skeptic

While punching might not be the best suggestion in many instances, especially in school. standing up to the bully is very important at some point. What really bothers me in some instances of this in school, and probably other places, even scouts, is that too often the instigator is not the one to get caught. Or in some cases, the one being bullied finally stands up for him or herself, but is expelled or punished at the same level as the one really responsible. Over-reaction by adults is just as harmful as no reaction. Another element that is too often the case is that the scout or boy who is being bullied often brings it on himeself by saying or doing things regularly that simply annoy others in some manner. When this is done simply due to immaturity or need for attention, it still is not understood very well by peers; sometimes even we, as adults, may not initially pick up on it. But, to be fair, boys who are teased and ignored, and girls too I suspect, very often continue to repeat the same behaviour that made them the butt of the others to start with. Still, the requirements are useful in our current society. Whether they really do much good, as Beavah has said, will only be seen over time. Much of the problem starts, like most, in the home. Today, when parental supervision is so sorely lacking, sibling issues often export themselves to school, scouts, and other places. Media continues to glamorize questionable character in sports and entertainment, and politicians publicly insult and denigrate each other. We reap what we sow.

"Which ACLU suits would most likely lose? What cases are you talking about?" asks Merlyn. Most likely all the ones brought against local government entities protesting the symbol of the cross when it has been part of the entity's history from the outset. But taking it through all the appeals processes and so on makes it too expensive to fight. Believe it or don't, but religious symbols that are of historical nature would and should be allowed to remain, and the highest court probably would rule as such. In the case of the Ventura cross, the so called damaged party lived almost thirty miles away. The city council publicly admitted that it was the desire of the huge majority of the city that it be defended, but they did not have funds to carry through all the years of litigation the ACLU promised. And, of course, these are the tactics they use in many of their suits, knowing full well they can make it almost impossible for the city or county economically. And each time they go find another unknown threat to defend, often bringing litigants with seriously questionable standing. An example is the Balboa Park suit; the people supposedly harmed somehow, never even attempted to use the facilities. Worse, Napolean Jones, the judge who made the decision refused to accept the U.S. Department of Justice's statement of support. I know Merlyn, only those who agree with these tactics have any standing with you, and they can do no wrong, and you will let me know how ignorant those of us are that believe your rights stop when they trespass on ours.

The point is that if the ACLU would be far less likely to challenge many things they do, BSA and otherwise, if they knew that they would have to pay should they lose. And many of the suits threatened would most likely have lost, but the government or other entity would be required to spend huge sums to defend out of their own pockets, money that under current law would not be repaid if they won. San Diego initially stood with the scouts, but when the ACLU made it clear how much it might cost them in defense, they chose to back down and pay them almost a million dollars. The city of Ventura has a cross above the city; the city was founded by Father Serra in 1789, and a cross of some sort has been there ever since. But the city sold the property to a private entity in order to avoid the cost of a lawsuit. The cross on the seal of L.A. was so small you barely could see it unless it was reproduced in a large size; but the cost of fighting it, even though it represented part of the history of the city, was too high. It is the same thing as the ambulance chasers, scam auto accident people, and fake department store injury threats. I worked in retail as a manager for over 20 years. I actually witnessed, and would have testified for the store, a woman purposely fall over a furniture cart and immediately start screaming how badly hurt she was. Actually, she barely scratched herself, but the store would rather pay a settlement than the cost of litigation. If we had the ability to turn the cost back on the frivolous suer, most would not happen. And it surely could still allow legitimate suits to be brought without high risk to the attorney and his client.

How many suits would the ACLU be filing if we changed our court system to make them liable for the costs of themselves and the organization sued if they lost the suit? That is why they would not survive with their tactics in most areas of the world.

Certainly there is a certain amount of reasonable expectation here as far as setting example goes. I know that I fall into the category noted, and am frustrated at times about not seeming to be able to make myself lose. What is more frustrating is that I actually eat less than at one time. In our council and my district, there are many similar to me. But, the younger scouters appear to be mostly fairly fit and healthy; a few are actually above average runners or athletes of varous sorts. There are two realities with me. One is genetics; three doctors have point blank told me that my metabolism is such that as I grow older, it will slow down. So, even if I eat less, I also burn fewer calories even with the same levels of activity. On the other hand, I have had various injuries to muscles, joints, and ligaments starting in my teens. Now, as I have gotten older, it is much more mentally difficult to do some types of activity, due to pain from age related deterioration. Last year, I finally decided that longer hikes were a thing of the past. Always a plodder who would just keep going, it is now much harder, and mentally, I have trouble walking through it like I once did. Recovery was quick 20 years ago, and I would be day hiking to the nearest ridge or peak; now I just want to sit, observe, and relax. Harder to get up in the mornings too. Still, last summer I did my 23rd official scout camp mile swim, hope to do number 24 this summer. But it takes me over an hour now. At over 60 though, some elements that drove me before no longer really matter. I do not particularly worry about how I appear to the opposite gender, as she and I are comfortable with each other, and rarely judgemental; this happens often it seems beyond 50. I don't smoke, and never have; I seldom drink, and even in my younger years, rarely drank to excess, and never when I was underage; I take cholesterol meds and manage to keep it around 200 or a bit under most of the time. Still, I could do better. And, if I did, I might again be able to play one on one for more than two minutes. Ultimately, I must decide for myself. Meanwhile, I still can encourage the scouts to do whatever they can to live up to the physically fit element, reminding them that at their age, I was, but that now I have 50+ years on them.

All of us occasionally lose it at some point. Sometimes we do not realize it is coming on and explode. For me, on those rare occasions, I have tryed to make it a point to apologize to the boys as a group, and individually if necessary. The apology explains why I was out of line, but also tries to reinforce needing to avoid it happening in the first place. JMO

I see two different things in this discussion. One is service at service centers; quality, availability of product, convenience for direct visit and so on. We do not appear to have a particular problem with this, as there seems to be a cooperative interaction between councils. Ordering items from a nearby center if not available locally, and them shipping to the local shop; advancement items filed locally and mailed to the other council, and so on. The other element has more to do with the unit location itself, and its participation in its assigned council activities. Border line units often find themselves wanting to aline with the "closer" council, as they really are more a part of them than their own council, due to political boundaries and geographical constrictions. I could see there being a real rationale to allowing these units to affiliate with the council to which they better fit. On the other hand, a troop in the center of a neighboring council's area that wanted to affiliate with the council next door, due to issues of some sort, would likely be better served to find a solution within their council, as it would be difficult to make it work. Just some thoughts.

Of concern beyond understanding what "honor" means is why "personal honor" often appears to have little importance to them. Saying they will do something, but then not; ignoring money owed to another scout or to the troop for something pre-paid; apologizing for something, then repeating the offense multiple times, each with another apology. Other than setting the example, how do we reach them in regard to "having" personal honor?

Merlyn; No one said it was dishonorable, simply biased. A local newspaper should print local news, no matter if it relates to current PC infatuation or not. There is far wider spectrum of families, those people to whom the paper markets itself, who are interested in scouts, and other youth oriented organizations. So should they not be equally covered? Oh, but that might get me critism from the PC police, so I will simply overlook their activities unless they are handed to me already written; and then I will publish them weeks after the event and bury them in a back section somewhere. That seems to be a common practice in the larger print media.

Thank you Beavah for the spin-off. I tend to lean towards the media losing its perspective more often than not, influenced, as you note, by the ownership and profits. There are still many smaller papers that make an effort to be more traditional, but they tend to be very localized, and often are completely dependent on local advertisers or a personal purse. Media on the air, seems to me to be pretty biased one way or another in almost every instance. Few really good give and take programs that seriously get into issues; mostly perhaps because it is too expensive due to small audiences. Of course, that then brings us back to the viewers, most who are either too lazy, too poorly educated to understand, or too jaded to care. In SC right now, in Santa Barbara, there is an interesting case in the courts where the newspaper staff and union has sued the owner. The owner claims she has the right to dictate, and a large part of the staff disagreed and have been fired or forced to choose or quit. I am continually annoyed by what our local press seems to feel is of interest and not of interest, especially when they almost totally exclude scouting, other than prepared items from Eagle presentations. Even though local politicos and business people are involved, they never publish anything on the council Eagle dinner or awards at the annual meeting. And this year, a local native, in his 90's was recognized at the annual auction affair, and not one word was in the paper. Granted, part of this falls on the council itself for not preparing stuff perhaps, though I have been told the press knew of all of these. They just are not important enough to assign a reporter I suppose. But should the council need to "write" the stories? Meanwhile, the local county chapter of LGBT had an awards dinner and it was prominent on the front page of the local news section, and had a reporter byline. So, is there a bias?

So, should I draw the conclusion that the original question will not get answered; or that perhaps who exhibit the symptoms queried do not have an answer that makes sense? Meanwhile, perhaps someone should spin off a thread to deal with the media discussion. It seems to have a lot of interest, but does not fit with the original thread intent.

scoutmomma; Maybe I just see things too simplistically. To me, if my core values and personal belief system is secure, and I want the same for my kids, then I work really hard to give them that within themselves. Just seeing these things should not have any effect then, other than perhaps annoying me, if I have done a good job. But, as I said before, perhaps I am giving them more credit than is due.

Merlyn, the thread was opened so as to answer the question. My observation is that individuals seem to bring these lawsuits against religious expression and symbols because somehow they are harmed by these words or symbols. For example, how in the world is anyone harmed by a cross on the Seal of Los Angeles, one that basically represents the mission era and the founding of the city? How can a cross on a hill be so offensive that you cannot just ignore it; again when they usually have historic or memorial reasons for their existence in the first place. It seems to me that individuals who are that insecure in themselves have far more to fear than words and symbols. If, as some claim, a cross, Star of David, or even a Budhist Wheel somehow harms them or their children because they "may" respresent teachings they choose not to listen to, then they are not doing a very good job at supporting what they do believe, or want their children to understand. Why not ignore it on a personal level, and use it as a teaching example for their children's understanding of their principles, beliefs, or spiritual challenges? Many of the suits brought to court have only the vaguest connection to the so called damaged parties; and if it was not for the cost of fighting these, many communities would fight them. Change our court system so that the party bringing the suit would have to pay if they lost, including court costs of the defendent, and most would simply disappear, along with the legal predators who are actually behind many of them. There are few, if any absolute rights. And while some minority issues should be corrected and protected, the rights of the majority should not be trampelled in the process.

Okay Merlyn; here is a spin-off so perhaps someone can answer my question? It truly makes little sense to me that people appear to have so little internal strength that common words and symbols so intimidate them. So, for Merlyn, and others of similar feelings; explain how the simple exposure of someone to the mention of God is somehow hurtful to you. You do not believe God exists, nor any other power beyond yourselves, so why do you care? No one has said you have to change your opinion or accept theirs. While they believe their beliefs are more viable or real, they have no effect on you. Or does the remote possibility, shown by the existence of the word God or Power Greater than I, traumatize your Id? Why can't you simply "not believe", rather than find it necessary to belittle and demonify others for their their audacity "to believe"? Have fun with your answer; I have already donned my fire suit.

So, for Merlyn, and others of similar feelings; explain how the simple exposure of someone to the mention of God is somehow hurtful to you. You do not believe God exists, nor any other power beyond yourselves, so why do you care? No one has said you have to change your opinion or accept theirs. While they believe their beliefs are more viable or real, they have no effect on you. Or does the remote possibility, shown by the existence of the word God or Power Greater than I, traumatize your Id? Why can't you simply "not believe", rather than find it necessary to belittle and demonify others for their their audacity "to believe"? Have fun with your answer; I have already donned my fire suit.

The point about stopping youth from doing BOR's jogged a thought. What do others feel this has accomplished? To me, the boys did a better job than the adults, as long as an adult sat in to supervise and avoid hazing and unfairness. This was a major part of the leadership role for the PLC, and truly added to their development and feelings of being in charge. Peer pressure is a wonderful thing when properly applied, and in a monitored environment. We used PLC BOR's on occasion for discipline problems, and solved most problems without the need of direct adult involvement. While some on this board may not be familiar with this, those of us going back a bit, remember it pretty well.

Where is the monitor for this thread; time to close it IMHO. A few of you are truly not being the example I would hope to see in my leadership.

Victory????????????

For me, the future of the scouts with whom I work seems very difficult. Our generation, the one that was so idealistic at one time, will leave a tragic burden to overcome. And to think that less than 8 years ago, I was encouraged that our national budget was actually in balance, and the debt was decreasining. If the billions that have blown to the winds in the Middle East had instead been mortgaged to repair our own country, it would be at least a bit more acceptable. Every time I hear the cry that we cannot afford to fix our schools, transportation infrastructure, hospitals, or less fortunate, it galls me to the bone; especially when the next moment, these same people want to throw billions more that we do not have at problems in other parts of the world. Again, if the monies were to be used in monitored, beneficial programs to help these people pull their boots, then it would not be so upsetting. But, back to the realities of simply doing what little I can. I will vote, because if I don't, I have not set the example I should; but my faith in our so called representatives is pretty thin. Skeptic wears not very rosy glasses.

Rotary on double party line and letter prefixes; now we are really dating ourselves.

oldSM; Just curious; did you consider the suit because she did not send him home, or call you? Would the few extra days have made any difference in the diagnosis or treatment? Did you discuss your concerns with the council or camp, e.g. quick action often is indicated for some issues, and certainly a report to parents at camp close as well, should there be something unusual medically related. This might have made them review their methodology. If, when you took him to the specialist, it had turned out to be something minor, would you have still considered suing? Guess I really cannot see they were negligent, in that she told him to tell you so you could confer with your own doctor. But, did you perhaps miss an opportunity to improve their approach to unusual medical challenges in the camp setting? Great that he is close to completing his Eagle.

Not sure if it is true, but Nut Culture will soon be revitalized with new requirements related to investigation of certain current cultural activities. Lots of opportunity in this area, I would think.

Living in Southern California, it often has occurred to me that there may be a relationship to the vicious Santa Ana winds and the political season. Are there any parallels out there in other areas? An inquiring mind wants to know.

Part of the new National technology access is the advancement records from your local council. I am now able to review what they have on file directly for every scout; and I believe, once I start doing the records on-line, it will become almost automatic. That part though I still am a bit fuzzy on, as the report still has to be filed. If we do it on-line, but never filed the report, will it still be a real record?

Much of the contention here appears to come from our broad spectrum of experience. While the syllabus is the same for all, the people putting on the courses have local interpretations of the material. Having gone through the older version in the 80's, then serving as a counselor on the new course, I can see some similarities; but it was initially an adjustment for me. As we progressed through the pre-course training, I began to see how the 21st Century course was far better for the methods needed as "adults". In my original course, it was an 8 day continuum, and focussed on the outdoors and patrol method. While it was certainly very educational for some, many of us had had extensive training already in those skills, both as scouts and scoutleader training. And, today, in our area, the essentials courses focus on introductions to the specific level, cubs etc, and what they will need. Then, they have secondary courses that expand on specific areas. We also have separate outdoor training courses, the introductory level good for all boy scout leaders, and the advanced levels for the more intensive high adventure areas. Separate offerings for backpacking, biking, winter, and water activity. So, the WB course currently offered in our council presents these opportunities as available and recommended for the the best success; but it focusses on ways to lead and manage, while using bits and pieces of the the more intensive skills offered elsewhere. Hopefully, this makes some sense. I know that when I have had assistants willing to put in the effort on the outdoor oriented skill offerings, we have had the best outdoor program. When I have too few, the outdoor program suffers somewhat, especially now that I am no longer as able physically to help on longer hikes and backpacks. Woodbadge is still an advanced leadership course. It is not intended to take the place of other, more focussed offerings in specific levels. Those taking WB should ideally have had at least the first couple of levels of these other opportunities before WB. And, at least in my patrol I had as counselor, those who had the most preliminary work had the best ticket ideas and were better able to see the benefit of what they were doing. Was it because they were more management capable, or because they were more comfortable because they felt more skilled already in their actual area?