sherminator505

"I also wonder if there's just a big propaganda machine that's been developed here, to pressure the public, to whitewash reality." Again, to what end? More specifically, what do you believe this "propaganda machine" is intended to "pressure the public" to do, exactly?

"So do children lose their rights once they don the BSA uniform?" Of course not! They still retain every right to be unpatriotic and uncivil. They have every right to forget the respect they have for their country and its leaders. They have every right to ignore the Scout Oath and Law and behave like a pack of uncultured yahoos. But are those the decisions we want to see our Scouts make?

"I guess the final impetus for my interest in this question is that not only am I involved in scouting, but I also wonder if there's just a big propaganda machine that's been developed here, to pressure the public, to whitewash reality." To what end?(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

"With this, I'm just trying to find answers." What questions are you trying to find answers for? Are you simply trying to justify your own feelings toward homosexuals? Are you seeking to defend a policy that you really can't square 100% with your conscience? Is this an effort to satisfy your intellectual curiosity, or is it simply a quest to find the "magic bullet" to win the water cooler wars? Perhaps you might want to examine your questions more carefully. Perhaps you should consider the place from whence your questions come. If you did, you might come to some interesting conclusions. For example, I have seen you post on more than one occasion that homosexuals have a higher incidence of pedophilia than heterosexuals. Assuming that this is true, have you really considered why that might be? Would this be attributable exclusively to their sexual orientation, or do societal factors play a role? Could the peer pressure to repress one's sexual orientation limit healthy personal development? I don't know the answers to those questions, but I do know a couple of things. First, I know of two molesters that victimized family and friends. Both were, by all appearances, heterosexual. I also know quite a few people who are openly gay, and I don't worry that they would molest anyone. So I guess that the questions that end up being asked depend greatly on one's preconceived notions.

"Oh, I wouldn't be too concerned. His term will expire before next Jamboree." Hubris.

"Once upon a time, if memory serves, a CS who received AOL automatically got Scout AND had the 2 months as a scout requirement waived for Tenderfoot." I remember this. It was back when I was a Scout (OGE calls this the dark time). I remember that this disappeared in the '80's and AFAIK it hasn't returned.

"Camped through all four seasons in one weekend" This sounds like typical New Mexico!

"Gee, as someone who has voted for Sheriff Joe every time, and am a former member of the ACLU, not only to I not see your point, but since you offered nothing to clarify, I will discount your opinion out of hand." OK. Since you have decided not to think like an engineer, let me lay out why your analogy is flawed: 1) Sheriff Joe is not the Honorary President of the ACLU. He has no official, ex-officio or other ties to that group. 2) I really think Sheriff Joe has much less in common with the ACLU than President Obama has with the BSA. 3) I think quite a few people would have liked to see President Obama speak at the Jamboree. Hence the thread. Frankly, I would have expected more from an engineer!(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

"It's like Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio not showing up to speak at an ACLU convention." As a Scouter who voted for this President and supports him, I really have to point out that this analogy is exceptionally flawed.

Leadership as the Senior Patrol Leader, when properly performed, is not fake (I'm a BIG fan of SPLs).(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

Why are we focusing on the PRESIDENT not speaking at the Jamboree instead of the President not speaking at the JAMBOREE?

Basementdweller- That's Abel's quote, and I springboarded off of that because I felt that it reflected a corrosive attitude that *some* DE's seem to have toward volunteer Scouters. There seems to be some disconnect between the volunteers and professionals (as OGE pointed out) to the point that at times it seems we're talking about two different organizations.

"I guess I am surprised by so many responses that the parents should iron out the problems for the scout when he is at the rank of Life." Ordinarily, I'd agree with this sentiment. However, in this case the SM's e-mail seem to be way over the top, indicating a sudden release of pressure. In my work experience, the receipt of such an e-mail would indicate a clear readiness to go to war. From someone who is in a power position, this is clearly inappropriate. Further, I think that the cc of this e-mail to the Dad is an open invitation for parental involvement. So it would seem that in this instance, the advice for the Life Scout to go it alone reflects a certain disregard for the facts at hand.

I agree that there is a barrier. I do not agree that this barrier is either natural or necessary. One thing that the volunteers seem to realize that the professionals do not is that program leads to growth. If you have a program that delivers the Scouting promise, then your membership will grow as a result. So by providing the volunteer Scouter the know-kow to deliver a better program, the professional Scouter is, in fact, promoting growth. The whole training regime needs to be shifted to support this. We don't need to be teaching generic management theory. We need to be getting A LOT more specific to the individual Scouter's needs to deliver a quality program. I don't see a lot of that coming out of National these days...

WOW! The Scoutmaster sent the boy to Jamboree on this note?! A few questions, if I may: Where was the Scoutmaster during these 5-1/2 months? More importantly, where was the Senior Patrol Leader during these 5-1/2 months? Despite the inappropriateness of this e-mail, did this prompt a conversation between you and your son? If so, what transpired? Was he in fact doing the job? It seems that there are a multitude of communications problems here. My best advice would be to have a cup of coffee with this SM and find out what exactly is going on here. I assume that as your son is a Life Scout he is still working toward Eagle, and I wonder if this doesn't signal trouble ahead if you don't head it off.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

On another thread, I read one sentence that practically hit me in the head like a 2" X 4": "I have also been told by our professional staff that Scoutmasters cannot be counted on to do whats right." This made me reflect on some of the things I've observed over the years and the discussions I've engaged in over the past few months. It has led me to believe that while the BSA seems to honor its corporate culture above a lot of other things, it seems to be fundamentally confused as to the nature of its organization. In corporate terms, the BSA is not one large corporate body. It is a franchise-type organization, with councils and units within them that are charged with delivering the Scouting program. Strangely, with all its emphasis on leadership theory et al. this fact is too often underemphasized. So what is the role of the professional Scouter? The professional Scouter is concerned mainly with providing the tools to help the various franchises succeed. This does not include making blanket judgments about volunteers like the one above, nor does it entail pushing the training regime they would rather support as opposed to one that would be more specific to the individual volunteer's needs (read WB21). I find that quite a few of my fellow volunteers have become cynical and jaded with regard to BSA's corporate culture, and much of this is attributable to the above. Have you made similar observations, and if so, what would you suggest as a remedy?

Honestly, I wonder why any Scouter would want to kill a Scout's enthusiasm. I've typically found that merit badges like Personal Management tend to get put off by the Scouts, while others like the Citizenship MB's tend to draw the Scouts' interest earlier. In my view, there is really nothing wrong with this. What I would like to see is the return of what is probably the only good change the BSA made in 1972: First Aid MB required for First Class.

Interesting story on this: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/25/commission-official-defends-justice-department-black-panther-case/ Apparently this is not as cut and dried as some really, really, REALLY want to believe...

It's amazing what will come out of focus groups sometimes...

"Holder said that the DoJ would not prosecute any charges of civil rights violations regarding voting by the Black Panthers." Source, please.

"For example, the scandal with Holder dropping charges on the Black Panthers for voting rights crimes that resulted in the resignation of a DoJ attorney." Didn't the Bush administration already look at this? Why didn't they prosecute it? Perhaps you should be watching or listening to something in addition to Fox... just a suggestion.

Show of hands - who bought it? (My hand is down, BTW)

I think that the BSA has twice as many knots as it really needs right now. We have a $1000 knot that could just as easily have been a buckle, bolo tie, or some other shiny doo-dad. We have numerous knots for unit organizing, a knot just for buying a life membership in NESA, and don't EVEN get me started on the number of Cub knots floating around out there. If you want to get these uniforms cleaned up, use fewer knots. Use a silver Eagle device for NESA membership, give the big donors a nice bolo tie, use a single organizing knot, again with suitable devices, and streamline the Cub Scout leader recognitions. I don't think that leader recognition would suffer one iota as a result. While we're on the topic of knots, why is there a knot for Silver World when registered BSA members aren't eligible for the award?

DeaconLance, I'm sorry you had that experience, although to be fair I have seen male leaders do exactly the same thing, with similar results.

When we speak of Sea Scouts and how they might wear OA recognition, it brings a question to mind - what percentage of Sea Scouts would meet the camping requirement?