Rick_in_CA

I would change the video part to something like: "Optional requirement, create a video of 2 minutes or more about your experience, what you learned and sharing shots of what you saw and did while earning the award. Show the video to your unit leader for review." Do not require the video to be posted to social media.

One of the original stated uses of the scout staff, was self defense. I'm curious about the inclusion of Gymnastics in the list. Was there an understood martial aspect to gymnastics in 1910?

@packsaddleI'm so very sorry to hear that!

Aren't they really the same thing? "Atheism is in the broadest sense an absence of belief in the existence of deities." How is that any different from non-theism? As for the question: "is Buddhism an atheistic religion," you have to get into the weeds about what constitutes a belief in a deity or deities. While it is true that Buddhism doesn't have the concept of a "creator god", there is a belief in beings who's labels are often translated into English as "gods" or "demi-gods". Do those count? Buddhists don't "pray", or do they? Now you have to get down into the weeds again and define what is a "prayer". Is meditation a prayer? I once had a Buddhist tell me they don't pray because "there is no-one listening", which is assuming that a prayer must be addressed to something outside oneself. But that sure looks a lot like what a Pure Land Buddhist does when they send entreaties to Amitābha to let them in to Sukhāvatī? Or is that a fundamental misunderstanding of what a Pure Land Buddhist does? All this is just a way of saying that the BSA and us scouters should not be in the business of "judging" someone-else's faith. For an organization that endeavors to be open to people of all faiths, as soon as you say "you must acknowledge X", you quickly get lost in the weeds and are in trouble. Who are we to be judging if some kid's faith is "good enough", especially when that faith is significantly different than our own? Or even if it's purported to be the same?

This is a great story from Bryan on Scouting. Shows what "Be Prepared" is about. It's not just having a first aid kit, not just even having the first aid skills that go with it, but it also having the wherewithal and confidence to not panic and act, even lead in a situation like this. Bravo to this scout and those that helped her become this wonderful young lady. https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2020/07/15/unsung-hero-she-rescued-a-fellow-hiker-during-a-family-vacation/

I don't think this has anything to do with how Boy Scouts are viewed specifically, but how young people are viewed in general. You are correct, liability is a big part of it, but so is the extension of childhood. For too many people, "young adult" no longer referrers to 14,15, 16 year olds, but to 18, 19, 20 year olds. How many 13 year olds get gigs as babysitters now days? How many 13 year olds can't be left home alone without a babysitter themselves? How long before 18, 19 and 20 year olds are going to need "adult supervision"?

To many people don't want to hear about "innocent" in situations like this. The issues around child safety (not just in the Scouting context) in our society are taking on the characteristics of a moral panic (just look at the craziness about leaving children in cars). So if this turns out to be a false accusation or some sort of miss understanding, it probably won't make the news (since news outlets are reluctant to report stories that will be unpopular with their readers or viewers). Even if it is reported, people won't internalize it. So the damage to Scouting's reputation is done regardless of the actual outcome. Look at some of the comments on this forum and elsewhere that basically take it as a given that the BSA was systematically negligent in the past with regards to child abuse issues. Why does this idea exist? I'm not sure, but I don't think it's a fair characterization. The reality is when compared with almost every other youth organization of the time, the BSA was ahead of the game almost it's whole history. The very existence of the "perversion files" is because the BSA was trying to deal with an issue that almost everyone else (4H, FFA, YMCA, etc) ignored. But it's the existence of those files that is one of the main reasons the BSA is getting hammered by lawsuits and 4H is not. Could the BSA have done better? Of course. But they were doing better than almost everyone else at the time. But that isn't the perception.

The thing is we really don't know any of the details - we don't know the real circumstances of the events, or even what is being alleged. While it is likely that there were YPT failures, we don't know if there were any. The YPT rules while a significant barrier to abuse, they can't prevent all abuse. The reality is we really have no idea what happened if anything.

The Civil War was fought over secession, the south the secure it, the north to prevent it. Secession however, was all about preserving slavery. How do we know? Because the south said it was. They published articles saying it. State legislators passed declarations saying it. The first states to secede sent representatives to other slave states telling why they should also secede. Those representatives said things like: "Georgia seceded for one reason, and one reason only. The preservation of slavery!" (can be found in the minutes of the Virginia convention where they were discussing secession. See the University of Virginia web site). The idea that the Civil War wasn't about slavery is revisionist claptrap, created by the south many decades after the war to try and "redeem" the "cause".

I agree with you. It's all about context, and there is too much ignoring of context and the actual history around things. History is seldom black and white. Our historical heroes and villains were real people with all the complexity that brings, not cartoon characters. But context and nuance is hard, and cartoons are easy.

Seriously? No Neil Armstrong? No Eisenhower? Really? Things may be a bit over sensitive today, but it's not even close to that. I am fine with renaming a council that was named after a traitor to our republic that was fighting to preserve slavery. (That should get things rolling... ).

As for PR, I know many of the people on this board has seen it, but perhaps many of you haven't. This is from Scout South Africa, and this is that kind of advertising that the BSA needs.

One problem with all this background checking is that many of these checks are done on the cheap. I have a friend that was given a copy of his background check when he started a new job. There wasn't anything bad in the check, but it clearly wasn't him (he never lived in Nevada for example, but he did live in Boston for years which wasn't mentioned) even though his name was on it. That is why most states require potential employers to provide a copy of any background check too you so you can check it for errors. I have another friend that used to carry a laminated letter from the local sheriff because he was repeatedly accosted by bounty hunters. He had the same name and DOB as a skipped felon from another state. The letter explained that he wasn't the individual they were looking for. He had a couple of very scary encounters with a few armed clowns, including a night spent in jail because one of the clowns refused to call the phone number on the letter because "he knows that trick!".

It turns out navigating through the environment changes the brain, and depending on GPS changes it in different ways (parts shrink). https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14652

Actually it does. Adults change the dynamics, no mater how quiet they are. Which is why the old BSA requirements and the modern Duke of Edinburgh Award require the trek be without adults.