WAKWIB

Probably many of the Dems and Repubs took something like Woodbadge in college. Maybe that's the problem.

Basementdweller: Isn't Leave No Trace just another cult? .....just kidding!

I had a great LOL at the Lord of the Flies comment. I've seen a few campouts both as a Scout and as an leader that might fit that description. Obviously, that should not be the overall flavor of any Troop. It sounds like your Scout is having a good time with the program. He might have the opportunity to have an even better time with another unit, and you indicate that there are a lot of options. If you are totally not comfortable with what you are seeing in the current situation, and your son is on-board with the idea, you owe it to yourselves to shop around a bit.

If you hold it up to a mirror, red feather, it looks a little better. Sort of...

If you are designing a CSP without the permission and supervision of your Council, you are already out-of-bounds.

This is one of those: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" kind of things. With occasional exceptions the standard CO/Unit relationship works well. As noted in other posts the benefits of a stable meeting place are substantial. Having a Scout unit meeting in an established facility gives the Unit a sense of security and credibility in the mind of folks. A Scout unit can provide a ton of good things for the CO in terms of service projects both "in-house" and in the community at large where the Unit, in a way, represents the CO. I think overall it is a win-win. The fact that the CO is the owner as opposed to being owned by corporate BSA probably has many benefits that others could address better than I can.

"Could someone still think about these things and work them out in society and still hold a non-religious/atheist view?" Absolutely yes, Merlyn. A person could be created and endowed by their creator with the powers of observation, reason, logic etc. They can also be endowed by the same creator with the unalienable right to not believe in or acknowledge that creator.

Merlyn. Does it really have to be either/or? Could someone still think about these things and work them out in society and still hold a religious/god view? You made a good point in an earlier post that society arrived at good workable codes of conduct throughout history. That is, finding the best means to an end. In nearly every civilization in history, much of that code appears to come from some kind of religious perspective. The founders of the United States of America led off their conversation of what our govenment/laws should look like with the premise "that all men were created equal, and that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights." This sounds like an appeal to some kind of deity to me.

How did we get the the ability to think about these things and decide what is best?(This message has been edited by WAKWIB)

I would first consider: Why do we even discuss "right from wrong?" If indeed we are simply primates, then are only concern would be food, shelter, and reproduction. There would be, in essence no need for a moral code. The next question would be: "If we have a moral code or ideal, what informs it?" I'm interested Merlyn (or others) in your answers to these questions.

I would first consider: Why do we even discuss "right from wrong?" If indeed we are simply primates, then are only concern would be food, shelter, and reproduction. There would be, in essence no need for a moral code. The next question would be: "If we have a moral code or ideal, what informs it?" I'm interested Merlyn (or others) in your answers to these questions.

"People have been trained for at least one generation now to discount their moral and religious views as (somehow) illegitimate bases for one's political views." For the most part Western culture has been shaped over several generations to accept a "scientific view" that: 1)There is no god 2)Humans are simply high-order primates With this in mind, it would follow that any moral compass would be useless, or doesn't exist at all. However, discussions like this tend to bespeak the lie of the two points of the scientific view described above. For apparently we have something our "brother apes" don't have; a conscience that is somehow imprinted with the capacity to discern and discuss right from wrong. If we didn't have such a thing wouldn't we still be fighting it out in the jungle?

At a local level with consenting units = a fantastic opportunity. I hope it works out well for you guys and gals!

It's an earned rank that should display the fact that a young man has learned much and exercised responsible leadership. However, I think we can over-emphasize it in a sense that we might expect that every boy that joins Scouting must hit that mark, no matter what. Over the years I've seen a bit of cutting corners on requirements, overlooking bad behavior, and the like, in the effort to keep the kid on track so he can make Eagle. Obviously a poor standard to follow. Encouragement is one thing and is part of the Scouter and Parents job. But to drag the chronically stubborn, lazy, uncooperative Scout like a obstinate mule up the Trail to Eagle is a bad reflection on the program and the merits of the rank.

I can really just speak on this from personal experience. I am very sure that being an Eagle Scout helped me land my first "real" job after college. It was mostly a happy coincidence that the employer was himself an Eagle and, at that time, an active Scouter. I didn't know that going in for the interview. It was sure apparent quickly as much of our interview time was spent discussing Scouting, summer camp, etc... In our community, Scouting is a deeply rooted tradition, and it probably does help some folks get their foot in the door. The two private colleges that my oldest son has attended offer scholarships for Eagle Scouts, which he applied for and received. I have never heard of the HR scenario described by Engineer61, but I suppose if it happens at one company it could happen at others.

studentscout: For the record, I just wanted to thank you for bringing your perspective and experience to this topic. You have put down for us your first-hand opinion of scouting and atheism in a way that can help us understand, rather than just trying to get in the last word or insult other posters. I think that you have come to appreciate the fact that scouting is way more than just a bunch of tongue-wagging over a couple of hot-button topics. When it comes to this topic of God, at this point in time you and I would be at polar opposites in the discussion. But I respect your point, chiefly because it's given in an honest and respectful way. I've personally received way more from your couple of posts than from the other 9 pages of playground squabble. Thanks again, and press on in your search for truth.

@Scoutfish: I get your point, but if you carefully or even carelessly read this particular thread, and if you can find a true political debate here then I'm a monkey's uncle (spin-off a thread on evolution here?...Boy, I hope not!) This thread was started with the clear intention of starting the usual We vs. Merlyn stuff. As Beavah sez "do da Merlyn thing." And, per usual, it disintegrates into something like: "I said this..." "No, you said that..." "Why did you say this..." "Crap, I forgot what I said..." and it goes downhill from there. There will eventually be a bit more name-calling and the mods will lock it down. This isn't political discussion. This is a playground squabble.

Like a moth drawn to a flame, I still read these I&P threads from time to time. After about 6 posts or so, it eventually dissolves into the same cast of characters reading from the same poor script. If you come here to find facts, forget it. If you even think you might find a well formed opinion, you'll only discover it by accident after wading through a lot of BS. It just comes down to a whizzing contest in the end. I often wonder how many new folks come to this site and find a lot of good stuff in the other departments, eventually work their way to I&P and get turned off by the nonsense. Even if one would like to share an opinion on a particular topic, the "discussion" is already in the ditch after page 1, and beyond redemption. I know, "If you don't like it, WAKWIB, stay away." True. But I wonder if it ever occurs to us that this site is something of a public face for the Scouting program.

Eamonn sez: "I'm left wondering if we the adults just kinda do the stuff and hope that something rubs off ? More than give any real thought to why we do what we are doing?" Yes, to some extent that is what many of us do. The happy opportunities and outcomes that we all could share were likely not totally intentional. Things happen. Friendships, learning moments, life-change and that stuff, well, they just sort of fall into place. Scouting is just one of many venues in which that can be played out. I do think Scouting gives many obvious situational possibilities where good things can "rub-off." A young man grew up in our troop. In the early days of his Scout experience, simply put, he and did not get along very well at all. Over time and shared experiences a friendship formed. At a recent farewell party for him as he was about to head to the Army, he communicated to me that "I was the father he never had." I never thought in a million years that he would hold me in that high of esteem. We just did a lot of Scout stuff together and it happened. I'm one of those types that think that God works in people's lives in His own time and way, and that occasionally, whether I know it or not, I might be a tool He uses to shape someone. Just as He uses others to shape me.

eagle90 It sounds like your council maybe saying something like "We've done such a stellar job of losing Eagle Project paperwork, that in addition to hard copies, we would like to see if we can lose a Scout's CD or flash drive too."

President Obama's signature was probably being printed on Eagle certificates even before he knew himself that it was traditional "protocol." There is a cadre of folks who take care of all that nicey-nice public relations stuff for every President. He has no honest reason for not accepting the title of honorary president of BSA. Despite his politics, he should clearly see the good that our organization does. Plus I wouldn't think that he would want to alienate that voting block. Were the President to show up at Jamboree, he would be greeted with a level of enthusiasm that he probably wouldn't see just anywhere. Regardless of his policies, our Scouts have been trained to think for the most part that, "Our Country is Great, and Our President is Good." They would give him a rousing welcome. Gee, in such a setting I might even whoop and holler a bit. Although I might feel bad about it the next morning.....

Technical clarification. Apostasy means to renounce, or reject the tenants of a faith once held. Synonymous with the phrase: "To fall away from the faith." Example: If I were to wake up some Sunday, go to my church and announce that I know longer believed the Bible was the Word of God, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is not the way of salvation (or is one of many ways}; I would be considered an apostate from my church, as well as an apostate from the entire New Testament doctrine.

BP, All John has done to this point is toss out some essential, and universal Christian doctrine, and has used this as a framework to speak unfavorably of some incarnations of "Scouts Own." He could quote Scripture all day long, but shouldn't really have too. Plenty of New Testaments available for any and all to read. Maybe you are not too familiar with it. Take some time to give it a second look.

Big congrats! May this next chapter in your life be happy and prosperous!

John-in-KC, Reading the scripts brought to mind a number of protestant services I've seen at Bartle over the years. Protestant, as you and I understand it (and the over-riding historical doctrine of various protestant denominations declare), should emphasize the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Fortunately, I have had the pleasure to see a few protestant camp services in recent years that made a better effort on that score in that they clearly proclaimed the Gospel and kept away from the suggestion of man's attempt at righteousness through his own works. I think some of this "Scout's Own" stuff from it's earliest days until now has been a soft approach to tapping into God's revelation through conscience and creation, and a rather weak attempt even at that level.