sherminator505

I'm not sure... but I'm guessing the picture would be big enough to cover the state of Rhode Island!

"Ed & Merlyn - please do not respond to each other. It gets very tiresome. Create your own Ed & Merlyn thread and post away!" Wouldn't that take all of the fun out of this thread? But seriously, I have a question: How might an athiest Scouter evaluate a Scout's answer to the question "What does duty to God mean to you?" Or how about "What does 'a Scout is reverent?' mean?" What frame of reference would an athiest Scouter draw upon?(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

Alright - let's give it a rest, people. We've succeeded in running off the originator of this thread, run up over 600 posts, and NOW we have reduced it to an I/P style thread FOR NO GOOD REASON! The thread has become so long and pointless that I am technically unable to post a reply to it, so I am commenting here. I think it's high time for a moderator to end this!

There is no such thing as the "troop method" in Scouting. If that is what this "Scoutmaster" wishes to do, then he is giving the boys something other than Scouting, and you should find another troop immediately.

"Actually NJ, the legal right does make it "right". Now you may not emotionally agree with it, but legally it is factually right." Wasn't this the argument of the Pharisees, say, 2000 years ago?

This is what I love about the BSA's new emphasis on training! They float out the stated goal of promoting Woodbadge for every Scouter within two years, but I have yet to see how they propose to support the change. Some questions that have not been clearly answered (in my opinion): 1) How are districts and councils expected to build their training staffs? 2) How does the BSA intend to counter this notion that Wood Badge is "strictly for the old salts?" 3) How do we intend to build a culture where WB21 is the expected outcome of a Scouter's training curriculum? There are probably more, but these few should be sufficient to start the discussion.

"No way, no how, are they/we going to want to send our children into the woods with a leader of indeterminate sexuality." Indeterminate? How do you propose to find out exactly? A cosmopolitan-style quiz? "BP - What are the logistical problems for having homosexuals in scouts?" Interesting question. As we know they are there now and are simply not "avowed," perhaps the answer lies well within the boundaries of what we're doing now. I'm not convinced that anything special would be required. "Ok,here's my point: Why not a Don't ask, don't tell attitude?" That works to a point, but what happens when someone with an axe to grind shows up at a council office or National with a copy of a receipt that suggests that a Scout leader frequented an establishment known to be "gay" (keep in mind that this has in fact happened)? I think it is very important to look critically at how we prosecute our policies, what our motivations are in doing so, and whether or not they are truly in line with our stated values as Scouters and as Americans.

Is there anyone here who actually believes that the skills needed by trainers changed when the BSA went from TDC to Trainer's EDGE? The main differences are in how they are packaged and taught. Now if there was more emphasis placed on how to BUILD training staffs to deliver the training that BSA now requires, THEN we'd get somewhere.

"Why not? Aren't the QMs part of the staff, and don't they participate in the training? Do they wear 3 beads? BDPT00" My statement related specifically to teaching - up on the platform so to speak. Yes, they are part of the staff, and yes, they do participate. This is why I wouldn't train the QM any differently than the other staffers. I'm sorry if my previous post didn't convey that.

I think that Trainer's EDGE should be a requirement for Wood Badge staffers, but I would take it one step further. I would run the entire Trainer's EDGE module as the first step in developing the Wood Badge staff, including the quartermaster. Even though the QM has no teaching responsibilities, he/she must have an appreciation of the logistical and material support that is necessary to run the course. That said, I feel that the Trainer's EDGE course could do a much better job of covering that particular area than it does at present.

"Department of irony: Our district has postponed this year's Klondike Derby--twice--due to snow." OK! Now we're talking. This reminds me of a time when the news got it completely wrong. They reported that a group of camping Scouts was "rescued from the snow," when in fact the state police evacuated our Klondike Derby because of deteriorating road conditions. That one still gives me a chuckle.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

It happens all over. I was in southern New Mexico when what most would consider a light dusting of snow was headed for the area. Everybody on the radio (even the FM rock station) was acting as if a hurricane was headed for the Mesilla Valley. If it's anything out of the ordinary, then off they go!

Chapter Chiefs cannot be District Committee members, as the District Committee consists of adults who are 21 or over. However, they are considered leaders in the district by virtue of their elective office and my FEELING is that the silver loops would be appropriate for Chapter Chiefs when they are performing in that capacity. But I am not confident in that position as anything more than opinion.

There was a time in Scouting, from the 1920's to the 1950's, when the Boy Scouts had a very cool uniform item. It was an Eagle Scout pin, small and oval, that could be worn on the campaign hat. I earned Eagle about 30 years too late to receive one of these pins, and the only place I've ever actually seen one is on ebay. I for one would like to see the Eagle pin return. The centennial of Scouting provides an excellent context for doing something like this. I am curious about the group's thoughts on this one.

Oak Tree (regarding your Wood Badge class), You did not encounter a dumb question. You encountered a dumb person who asks questions.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

"Yeah, this is an issue I'm tired of hearing about. Same for "gay rights"." I'm sure a lot of people were tired of hearing about "voting rights" for women by the time the 1920's rolled around. I'm also sure that some folks were tired of hearing about "civil rights" for blacks by the time the 1960's rolled around, too. Like it or not, this change will also come, because that is something we do as Americans. We tend to work for a more level playing field, even if it takes a while.

Ed's right in that a uniform at an EBOR cannot be required as a condition for passing. What I would like to know is, why do we discuss minute points such as this and not the climate that creates situations like this. More specifically, what can we do to change the whole set of expectations so that ticky-tack questions like this become moot?

Thumbs up. While I expect the I/P forums to be a bit wild and wooly, some posters don't seem to realize when they've wandered away from the topic at hand and gotten into some pretty personal stuff (or maybe they just don't care). I try to keep a few points in mind when reading and or participating in these threads: 1) Merlyn is who he is. He is not a Scouter, and he has never claimed to be one. He is our resident pot-stirrer. Feel free to argue with him if you feel you must, but first consider the source. 2) Ed likes to argue. He has a heart of gold and is no doubt a top-notch Scouter, but he can give you a HUGE headache if you let him. 3) Gern is a true lefty. I find myself agreeing with him more than, say, Ed. Often he makes the same points I do and does it so well that I have nothing to add. 4) Beavah is a common-sense individual who I tend to agree with about half the time. The written accent is neat but a bit hard to read and understand at times. 5) GaHillBilly and BrentAllen are true righties, and they make me cringe at times. But generally speaking, they mean well when they stick to the topic at hand. They do, however, tend to wander at times... 6) BadenP must have had a difficult life. He's just bitter. But he means well. 7) My leanings tend to stand in sharp contrast to Ed's, and I like to argue, too. Witness the results. 8) John-in-KC really seems to be in the know when it comes to Scouting-related topics, and I respect his opinion even when I disagree. 9) OGE is a great moderator and seems to know just when to step in. I really admire him. 10) As bad as some of the regulars get sometimes, it could always get worse. Anybody remember Kawidaphoenix?

"Let's not forget, there is no requirement for the Eagle candidate or any other person involved in an EBOR to wear the uniform. Requiring one is adding to the requirements." It seems that we've beat this one to death in previous threads. but I have a slightly different question. What is wrong with the EXPECTATION that a Scout (or Scouter) who is known to own a uniform should wear it, properly, to a BOR? It seems to me to be no different than the EXPECTATION that a job applicant show up to an interview dressed professionally.

I can't believe this thread is still alive! I wouldn't wear mine on my uniform (granted, I'm well over 18) but I wouldn't walk up to an 18 year old ASM and tell him it needs to come off, either. I, too, have seen adults wear the badge, and it did look out of place, but it didn't bother me nearly as much as the ones who wore the big First Class pin on their campaign hats when they first brought them back.

I really think your son will regret missing the opportunity. I completed Eagle at 17 years, 10 months, and didn't leave myself enough time for even a single palm. Looking back, I regret that very much.

At a minimum, every troop needs an SPL, PL's and assistants, a scribe and a quartermaster. Other positions should be filled only where the need exists, depending on the size and dynamics of the troop.

"The Scout Camp in Chesapeake, VA had to be shut down for three years because of a gay ranger sexually harassing older scouts." Funny. I was just reading a story on another thread about a female Scouter who was caught doing the same thing. Was she gay?

There is one aspect to this story that makes the union's beef with the Eagle candidate completely unjustified. It was the candidate's idea! Absent the layoffs and labor issues, this wouldn't have even raised an eyebrow. Now if the city had actively solicited volunteers to do this project, THEN I think the union would have a valid point. But THAT is not what was reported in the story.

Whether you are talking about 2% or 5% or some other number, it is hard to argue that most boys who join Scouts are capable of earning Eagle. Most just don't seem to have the perseverance.