skeptic

Our troop has been in the UMC basement of their current building since 1928, and we date to 1921. At one time, most of the boys were also member families. Now we are the only troop on the poor end of town, and have not had a church member in the troop for over 10 years, other than myself and a couple of adults on the charter. Two Eagles in past 3 years from the congregation, but other troops. They all live at the other end of the city, the higher income area, and so we are not convenient. They have always been supportive, but few members help anymore, other than give us donations. We can use the church van, the gym, and any other part if it fits the schedules. Have a new pack now, but so far no boys from the church other than the cubmaster's son. Hope to have some soon though, as we need boys. In our council, every Methodist troop, and they are in every community, is over 50 years old.

Gooseberry with lots of whipped cream.

These are politicians, don't forget. The general populous is still in a majority against these things, though at a lesser level (suspect many have just given up in the face of the big guns out $$$ing their wishes); and there is the major reason why judges and legislatures do not reflect the wishes of the people whom they represent. The agenda pushers have far more dollars to throw at the people making decisions, and are far more zealous. Most regular people just are trying to survive, and do not have the energy or financial ability to continue the fight. Shield up!!

Yep, it is a true dilema. But, I can accept the criticism that the profit is too high. That is legitimate, based on my knowledge of the retail business. That is why you can buy almost identical pants and shirts in some low priced stores at considerably lower prices. They likely pay a bit less, but not much; but they are getting less profit and more volume. From my perspecitive, National should review their pricing and reduce profits by a large percentage; especially in this economy. They have the resources in place to find dollars someplace other than through retail items. JMHO

In my first two troops as a boy, they had a routine of having you stand with your hands out at your side, palms up, and putting a scout book on each one. Its purpose was two fold, in their perception anyway; corrective physical activity, and being reminded that the Oath and Law were sitting on their palms. I told my scouts about this process a couple of times. What surprised me, a number asked to do it so they could see what it was like. Then it became a contest of sorts. Did it work back then; hard to say. Seemed to have few real problems; but that was back in the day that respect was expected, period.

Funny that your leader fought on the Russian front too. In the 3 years I spent in Germany in the late 60's, I never met a German who fought in WWII that had not fought on the Russian front. We used to laugh amongst ourselves about that coincidence.

Never a CS, as I was the tag-a-long when my brother was and mom was the den mother. I wanted to do what he was doing, so could not wait to join Boy Scouts. Have a photo of me on my 11th BD in my new uniform; joined the day of it and went on my first trip a day or two later, the Lutheran campout in SCal in 1955. Active in 2 SGVC troops until 58 when moved to the desert and almost dropped out at 14 as a Life. A friend of mine was the SPL of the troop in town that I visited and was in my freshman class. When I did not come back, he nailed me at school and dragged me back more or less. Ended up going to camp that summer and finishing Eagle in 59; Dale got his third palm at the same COH. Went on to jambo in 1960 as scribe and unofficial SPL (the actual one could not seem to do the job). Briefly ASM in a base troop in Germany in 66-67 until got sent remote to a bombing range near Munich. Considered pro as I was getting ready to grad in 71; but they actually made me visit and tag-a-long with one at work and I realized that was not for me. Tried to get involved in Orange County in early 70's, but they did not seem to know what to do with me. Finally got involved again in spring 76 in the old Topanga District of the GWC. Moved to Ventura in 77 and my store manager was CC of our troop; he dragged me to his meeting and I walked out SM. Still am, and of course have worn dozens of various district and council hats over the years (most of us seem to not know how to say no). 1st ASM for 85 jambo troop; WB in 80's and staff 1st course of new one. And here we are. Am sort of one of the local historians, as my troop started in 1921 and I collect and display memorabilia. Have displays each year at annual meeting and Eagle dinner; and sometimes in other locals. (This message has been edited by skeptic)

This was taken seriously enough that someone from National posted a request to Scouts-L to retract it and make it clear it was a joke. Apparently they "did" get all kinds of feedback at a higher level. Some things should not be made jokes of, as they are confusing enough, especially for novices.

It appears that the on-line copy is still the old one. Wonder how long it will take to get the new one up.

Is it time to bring back POGO? We certainly have a big enough swamp to row in. I am sure Walt Kelly could have a ball with it if he were still here. For those too young to know of whom and what I speak, Google it. (This message has been edited by skeptic)

Over the years, I have furnished record data on training to the local council, and supposedly to national through them. None of this info is apparent in my on-line records. Do we know if there is a system in place to get these things, such as PTC training, Woodbadge, advanced scouter training for positions and so on? The only thing that shows are recently taken on-line courses. If there isn't; should there be?

Lisa: SR540-- Covered it pretty well. I can reflect on it from both a scout and leader perspective; but when I went in 1960 as a scout, they did not have nearly the choices now available. Still, the experience was one of the highlights of my life, period. Did it keep me in, as a 16 year old? Probably contributed to my continued involvement through HS, especially since I lived in the hinterland desert of San Bernardino. In 85, I was 1st ASM. Saw many of the things SR540-- noted. One thing that I noted that applied to both experiences, IMHO, was that scouts who had to work to go, get there partly or almost completely on their own efforts, truly appreciated the experience, and took advantage of it far more enthusiastically than others. That is not to say that those whose parents simply plopped down the bucks did not enjoy, or whatever, as most did; but there were a few of these that were the real problem children of the troop. And, most of them did not stay in the program past their "forced" Eagle. Overall, if a scout can go, it is generally a growing experience. Personally, I still think that 12 is a bit young; but I do not make that decision.

Not a bad presentation for introduction. Did note that there seems to be an error about when scouting began. They say BP started it in 1900; but we all should know that it began on Brownsea in 1907. Possibly just a script error that was missed of course. While on the site, I reviewed, then watched a short presentation on the generations. Found it to be very enlightening and gave me some insight that had not necessarily occurred to me. I am sort of an overlap generation, technically, according to them, "mature", but really more of a "boomer". Guess being on the cusp will do that to you.

Just for board clarification; this is pretty much a continuation of an earlier interchange from January by this same individual about a "leader" whose "wife says", and so on. While there is always a chance for veracity in these things, the more innuendo and vague information, the less likely. Add this to the earlier posts, and I would not find much credence here. Certainly, in our council, this almost certainly would not be swept under the carpet, no matter how high up or how much popularity the scouter had. We have lost at least 3 of these types over the years; and it cost the council major contribution dollars in one case. Sign me "skeptical".

The Scout: There is a difference between censorship and simply cleaning up after gutter mentality. Not all things deserve to be viewed, just because they were posted. I too am curious, as I did not see the items in question; but it is clear that they were completely out of line and insulting. JMHO

You might find a JOTA patch of some issue on eBay. Or someone on the board may have one or more. Good luck.

Once again, we likely are seeing the "law suit fear" boogie man. It has surprised me, frankly, that they have allowed it this long. I can see a disaster ready to happen if a group, under the current rules, were to have an injury or cause damage. Even though we would hope we could encourage self reliance using this method, it has all the possibilities to cause serious consequences on rare occasions. So; CYA is the only way to go for the legal eagle protectors. Too bad.

Would a moderator consider please putting the pig out of its misery? The squealing is tiresome.

Over the years I have on occasion made up an award to recognize special things, usually at summer camp. Two funny ones (in my opinion) were given too adults. We went to Cherry Valley on Catalina years ago, before they got rid of the wild pigs. The small groups would come down from the upper canyon and visit each campsite to see what they could find. The first night, it happened they were making a huge racket trying to get at our trash bag which was tied up high. All the scouts were watching from their tents, their flashlights lighting up the camp. An ASM decided he would scare them off, came out barefooted and only in his BVD's, and chucked a rock at them. He hit a yearly in its side. It turned, and stared with little reddish eyes at him (it had short new tusks already). We fully expected it to charge the ASM; but it just went back to jumping at the bag. The next day, the ASM told me he was concerned he had made a major error in judgment, and was not sure what he would have done if it had charged. At the COH later that year, he was presented with the "Champion Pig Chucker Award", much to the delight of the scouts. I have tried to make sure that scouts with special challenges at camp get some sort of recognition, as well as those that have been the leaders in everything. It really makes a difference. There was one troop here in SoCal years ago that had a special troop neckerchief that was a canvas for hike awards. Every hike, they added some small symbol of the hike; and they also had special items for days camped. The older scouts, and leaders had stuff on both sides sometimes. It was really cool.

As I look back even farther than most posts, 1959, I see many parts of the Ordeal and Brotherhood that have either changed almost completely, or been modified to the point of having little or no real point any more. Was there, at times, hazing and unfairness; yes, on occasion. But it was not common, and mostly was dealt with when a problem became known. I would agree that putting some of the mystery back into the Order and its rituals would possibly make it significant again for many who now see no purpose. Of course, I also would like to see true selection by troop members again, including a limit on how many based on troop size and eligibility. That in itself would put some of the purpose back into it; because it would no longer simply be an extension of becoming first class and having a minimum camping experience. It would possibly also help if Scoutmasters were given clearer guidance on their role in approving the selection. Too many leaders either do not understand, or choose to not ruffle parental feathers, by not withdrawing unprepared or undeserving scouts from eligibility. Yes, they do exist. Personally, I counsel any eligible scout who is at the minimum, or possibly shows lack of maturity and intent. Have one this year who decided he would wait a year after we talked a bit about the intent and expectations of the honor. There is always that fine line that has to be walked by leaders; but they need to act as "leaders", not only in OA eligibility, but also in conferences and counseling. We do our scouts no favor by simply passing them on; that is one of the huge problems in the schools today. Accountability is a learned thing; but if there is none in childhood, then there will be none in adulthood.

An acquaintance sent me this link about a supposed plot to secretly turn scouts in non-Christians. I found it basically silly and amusing; yet wonder if others may have encountered this and what their thoughts are. Here is the link, if anyone is interested. This might be better in the politics section, so moderators, please feel free to move. http://catholicintl.com/articles/OrderoftheArrow-JohnSalza.pdf

I see this whole thread as someone "poking the pig"; therefore, other than this comment, I will ignore it as having no worth.

Trev: "This is the way I see ("skew") it: BSA is telling two minority groups that they are not welcome while at the same time knowing it has no factual basis for claiming they can not be the "best type of citizens". " First of all, no reputable leader is telling the scouts either/or in relation to homosexuality; it is not a topic for discussion. But, if it becomes a problem due to various scenarios (most, again likely due to adult intervention), then they could be asked to leave. As far as Atheists are concerned; they cannot meet the criteria of membership. If they choose to adher to those beliefs, or lack of, then they cannot be members. No one is saying they are "BAD" people (or, at least nobody should be saying that), simply that they do not meet the parameters for membership. Why is it so hard for a few to understand that membership is a privilege, no matter what the organization? Why do a few feel they somehow should change a group, rather than live their lives as they choose, and let others do the same? As has been stated and reinforced numerous times on these forums; scouting is not for everybody! It has requirements for membership. If you do not meet them, and do not like them, then find something else to do. The harder you push, the less effective you will be. Case in point; more private donations directly to Scouting, and fewer to United Way in some parts of the country when the PC people were able to make it an issue. Who got hurt the worst; Scouting, who got direct donations in excess of what they would have gotten, or the UW, which lost money which might have gone to other worthwhile organizations as well as Scouting? Merlyn: While I cannot prove it by any means, I can say that I know of no active leaders on the basic level in my area who make these things an issue, period. And, on the rare occasion that something rears its head, the youth involved are made to understand pretty quickly that disagreement with people does not mean they are bad people or, "pariahs" (thanks for adding the h). The negative tone in most of these discussions is from outside the organization on both sides for the most part. And, so we get back to the reality that there are a few fringe people who do not really care about the youth involved, only in their personal crusades and ideologies. Anyone who recognizes themselves, put the shoe on and walk away for a change.

Trev: Actually, they are told that if they want to participate, they need to meet the BSA requirements. And, for the most part, the so called "won't let them join" refers to adults anyway. It is really tiresome to hear the same old nonsense that by actually adhering to their basic tenets, rather than changing for a minority (many who want to push an agenda)the BSA is in the wrong. You can skew it anyway you like. Those of us in the trenches lean over backward to accept any boy. It is the adults that tend to cause the problem. Case in point from years back now. When the Randall twins were interviewed by an Orange County reporter about what they believed, the boys both agreed that they thought "Mother Nature" was responsible for the natural phenomena, not God. So, they still were assigning some type of spiritual entity to their beliefs, which would have been sufficient if "Daddy, the publicity seeking lawyer, had not gotten into it. They were no way old enough to have reached any kind of final decision on this; but somehow, because Dad made an issue and refused to let them associate, they were deprived. So, whose fault was it? I lean towards the father; but also felt that some of the adults in the local unit were a bit out of line as well. Still, it likely could have all been worked out if the father had not needed to become a public crusader about the awful BSA. Let the organization evolve on its own, rather than try to force everything. It will eventually get where it needs to get. Meanwhile, accept the FACT that not everyone can be part of everything; clubs and organizations are created with certain rules and ideas to be supported, so if you do not fit, find somewhere you do. Just because you DO NOT AGREE does not make the group or individual with whom you have a problem a paria. FJO