skeptic

But, if someone chooses to directly challenge this as a member, they should be allowed to continue in membership because it is their right to force their beliefs on the others and demand it be change to accommodate them. Why? Because they say so. Exactly where does it say that ANYONE is REQUIRED to join the BSA or any other group for that matter? The real sad thing with all of this is that the problems are brought on by adults in almost all the public cases. Few children have actually settled on personal faith or spiritual beliefs. When they claim atheism, it is usually a reiteration of a parent of other adult authority figure. In the case of the Randall twins, their father made sure that "his" being a lawyer was well noted and that HE was fighting for his kids right to echo his own beliefs. I have always found it amusing that when one reporter actually got a statement from one of the boys, asking about explaining natural phenomena and so, the boy said it was "mother nature" that made it. Again, it is the adults that cause the problems for the most part. What is wrong with simply letting others live their lives without your interference, and others doing the same?

A good suggestion for sure. But, believe it or not, there are a lot of people that still like to browse through old scrapbooks and hard copy material. If you are a real historian, primary sources are still what you want. The LBC does not accept anything but originals for their collection if at all possible. Granted, sometimes that is not feasible, and certainly, computer copies and backups are great; just do not be too quick to simply get rid of those primary sources.

"Just curious......Is the parents scout neurotic and paranoid too????" More than a few are. Agree though; no medical, no attendance. It is their choice. The council and camp need to cta's.

Yep, be careful when tossing that you do not lose the history of the unit. Our unit is over 91 years old, and we have huge gaps in its history due to some overly zealous cleaning. Ironically, I do have complete membership listings; but that is due to finding the originals in the attic of the council office. Our gap is in the middle, as the son of one of the founders kept a lot of material from the early years and we have it all in the scrapbooks and binders. Advancement records, once the scout is gone, really have little significance unless someone is tracing something; and theoretically, that info would be in a council file or now on Scout net. Unless there is something significant related to a unit purchase, most financial records should follow general recommendations for these type of documents, I believe that is seven years.

Interesting how concerns a century old are so similar to current ones. Hopefully we will see a sea change back towards more rational and altruistic interactions in our society. If not, we could yet go the way of the Roman Empire.

Kahuna; Am in the process of reading the book after recently receiving your inscribed copy as ordered. Am not very far as yet, but already finding it interesting. Found your quote on page 17 from James Truslow particularly applicable, in my mind, to what goes on today in many of these forums and our society as a whole. You might post some of it in another more contentious forum. Also find your comments on your short career as a professional, and the reasons for leaving to be spot on from what I have observed over my long tenure. The terrible schedule, which I briefly observed in 1971 while shadowing a pro from the old Riverside council in So Cal, was enough to put me off; added to it was the under $8K starting salary of the time and the lack of youth contact. Will likely post additional comments as I work through the meat of the book. Thanks.

Thanks; good to see that simple common sense is still around after-all.

KDD; I am likely much more seasoned so probably do have somewhat different view on many things. Do accept the much greater variety argument; when I was a scout, it was pretty much scouts, little league (if you had it nearby), the Y in its old formats, 4H, and a few others. But there also was no real peer pressure against scouting or the PC nonsense that is so common today. Of course we did have our McCarthyism going full bore at the time, and the start of the worst years of the Cold War. But we also had far stronger familial connections, less fear about something happening to kids if they are out of sight, and a basic respect for adults (on occasion a bit too much I admit, ranching to a fear of sorts). Still, general public life was far less filled with obvious egoism, and there was usually pride in communities reflected by the best things noted by the media regularly. As I said; I am an old guy. But, Scouting still has its place. If we simply run it as each unit sees fit, but within the honest parameters of "mutual" respect, it has much to continue as an important element of our society in nurturing youth.

Maybe the loss in membership is very simple. Our society no longer holds things like honesty, truth, real altruistic actions or thoughts, or other more traditional moral ideas as important. The ego -centrism of so much of our population and the mocking attitude towards idealism is reflected in the sneering comments such as "he such a boy scout". That in itself is reflective of the problem. That is not to say that some people, maybe even a majority, still respect these things; but they tend to no longer feel as comfortable expressing it a lot of the time, due to the tendency for so many people to make light of them. Just an observation of an old guy.

Frankly, due to the lack of almost any positive media coverage, I am not so sure people really know what BSA units do, especially the level of service they give. In our small to medium council, using a conservative average of 100 hours per Eagle project, last years Eagle class contributed over 20K hours, mostly to public schools, local parks, and the Forest Service. Without those projects, these improvements would simply not occur, as the state budgets do not allow it. That does not include the money factors in the projects, nor the likely similar level of hours in other general troop projects. My point is simply that the overall good the BSA does for their communities far outweighs the backlash of the PC campaign that favors a very small percentage of the public and in its own way is just as bigoted as they claim the Scouts are. The real problem is that Scouting IS NOT a political organization, nor does it have a huge, wealthy and powerful lobby pushing its cause. It has issues that need to be solved; but its history has shown it evolves over time. Their problem is that the negative campaigners do not care about how much damage may be done to communities or the children deriving real growth from their Scouting experience. All they want is to enforce their "rights", not understanding that rights are not license; nobody's rights should overpower someone else's. The two sides of the controversy could exist without all the drama, especially since NO ONE is required to join BSA or any church. It is a choice. The common sense idea that if you do not agree, simply do not intermingle seems to have no place anymore. We live in a world where the loudest, most strident voice or the richest cause wins. I suspect if you could ever get the 70% or so of the populace that simply tunes it all out, refusing to side with anyone, to speak up, they would overwhelm the more radical issues on both the right and left. JMO of course.

This is a nice article. I could not help but wonder why the Times can publish this very positive piece, though they did mention the Gay issue slightly in passing, and seldom recognize the similar large contribution of Scouting to the communities here. They certainly find the space to publicize all kinds of negative things, even though the positive is far more the norm.

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.