skeptic

Perhaps they actually scouted the rapids using maps that were currently established; but they did not expect to have the course vandalized by egocentric forces undermining the banks and throwing in man-made boulders.

"Gays and Lesbians want a "license to do whatever they choose, even at the expense of the majority". Seriously, I'm questioning what this statement means?" It means they want to force society as a whole to adhere to their beliefs and dictate to the government of "all the people" what the government should be allowed to do or not do, or with whom they should interact for the overall benefit of the community. It does not matter that the choice by government entities to use certain organizations for some types of activities makes total sense due to the resources or overall capability of the organization. If they have even the remotest connection to ideas that they feel are discriminatory, even if those ideas do not effect the actual function for which they were chosen, then they should not be allowed. How does this harm them in the first place; and secondly, why should they their beliefs or rights be greater than those of the others? With this rationale, a government entity could hire a contractor to build a fence. The contractor is the best choice, but then they find out a couple of his workers believe Gays are not someone with whom they can work directly because it is against their religious precepts. There are no Gays involved in the project, but the city should still fire the contractor given this rationalization. O.G.E.; Even if National were to make the rational decision to put the choices into the CO's hands, it would not stop the attacks. That would obviously not be good enough, just as a separate, associated LFL is not acceptable. You know that as well as I do. Surely that is the route to which National needs to evolve; and I suspect it eventually will happen. But, there will still be that little thing about a higher power and traditional values as espoused by the Oath and Law which somehow makes BSA a paria. Only total capitulation will satisfy them.

Merlyn; obviously you have no idea how seriously strapped almost every community government is in California. And, sorry, LL specifically raises money for "legal" issues and suits for their "small" segment of the society. They just received a donation of over 1 million dollars a year for 8 years from one donor. And, there are a great many similar donors to LL and others that bring these types of action. Every community challenged by LL, ACLU, and other similar "legal" entities must defend themselves with taxpayer money. I continue to wonder why you never answer the actual question or challenge in most cases. Perhaps it has something to do with not having any answer that makes sense. LGBT individuals, in my opinion, should be given reasonable and legitimate protections and have their rights upheld. But they want a license to do whatever they choose, even at the expense of the majority. Say that is not true, but if you do, then you are blind.

I want to know what LL is doing to make life better for the majority of the population. It is wonderful that they want to support and make life easier for their small percentage of the populace. But, attacking organizations that do far more, just because they don't like them is the worst kind of reverse descrimination. How can these sleep at night? Unfortuneately, they can waste money in any way they wish, as they have no restrictions on their legal funds. Frivolous and questionable suits do not require public money, but those they sue have only limited resources and that is what they count on.

Interesting comment Cheerful Eagle: "If you wanted to use Revolutionary War heros (and appealing to military heros has its own pitfalls), I think you'd want to be careful to build an appreciation of that into the program throughout the year. Otherwise, the boys just wouldn't have the internal script to be a part of the make-believe." It is unfortunate that you may be right, as there definitely seems to be a really sad lack of knowledge about even basic history or the country among not only the children of today, but their parents. When I was that age, there were many more movies and early TV programs that featured such subjects. Also, a lot of the juvenile literature was fact based historical fiction, and often biographies of early notables in the development of our country. I can remember devouring stories on the building of the Erie and Panama canals, frontier development, revolutionary heroics, and of course the myriad mountain man and sod-buster stories. Even the comics featured these subjects. On Tuesday evening, I sat on an Eagle board of review for an 18 year old. He wants to be a historian, and his thoughtful answers reflected his having given serious comparative thought to some current issues. It was refreshing, especially when he brought up the idea that "looking back" helps us to avoid similar mistakes. A simple premise for some of us, but one that seems to me to have been forgotten, especially by many of our esteemed leaders and captains of business. JMHO

"How do the switchbacks hold up". With a belt or suspenders. Sorry, couldn't help myself.

http://www.aaregistry.com/african_american_history/2781/The_Black_Boy_Scout_a_history___ This link will give those interested a fairly good picture of Black Scouts in the history of BSA, though only a snapshot. I have run across a number of interesting items in old scouting material that discuss the "Negro Scout" and so on. They have been part of the program from the outset it appears; but as noted, it has taken decades to find them more or less on the same plane as anglos. Enjoy.

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????????????