Mr. Boyce

I agree with the above poster. The "value" of this kind of knife, for all but the most dedicated tinkerers, is that it's something you can play with. So playing around with a knife is good sense???

In my experience, by the time I was 15 the OA provided about the only interesting thing left in the program for me. I think the BSA should keep studying ways to retain older, experienced boys, ideally in the troop setting.

. . . what are good strategies you've found?

I'm a size 34 and I ordered large; I guess I'm a medium in their book.

If the girls were allowed into the Boy Scouts, you would find that troop leadership would become mostly female, with boys kicking cans, starting fires and getting into trouble at the periphery. Big developmental differences at that age. Check out the studies that have been done. I'd keep with the approach we've always had. I think it was set up for the right reasons, and those reasons still make sense today. I'm sympathetic, though, to girls wanting a serious outdoor program. I don't have a good answer for that other than maybe knocking on the doors of the Girl Scout headquarters.

I was in NESA and for me it was a waste of money. The organization SHOULD try to be a scout alumni/scouter recruitment/volunteer recruitment/fundraising group.

Kill the epaulets. Heck, I've thought about just removing my own, just to be done with the doo-dads.

Over the past two years or so, I"ve lost a great deal of sympathy for the homosexuals due to their antagonist activism. I try hard to overlook their aggressive, stop-my-fingers-in-my-ears approach when it comes to dealing with any reasonable objection to their desires and political whims!

It's interesting to see the different motivations. I'm in it to do cool things, and BSA awards seem to me something you give to the kids since it really can mean something to them. As an adult, I can't say I'm motivated by the patches. I respect what oldgrayeagle says about honoring those who gave him the awards.

I wonder if, at some point, the BSA realized that the General Public viewed the Eagle rank as something cool and admirable, and realized that by pushing Eagle-hood, they could retain members and membership dollars. For the original question, I would guess that the BSA would become more of a club, and troops would end up with kids all about the same age. Troops with older kids would do more high adventure; younger kids would toy with fire. The chief problems is that a big education element drops out: why do merit badges? You would probably end up with the BSA handing out participation patches all the time.

To respond to the original question is tough; troops really can differ. My old troop hardly emphasized rank or advancement; that seemed to be left pretty much to each scout. So I view earning Eagle rank as a good bit of self-motivation. I really hate hearing of parents or scouters pushing and pushing kids to "make" Eagle.

In my state, there is both a state museum association and a state historical agency. Both should be ready and helpful.

Anyone who suggests that boys might just like being on their own without the female of the species will surely get mowed down! A couple of years ago there was a very informative bit in the newspaper from the admissions counselor of an elite all-girls high school, and she made very well the case for the value of a gender-specific institution. I could see her point and appreciate the value of what they were doing.

Is there a movement to ban the summer shirtless look for males? I was discussing this recently with a female friend who gets pretty disgusted at the shirtless look. But when it's hot and I have to mow my lawn, it's what I would like to do, except, as I get older, I have more aesthetic reasons for not baring my chest to the neighborhood. I'm being considerate, I suppose. I suppose I also don't want to see myself so post-buff. But when I was younger, heck, going shirtless and shoeless in the summertime was part of the good stuff of summer.

Given the high cost of the new shirts, I'm tempted to check with my tailor and the local fabric shop to see whether it's cheaper to simply have her make a scout shirt for me. In this case, I could simply have a collarless one made up.

In my experience as a boy scout, it was GREAT and REFRESHING to be away from my parents. Really good chance for personal independence; a breath of fresh air. Paul Theroux's recent article in the NY Times also cites his similar enjoyment of being away from his parents and standing on his own two feet.

I think Vickie's got it right: individual responses will vary. I've seen Jewish individuals just not care; others have, in similar situations. Myself, I was once very offended when I discovered at a convention that the only meal being served was pork! That's a bit like only serving meat on Fridays during Lent. . . you just have to be considerate! As a Catholic, I sometimes grit my teeth hearing some of the more evangelical expostulations. But it's a part of being grown-up and mature; we live in a society with many different kinds of people.

A footnote to the above: one can be opposed to open homosexuals being involved in scouting and not be "homophobic". I have not met very many homophobic people in my lifetime.

Interesting. I'm in an area without many Mormons, so it's educational hearing this stuff. But back to the lawsuit, the nuts of the thing is that the BSA got sued because a guy on a church's troop committee okayed a pervert running a troop. Is that it, boiled down?

I don't see having a no homosexuals allowed policy as "demonizing" anybody. And "homophobic" isn't really very accurate, either, since there's no fear involved. The more research I try to find on this issue, the more prudent BSA policy seems to be to me.

This is a quiet travesty. Here the BSA is "damned if you do, damned if you don't." Somehow the BSA is expected to keep better records than law enforcement, not only today in 2010, but back in the 1960s, when even law enforcement itself did a mediocre job with this stuff. Somehow the BSA in the 1960s was supposed to give this issue the very high priority that it now receives in 2010. Somehow the BSA is expected to divine, by smell?, what new scouters with no police record may end up doing. There just seems to be no reason or logic in this decision. . . other than, it's sad this happened, let's toss money on it.

Years back, when I was a star scout, I wore one. I kind of liked the fact that it wasn't a permanent attachment.

I think this whole "hey, we're gonna get great new technology out of this!" sounds a bit like we're expecting Christmas or Superman or something. It's an unproven assertion. But it's nice to see optimism. And is there any guarantee that the nifty new toys are worth all that cost?

Ouch, Kathy, one of the joys of my scouting experience as a boy was being out in the open air and cussing well and hard. The stealing stuff you mentioned, though, would break my boat on it.

Some interesting points. I think the manned spaceflight stuff is pointless. A good way to keep currently employed people with political clout employed. There is a point of diminishing returns from the Space Race Approach to technological invention. Let's acknowledge, like Merlin, the good stuff that's come up. . . but I'm skeptical equivalent "Big Bang" techno results are going to follow. I'm up for non-manned stuff. Hubble's been great!