skeptic

Hopefully both. They really are joined at the hip, more or less. But, BSA as a corporation, not but one option for the program here. Would like to see them figure it out, as the bones are still there, and so would be less difficult if done with integrity.

The negative attitudes a few bring to this is disappoointing. IF you believed in Scouting before, you should go back and see why and then work on putting that into play again in some new manner, or even the old. If you found the early development of Scouting as BP imagined it in the age of huge cultural and international upheaval and the needs of the changing masses and its youth, then you might ask why that seemed a positive for the time and how it might play in the more modern enviroments. I have to believe that most on here come because they want something from the program, or saw something. I realize a few are on here because they likely are enjoying the negative elements of this imbalanced trajedy of toxicity that is not actually representative of the real Scouting idea, but rather a reflection of the very reason Scouting should still have a place. Even the most jaded I suspect, if they are honest, cannot truthfully claim that the benefits of Scouting for over a century, both BSA and the world momement, far out strips the damages from the small darkness that somehow took hold, but is not the real Scouting. So, those of us that truly believe it still is even more needed and has its place should do what we can to right the ship, even if it means jetisoning some parts of the perhaps too broad or segmented organization. Do Our Best and put the Law and Oath at the forefront, and work to heal the wounds of the darker societal intrusions.

Am I the only one that suspects that if real vetting happens, a large percentage of the claims will go poof or be tossed? And, I still do not understand why immediate vetting should not have been the case to start, as then perhaps a large part of this mess would have been distilled into verified categories, versus "I was a scout and someone looked at me funny" categories.

What is not being admitted is that there very likely are these types of camp rule violations in most camps. We do not search people, or not usually, and we all have known of inidividuals that ignore the rules and bring unauthorized items into the camps. Most do not expose such violations, and a few may simply keep something with "camping" gear and forget it is there. It is when these items are involved in incidents, or simply exposed, that we become aware. Simialrly it highly likely that alcohol could be found in a large percentage of searches, along with larger than useful (for normal use) blades, yes firearms, possibly even fireworks, and varioous recreational drugs. We are dealing with people, and many have big egos and think they are immune to the rules. Until we get the larger picture, we likely are better off not passing judgment. Hopefully an answer will be found, and changes or legal responses applied in a reasonable and balanced way.

The documents shared over time have been similar, but changed a bit. The basic premise, is the same for a long time now. Problems lie in that many councils seem to NOT want to do it if they are responsible. We are looking at changing CO's, not to the Council, as ours does not really want to do it, and we are not comfortable with it anyway due to the asset issue. The good news is that our local church wants us to stay with the useage agreement, just not the legal CO problem that is ongoing in the litigious atmosphere. We can perpetuate our tenure though, which is the main issue for us, beyond the meeting place of decades with its history.

That was already noted in the earlier postings.

Subscribe Sign In https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sfchronicle.com%2Fbayarea%2Farticle%2FBoy-Scouts-Chinatown-survival-troop-17378339.php%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR2iiW3b0mQY2Sc4057JzQZuf0OP3N1SP3-AjRoLp8wtre5JZDNoF1hd1Oc&h=AT0vwmsquKWMJaHZc6Dqi9wammasLtSZWjR2RCuD9zyPfbTXROwiDqV4ayYo3miYePOfpCilboBYkTlXIpSYUgB16fhk8k4WgzKqbh2jaNOwoWqDF4zWGEGo7Ak65rSm&__tn__=H-R&c[0]=AT0tTvMUcQSJfk45w70_9xAhnU7LQCBas0_Su0IqSeqhcwJiO4oYAy8Xrcc4-Vhhbk90oGE8LWR5k4al1HKgpz4uZ3KofUFBNdN76lNlF1X3jKhIRYZ1q677-4yj2fic3MMCtIZIsiH3AgbvctaXmorBqbVxnVyKcjyJbtsAfjblA3PnsHBms_k65d14ep-C4NrHUV0A5-I-X8yhUBk BAY AREA Peter Hartlaub (he/him) is The San Francisco Chronicle’s culture critic. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @PeterHartlaub

While I do not really remember much of my initial troop, as we moved soon after I had joined, though it was not into serious drilling, but did have some of the basic elements of formations and respect. The unit I joined after moving was sponsored by the VFW, as opposed to the Lutheran Church, and it had a strong cadre of adults from WWII, as it was the fifties. It was there I learned and came to like basic drill and formalities, and we did include some more militaristic bits, saluting the SM if meeting formally, as well as the youth leaders. We drilled regularly and could do it well in parades and flag ceremonies. The drilling does serve a purpose beyond just "looking good", as it forces one to be aware of the command voice and, while marching, those around you. To this day I truly enjoy crisp formations in motion, especially a four wide flight smoothly rounding a corner, or a column changing direction as one, rather than in line. It just, to me, is impressive and almost mesmerizing in its smoothness. But we do not drill today, or seldom do it beyond basic flag ceremony practice. And honestly I cringe at times with the lack of tight formations and motions many groups present, including our own. But, they are still being respectful and it is still mostly appreciated by observers, even myself. I try to not be overly critical beyond working at standing up straight and staying in line, and respecting the ceremonial elements at actual formations. I have told my own youth more than once that if I can stand at basic attention for ten minutes, so can they; but also I teach them how to NOT be tense while doing it, especially locking joints. Related I find writing this is the comparison to the lack of interest by so many today in the OA. And I see that to be partly due to the loss of the OA mystique and well done ceremony. The PC atmosphere and, to me mainly misplaced idea of disrespect of the Native American history is part of that. There is no doubt that often sloppiness or not understanding the formalities of Native ceremony contributed, it is more the bending of history and culture in a questionable direction that actually often does more damage to the image and culture than the poorly performed ceremonies. Just my own perception, and I will not argue the foolishness of cultural appropriation with anyone, as that to me is mostly simply nonsense or other terminology not appropriate here. In the end though, BP, especially after his retirement from the military, made it pretty clear that Scouting should NOT be military boot camp or preparation. He aspired towards a world brotherhood of Scouting, a term we still use today and represented by the purple patch. And it works, when allowed to. Many of us have had the privilege of seeng it at a jamboree or in today, online interactions. And that "brotherhood", or I suppose that "family" of World Scouting may be more important to day than ever.

While there continues to be a great deal of confusion about the "agreement" between BSA and UMC, I do not feel it is accurate to suggest they are "dumping" the scouts. It surely is not the case in most of the units with whom I am familiar. But, as in ours, we are trying to formulate how to avoid any LC ownership, which seems likely to be a new CO, but continued primise use. Our local church "wants" us therer, but the legal confusion and fear of more direct confrontations runs deep. It is the lack of specific detail as to how they as a CO might be liable going forward that is the issue. Unless our legal system makes serious adjustments, with some concrete guidelines and penalty tables, it will continue to be free range for the manipulative lawyers some call black birds of carrion and greedy. So, the CO support that is still there, is very leery of such things in the current litigious atmosphere of our society.

Do not see that, but some likely do, especially those that tend to a negative bias from the get go. But, just a view. Will leave it there, and move on to something more positive and important.

I just looked at the survey via the link shared, and I frankly do not see what some suggest is trying to raise money, or make a profit. Is the link not inclusive of the survey?

Is the chosen battle really worth the discourse and dischord?

How about is it simply "human predator based". That is really what it is. I has little to do with the Church/CO or BSA directly, as the people doingit are NOT representative of the CO's or BSA. They are part of the fringe, but sadly fairly common negative elements of humanity. Just an observation that seems obvious to me. But, I guess some will disagree, as is their right.

Hearsay to roil the waters is not a good idea. Unless there is supporting evidence to such comments, it is not anything for this forum, or so it seems to me.

I just hope that those that would put someone to the grinding wheel due to their interpretation of something in the GTA or even what something means, would chill a bit. Also hope that most rational Scouters will have the sense, maturity, and integrity to not embasrass a scout over something like this and instead, if that important to them seek out and discuss with the unit leader(s). Even an aside meant to simply make a youth think a bit can come off wrong and cause issues. I learned years ago to not chastize a youth for something that is not dangerous or likely to cause harm, especially uniform stuff. I jokingly asked a Star Scout at camp what lodge the "tote-n-chip" was since he had that patch where the OA flap is in theory supposed to be placed. He was upset, as I embarassed him, though I suspect he also knew what I meant. At chow that evening I was taken to the woodshed by a very annoyed leader from that unit. I did apologize to them as best I could, but it was really not worth the outcome. Since then, I only correct or annoy my own youth.

It is apparently not of high importance to most councils. Otherwise, every council would maintain at their office a used exchange department. Far too many uniforms go to some form of thrift, and most of those end up in the market with little control and often excessive expectations. IF each council were to keep such a resource, people could use it for exchanges as youth grow, and the supply issue might be partly mitigated. But, that would mean they would likely lose a good percentage of "new" purchases. The focus needs to not be on profit to sustain the council, but service to meet the "uniform" part of the program. JMHO of course.

Some of that is also due to the changes in the church memberships, especially with older units likeours. In the thirties through early sixties, we had huge youth involvement in the church, and the units reflected that too. As the population shifted away from our end of the city, the youth went with it, and now the largest units are on the opposite end of the town. And the income levels also shifted that way so that our draw slowly became from the lowest income areas and oldest housing. Now we struggle as was here noted, but we have managed barely to keep the pack. We had a very large feeder for years at a school, but they moved to a church, then folded not long afterwards. Getting the cubs to visit to transition is hard, especially with the numbers and struggle with progam due to barely enough leaders able to do outdoor even at the minimum. Out history is a plus, as we are the oldest unit in the council by far, but that only goes so far, especially with the odd historical disintruest it seems in society in general. Finally of course, the biggest problem now is the CYA fears in the larger Church with the CO attacks by the black feathered ones. JMHO of course. Just note that, depending on your spiritual beliefs, there has never been a perfect human, and since all groups are made of us, that is a challenge.

Off and on through the years I have tried to point out the inclusion of the name of Jesus Christ in their longer name, which I understood to be the official one. Am fairly certain the usage of Mormon comes from the Book of Mormon, and that book has seemed to me to be the reason so many "Christians" have refused to recognize them as "Christians". For me, it has always been what verifies to me that they are one of the many off shoots of the larger family of Christians. While the extra book has never been something I have found acceptible for my own Christian belief, it also does not remove the "fact" they also include the more accepted other two books of the Bible. It is in many ways similar to my views of Jehovah's Witnesses and to some extent Christian Scientists. And there are a few more that are pretty restrictive form my mind. Perhaps I am too simplistic in my personal definition of what a Christian is. As I see it; if someone believes in Christ, no matter what the variants attached, they still are part of the Christian family. Not a debate for me, so please refrain. Just as most of us have little knowledge or understanding of other world wide beliefs, or simply do not feel they are real, those that have them have that right. And, I also believe it will all get sorted out in some manner at a future time in our spiritual existences.

In the case of the Methodist Church, I suspect you will find any of the established units have a long history of a safe and free meeting space, and often much storage as well. We have been our church basement since the building was dedicated in the thirties. With the slow deteriorization of the congregation, we have been allowed more storage options as well. Most importantly, almost 100 percent of the actual church membership loves the Scouts and when we interact, they show it both in financial sharing and more importantly simple friendliness. Since it is top heavy with elderly, though slowly getting a bit younger, the kids often experience the "grandparent" experience. Good for everyone.

Today there is a fairly extensive piece on the LDS in Bisbee and so on. This is only conjecture or poking for clarity, but I find myself wondering if the BSA officials that appareently made the under the carpet choice ordeflected were mostly LDS, since at the time they were huge influences on the National Council? No accusation, only curiosity.

Why would we need a state law to mandate what is obviously needed? And that can apply to the distant past too. Why was the general public attitude so misdirected? Protection of the innocent should not need to be a point of legal law, only moral law. And, that too is part of the basic foundation of real Scouting, as well as most belief systems.

Other than the history of the LDS with BSA, this is mute. LDS completely dropped scouting as a church sponsored program and have gone out on their own. While it became mostly finalized prior to the bankruptcy, it was in the works for almost a decade prior. So, the conjectures about LDS somehow becoming a different CO type is mute.

Government recognized the benefits of the BSA in the first up until around the sixties when so much began to change. That may well have been connected to disallusionment brought on by JFK and Civil Rights. Certainly for me, that was a huge pivot point for me. And I now see my generation as mostly jaded or just tired and having abandoned all the positive energy of the Kennedy enthusiam. Interactions with BSA were shared and often cooperative endeavors to improve society, not only with the military interactions where we could camp on bases and work with them at times, but also shared resources, such as happened with A.P:. Hill's jambo use. That was a screaming point for some of the radicals against anything positive with BSA at the time. They did not care about the symbiotic benefits of the connection. The Army's AP Hill assistance allowed them to train with large groups for many possibilities with large group gatherings, and also practicing skills only really viable with large groups. Meanwhile the BSA paid considerable for much of the materials and so on, even though the nay sayers tried to suggest it was all given to them. Narrow mindedness and bias. Today, we no longer can interact well with military bases, and visits are so restrictive that they are like looking through a glass case. Our unit used to camp on base at Edwards next to the old rocket sled track, and we had tours, used the dining halls, the pool and so on. Air shows were special and huge. At Vandenburg, we saw dog traiining, looked into silos, and saw the then being constructed launch structures, as well as the site of the huge naval disaster along the coarst near there. While security is important, I cannot help but wonder how much is lost with this blindered approach to public interactions. Of course, many of us have heard the stories of veterans that note their Scouting training as helping them survive, even up to the modern day, but especially in WWII, Korea, and Nam. Joe Price told me that it was his assignment to find as many scout handbooks and manuals as possible for military training that got him into collecting. They used them for training of the troops, as they felt they were some of the best resources at the time. And, being a Skeptic, I find myself feeling that the idea that somehow the Government can be dragged into the lawsuit and bankruptcy, due to perceived deep pockets I fear, is just that; an effort to find more money at the expense of others, the tax payers. JMHO of course.

We need to face the larger elephant. BSA, and far too many other groups of similar nature are in constant fear of law suits over what fifty years or more ago would have been thrown out immediately. Same discussion that makes the lawsuit issues so difficult in the bankruptcy. Our legal system is really poorly designed today in that it will not simply ban foolishness that is obvious. JMHO of course.

Ever since the changes that pretty much make anyone that is First Class and has the other minimum requirements I have made it a point to talk to every likely candidate to determine IF he desired to even be in OA, and explain to him the expectation he needs to meet the intent of the honor. And, I have had a few scouts tell me that it really is not something they feel the need to do. Along with my own Spirit evaluation, tht has on occasion removed a few. Sadly, still too many still become "sash and dash". Part of that may be the lack of real intensity and meaning in the Ordeal ceremonies too much of the time. Too often it is obvious that little effort has been made to learn the ceremonial parts, and some candidates are really still too immature to fulfill the honor yet. It is sad that so much of the Order mystique is no longer in place. Still, it does serve a purpose, and at times they do a really fine job. It depends on theose in the leadership over time.