skeptic

Is this a violation? Cubs with a wagon!

Actually are pretty good, though you need to actually follow up with practice and individual work. They definitely give viewers a basic grasp of the requirements.

POSITION Im neither right nor left and certainly not center. To me to be among the silent majority means to be among the dead. And for me not two or ten or two hundred make up a minority. Every man is such because every man is different. If I met a man who looked like me and thought like me and walked and spoke like me and was in no way different from me only then would I consider slaying him for he would have stolen from me all those truths and all those lies I'd found out for myself. All the living that had brought me here that man would have erased by being just like me. But kill a man unlike myself ? Not likely. There might be something I could learn from him. There is so much I need to know, why there are no butterflies in the worlds backyard, and when I find it out I need to know how to get them back. Men trample beauty underfoot like it was gravel. These actions are confined to no one country but I resent it in my own because I love my country. Could it be that men join clubs as men carry them for security. But from what ? My security is my country and everything I am in life and everything I know and everything I care about revolves around it. And I live in America and I find its face not ugly except sometimes. -from The Power Bright & Shining, 1985

Actually Merlyn, the standing issue likely will eventually reach the high court with the San Diego case. The lower court's ruling on standing is thin at best, and completely illogical (logic is not always used in these decisions obviously) in that the primary litigants "never" actually tried to use the facilities because the very idea of even dealing with the BSA would somehow cause them emotional trauma. Reality is that they would not have been turned away in the first place if they had actually applied; though their first choices may have been taken by others, including scout units. I just wish this one would finally get to SCOTUS, as it just reeks of questionable rulings almost from the start, and is one of the best examples of the activist court. Yes, I know you disagree and think the public good is not a factor with the cases. If the scouts should lose the camps, the city and area will be the real losers. None of the government entities have the wherewithal to administer the "open to public" facilities or to maintain them, especially in this economy. So, Balboa, or at least the areas without buildings, would likely return to the natural state and become overgrown and another fire concern. And the Mission Park facility would likely be closed or become a private park with exorbitant costs. This just reflects the self centered positions of those bringing these suits. You will call it whining, or some other juvenile comment; I just call it logic and reality.

Just experienced this a few weeks back when a scout, after finishing OA Ordeal and just staying the night for morning ride, walked across the area near my cot, then sat down on a log. It unnerved me because he pretty much did not respond, other than saying yes when I asked him if he was okay. I was just preparing to change some clothes before getting in my bag, and I was under the stars with a cot. It was like he was simply sitting there staring at me. He finally got up and went back to his bag and went to sleep; the others in the area were all under the stars too. Next morning he had no memory of it. His mom says she has never seen him do it either. But, he had had a very long day and previous night; so that seems related. I had just laid back on my cot and sort of watched him until he went back to his bag. Then finished getting ready for the sack. Years ago had a scout actually get up inside a bag and sort of hop around in his sleep. I was ready to stop him, as he was headed in the direction of a drop off into the creek; but he laid back down and went back to sleep. Again, he did not remember; but his mom said he had been doing it off and on for a number of years. This was the first time he had slept outside a tent, so that may have had something to do with it.

Ah yes; "citizens bring lawsuits". In most of these cases you can find a political and/or extremist group pushing it from the background, at least to start. Of course, I am not sure what it says about an individual if they are "so threatened by an idea or belief" that they need to sue in the first place. If you do not believe in something, then tune it out and move on; or find some other group with which to interact. The real problem is the development of a radically egocentric society. As long as people feel that "only their feelings or beliefs" are important, there will be friction. People on both sides of disagreements need to get over themselves. As Rodney King said (RIP), "Why can't we all just get along?"

Made me smile; thanks. Was looking forward to an Uncle Dan type individual wearing a 1920's style uniform.(This message has been edited by skeptic)

Me thinks Tim242 may be a spammer????

Thanks; I will mention it to the assistant SE. Not sure where they are at on this, as almost anything new has to be brought to their attention by one of us before they make any effort to work with it or explain. They are understaffed, and under funded, like many, and so the ones there are over worked and always putting out fires.

We still do not have the complete freedom from extra permits locally in our council. I was told again today that we still have to file them as in the past, even if within the local council and less than 500 miles. So, we still have to print and take to the office, or fax. Wonder why the local council could not simply be added as a recipient of the on-line form. Then someone there could record it when they get it. But reality is that most plans/permits are not far enough out to be checked before an activity; so faxing or taking it in is still the best way for it to be on file there. It is a work in progress I guess. They did post something on "my scouting" regarding the flagging for first aid and cpr on other activities. Say it is NOT necessary, and ignore the flag.

Since I often tend to think that people might actually be rational and maybe even act with some amount common sense, I put these thoughts out there. First; when health care reform and adjustment has been a major issue for decades, and continues to be a problem, why has this even been the first actual legislation passed of any kind? Second; since there are parts of this act that actually are beneficial to most people, and especially those with kids in higher education or facing very expensive health problems, why is there the baying of destruction of the entire bill by those against it? Why not instead start working on finding ways to amend and adjust going forward. Even the President has made statements regarding a willingness to fine tune and rework it. Finally; why is it that almost none of the people in Congress, on either side, or the few independents, are willing to actually do their jobs? Leadership is about cooperation and putting the good of the group ahead of personal needs and gains. Or, at least that is what we in our unit attempt to get across to our scouts. It is fairly obvious to me that we have not had true representative government for a long time. If there was a way to actually make it happen, real election reform and spending controls would do wonders. But as long as pols control our National and State centers of government, we will continue to see little constructive work come out of them. How to get "THAT" to happen is another conundrum. Then, again, I tend to be rather skeptical that any of this is particularly likely. When less than 40% of the eligible voters even participate, and many of them are being led around by the ignorance of party politics and propagandists, there does not seem to be much hope. One can dream I suppose. I am disappointed in my own generation. We were so inspired for a short time to actually make a difference. But, we let ourselves be beat down and mostly just became self centered and short sighted. We let dreams be killed or subdued by the loss of some of our strongest inspirational leaders, rather than use their losses as catalysts to farther sighted action. Most disastrously, we have allowed money and power to almost completely invalidate the voice of the majority. But what do I know? I'm just a semi-retired teacher and scout leader.

So, can we claim mispronunciation when we hit our thumb with the hammer? Or do we just have a corner taken from our Hammer Swing'n Chit? Just asking.

It appears, at least with Chrome on my computer, that the tool bar type links at the top do not work, but the ones to right in the red boxes do. Once you get to the page, the sub categories do not work, but the main page items appear to.

Do have a question regarding the article stating they had the "first" female SPL. Not sure how that might happen, at least within normal bounds. If it is a crew, then the leader is a president. The crew would not be a part of the troop. I suppose they might have made a local decision to merge the two, so to speak, and have an overall group leader, or SPL. Back in the day, prior to coed of course, we had explorer patrols that operated separately from the main core of the troop, including being able to do both the explorer and scout advancement programs, but they were part of the troop just the same. We also have on file a charter for a "Sea Scout Patrol" within the troop back in the 30's or 40's. It appears to have been issued by National, but is a separate charter listing the patrol as part of the troop. Frankly, organizing along those lines might actually be a good way to re-position the program in some instances. I could see holding onto the older boys more easily if the coed function was available within the troop with the same age restrictions and leadership at least, or maybe even all ages. Of course, would need to also then make all ranks open to the girls too, which might also be a good thing.

Sort of like crowd control for the suffrage marches in the teens. The article notes the police refused to do it. Borderline, but a common thing back then in actuality.

Once again; we might want to consider the Koshare groups in Colorado. If you read their history, it is obvious that they have worked very hard over the years to develop authentic dances and to cooperate with traditions of the tribes from whom they take dances. And, if a concern is brought to them by a "legitimate" tribal authority, they have respected it, and worked to either solve the problem, or discontinue that part of their routines.

Great article; too bad no photos. But, there was also NO comments about the PC nonsense. That is to be lauded, as the story is about the unit.

The comments about OA being fake and insulting to Native American culture are simply part of the PC mentality of today. Yes, there have been some poor renditions of ceremonies and regalia; yes, some scouts involved do not give it the seriousness one would hope; yes, there have been a few real faux pas's over the years that did not show the OA as particularly cognizant of Native American history and tradition; but more often, the efforts are well done, and regularly receive positive feedback from local tribe representatives. In our area, we have local Chumash leaders that on occasion participate in ceremony. I continue to be a bit dismayed by the apparent overboard reactions by a few on these forums in response to various issues. It would concern me that they would possibly be that contentious and strident on local issues; not an example we might consider within the idea of "Scout Spirit". Just saying.

Engineer: "Some of us have no interest in the outdoors." If that is the case, then why would they even consider the BSA? Whether or not it is as extensive as it once was, which really depends on the unit program, outdoors is still a major part of the program. Someone joining with no interest in nature and the outdoors makes no sense at all.

Two thoughts, or questions to ponder. How much effect does the project have on the age of attainment? Remember, no projects were required until circa 1965; and initially, they were not quite as specific in regard to requirements. On the other hand; are adult Eagles, those that earned it as an adult when it was still allowed, factored into the data. Also, when you consider that you had to be 12 to join until the 40's, then the age difference is even wider. Still, much of it has to do with maturity I would have to agree. Kids are so over protected and under challenged by things that encourage self confidence and mental maturity that they are seldom equipped to meet even basic realities of adulthood, even at 18. Of course much of this is already being discussed in other threads, or has been.

Base'; I hear you. We are the only troop on the west end of our city, which once was the core, but is now the "poor" end of town. We have not had younger males available to do the proper outdoor program for 10 years; our parents are wonderful, but either no male in the home, or have things that make them unable to be involved except peripherally. Same goes for the cub pack that meets at our location. As such, we struggle to have a decent program in both units. And ours could be the next one of those about which Lisa speaks; we are very old, but we cannot draw the kids from the packs due to our small size and lack of extended program. I truly do not know if we will make it to our centenary,(we are in our 91st year), as I really need to have a replacement due to my own age and its related problems. The large troops with the "younger" males stay large, while we struggle. Do not have the answer; just hope I find one. The best thing we have going is our meeting place; it is like a museum. But, of course, the interest in history by younger people is not as strong as it once was either.

Take away access to questionable video games, TV hypnosis, and delusions that every kid can become a professional sports player of some type so they might be involved simple playing for the "fun" of it. In the hay-day of Scouting, Little League barely existed, and there were few other sports for youth. High school sports had restrictions on how much training could be required in the off season by schools, and of course TV and computers were pretty basic and a minor distraction. Kids also were encouraged to simply play outdoors, often until dark; then simply were called home, or went there due to darkness. The paranoia about something awful happening to kids was not there, and of course the traditional family was more outwardly cohesive, with one parent at home much of the time; and even those that had two parents working, had relatives and neighbors watching out for the kids. And of course, the contradictory attitudes towards foul language, suggestive dress, and easy exposure to "very adult" things in magazines and movies was far less accepted. Also, kids were not so often "labeled" in school and society, and getting in trouble in school or on the streets was more likely to bring home punishment, as well as that given out by a teacher, principle, or official. Kids had more respect for adults, and also possibly for themselves; at least in appearance. And, most understood that you had to actually "earn" your way and were far less likely to callously waste food or be frivolous with possessions. Scouting will not likely ever grow substantially in the culture of today, because they still have the audacity to at least try to have standards to which members should aspire. Again, simply MHO.(This message has been edited by skeptic)

Caleco; I think the difference may be that in the other instances, they were ordered released to the defense, but not publicly. Not sure, but seems to me this is the first "public" release order.

Can anyone say "McMartin"? Why is it that we do not learn from such fiasco's? Now the "witch hunt" is to open to whomever might likely profit from it, mostly lawyers with questionable ethics. As pointed out; how many individuals who were never prosecuted for whatever reason held sway at the time of the accusation or suspicion will now be dragged through the mud? How many victims will be accosted by things they may have finally dealt with and moved on from? Redacting victims is only asking the "diggers" to find them by other methods; but they will search, that can be almost guaranteed. We continue to have some that think somehow we can make positive changes to difficult earlier traumas that were dealt with as the society generally acted at the time, but now do not conform. At some point, ALL of this should be allowed to remain in the past. Now, I could see the usefulness of using completely redacted files to examine responses at the time as guides as to how better to deal with similar issues today. That makes sense to me. But, as I have noticed; much of what seems sensible or pertinent to me in relation to these emotional subjects do not seem to much credence in these discussions. Whether that is because few here feel they are worth consideration, or they are so close to reality that they cannot be dissed very successfully, so do not fit in to the propensity to obdurate hysteria, I cannot surmise. Whatever, I personally find these continued negative decisions to be invasive at least, and certainly overboard as far as their reach and the "emotional compensation".

One of the aspects of this discussion seldom touched on is the reality of early pubertal children, especially boys. Having spent many hours in many schools as a sub for 14 years now, I have noted that kids in grades starting at about 3rd or 4th, but especially in middle or junior high levels, are almost manic about "gays being unacceptable". Boys are particularly obsessed with making sure people do not think they are gay, and also in their abhorrence of the idea. This observation contradicts the statements about acceptance, at least at this stage in development. As such, it is certainly a reason to seriously consider the strictures on leadership now in place. That is not to say they will not grow out of this paranoia eventually, and that some may not eventually decide they really are gay; but confusing them even more at that age may not be constructive in the short term. Girls at this age do seem less likely to be put off by lesbians, at least they are far less vocal it appears. Whether due to being female, or because women being together long ago became normal in our society, so pretty much lost its public stigma; though even in the past, there were some who gossiped about the "old maid" couple down the street. But the stigma was far less damaging because of the strictures segregating the genders at that time. If they chose to be blatant about their "lifestyle", then they became scandalous and were shoved to the fringes of the community. Another cultural change, in our country especially, is the continued almost prudish attitudes relating to public and group interactions of genders, while blatantly dressing as provocatively as possible. School dress codes are not generally strictly enforced for whatever reasons. I know that I personally have on occasion asked a female teacher to deal with a truly serious violation, and do not have any problem with speaking directly to boys; but the fact that parents allow it anyway, even with the so called codes, is reflective of how contradictory we are. Yet, kids are no longer required to actually shower in gym; we make every effort to make sure that adults and children are not exposed physically in public dressing rooms and so on, even if the same gender; and we continue to allow more and more provocative exhibitions in movies and tv, as well as sexual and violent activities. So, basically, we tend to only confuse kids in general in regard to sexually related issues, and even the boundaries related to speech and violence. These are simply observations. But in regard to this thread, I too agree the issue should be a local one so we can at least maybe deal a bit more easily with it when necessary. Also, I truly wish that somehow the media would stop applying their comments to youth members. There IS NO BAN ON YOUTH members relating to this; it is on LEADERS.