mould it to their specific views. You refere often to our Congrssional Charter, look at what "politics" has done to the original concept of "representive government" "of the people, for the people, by the people" Today it's a retirement position not a representative responsibility. When I see this happening to "Scouting" I become alarmed. I don't agree with NJCubScouter's position but I fully encourace action upon it. People, as a group, through out history have kept silent until it was to late. We can survive longer without National Committees than National Committees can survive without Scout Troops. I don't work for my community or my chartering organization, I work for my Patrol Leaders Council. I am empowered by my Chartering Organization and the Community benifits from the Scouting program but it's Baden-Powell concepts and 90 plus years of history which attracts the boys. When the boys are being short changed their voices must be heard. As Scoutmaster I am their voice to the District, Council and National bodies. That's how I see it anyway. I don't have to be a voice with my Chartering Organization, as I've said elsewhere my CO is full of Scouters. Many of us are constantly in Council's face.

CubsRgr8, You asked why public schools don't sponsor more units and wheter this has always been the case. I can only speak for the Chicago Area, but it believe it was a nation wide change, when the athiest vs Bsa thing came up publicly owned facilities were no longer allowed to sponsor troops. The school tropps around here were PTA sponsored and they all had to find new CO's. The Fire Dept Explorer post dispanded and the Police Post went to a private not for profit organization. The park district troops closed and the Chicago Housing Authotrity was forced to stop funding it's troops. New court cases have changed some policies but actions against BSA by special interest groups have cause many units to move or close down in my area.

Bob White, Reading your posts in this thread I have to ask a few questions. You said that the National Relations Committee is composed of 20 members. Who decides who will sit on this committee? The info I have says that even if the National Office finds merit in any suggestion it will be three years before it will be acted upon. Do think it was three years from the onset of the gay question before policy was written? Don't you think your many years of providing program to youth at the troop level, where we get to see if program works and how to adjust to individual boys, should be at least as important as how many troops you sponsor? Volenteers with influence who have never run a troop remind me of Catholic priests explaining how to work out marital problems. It's all second hand info. If a District meeting in not the place for District volenteers to discuss what OUR movements is doing and where it is heading where should we discuss it. Are you saying we should adopt the BSA right or wrong BSA attitude? Why should you quit if your values are compromised by National policy? What makes this their movement instead of yours? I write letters all the time, some have even been answered. If all the people who are involved with Scouting that disagree with the present policy on Gays refused to allow FOS (Friends of Scouting, which is our name for the annual hit the parents up for a check night) Texas would be on the next flight out wanting to know what the problem is. Money and the witholding of it gets attention. You have stated repeatedly what a great program you think Scouting is, shouldn't you be willing to stand up to those who would cause you the quit because you felt you had to compromise yourself inorder to folow their rules?

Mike Long, Mike, I am not suggesting anyone of us are kids in fact I am stating that we are not kids. I have no problem people who have different views than I in fact I welcome it. I too have changed my views on certain topics as I have grown. I never ment to offend anyone. I simple see things differently than you do. On another thread we discussed a scoutmaster who was a DI and runs his troop autocratically, little patrol method, no PLC control, no boy run troop. Do you think for a minute that Council would tell the CO that if this troop didn't start delivering the Scout Program properly their charter wouldn't be renewed? I have never heard of a charter not being renewed unless there was a criminal charge involved. I love this program, whats more I believe in it and because of leaders like you, Bob White, evmori, Old Grey Eagle et.al. I know that it will survive no matter what differences of opinion we have because you believe in it also. You state that you used to share "That View" which one is that.

People, we are not kids. Does anyone think that if National was in danger of losing it's pay check it wouldn't change policy to appease the masses? If morality was such a big thing why hasn't National made a policy before. Until now it has been the CO that was the deciding factor in who was eligible to be a leader. When the CO said gays are OK and the LDS and SCLC said they would fold their tents if National didn't make a rule, National made a rule.

NJCub Scouter, You wrote: I also see it as an issue of "someone trying to impose their views on others," but I suspect that I am referring to different "someones" than you are. If by this you mean National trying to impose it's views on local troops I think you've missed the issue. If you don't share National's views you need to find another organization OR work to change the National's views. But to take National to court to force you're views on them is wrong. Please understand that when I say "you" I don't mean you personally NJCubScouter. If you want to join my club you follow my rules. If the "someone" you are refering to are the religous organizations which provide the bulk of our membership and there fore get the bulk of National's ear, again I feel you have missed the issue. The straight is normal anything else is SICK mentality has been the cornerstone of these religions since there beginning. Morally straight has never included being gay. If people want that to change they need to get enough people to boycott BSA that it becpomes financially better for National to back the new group. Let's face it National is a Corporation and like any Corporation money is the bottom line. National is not going to go against those who provide the capitol. Change follows the money when the people in charge of deciding policy get paid. If this was left up to popular vote and decided by individual moral views I still think the "Keep it Straight" group will out number the "Open Door Policy" group.

Bob White, Sorry I didn't make myself clear Bob. When I suggested you check with lawyers I was refering to the question of whether National , Council or for that matter anyone other than the CO has any claim what so ever to troop funds or equiptment.

As usual Bob White has the information. I was under the impression that the First Clas First Year approach was brought in in 1965 when they revised the Handbook at that time but that is not important. The reasons Boys who attain First Class in the First year tend to stay in Scouts longer (according to studies and surveys I've seen in relation to Training Trainers) is that these boys have a.) Have mastered outdoor skills which have built self esteme and confidence. b.) Patricipated in several overnight campouts, which they had a voice in planning. (self determination) c.) Have learned skills they feel will benifit them for the rest of their lives. I can't say these are universaly true but these are the top three responses I've bben shown. The focus I've always felt should be mastering the skills rather that being exposed to them but that's another thread.

Responding to NJCubScouter post of 4/2. The troop doesn't "Turn over" anything to the "LBA" the troop never acquires anything to begin with. Funds are raised by the "LBA" for the troop needs. Equiptment is purchased by the "LBA" and used by the troop at no cost. The "LBA" does carry a not for profit status (exactly how forms are worded I don't know as I've said my troop doesn't do this) I know that the "LBA" isn't the CO. It doesn't "hold the money and equiptment it owns them". Responding to Bob White, Bob you should really check this out with lawyers familiar with suits brought against National because of something Troop Leaders have done. DE's will tell you how they would like things to be. Having been around in the early 70's when 90% of the troops in our District folded within a three year period, I am familiar with whether Council can demand money or equiptment. Again this is why you are NOT authorized to use the BSA uniform, Logo, or Name to promote troop fund raisers. Pop Corn yes because Council gets a share.

Evmori, LLT?? Never heard of a pre-JLT approach. As a Trainer for my district I am VERY interested. I post this here because maybe others are interested too. Can you explain the approach.

NJCubScouter, Obviously I misunderstood your reference to a nation at war. I don't look at this as much as a gay/straight issue as I do an issue of someone trying to impose their views on others. I don't care what two grown people do in the privacy of their own home. But to make it public and then insist that I accept it is offensive. I have gay friends, I invited one to my wedding, HE brought his BOYFRIEND. My Mother almost have a coronary. These people know that I would not allow them to be leaders in our troop. I respect their rights they respect mine. My reference to page 53 of the handbook was to the deffinition of brave as it is written there. A Scout has the courage to stand up for what he believes in even if people laugh at him or threaten him. Yes the gay/Eagle scouts are showing bravery, they are demanding to be heard. As for compromise in the days after the 9/11 attack I was refering to a compromise with Osma not the people hiding him. If Bush tried to reach a compromise with Osam that didn't include is standing trial the people would impeach him.

OK Let me try to resond to some of the questions. No a unit money- earning app is not filled because the unit isn't the one raising the funds that is the whole point. The unit supports the (for the sake of space I'll refer to the benevolent association as LBA) The unit supporst the LBA the same as it would the PTA when we act as ushers or the rotory when we help with their pasta dinner. The troop supports the community by helping a number of the social groups. The LBA isn't a laundaring device it is an alternate means of handleing troop assets. As to protection Bob, I'd like to think that National would support me in a suit brought by my CO but given the way it handles most other legal matters I doubt it. National generally tries to distance it self from anything which they didn't have a legal responsibility for. The policy is that BSA is not a franchise and National has no legal responsibilty for a troop. Bob you say that the DE will ask that the equiptment be used for another youth group or be RETURNED to BSA. You are right on the money 99.9% of the things you've posted IMHO but this is the 0.01% The CO owns the equiptment lock stock and barrel and BSA has no claim to anything. If you CO decides to fold your unit and take your trailer it is their property. The money can go anywhere the CO wants it to go and the equiptment is theirs to do with as they like. National can't have it both ways if they are not responsiblr for the actions of a leader or the troop, then they can't claim the property. There is no partnership. As long as you state that the fund raisers are for LBA it's not fraud. Our CO is the Knights of Columbus and the local chapter has a building which is called the K of C Hall. It's owned by "The Chris Club" a not for profit organization composed of K of C members and serves exactly the purpose I'm talking about. When I was a scout our troop was sponsored by our Catholic Church which was owned by the Arch Diocess but the equiptment and funds were held by the Holly Name Assoc. The HNA was run by local people and had no obligation to the Arch Diocess. This is not an attempt to hide anything. If the CO isn't comfortable with this they dissovle the troop, fire the leaders whatever they choose. The CO and COR still have the final word over how the troop runs. It's a matter of ownership of funds and materials. As I said my troop doesn't do this my COR is an Eagle with plams, Vigil honors and Silver Beaver recognition. Also several of the K of C members are also Scoutmasters so they understand BSA policy and politics. They also have no contact with the troop. They are a means of obtaining a Charter. We meet at our church and receive and expect nothing from the K of C.

On another discussion page there is a post concerning a group of leaders who took Troop equiptment and Funds and went to another Troop. The Chartering Organization of the original Troop tried to recover the gear and funds but the only way to do that is small claims court. This raises the question of who do you name as defendant? The Scoutmaster? The Committee Chair? The Treasurer? The entire Troop Committee? Every person on the Charter over the age of 21? The Chartering Organization in question has decided not to press charges but what if they were determined to. How do we, as leaders, protect ourselves? Yes 99% of us run an Honest Troop and could account for every penny and produce every tent peg but should we think in terms of protection in this day and age of law suits? Let's even take this one step further what if your chartering organization under goes a leadership change and they decide that they cannot in good consience associate with BSA. They demand all the money and gear you have worked twenty years to collect. Perfectly leagal and we all know everything belongs to the Chartering Organization. Finally I get to my real question. How do you feel about "dummy fronts" By this I mean an organization created to hold troop money and gear aside from the Chartering Organization. Let's say for the sake of discussion that the leaders in my Troop decide to form the "LongHaul Benevolent Group" This groups sole purpose is the perpetuation of my troop. When we sell popcorn the money goes into the Troop account run by Council. But when we hold a pancake Breakfast it is advertized as The "LongHaul Benevolent Group" pancake breakfast for the benifit of Troop XYZ. All the money from Troop fund raisers and the troop equiptment is held in the groups name. My Troop doesn't do this but I know of a group that does. Comments?

NJCub Scouter, You ask "Who needs a united country(in time of war)" Do I take that to mean you support our response to 9/11/01? Stand up to terrorist as long as peopled died first but if the terorist is only trying to hurt you financally turn the other cheek. Don't stand up for your right to choose who you associate with is some one may be offended. See page 53 of the Handbook, read the part about being brave. Compromise? What would your feelings be if President Bush announced that the United States would be willing to agree to a compromise with those responsible for 9/11/01. No retaliation not criminal trials "Let's sit down and talk this out." A couple of thousand dead could lead to some meaninful discussion.

Sctmom, This is definately a topic for Scoutmaster conferences and Boards of Review. The Scoutmaster conference prepares the boy to Stand for Review. It preparation for the day when the boy stands before an employer and lets that person know why he should be hired and what a mistake it would be for the company not to hire him. It is also the time for the Scoutmaster to get the boys take on how the Scoutmaster is doing. It's my chance as a Scoutmaster to Stand for review by this scout. "What are we doing that you like most?" "What do we do that you don't like?" "What do you want to do that we aren't doing?" "What would you like to see changed?". The Board of Review askes questions of the boy to see if he is ready to advance but also to find out if I'm doing my job. It's their chance to check on my program from the boys perspective. Good programs benifit from input given from different angles. It's been a long time long time since I've viewed Scouting from an 11 year olds perspective, I need a reality check at times.

Where are the proof readers when I need them. When testing the MSR bottles put the IN a pot of hot water not ON.

SouthPoleScout, Not knowing where you are located it's hard to recomend a specific stove. As Bob White said altitude and temp are big factors and play a big role in deciding which stove "to invest in". When you are buying a piece of equiptment you want to aim for the center of you use curve. By that I mean that you decide what your needs are and buy something which can be used most often. As an example I recomend that our new scouts DON'T buy expensive 0 degree sleeping bags even though we tent camp in 0 degree weather. A good 40 degree bag with quilt liner will work just fine and can be used at summer camp when it's 80 degrees at night. Same with stoves. Propane and other compressed gas stoves don't function well at high altitude or low temp. 40 degrees can be low temp for some stoves as the canister frosts up and pressure drops. Why does your son need his own stove? Backpacking (this was originally posted in High Adventure) is team oriented so the "group" doesn't carry redundant weight. All that said, as a long term investment, I would go with the MSR Whisperlite Internationale. If it burns this stove can use it as fuel. It has exchangable fittings for different fuels. INVEST IN THE BASE. Again as Bob White pointed out this stove tips under weight. I don't have a problem with who carriesd the fuel, adult or youth as long as the MSR bottle is good. We test ours by placing them, open in a refrigerator over night and then capping them. They are then placed on a pot of 120 degree water, cap down. No bubbles after four or five minutes equals good bottle/good gasket. These stoves don't require refueling because the canister is the fuel tank. We used these at Philmont this summer, had two stoves and used 2 1/2 bottles of fuel for the entire ten person crew over ten days. Adults are required for campouts where stoves are used (as opposed to patrol outings where we limit cooking options) so supervision issue is covered. My dime says the Whisperlite will give you the widest range of uses.

dcviper, Welcome. I'm sure that when the rest of the group wakes up you will get a number of replys. Don't you just love having so many experienced Scouters to tap into, I love it. I use an internal frame. I have been to Philmont twice with it as well as local week long backpacking treks and have nevr had the stays warp while in a pack line. I am not familiar with you style of pack but I own a Kelty external and judging from the quality of it I don't think your stays are going to be light enough to be distorted. Just had a thought! When I went to Philmont as a youth we used external back boards and lashed our packs to them. Some of us had packs weighing 100 lbs. (Stories about how we snuck these past the rangers eyes). If you load the top with enough weight yes you can disfigure the stays, but with today's focus on lite and spartan you should be fine.

Well first we must define terms. If "cool" means accepted by his peer group, I don't think we have much control over that. If "cool" means fun then it's a matter of finding out what the boys want to do and learn. This feed back should come from your PLC. You said the boy dropped out. How much involvement did he have in the PLC? How involved was he in his patrol and the troop. What I'm asking is did he give scouting a chance?