skeptic

Barry; I appreciate your calm response with what seems to me to be the simple truth. As our society and perspectives within it change, established groups may need to adjust or evolve. But the key is the latter, rather than to be pushed and shoved by political entities or selfish and obdurate egos or power mongers. JMHO of course.

Good early report, but far too early to make any real judgments on the results. On the other hand, this does not surprise me personally, as I was one of those that had heard a chorus of why not my daughter or sister for years. Maybe I just have a better ear, or maybe it will fade out with time. But, locally, we are having a lot of early discussion about the next group next year, and it is mostly positive for the moment, other than those for whom change is simply not acceptable..

If she was the SM at the time of the election, then she had to approve his nomination. That is part of the process. If she did not approve it, but someone from the unit did so in her stead, then it is still an approval at this point. Any contesting should have occurred at the time of the election. Now as noted, if she approved him for being a candidate for election and since something might have occurred to be of concern, she should have gone to the OA leadership. I am simply curious as to what we are not hearing in this situation.

Years ago, I visited the Roy Rogers Museum that was in Victorville, CA at one time. In one of the display cases was Dusty Rogers' Eagle medal. and related items. While only getting a nod, I did see Roy Rodgers there that day giving a personal tour to a family. I was told that it was a regular part of his routine at the time. It is too bad that the museum was moved to the Bronson and then, I believe, recently closed. Today, you can watch old episodes of the Roy Rodgers show with Dale, the animals, the old jeep, Nellie Belle and various B or lower stories. Not sure why it was actually popular then, as it really seems a bit lame now; yet I watched a couple of episodes on the western cable channel the other day. Must have really been bored or nostalgic.

Related would be death for other reasons as well. I know that when we lost one of our Eagles years ago to an Air Force training accident, and we were asked to be honor guards, it was really hard for many of his friends from his time in the unit. For me, it was more so, in that he and I had been friends beyond his youth time and his mother asked me to do a eulogy. Still probably the hardest thing I have ever done as a leader.

There was another shared piece relating to a parent allowing her son to have more latitude in his play time and location. It occurred to me that BP would very likely be square on the side of this basic idea. Afterall, he spoke often about how as a youth he spent a lot of time alone wandering in peripheral forest and fields, learning and coping with challenges encountered. Even though a different era and possibly less, if any, kickback from the society of the period, there are a lot of similarities to this current discussion I feel. Afterall, isn't the basic idea of the "patrol method" just that? And I would agree that too often we do not allow that space and time for the scouts to discover this, stepping in to avoid disappointment or possible failure, which in reality is the most important learning they will glean. Just a thought.

Enough mewling and crying and ooohing and awwwing. I will revisit this in six months to a year for Cubs and late in 2019 after some time has passed. Far too early to make any serious judgements for most of it, though perhaps some of the early head knocking can push for adjustments.

Perhaps I am; one of the drawbacks of getting old and cantankerous. Or as Winnie the Pooh says, "Oh bother".

All the whiners that post nastiness about National and the plot to destroy the program are far too self centered to step back and take a real look and listen to the voices that are most important, those of the youth being served. Most of the perceived negativity is imagined, and if heaven forbid one of the terrible things predicted does happen, the few will parade it around with loud "I told you so's". Reality is that adjustments will be made and those focused on playing the game will work to smooth it out and move forward. They will work to help others at all times and portray cheerfulness to the larger community as they see more young people doing the game and being better examples perhaps than the nay sayers. And yes, I am one that really did suggest girls be allowed in the program many years ago when I saw how many younger, and sometimes same age sisters on occasion came along on trips with family options. They always were asking how come they could not go on all the adventures, and the boys seldom had much issue with it, other than the occasional sibling issues that happen anyway. Yes, a few adults even then complained, but most of them were rarely really happy anyway; guess their glasses were dirty. I too get tired of the negativity a few tend to blather constantly and wonder why they continue to visit or claim to be involved when they so obviously are not happy nor understand the basic tenets of Scouting. Nothing is ever perfect, and perfection does not pertain to any of us as far as I am aware. Pointing out errors in processes or verbal context is fine, but to label those making the errors in negative and sometimes scurrilous is certainly not Scout Like, nor even simply honorable.

All registered adult leaders must have a background check, period. Now, what some might consider damaging, may not show up, or it may not be the type of issue that would cause non-acceptance. My understanding is that also applies to job background checks. But councils do have an option to respond to some challenges, especially if we are talking of the foolishness of some youthful offenses. I guess that would relate to the statute of limitations in some cases. CO's have the option to turn down anyone if they choose, though few get overly involved unless it is brought to them with concern.

I am going to try and copy it so that I can manipulate it to have blanks where specific names and dates are. Then it could have such a use but keep most of the historical integrity. I will have to scan the back and share it also. It has a form to list all the awards of the scout, and this one has all the dates for his ranks and merit badges listed. It is odd to me that in my half century of finding stuff, this is the first version of this I have ever seen. Like many of the old certificates, it is somehow more personal to the intent and recognition and also just simply better designed. Since the cert is actually sealed in the frame I am not sure how a scan will come out, and do not want to open it up.

Early recognition of an Eagle from the 1920's leaving a troop with an "honorable discharge" with his promise to continue to live by the precepts of Scouting.

Let us not ignore the simple facts. If rules and barriers in place are not monitored and followed, including IMMEDIATE response to problems, then there will be abuse or bending of the fuzzy lines. This, as has been noted, is not just a BSA problem. It occurs in any group of youth and adults when they interact. And expecting ALL adults to be mentally and emotionally strong enough to keep the barriers in place, even when hormonal adolescents may be involved may be foolish. That is why the two-deep and no one and one are there. People are people, and most try to meet expected standards of society and if the first line defenses are followed, then most problems are avoided. Still, nothing is absolute, and vigilance is still the final best option. FOLLOW ALL ELEMENTS OF YP AND MOST PROBLEMS WILL NOT OCCUR, AND IF THEY DO APPEAR THEY WILL BE DEALT WITH EARLY ENOUGH TO HEAD THE LARGER FIASCO OFF AT THE PASS.

I posted this in another forum on FB and it has brought some interesting comments. Thought it might find some more. Wonder what the general thoughts might be regarding BSA moving proactively to establish renewable energy in as many scout camps as possible, as well as making them centers for research stations for local universities. I feel that our own camp is in a unique location to allow some good study possibilities since it is in the worst of the drought zone, has its own microclimate, has good sun and sometimes wind, and is near the confluence of major geologic zones. It is also withing four hours of less of many major university campuses. Coordinated sharing agreements might benefit both the camps and various university and even corporate groups that need testing opportunities. Thoughts?

How about we simply ask all members to vouch that they are not the center of the universe and that "something" greater and better than themselves may exist, whether they call it God, god, or something? I am sure that would still find someone that thinks it is treading on their rights or personal space. How broad do we have to go before we might reach "almost" consensus? Obviously, total agreement is beyond our small capabilities.

I am surprised that someone has not started complaining about Pedro anyway, since he is, after all, most likely a Democrat.😁

I fail to understand the issue related to the knot. One knot, and if asked, the recipient can say he was recognized in more than one district at different times. There should be no reason to have to further indicate to others, as those that are friends and scouting colleagues know anyway. We make way too much of these things. Afterall, the program should be focused on the youth. If adults are "seeking" personal recognition, then they may need to evaluate their involvement. Just MHO of course.

One of the frustrating issues I have had over the past five years or so of participation in this forum is that so often we want to immediately focus on the negatives that may or may not exist. Is that necessarily the best way to respond? If a play does not work in organized sports, do you simply say it is hopeless, or do you find a variant or completely new option? Most barriers are surmountable, though many may be better if gone around. The point is to score. In our case, the ultimate goal is to offer the best elements of Scouting to the greatest amount of youth that we can. There is a reason that there is the annoying, but in a way complementary, slur; "oh you are such a Boy Scout" or other similar variants of this. Scouting, at its best, makes society and those of us within it better. So why not look at the challenges we are given as that, challenges, rather than immediately finding reasons it cannot work. My grandfather used to say to me fairly often, "Can't never could do anything!". Think about it before you jump to the worst scenarios. The positive is still there, but we may need to find alternate routes.

It is odd how living in the most populated state we are not having "so many pissed off people". Wonder what the concern is, other than not being really involved nor understanding the overall picture. If anything, we have had mostly positive responses, even from many who were Girl Scouts. A few overly sensitive or prone to hyperbole individuals make noise, and somehow it is immediately taken by many to be the end of the world, or at least the beginning. Those actually directly involved NOW are either very gung-ho to move forward, or at least willing to work to smooth out the rough spots and offer the program to a broader group of youth. 🙄

Perhaps you might simply choose to delete it, rather than pass it on. It has little to do with our subject, other than indicating the individual's skewed perspectives.

Do not understand your reasoning. The overall name remains Boy Scouts of America, and they will still be scouts. Way too much unneeded concerns and over reacting to this whole thing. Just work the program for all the youth involved. Who cares it they are called scouts or boy scouts? Call them boy scouts if that fits them and makes you comfortable.