packsaddle

scoutldr, Did you say 'Dooooouuggghnuuuts?' I'm drooling already. An aside, my guys do an experiment for Environmental Science in which they collect airborne particulates from different locations around their homes and neighborhoods. With remarkable consistency, the kitchen comes up as the worst. Worse than the driveway, the baseball field, the front yard. Only the roadside on a major highway exceeds it consistently. I suppose it's not much of an endorsement on cooking skills, but I think the indoor environment is usually worse than the outdoor environment for asthmatics, at least in our area. I could be wrong.

BW, Thanks for stating this so clearly. A simple majority of a small number of persons require our public silence on disagreements with BSA. The merits of the arguments are unimportant. They don't care that we are devoted to doing good things for young people. And if we are quiet about our personal lives they don't care about that either. This is a control issue, not a morality issue, nothing could be simpler. TwoCubDad, I appreciate your astute observations and I don't consider them over the line. In all the exchanges I've read, it seems that if BSA merely allowed public criticism, a majority of this criticism would go away. I have a mixed reaction. First, I feel that TJ should stay if he passes the background check. I've said this before. Second, the un-American way of coercing silence out of us should cause some good discussion for the boys during, for example, study of the Citizenship in the Nation MB. For that matter all of the Citizenship MBs. My boys have acute observation abilities and they are quick to identify hypocrisy and quick to point it out. One of my favorite scenarios: "A child, however, who had no important job and could only see things as his eyes showed them to him, went up to the carriage. "The Emperor is naked," he said. "Fool!" his father reprimanded, running after him. "Don't talk nonsense!" He grabbed his child and took him away. But the boy's remark, which had been heard by the bystanders, was repeated over and over again until everyone cried: "The boy is right! The Emperor is naked! It's true!" The BSA realized that the people were right but could not admit to that. They though it better to continue the procession under the illusion that anyone who couldn't agree with their policy was either immoral or unworthy. And they stood stiffly on their carriage, while behind them other professionals held their imaginary mantle." Sound familiar? Third, this divides our attention between two injustices, a misdirection. Given BSA's ineptitude in other areas, this is unlikely to be intentional. Of the three, I think their example for the boys is the worst. It smacks of another policy (use of tobacco) where they wink and say, "do as we say, not as we do". And the boys see this clearly. I have heard several times the sentiment that such hypocrisy itself should be grounds for dismissal. I agree. If true to their own avowed principles, they would fall on their own 'terrible swift swords'. As it is though, we can merely advise the boys that if they want to continue to be Boy Scouts, they should keep quiet, lest some public statement get them ejected. It's the BSA way, isn't it, the way of using fear to control?

OGE, R.Reagan...really now. That was as delicious as pierogies with sauteed onions, farmers cheese and mashed potatoes (that was cruel ScoutParent). But please don't forget about our coke-snorting and drunk-driving current POTUS and VP. Rooster, don't hurt yourself leaping out of the chair.

Bryan, I implore you to tell OGE that it's wrong. I'm getting hungrier by the moment. P.S. don't forget the prime rib thing.

OGE, I'll wager those memories represent some of your life's best times. I have similar ones. My mother still lives and I have tried repeatedly to reproduce some of the things she did in the kitchen, even with her help. It's just not the same because I think those great memories are part of the recipes. Bon appetit. Bryan, welcome to the forum. So spending $50k/mo is incentive to maintain BSA's policy how? One point that many of us have tried to make is that the policy is not to exclude gays, but rather to exclude persons who avow themselves as gay. BSA addresses absolutely none of the concerns you seem to have. Policy, as applied, does nothing to detect a sexual predator regardless of sexual identity...until their actions show them to be predatory. Then it is too late. The background check will weed out persons with court convictions, not personal ones. Those abuse lawsuits would be there anyway and the policy just adds others (Dale) needlessly. If you think statistics support the argument that Dale or TJ have predatory or some other kind of felonious tendency, I disagree. Every person, including you and me, should be judged as individuals, not as part of some pejorative group (Jews, blacks, Presbyterians, WASPS, etc.) Or have I misinterpreted civil rights laws? The constitution? If you are concerned about drugs and disease, I share your concern. But the appropriate policy to address those concerns would require mandatory testing. Is that what you advocate?

scoutldr, just a note. In NC, a person speeding over 80mph with a child in the auto may be prosecuted for child endangerment. I should note that I do not know this from personal experience but from another authority.

OK, BSA may be behind the times...blah, blah, blah. Sorry, I hit the button twice.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

OK, BSA may be behind the times when it comes to policy on piercings and tattoos. Anyone surprised? Normally I would consider this a matter of personal choice, but when practices such as these disqualify a person from being a blood donor (at least for the duration of the incubation period), I have a problem with the practice. There is a real risk and I tend to disapprove. In the comparison between love and hepatitis, for example, it is the hepatitis (or worse) that is forever. I objected to my daughter's ear piercings. I was ignored. We'll both get over it.

Don't stay gone for long! Believe it or not, I'll miss you and I've always known your heart was with the boys. That much, at least, we have had in common. Take your TDY in the wilderness and then return. I hope to read you again (and then argue about it). Essayons

My heart is always with the boys. How could I quit? I would stay and argue with curmudgeons.

OGE, That is almost exactly what we plan. Wow! Actually we are in pretty good shape for activities as it is. I have a couple miles of heavy rope and abundant timber so we do monkey bridges and stuff for regular meetings. But we weren't just going to let visitors watch...we were going to do a big cooking demo and let them share in the feast while the boys test the loading factors on the bridges. Food figures large in all our outings...I thought it probably would for the rest of the public too. Nice to know this is a tried-and-true approach. P.S. I was 5 when my family got their first 12" B&W Motorola. Probably scarred me for life. As for district or council involvement, our experience with them has been so miserable that we will just go it alone. Then we will be in control and can take all the credit. But we plan to do it this spring to pre-empt the normal roundup in the fall. As I said, the competition is fierce.

To me this is far more important than, say, camouflage clothing or sexual identity. Tobacco is a known immediate threat to health. It is hypocritical to tell the boys that tobacco products are prohibited while adults are allowed a smoking area. All tobacco products should be prohibited, period (thanks NJ). I further support lumping tobacco with alcohol and illegal drugs. Our troop is tobacco free as well, period. My opinion is that if an adult is so addicted that they can't go cold turkey for a weekend, or a week at camp, then they are not a good role model. Period. Summer camp is a great place to begin to kick the addiction. evmori, I am mystified as to how you can ignore the immediate threat secondhand smoke poses to a person with asthma. I know of one child who nearly died because of a smoking parent (and I suspect there are others). When informed by the hospital, the parent quit and never smoked again. Too bad it had to be under those circumstances. Acco40, interesting idea! Does BSA get any funding from tobacco interests?

OGE and others, I am also interested in this topic. Our troop has had to compete fiercely with other troops to stay alive. For many years the DE did nothing to help and actually recruited boys away from us to larger and stronger troops. We have turned the corner on this now. One reason is our chartering organization has taken new interest. Our troop now plans to hold a Scouting Exposition and to invite the entire community to visit. It will be a full-blown campout on vacant property in the middle of our town and we will pull out all the stops to demonstrate the activities and leadership our troop has. I would like to know if anyone else has tried something like this. Any suggestions?

OGE, you can pass the prime rib right over to me and the duck soup sounds good right now as well. Does Grandma still make it? Rogue391, I saw the SouthPark stuff and nearly fell out of my chair. It was a cutting satire that was much enjoyed by me and some of my volunteer colleagues. I imagine there would be considerable discomfort if viewed widely at National.

hops_scout, It probably doesn't have much to do with military gear except that the topic evolved (as these threads tend to do). But I'll accept help anywhere I find it. Always looking to help the boys.

Merlyn, I understand and appreciate Bob White's point and I suspect you do too. Nevertheless, I value open discussion, even if some parties think it fruitless. I agree with NJ on this and I still welcome your views. That said, I may not be in total agreement with your goals. BSA may deserve, through their policies, to lose their congressional charter. But my goals have to do with youth who need the kind of programs and activities that are offered here. BSA has good programs although I disagree with BSA regarding their choice to exclude based on religion (or lack thereof). I refuse to turn my back on a child simply because of his religious background and I think BSA and the 'faith Nazis' are wrong to do this (no Scouts for you!) Personally, I think that Jesus would not turn his back on a child either, regardless of beliefs. I am willing to listen to anyone who thinks that He would. Furthermore, judging from your involvement with the ACLU, I suspect you also would help children without regard to background. I have a slightly different view on the prospect of change as well. BW may be correct that BSA will absolutely not change. If persons like me and some others stop trying simply because we disagree, BW is correct and the status quo is certain. Therefore, I offer encouragement to continue to be the pain that you are.. but consider some constructive options as well. nldscout, Huh?

Thanks BW, I appreciate your thoughts. Our troop is over 50 years old and the practice was in place when I arrived. I suspect it is decades old, considering the list of names from the old days. We'll dump this practice immediately and institute a more constructive alternative. Do you or anyone else have some suggestions? Thanks again.

mk9750, I share your concern for your Eagles. My son and several of my old scouts are among that group. However, I do not, under any circumstance, see a return to the draft. Therefore I see any involvement by them as voluntary. I agree with President Bush (nice speech by the way) that if Saddam is not evil, then evil has no meaning. If given the opportunity I would personally extinguish Saddam without hesitation. I would feel guilty afterwards. I would live with it. But I share fears that our government has not planned this well. I see the possibility that we could strike quickly and succeed, only to be buried in 'nationbuilding'. I see that we could be doing this just for 'the old man'. I tend to share NJ's and KWC57's hesitation. Something is not 'right' about the way this has developed. If we cleanly eliminated Saddam and his government without losing a single life, our country would still be as vulnerable to terrorism as it is now. And there are plenty of other evil guys out there to fill the gap. Rooster's list is accurate. But it also applies to other countries past and present. Saddam is no Hitler. We don't hit NK because it already has nuke material - dirty hit, too much risk, resolution still possible through diplomacy. Once Iraq gets it, they will graduate to that status as well. They will be in the club like it or not, Saddam or not. The real power of having a nuke comes from not using it, from having it as a threat. And knowing that its use would essentially be 'the end' is the greatest reason not to use it. Saddam is not suicidal. The other weapons, chemical and biological, are just too easy to reproduce by anyone. I will not be surprised if the Anthrax letters, for example, were manufactured inside this country or mailed by a citizen. We are not and never have been 'secure'. Our society is open and most of us (I hope) would not sacrifice the freedoms necessary to close it. Security is, as it always has been, an illusion. I'll live with that too.

Thanks, Mike Walton's web page was an eye-opener! If this was enforced strongly in my area about 30% of the adults, slightly less for boys, would be in violation. I have always appreciated the uniform for most of the reasons mentioned but I agree with KS that the pants are not appropriate for some outdoor activities. Don't get me wrong, I like them, their fit and feel, but not for hiking or rock-climbing. Just not up to it. My troop has a compulsory uniform rule that the boys decided on. We enforce it by issuing demerits for non-compliance (they can get demerits for other things as well). The consequence is KP or latrine duty on camping trips or extra hours of service to 'earn' their way out of the demerits. The boys decided this as well. Are we in violation of hazing regs?

Acco40, Since this is true confession time, I have about 40% left. This is ok for us because it is usually the result of more-than-adequate testosterone (and some genetics). My daughter thinks I'm old...we don't see eye-to-eye on this (but she is probably right). littlebillie, you raised a really good question. If the churches themselves are struggling with the faith-based funding initiatives, then the permutations for BSA are staggering. Their inability to fathom the implications of a HUD grant indicates that they will not be up to this task either. My solution to the funding needs is to dump a whole bunch of professionals and close some offices, slim down, become efficient, trim the fat. It worked for Xerox and KMart is trying it as well. If they kept our Scout camp, the rest of my council could go away and no-one would notice. Merlyn can come to this forum for no other purpose than to learn from the immortals... or to provoke comment. I have no problem either way. He's welcome as far as I'm concerned.

Sorry folks, I've been soaking in a bubble bath. Statistics aside (I tend to agree with Mark Twain) I think BSA is alive and well. It will live or die on the strength (or lack thereof) of the volunteer leaders. All of them. For better or worse they are the role models. The boys and their parents see us and the programs we support. These are the things that directly affect them. The negative press is something that might affect prospective families' decisions to look further. But in a close community like mine, the grapevine is stronger than the media. That said, I have had several families leave because of BSA policy (so they said). There is no way to account for those who look and pass the program by. acco40, I tend to agree with your sentiments regarding BSA policies. This has not persuaded me to forsake the youth, however. I still think the program is a great program. I know of no Eagles who made their achievement in order to 'poke a stick in the eye' of BSA. I also know of no organization that penalizes Eagle Scouts. On the other hand, I have acquired a certain contempt for the 'professionals'. I continue to doubt their devotion to the boys as opposed to the organization. littlebillie, nice to see you are continuing the tradition. I think it is important to note that role models are both Positive (read scout leaders) and Negative (read, athletes with feet of clay). Both types of role models can be employed to reinforce positive goals for the boys. For example, at summer camp the adult leaders can set positive examples through their personal conduct. When my boys comment on other leaders who smoke or who neglect to participate because of obesity, I respond to their observation and use it to provide a contrast to what their goals should be. I caution that they too, have choices to make...and they could end up just like those negative examples...if the boys do not choose wisely. The boys usually are in quiet thought for a little while. BSA is subject to selective forces just like all populations and organizations. The organization will prosper or die according to its value to the public. Or it can evolve to include or exclude based on those same forces. I was once told by a former employer that, "In this society, you are paid according to what you contribute." Any fate will be determined on that basis, most likely. But I don't see any particular fate arriving for BSA in the foreseeable future...at least as long as my troop is doing well.

ASM1, I'm laughing along with you and I'm not even sure why. Is the joke on me?

MK9750, I liked that last line about conservatives. I wish I knew who they are (Scalia isn't and he's not alone). I guess my rights technically were not violated because my immediate threat to take the action you suggested caused them to cave (and I was able to waste a vote on Richard Nixon). But the registrar wasn't ignorant, it was a state law that I later learned actually WAS on the books. It has been thrown out more recently. In this case I suggest that the state HAD established a religion in the loose sense that one had to publicly profess belief in God in order to vote. And I am glad that regardless of what label you would apply to them, the legislature threw out that law. The 'conservatives' you hold dear fought hard to resist that change (not to mention poll taxes and Jim Crow laws).

scoutldr, I am realistic about this and I agree that the info may already be out of control. I will still resist. (I don't pay by check if the vendor requires a SSN; I use a credit card or I find another vendor) I was outraged recently when I found out that my state was selling citizens' auto-license info to industry (BSA could well do the same). It made me suspicious of other info-gathering efforts. So...it should be unnecessary for BSA to require us to provide the info if it's already out there for them, right? As I said, I'll play along but I'll bite back if they get out of line.

le Voyageur, Interesting contrast, the thing about the 'dark ages'. However, while Christians were living in pig stys in Europe, they hardly ruled the world. There was advanced culture, science, mathematics in the Islamic world, for example, and China with its great civilization vastly exceeded Christianity in numbers. Pfann, I was once denied voter registration because I refused to state my religious beliefs (they changed their minds after I explained a few things). I was told, "In 'this state' you can't vote if you don't believe in God." This presumed a fact not established and I objected. I shouldn't have had to. I would be happier for government to keep its nose out of my beliefs and I would be happier for other persons not use government to impose their beliefs on me. Scalia disagrees. You may not feel that way. I do.