mk9750

Rooster, I reread my post and see that I may have been confusing. The question about which Point of the Law the Scout would drop made the boy squirm, because he felt that there were none that deserved to be ommitted. When he couldn't answer that question is when we gave him an out and asked which Point he struggles with in his life. This was much easier for him, as we ask a similiar question in rank BORs. Although I don't feel there is any value trying to make a Scout squirm, if it happens to happen, it is interesting to find out the underlying reasons. In my instance, this young man basically refused to consider the Scout Law without all 12 Points. Although I knew the boy well, and was not suprised by his response, the others on the BOR had a very high opinion of him after that. Sorry for the confusion. Mark

I believe that the majority of mainland Americans view premarital sex as immoral. I believe that the same group views homosexuality as immoral. Based on that, both circumstances should cause the person who finds him or herself in one of them should determine that they are not eligible for membership, and not even apply, should they be in the USA proper. My question is whether the same opinion on the morality of premarital sex exists in Guam. If it does, then the young lady should not even be applying for membership, and if she does, it shouldb e denied. If however, Guam has a differnet standard, even though it is a BSA program, I think that should be considered. TJ and others, before you use my position to advance yours (local control), I think there could be a tremendous difference in cultures in mainland USA and Guam. I do not believe the same level of disparity exists within our geographic boarders. While certainly, San Fransisco may have a culture that accepts homosexuality, I think the the "American culture", the morality of the nation, would reject homosexuality as immoral. It would be wrong of the BSA, I think, to enforce their standard on another country's cultural beliefs. It is, however, very proper that the BSA enforces their standard stateside. Mantua, I too applaud your very serious consideration of this issue. I hope and pray for the best results for all involved. Mark

Sometimes these discussions make me think we've got the worst Troop that ever donned uniforms. Other times I wonder how it could be that someone else is experiencing a problem because we've just never seen it. This one is in the latter category. Not that we plan things this way to prevent rowdiness, but I think what helps us that first of all, every boy has a very specific assignement in addition to setting up his tent when we get to the campsite of Friday night. That helps burn off some energy. Then, snacks are always either Mexican Madness, a taco salad - like conconction, or hard pretzels, depending on how long it took to get to camp. Either way, it's not high in sugar. Lastly, the older guys get the priveledge of staying up and B.S.ing around the fire while it burns itself out, while the younger guys go to bed. The SPL always makes a point of congratulating whichever of the Patrols were quietest while he was still up, and to some degree, that's one of the criteria for being invited to stay up "with the older guys". Act maturely and keep quiet, get to stay up a little later. Horse around, and it seems like it takes an extra couple of cycles of campouts to get the "invitation". Somehow, we never seem to have a problem. Mark

Dan? I have no idea where I can up with Dan. Sorry! To make it up, you can call me anything but Late for dinner. NO ONE calls me late for dinner!! Mark

Eagle74, Once someone used that as a follow up question. I thought the boy's head was going to explode! He wanted so much to have an answer, but he just couldn't choose one. Finally, we let him off the hook by asking him which Point he struggles with the most. If you enjoy watching a boy squirm during a BOR, that's a great question to ask. But I decided it wasn't a fair question, so I've never asked it. Mark

Having only seen project booklets from boys in our Troop, I agree with Rooster. Much depends on the extent of the project, as Ed says, but Rooster's point about the concept of the project being what is submitted for approval is right on. Like most everything else in Scouting, the Eagle project is a learning experience. I think very few boys will have the ability to conceptualize and carry out a project that is challenging enough to be acceptable before they start. That's why they do the project, to learn how. I think we as adults would agree that the more detailed the plan is, the easier the execution will be. But a Boy Scout most likely will not have this understanding on his own. Those who approve his plans aught to make sure he has enough detail to make failure unlikely, but the real value in the project is how he overcomes the obstacles along the way. Some will be problems he creates for himself by a lack of planning, others will be problems which were unforeseeable until the project commences. But it is the experience gained by working through these problems that shows evidence of the leadership skills and cements a boy's position as and Eagle candidate. If I were responsible for approving plans (and I only did one time, for the Scoutmaster's son), I would make certain that his plan showed evidence of a commitment to perform a certain level of service at a predetermined level of quality. After that, whatever details the boy wants to include are for his own benefit, and I would congratulate him for his planning. But I wouldn't require any more than the above before I signed off. Mark

Acco40, I started reading your post thinking I was in vehement disagreement with you, but as I went on, it became obvious we actually agree. We request that the PLC do the annual planning calender with rank advancement as one of three priorities. They comply. The program makes the oppurtunity available to finish 1st Class in about 16 months. We do try to remind them that what they are doing may make them eligible to be signed off for a requirement. If they don't take the steps to complete the requirment, or if they don't ask to be tested (if approprate) and signed off, we don't make them do it. And that's often why it takes a few boys more than 16 months to get to 1st Class. I do disagree, however, with your position that getting boys to 1st Class isn't a goal of the program. Too much of the Aims of Scouting are accomplished through all that completing rank requirements provide for us not to make acheiving 1st Class a goal. After that, a boy as plenty of other oppurtunities to work toward the Aims, using the Methods. They don't have to continue advancing to continue getting value from the program. But it is very difficult to make that same statement before a boy reaches 1st Class. And if 1st class isn't a purpose for the program, what then should guide the youth leadership as they plan events? BTW, I apoligize for all the typos in my previous post. I neglected to proofread before I pushed the post button. Any errors you see in my posts are generally ignorance. That post had far too many instances of carelessness. Mark

Bob, Very well - reasoned explaination of the two topics. I have said we do not subscribe to First Class / first Year, mostly because I have alsways read into the program that "first year" was a rigid twelve months. your post suggests that it isn't as rigid as that. If you say "14 months", than I think if it's stretched just a little more, we do follow the program. Most of our boys cross in April or May. We work like crazy to provide all new Scouts the oppurtunity to do all requirements for all the ranks to 1st Class by the time of our Court of Honor right after their second summer camp, or @ 16 months after they cross. the only two requirments we cannot (or will not) make available is the 2nd Class req for the drug and alchohol awareness program, and the 1st Class req to discuss with an elected official. But the program year our Troop develops takes into account all of the other requirments, and takes this whole time to make happen comfortably. We have had a few boys accelerate the process, and more than a few who take as much as 28 months (an extra year). But the vast majority of our guys finish up with Boards of Review at or right after summer camp. the other emphasis of the First Class First Year plan is the new Scout Patrol. We go back and forth on utilizing this. In years when we have had 12 - 15 boys cross, we have utilized the NSP and created two new Patrols. We've also had 2 - 4 boys from a couple of different Packs cross, and in trying to keep them together, without forcing them together, we've placed new Scouts into existing Patrols. I've paid very close attention to the Advancement progress and the attrition rate in both circumstances, and, at least in our Troop, there is no real difference. At least not for the new Scouts. We get the chance to make Troop guides out of a few more older boys the way we do it, in that we still assign a Troop guide to each Patrol's new Scouts. Mark

My wife uses a mesh material that is kind of rubberized to keep the chair cushions from moving around on the dining room chairs. I've also seen it used to line cupboard shelves. My son stole a couple of them before one campout because he was having the same problem with his therma rest. It worked, he went out and bought a roll. After a few uses, it kind of balls up and become a pain, so he just cuts more off the roll. He went through about 1/2 the roll in his 7 years of Scouting, and I think I remember hearing him say it cost about $4.00. By the way, let me take this oppurtunity to say thank you to everyone here who has ever been a positive influence on a boy's life. And that means each and every one of you. My son's Eagle Court of Honor was a week ago. The pride I have for my son is only surpassed by the gratitude I have for Scouting and the fine people who make it happen. Just in case someone hasn't said thank you to you, THANK YOU TO YOU! Mark

TOO MUCH BILL O'REILLY? That's like camp food being too good or a girl being too pretty. Can't happen. Mark

Eamonn, I think we go to the same summer camp you are talking about (Heritage). If so, I agree that DE's being "asked" to go to fill in where needed is probably not of much value. They are staffed perfectly, I think. They might get by with a couple less, but the program wouldn't be as good. They certainly don't need any more, IMHO. That staff really jells as a unit over their weeks together. The addition of a couple of added bodies who only stay during the day can't be much help, and might actually be a detriment. I do disagree about the fact that parents aren't there. At least in our Troop, we historically have had no more than two adult leaders, but at least 4 and as many as 9 other parents there. Now, your DEs don't need to spend time with us, as we come from out of Council. But my experience has been that plenty of parents go to summer camp. Dan, Way to go getting to JLT as much as you do. I am coming to believe that a well run Council JLT is the best offering the BSA makes to boys. It's value to an attendee is only surpassed by its value to the youth staff. Thanks for your support on behalf of the boys in your Council (as if I could ever really speak for the boys in your Council!). Mark

AdvanceOn, We have the same experience as you describe. Council JLT here is excellent, but our boys have increased their leadership skills exponentially when serving on staff. This is very close to our Troop practice, based on the medical profession: See one, Do one, Teach one. Go to JLT (see the Skill). Go back to your Troop and practice it (Do one). Come back as staff and instruct others (Teach one). It's a beautiful program that has never failed us. Mark

Packsaddle, "Golf"? Ouch, that hurt! I think you're right on the money with your breakdown of good and bad MBs at summer camp. My only experience contrary to yours is Env. Science. Despite the fact (and you are right) that the badge requires sitting and observing, doing this badge at summer camp is far more likely to be of value to a Scout than doing on his own (at least at the summer camp we attend). Other than that though, I agree. Handicraft are supposed to be fun and expose a Scout to a new craft. The rquirements are minimal. If this isn't as tough as it could be, the damage is minimal. Scoutcraft MBs depend completely on the instructors, and how they compare with what's available at home. Aquatics are almost always better at camp. I've never liked the rifle and shotgun program where we go, but I think that is just a local problem. At our camp's Trail to 1st Class, we love our guys to go through this, but we want them to ask guys in our Troop to test and sign them off a day or two later. We've seen too many times where Scouts were told en masse what a compass does, and never got to actually use it. No way we are signing off for something like that. The key, as most have pointed out here, is to check out every program in advance. Mark

Although I am not going (maybe I'm not qualified to answer the question!), our venture Patrol is leaving for the Appalacian Trail thsi weekend. They try to keep packs, including ALL gear, to the following: Adults: 48 pounds Older, bigger youth: 52 pounds Younger, smaller youth 41 pounds Most adjustment is made at the pack weigh in, where if someone is overweight (their pack!!), everything they are bringing personally is reviewed by the group to determine it's value, and if better / lighter alternatives are available. Once that process is complete, if the pack is still over weight, common gear is redistributed. This has worked well for our group over the years. The first time I heard that adults carried less than boys, I questioned it. It was explained to me that adult knees don't do as well on the ups and downs of the AT, and therefore they get a break. Have fun and good luck!! Mark

I always ask: "If there was a 13th point to the Scout Law, what should it be?" I also spend a lot of time asking about how as an Eagle Scout the candidate will give back to Scouting and his community. And one that I have heard a couple of times from someone else: "Is it more important to meet a goal or maintain your integrity?" At the beginning of the BOR, this person usually tries to put a Scout at ease by saying that there are no right or wrong answers. At the end, he always admits that this one does have a right answer to him. I'm proud to say that every Eagle in our Troop has gotten this one right. Mark

My philosophy on this topic runs very close to Bob's. However, in that I am not a SM, my philospophy means very little. Our SM practices an approach similiar to KS's. He rarely allows a boy to actually fail, at least when the consequences will be felt by a number of boys. But I think he goes too far.If he sees something is not quite right, he will hint, then he will hint more strongly, then he will suggest, then he will suggest more strongly, until he gets to the point where he basically is telling them how to do something. I think the problem for us is two fold. We certainly struggle allowing the boys to really be in control. But I think more importantly, our SM puts the cart before the horse with regard to training. Our cycle kind of goes: Elect leader, hand him a job description (in the form of a Patrol Leader's Handbook), let him have at it, send him to Troop JLT, let him have at it some more, send him to Council JLT, let him have at it some more, then criticize when he doesn't live up to expectations. It is during this cycle that the progressive interference from the SM takes place. I think I may be leaving a bad, or maybe incomplete, impression of our SM. He is a great guy, and very dedicated. But he has a tough time allowing the guys to fail, and I think he puts too much emphisis on JLT training as the vast majority of training a boy gets. He has allowed the Troop JLT to be completely boy run. And I think this is good thing, except that it often can't be complete enough to really teach a boy his duties. And during that time before he gets Troop JLT, and then before he goes to Council JLT, a new leader is pretty much on his own. Again, in an effort to be fair, we have asked specific ASMs to be responsible for specific Patrols, and they often don't have the training themselves, or just can't be there enough to be the mentor that a new leader needs. But again, I see that as the SM's responsiblity. As an example, we have been getting a rash of complaints that meetings are getting boring, and one boy actually quit (he's since come back after all his best friends, all Scouts, talked him into coming back). Fortunatley, the SM recognizes that this is a real problem. Unfortunately, his reaction was to take over planning the next 3 or 4 meetings. I realize a few things are conspiring to make this seem like a reasonable course of action to him, like the SPL being on Council JLT staff, and therefore gone this week. But I tried to get him to understand that our job was to coach the junior leadership (in this case, the ASPL, who should fill in for the SPL) how to do a better meeting plan. I even feel that if this doesn't work, it's still better than stepping in and doing the job for them. I have sugested, and we are kicking around, the possibilty of the adults doing a mock PLC and a mock meeting, hoping to show and inspire these guys to do better. Does anyone have an opinion on this? Ultimately, I think a blend of Bob's philosophy and everyone else's, where a SM hints, and then suggests a better solution, but then steps back and let things play out (assuming no health, safety, or legal issues) may be the best. But the SM, and anyone else on whom the troop depends to teach guys how to be leaders, have to do their job, first. Another long one. Gosh, words get to be like a drug for me. I've gotta learn to cut some. Mark

Wow, a voice of reason! Nicely said Rooster! Mark

All our Scouts pay when they sign up for the event. We offer no refunds, unless it is significantly in advance so that arrangements can be made. Reasonable exceptions are made in the case of illness, but those monies go into the Scout's Troop account, which can be used for another event. If it's the same person or two every time, I'd be getting the youth leadership to make those people responsible for something significant, like cooking, to make it far mor edifficult for them to back out without reason. Mark

TJ, In my own very unscientific poll on this very issue, here are the statistics I can up with from parents of current and past members of our Troop: -Less than 1% disagree strongly enough with the policy that they would actively do something about it (one family made their son quit the Troop, stating the policy on homosexuals) -About 60 % agree with the policy but would probably not leave the organization or do anything active to prevent a change (you might phrase this as 60% as the middle of the road. However, they do have an opinion, and it is against homosexuals in Scouting. -About 3% have a strong enough opinion against having homosexuals in Scouting that they would actively campaign against it or quit if the policy were reversed. -the rest, about 36%, strongly, vocally oppose gays in Scouting, but don't know what they would do if the policy were reversed. I'd like to comment on the issue of homosexuality and morality. Yak Herder touched on this, but I think it is an important point. Society is what is changing, not morality, or maybe better stated, not the BSA's position on what is moral. 40 years ago, it wans't necesary for the BSA to make a formal proclamation as to whether homosexuality was moral or not. Society said it was immoral. Now, with society changing, the BSA felt it was appropriate to make public their stance on the morality of this issue (that's my take on what has happened). And their stance was formulated by the major owners of the program, the chartering organizations. Many of the chartering organizations represented continue to hold the traditional (or conservative, if you prefer) beleive that homosexuality is immoral. Hence, the BSA's position on this matter. Right now, society still believes murder to be wrong. If, many years from now, societal shifts cause us to be more accepting of murder and murderers, I'm betting that the BSA would make public its stance on murder and declare it immoral and make those who are murderers give up their membership. It's not that they allow murderers now. The response then would be to make certain society knows that the BSA's values are remaining constant in the face of changing societal norms. I don't mean to belittle this issue, it is important. But I have to tell you I appreciate the discussion in that it sharpens my sense of debate and logic. As someone has said, some of us are on one side, some on the other, and neither of these two groups are likely to change their minds. But it is valuable to me to have to think logically about something important. Mark

In as much as I have come to respect the opinions of most everyone on this forum, I've got a situation for which I would love your feedback. A few weeks ago, the caretaker of our local BSA camp approached our Scoutmaster and put an idea in his head that our Troop might want to consider adopting a campsite at the camp and start making some improvements. He mentioned that almost all of the deirable campsites are spoken for, and if we wanted to get a decent site, we should speak up quickly. The SM brought this up at an adult committee meeting. As the acting CC (the CC was sick), I strongly urged that the SM take this to the PLC to decide if, where, and what they could do. I also suggested that our committee be ready to provide resources as necesary if they decided to pursue this. The SM spoke further with the caretaker, and sent an e mail to the junior leadership making the sugestion that they should consider this. Just as a personal opinion, one of our weaknesses sometimes can be that we as adults in out Troop "strongly urge" the boys in the direction we think they should go. Some of us see it as a big weakness, other adults don't see any problem with it. As much as I don't like it, even I participate sometimes (mea culpa). As a response to the e mail to the Junior Leadership, an ASM responded to all suggeting that this would a perfect project to divide up by Patrols and make certain sections of the project the responsiblity of specific Patrols. I responed to all by congratulating the ASM and adding my two cents, most of which came from what I have learned here. The SM responded saying that although he agreed, since our Troop's reputation is on the line, we shouldn't leave this kind of project to the boys (that is my translation, not his actual words). Here is my response: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX " Even if what needs done first is a shelter, I'd still have the PLC run the work and assign jobs to the patrols. There is no need for adults to interfere with the PLC. When they need us for advice or resources, they should know to ask us. If it's their Troop, which it is, it should be their project. "Certainly, they won't have the skills necessary to do the job on their own. And it is irresponsible if we let them. But it would be equally irresponsible to take away a great opportunity to learn leadership, teamwork, and the hard skills that they would learn by doing the project themselves. "I often think that this is one of the weakest parts of our Troop. We too often tell the boys what to decide they will do, them tell them how they should decide how to go about doing it. We do it for very understandable reasons: We don't want them to fail. Sometimes it's because something just needs to get done, and we can't afford the risk that the boys can't or won't do it. Sometimes it's because we (as adults) commit to something and then don't want to be embarrassed if the boys don't meet adults' expectations. I don't think this is the way Boy Scouts is supposed to work. It is the boys' Troop. They decide what they want to do, consistent with the three Aims and eight Methods of Scouting. They ask the adults for resources when they can't provide them for themselves. Then they go at it. They do the best they can (and one of our jobs is to require that of them), and the results are the results, be they good or bad. But in the end, it is the character, leadership, and skills building that really is the result of whatever they attempted, not the edifice or improvement left after the work was done. "I hesitate offering my suggestions here, because I don't won't the PLC swayed by my thoughts. But were I on the PLC, I'd suggest that they get some input from a knowledgeable adult about the processes, materials and skills nectar to build a pavilion, they divide what they get into manageable assignments for each of the patrols. Each Patrol Leader should make assignments for all of the elements that Patrol is responsible, and get going on it. "These boys can do this. I am abundantly confident. all we have to do is step out of the way, and be ready to provide any resources they need to make it happen on their own. If I'm wrong, if they know they can't do this on their own, then they shouldn't even try. "(SM), if you think I'm wrong, run it by (the caretaker) or someone at the Scout office. I'm guessing they'd love to see one of these projects really boy accomplished (if they haven't already)." XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Am I on target? Do I accurately portray what Scouting is? I don't want to make enemies, and our SM is a terrific guy. But I think I am ready to use what I have learned here and take a stand to push our Troop to the next level of youth leadership. Am I on track here? Thanks for your help. You guys and gals are a tremendous resource, and I'm glad I found you all. Mark

TJ, Your example of the neighborhood was well thought, and except for one major flaw, I would accept it. But that one flaw is big enough to keep me from seeing your side. In your example, the status quo changed. You certainly would have a responsiblity to defend the status quo. If however, the neighborhood had been established in a manner contrary to your beliefs, should you decide to move in knowing this, you should be bound by their system. In this case, knowing that they do not match your ideals, it would be unwise to move into that neighborhood. If you moved in anyway, you accept the consequences. As far as BSA policy goes, you knew before you requested a leadership position what the rules were. It's a far different issue when viewed from that light. There also is one other difference between the situations that come into play here. One could argue that the neighborhood has no right to discriminate against someone with different beliefs. As a "public" entity, laws do not allow discrimination like you describe. The BSA is a private organization, and they have that right, just like the locker room. I have a question or two for you. I assure you I will not use your answer to continue this debate (although I guess I can't promise on behalf of everyone else). I just want to understand better your situation. Am I right to say that you are not "out" in your community? If your are not "out", is your relationship with the BSA the reason you have not gone public? If it not the only reason, what are the others? Mark

OGE, I think I understand Ed's statement, because I think I feel the same way. During the last debate on this topic (I can't believe we're doing it again!), I came to respect and admire TJ. I think I even can say I like him. And I feel this way despite the fact that I abhor his lifestyle. I did question then, and I still question now, the incongruity in TJ's position that he is gay, he know's the BSAs position on gay leadership, and yet he continues to fail to act on the knowledge he has and quit on his own. This seems to me to be similiar to men not being permitted in a woman's locker room. The man can hide the fact that he is a man and gain entrance, but by doing so he does not become right. If a man finds himself in the woman's locker room, he should leave on his own, because he knows the rules prohibit it, and he knows what the likely opinion of the women in the locker room would be. If it takes him becoming an "avowed" man in this case before he leaves, he is not acting honorably in this situation. But TJ's error here does not negate the fact that he appears to be a warm, friendly, compasionate person, who I can respect, even despite that error. I discussed my position on homosexuality in great detail on the other thread. I'm not going to do it again. I just wanted to express how I can understand Ed's position. Mark

Bob, Is that true that BSA was an original founding organization? I had never heard that. If true, I'm definately going to tuck that somewhere for later use. Mark

DSteele, Your decision to remain reletively silent on this issue is fine with me also (as if you needed my permission!). "Discretion is the better part of valor" is often very true. Saltheart, You can make my arguements for me any day. You sure know how to turn a phrase! To all, I am fortunate that our local UW chapter has either not been pressured, or not succumbed, to the PC folks on this issue. Although I'd rather bypass the middle man (and do for much of my contribution to Scouting), I've taken the stance that in order for the UW to continue to want to fund Scouting in this area, they have to be reminded that Scouting is important. That is why I also contribute to the BSA through the UW. I always figured that they skimmed some off the top, but I don't know how much. Always figured it was a reasonable trade off for keeping BSA in the minds of the UW. Shoud the United Way in my area ever decide that they want to stop funding Scouting, I stand ready to be a real thorn in their side. I've already decided I am going to publicize the issue. I am a lowly unit volunteer, but I plan on doing what I can. Mark

Everyone here is, of course, correct. I would offer one word of caution. Before anyone assumes that the Scoutmaster is denying a boy the chance to earn Eagle Scout at whatever he says as too young, please make sure that age is really the root cause of the reservation. In our Troop, and apparently in many others, it is at the Scoutmaster conference that the SM asesses the Scout's leadership effort and is effort to live up to the Scout Oath and Law. Particularly with the leadership issue, what the SM says is a lack of satisfactory completion of leadership could be construed, especially by a young Scout, as meaning the SM thinks he's too young to be an Eagle Scout. Someone really aught to get clarification from the SM before jumping to conclusions. My opinion about young (13 and under) Eagle Scouts has already been posted and disected. I just don't believe there are very many boys who are mature enough at 12 and 13 to have completed the requirements for Eagle satisfactorily. And when I say not many, I am saying like 2 - 4 across the country in a year. But if they have, nothing should stop him from receiving his award, not even my opinion. Mark