skeptic

Make sure you are signed into the site. If you do not see your name at the top right under signed in, then you are unable to do some things.

Most likely some unit's or scout's drawing for a poster or other similar graphic, or to use as a guide for carving or painting. Just guessing, but have seen similar items in smaller scale, and they were used for those types of things.

Well, it appears that at least some Catholics are not necessarily in favor of throwing the baby out with the water. This article says it pretty well, from my perspective. http://ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/open-doors In another of the related threads, there is a supposed statement from a Methodist church. I do not claim to know the details related to legal issues, but my understanding is that the National Council insurance would continue to be in affect if something occurred. Some people are simply looking for excuses; and this one seems to fit that category from my perspective.

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang

Come on people; let's just allow people to respond as needed in their own units, hopefully using common sense and not blowing things out of proportion. It appears to me that some individuals simply have to have "chicken little" responses. It is a step in the right direction. Soon enough the secondary issues will have to come to a head. If you care about the actual program, then just put your efforts into working it and please stop making everything into a political football.

Hopefully you mean concerned adults within the pack.

It has become very tiresome to continue to have certain individuals posting over the top opinions about National's policy. While it is certainly not exactly 21st century, and it can be at times very burdensome and ill advised, I cannot see that it is "hateful", purposely intended to demean Gays, or a witch hunt to find them and remove them. There is a definite disconnect between what I would call the real scouting, that is on the unit level, done by volunteers within the basic standards of their particular charter org. Reality is, that even today, close to 70% of the general population in this country has pretty much unspoken, but traditional values. While there is far more tolerance and less chest beating by the majority, the larger majority of society still chooses to not associate directly with Gays and other related individuals. They accept that they have certain rights and must be tolerated without public turmoil; but they also choose to have as little interconnection with them as they can. That is not hatred; it is not bigotry, it is simply their right to move in the elements of society in which they are comfortable. BSA needs to find a workable solution to this. But that solution should not force the majority to interrelate should they choose not to; nor should those that are more open to acceptance or are part of the minority be disallowed to participate within their own groups or barred from general larger group participation. Those that are so thin skinned that they cannot abide anyone with different beliefs or styles of life anywhere near them need to simply follow their own choice and not intermix if the situation arises. Just like in the general public, most will have little or no actual knowledge of these issues, as they technically are not a direct part of the real program and are delegated to the parents or guardians should it become necessary. Both fringes of this Political Spectacle should simply be ignored and butt out, as they have no interest in BSA and its basic program. Let the wheels of change continue to move, and stop demonizing either side. That is the problem in the country today; our leaders set such a poor example with their polarization in government, that somehow it becomes a similar focus in just about any other politically charged public interaction. Now, I will sit back and await the vitriol; but this is my simple opinion. And I continue to just not get why so many cannot just allow people to be people and to keep their noses out of others' lives as much as possible. Freedom is not license. Rights are not absolute. Find your comfort zone, and play within it; but if it does not mesh with someone else, just accept it and move on.

King and others: Here is the link to National's comments and clarifications on the whole proposal. I also have quoted part of it specific to my earlier comments. http://www.scouting.org/sitecore/content/MembershipStandards/Resolution/FAQ.aspx 1. This proposal is in line with Scouting's principles and virtues. Some have asserted that having different standards for adults and youth is illogical or contradictory and runs counter to the principles of Scouting. Asserting this proposal is contradictory is based on a misunderstanding of the resolution. The resolution states:  Youth are still developing, learning about themselves and who they are, developing their sense of right and wrong, and understanding their duty to God to live a moral life.  Any sexual conduct, whether homosexual or heterosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting.  The organization will maintain its current membership policy for all adult leaders.  No member may use Scouting to promote or advance any social or political position or agenda.  Members must demonstrate behavior that exemplifies the highest level of good conduct and respect for others and is consistent at all times with the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Scout Law. By reinforcing that Scouting is a youth program, and any sexual conduct, whether heterosexual or homosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting, and that no member may use Scouting to promote or advance any social or political position or agenda, this resolution rightly recognizes there is a difference between kids and adults while remaining true to the long-standing virtues of Scouting.

King; just read the entire proposal.

"If" the resolution as written passes, those individuals noted here would then be in direct violation of the policy. Few here seem to even notice that there are other parts of the resolution beyond allowing kids who feel they are Gay. One of them is against public political statements of any kind in relation to Scouting.

I agree with you; our district Eagle BOR coordinator, who is retired and has no family has given a number of these donations in honor of various of his scouting friends. That is the only reason I wear said knot, because he presented it to me at a roundtable. Should I not wear it because it represents money he donated in my honor because he does not want the government to get his small legacy when he dies and feels this is a good way to thank friends?

Seems to me the issue is simply enough at the lower levels. Do what they do in other parts of the world. Have an all girl unit under the BSA program; have an all boy unit under the BSA program; have a coed unit with both men and women leaders under the BSA program. How hard is that? Like everything, it just takes making it happen as the group would want.

Well, the COR was over the weekend. I had six scouts and they did so so. Apparently they still stayed in the lowest third, but I hope to find out where they had the most opportunity. Think it was just not doing enough events, but do not really know. It was really dry and dusty, but only hot for a couple of hours. Had lots of cow pie dodging necessary though. Am still trying to overcome the sinus issues this morning. Had a couple of patrols get the compass event perfect; mine was not one of them. I have noticed that the biggest issue is lack of really knowing pace and carelessness on taking bearings even if they actually know how. My group has practiced numbers of times, but they still botch it up much of the time completely, or only get close. In real life they would be lost. Also have heard similar comments from other event leaders of basic skills, especially knots and first aide. Another reflection of the new order. We cannot retest, and few ever really practice on their own. Oh well. We do what we can. Still a good weekend, even though I am zonked.

Now that is a great idea for COR. We really need those kind of group cooperative events. Thanks.

It remains to be seen about the supposed extra voters; somehow I think that is nonsense. On the other hand, the individuals in this particular group appear a bit hypocritical to me in that they are bending the data themselves. As far as the Catholic faith is concerned, I have no problem with it basically; but I have never understood the idea that somehow going to confession and getting forgiven repeatedly for the same sins is in itself sinful from my perspective. And that is a very common thing from appearances, though I obviously do not have anything but long time hearsay. The person that posted in their comments from the given link that ANY sexual activity within the youth is grounds for dismissal makes a valid point in regard to this update. It is a step in the right direction; but they will still need to find a way to deal with the transition from youth to adult that makes sense. How about if we simply wait and see and in the meantime just do what we do on the unit level.

It worked; I posted a new item. Yea.

Annual district Camporee this weekend; go up Friday afternoon, return Sunday morning. Have 402 paid registrants at the moment, and the weather looks like it will cooperate. Now, if the cows have not left us too many gifts in the grass, it should be a good weekend. My small group seems better prepared this year; have hopes they will do better in the events and get through most of them. Also have scouts to be "called out", the first group in a few years; one leader is on the list, but he may not be there because he is caring for a younger child this weekend. Hope he may be up for the evening on Saturday.

Pack; There were some other similar issues that came up before Dale, but National did not get involved, so they did not reach the level Dale did. I too do not remember any real issues with this at all until the 90's when the Gay political movement really began its push in various arenas. We will not likely ever get the total truth on Dale, but it appears from what data is available that someone in the council took exception to the college involvement in a very public activity, even though it was NOT in the local area. My understanding is that the unit from which he came had no issues; it was someone outside. Apparently that person and perhaps a few others had some pull in the local council and decided to push it. Of course, it then became a National issue very quickly when the Gay supporters chose to use it as a test; or at least that is the way it appears to me. What is sad is that if the local council had just let the local unit determine its membership, and told the outside individual(s) it had nothing to do with them it may very well have not reached the level it did. I do suspect that if Dale had not been the touch point, another would have soon been found due to the beginning of the modern Gay political maneuvering. Just my take from the bits and pieces easily found. Someone in the actual council area that was around then may have a lot more light to shine on it, but it is way too late now. So, here we are walking that thin line at the unit level, trying to keep the idiocy of the radicals on both sides from destroying us. I still see a possible glimmer of hope for adults in the less obvious wording of the overall proposal that deals with NO types of agendas being acceptable within the program, and specifying that ANY disruptive leader may be disallowed. The biggest hurdle is the one of movement from youth to adult if the status would change. How they deal with that is beyond me, unless they amend the resolution or something.

Neither right or left should be using the BSA as a political weapon. We are not supposed to be political at all, only patriotic. There is no solution for this that will completely satisfy either side. So, if you believe the positive of BSA outweighs the negative, then simply work the program locally and keep it to yourselves. Only deal with divisive issues if they come up; don't go looking for them.

Sentinel; take it with a grain of salt as B.P. exaggerates constantly and obviously has a vendetta against National in general. He may deny, but it is clear from his long list of negative posts, no matter what the issue. Just my personal observation and opinion of course.

Yep, once again the pre-announcement of the resolution, not yet actually passed, has become REALITY in the press. I suppose they needed to have the actual resolution wording available for the voting members ahead of time, and it would have been leaked anyway, but now we are again where we were with the earlier announcement about the "local option". I do find it interesting that there has been little verbal jousting about the small, but definitely changed, adult wording that clarifies to some extent the definition of "Avowed", and adds wording to include other possible distraction bent leaders. It also very specifically appears to make it clear the pushing of ANY agenda is unacceptable. To me, that is a huge improvement and does give more support to the CO 's part in leadership selection.

Read the numerous comments on Bryan on Scouting on Facebook, as well as the comments directly on the Scouting Magazine site. Almost all are agreeing that this resolution is almost laughable and nothing more than trying to please everybody. Just do not know how much longer I can work in the trenches with the constant shadow of this foolishness over my head. But,will continue to try and simply do the program on the unit level and try to keep the politics at bay.

Well that's the lovely thing about membership organizations, you can always leave and start your own if you want or find another that fits your belief system. If I don't like AARP I can find another senior's group to belong to. Don't like my college because they encourage anti-conservative or liberal values? I can find myself a college that fits my belief system without forcing the obvious majority of people at said college to conform to mine. Why would you want to do such a rational and common sense thing?

Atheists like myself still obey the scout oath and law. The scout oath says: On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country I do my best. My best is that I do not believe there is a God. I think it is a children's story made up to put priests in power by selling people comforting myths and legends. The best I can do is my duty to my country. I pay my taxes. I vote. And I speak out. I volunteer for things. Etc. Likewise, I also obey the Scout Law: A Scout is reverent. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others. I am faithful in my religious duties. My religious duties are to wait for solid evidence of an afterlife or supreme being before I believe in one. In the meantime, I spend my time respecting the beliefs of others. Our scout unit has a chaplain. As the unit leader, I ask him to give prayers before eating or at the end of the meeting. I bow my head and remove my hat during prayers. In fact, sometimes I am the one leading the prayers when he is not there. I usually do the Great Scouter of all Scouts prayer, or the Philmont prayer. You religious guys seem to like those, and it seems courteous, kind, and friendly to fulfill my expected role in those areas. I never speak about religion to boys in the unit. I assume the parents and the fundamentalist church that hired me to lead this unit without asking my religious background would not appreciate me evangelizing for atheism. So, I don't speak of it, and I tell my son to not speak of it to scouting friends. Should I be kicked out? I don't think so. Should I be allowed to be an atheist openly? Yes. Would I do so openly? No. I would remain secretive about it and continue to lie to people about my religion. I wish I could be trustworthy on the topic, but BSA and the COR's beliefs have placed me in the difficult position of having to lie to maintain my membership. As I teach my sons, "A Scout Is Trustworthy" does not mean that he outs himself as a Jew to Nazis. It just means people can rely on you. So far, this unit has relied on me, and I have delivered. Without me, this unit dies. I am what holds it together. I wish religion would go away from the world. I think it is nonsense. But, that will never happen, so I work within the confines that those who still need it require, and it is a sacrifice on my part that you who despise me will never understand or appreciate. Meanwhile, all around me I listen to people tell me about how atheists cannot be good people, because apparently everyone will murder and steal without religion. I am a black man before MLK came along in a way. I'm OK with it. One day, religion will start to fizzle as we continue to advance technologically. Just like in Europe. For now, this is us, and I am one of us, so I do my job. I'm the best man for it. Merlyn; Maybe I look at things too simplistically. For me, the Dale decision by the local council and National was wrong. His life away at college had no real effect on the unit to which he was still registered. Most likely, few if any members of his actual unit cared, as it had never been an issue when he was there. But, once the whole thing became public and a part of a political agenda, it was not possible to re-bottle. Just the way I have seen it from the beginning. National tried to make it less controversial by using "avowed" in the ban; but that term has pretty much been either ignored or terribly twisted by both sides of the debate. It was also meant to be related to "leaders" only; again it was extended to youth by a few illogical and extreme individuals and became just another skewed attack point. That is why I have always favored the so called local option, as only the unit really understands how something has become or is becoming a problem, no matter if it is these two political points or something else such as abuse of some sort or alcohol or drugs. Just the way I view things and what has worked in our unit for a very long time.

Atheists like myself still obey the scout oath and law. The scout oath says: On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country I do my best. My best is that I do not believe there is a God. I think it is a children's story made up to put priests in power by selling people comforting myths and legends. The best I can do is my duty to my country. I pay my taxes. I vote. And I speak out. I volunteer for things. Etc. Likewise, I also obey the Scout Law: A Scout is reverent. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others. I am faithful in my religious duties. My religious duties are to wait for solid evidence of an afterlife or supreme being before I believe in one. In the meantime, I spend my time respecting the beliefs of others. Our scout unit has a chaplain. As the unit leader, I ask him to give prayers before eating or at the end of the meeting. I bow my head and remove my hat during prayers. In fact, sometimes I am the one leading the prayers when he is not there. I usually do the Great Scouter of all Scouts prayer, or the Philmont prayer. You religious guys seem to like those, and it seems courteous, kind, and friendly to fulfill my expected role in those areas. I never speak about religion to boys in the unit. I assume the parents and the fundamentalist church that hired me to lead this unit without asking my religious background would not appreciate me evangelizing for atheism. So, I don't speak of it, and I tell my son to not speak of it to scouting friends. Should I be kicked out? I don't think so. Should I be allowed to be an atheist openly? Yes. Would I do so openly? No. I would remain secretive about it and continue to lie to people about my religion. I wish I could be trustworthy on the topic, but BSA and the COR's beliefs have placed me in the difficult position of having to lie to maintain my membership. As I teach my sons, "A Scout Is Trustworthy" does not mean that he outs himself as a Jew to Nazis. It just means people can rely on you. So far, this unit has relied on me, and I have delivered. Without me, this unit dies. I am what holds it together. I wish religion would go away from the world. I think it is nonsense. But, that will never happen, so I work within the confines that those who still need it require, and it is a sacrifice on my part that you who despise me will never understand or appreciate. Meanwhile, all around me I listen to people tell me about how atheists cannot be good people, because apparently everyone will murder and steal without religion. I am a black man before MLK came along in a way. I'm OK with it. One day, religion will start to fizzle as we continue to advance technologically. Just like in Europe. For now, this is us, and I am one of us, so I do my job. I'm the best man for it. Now, I would not have any problem with your approach, even if you stated you were an atheist directly. You are not promulgating scouts to believe as you do; rather you are referring it to its proper place, the family. You seem to respect the religious' right to have their religion. Just like the other G so discussed, you do not make it a major item for discussion or suggest that others do as you do or act. That is the way it was for years, and things went fine. And they still will if people just keep their PERSONAL lives to themselves and refuse to be drawn in by someone that wants to somehow demonize them. JMHO of course.