BSA24

> The answer is quite simple, the Troop does whatever the PLC decides. It is funny how many scouters at the district level responsible for teaching people how a PLC works then completely ignore it when they are planning events. District volunteers will instead just send out an email to a bunch of adult leaders advertising a camping event and fail to even attempt to contact or build a contact list of the youth unit leaders in the Boy Scouts. Likewise for Cub Scout units. District leaders assume that the units have a duty to support them and instead of approaching it from a marketing/advertising/sales perspective, they instead assume everyone is required to go and get mad when they choose not to. No one in BSA has to attend anything. The training is optional. The meetings are optional. The camping trips are optional. Advancement is optional. The uniform guide is optional. There are very few actual requirements of leaders and youth in the scouts where failure to comply will result in any consequences for those so choosing. District leaders who understand their role as servants of units and youth have great events. Those who believe they have been promoted to the grey colored loops are fools.

BSA did everything wrong here. All of it. It is a PR catastrophe of galactic proportions. * You mean BSA has had these files since 1965, and has not thought to call them Youth Protection Files instead of ineligible volunteer files? * BSA never had a game plan for how to release these one day in the future? No contingency for some being stolen and published, or a tell all from an angry former employee? * BSA has not previously crafted a message on the files? * BSA chose to withhold the files until forced to release them, making it look like there was something to hide? What do you think is going to happen next now that the brand has been burned some more? The good news is, no gays or atheists will be beating down the door to join any time soon. The bad news is, nor will anyone else. Do you think this will get the kids wearing their uniforms publicly with pride? There is no way to respond to any of this and spin it for the better. It's too late to get in front of it. BSA is on the mat and the ref is counting. I doubt there is anyone down in Irving, TX who is qualified to get back up and into the fight again.

I don't understand why there isn't more training, instead of less, and why we can't test out of it. I'd like to see scout leaders required to be able to do everything T-2-1, whether they are cub leaders or whatever, but they should be able to attend a rally night or something like that where they can test out by demonstrating knowledge to avoid watching a presentation about "scouting fun".

Problem 1: Boys not happy with who is in charge Reason: You set up a process to make their selection delayed by six months (meddling adults) Solution: Let the boys elect their leaders the way that they want and stop meddling beyond setting minimum standards to hold office. (Having served as ASPL, generally an unrelated job, is not a BFOQ for SPL). How about having been a PL first instead, but elected to it and then no automatic bump up. Problem 2: Boys **** about election outcomes and not all support the new leader Reason: Leaders failed to ask the boys to establish ground rules for the election process themselves, and then failed to guide them in a discussion of "How do you disagree with the choice but support - just like the PResident?" Probably SM and ASM's regularly moan about national political leaders or other scout leaders in front of boys teaching this behavior to them. Solution: Don't talk about anyone behind their back in front of the boys (or ever). Have a discussion with boys on election night before they vote on what the minimum qualifications for the job are. Have the boys, not the SM, establish ground rules for the election, and give an SM minute about "disagree but support."

There's so many things going on there you will never boil it down to a switch you can flick on to fix it. But I think you are on to something. * Many old boy scouts remember there only being the SM, maybe one ASM, and the boys all riding in the bed of a pickup truck to go camping with their gear in a trailer. They see Boy Scouts as when the SM and ASM take the boys camping and the parents are done. * Most Cub Scout leaders experience significant conflict and stress doing their jobs. It isn't the actual den leadering that burns them out. It is the politics of who runs cub day camp, having district leaders pop in and ask for money every three months, conflicts with parents, etc. Districts are built around Boy Scouts, and Cub Scout leaders are usually treated like a bunch of idiot Mommies pretending to do Scouts. * So you're a Cub Scout leader, and when you've engaged some of the Boy Scout leaders in conversations about scouting, you've received the standard snort and eye roll about your activities followed by a one-up. "Our troop doesn't allow Mommy to coddle them. We're building men here, not princesses." When your son joins said troop, you are not going to help them. * Lack of communication with Packs is another problem. I am amazed at how few pack meetings have Boy Scout leaders come and give a brief speech to the kids and parents or presentation about Boy Scouts. Troops sit back on their fat asses and expect packs to feed them boys without any respectful acknowledgement or support of the Cub packs themselves. * Troops these days do a lot of harder camping that Cub Leaders don't want to do after a week in the office. Cub Camping is car camping. Maybe parents don't want to go backpacking, rafting, canoeing, etc. They are probably not interested in being outdoorsmen. I think this is a moment for Boy Scout Leaders to look in the mirror and ask themselves what they could do better to avoid turning off Cub Leaders before crossover even happens. Even the well-intentioned friendly joke might be offensive enough to have someone emotionally resign from scouting at crossover. (This message has been edited by bsa24)

> We are all part of the BSA and this is what the > BSA has decided are good measurements of overall quality. We are all volunteers who run franchises of BSA's program, and this is what BSA has decided makes a good franchise for them. It has nothing to do with what makes good scouting for youth. FTFY

>> Life lives in my nose in my boogers. > How do you expect others to take your scientific knowledge seriously when you assert that your boogers are alive? Mucus is a secretion and is no more alive than sweat or urine. Read the sentence again carefully. "... in my boogers." Are there bacteria in my boogers? Did I say that my boogers were authoring the next guide to safe scouting without assistance? They are? That would explain a lot.

> you could get an auditorium of scientists to agree on ANYTHING... is enough to make most scientists fall out of their chairs This is false. Scientists agree on many billions of things. The areas in which scientists disagree are far more arcane than the topics noted here. > Most researchers have noted that abortion and contraception use rise concurrently in most populations, Most scientific researchers also note that abortion is only tracked when a society becomes liberal enough to allow it to be performed legally, allowing it to be tracked, and that this correlates to a lessening of public shame in the purchase of birth control. Both track upward in trace reporting, not in frequency of use, and cause and effect are not noted. Your conclusion was laughable. > I ask you why the California Democratic Party supported Proposition 37, which would require genetically modified food to carry a warning label. Because the huge companies creating genetically modified food have been using the patents on the genetics in the food to sue small farmers out of existence. > I ask you why so many prominent Democrats and liberal activists link vaccination with autism? I am not aware of any in the scientific community who can present peer-reviewed research that supports this claim. I am only aware of Jenny McCarthy, former Playboy Playmate, as having this belief along with anyone with a money interest in seeing it through. > Let's say an American conservative doesn't believe in the conception of evolution as he and as most liberals, mistakenly understand it. So what? Does his belief hurt us in some way? Yes, it does. It sets up an entire cascade effect in their minds of hand-waving at legitimate science. The belief in magical thinking over evidence, the belief in folk solutions over research and understanding. Human curiosity and exploration are replaced by defensive argument in favor of existing doctrine. It causes stupid beliefs to lie untested, such as the false belief that homosexuality and pedophilia are linked, which science has proven are not. The belief that homosexuality is a learned misbehavior or human dysfunction, when all research suggests it is a natural occurence, and that the entire perception of gender preference as binary is a cultural learning rather than a moral issue. Rejection of science creates a weak mind which can be led by other weak minds with strong personalities. It allows the mind to be more easiy subborned by an agenda, and used for soldiering toward some dark purpose. How can a country lead the world in technology and science when our children are trained that the earth is 7000 years old and our scientists do not understand the atom - even as we use it for power and weaponry - and TV's, and pictures inside our bodies, and all of our chemistry and pharmacopia? Do you not see the damage being done? 44% of Americans are young earth creationists. They doubt that scientists are able to study and prove things and understand the world. This is willful ignorance by people who use electricity and drive automobiles - all creations of science, every day, everywhere they go, yet confidentaly and vehemently reject scientists as a credible source of knowledge. Carl Sagan said that the difference between a faith and science is that science works. You can see it. You can turn on your TV. You can turn on a radio. You can see an X-ray photograph of your bones. You can see an atom bomb detonate. You can see pictures of Neptune taken by our probes. Faith has produced - good feelings. Nothing more. > I ask you why liberals support medical marijuana laws when the science clearly shows that already legal THC alternatives such as marinol are safer than non-FDA regulated pot? Because the science does not clearly show that. The science clearly shows that alcohol and tabacco are far more unhealthy, and are far less regulated. > I ask you why so many liberals oppose nuclear power? 70% of scientists favor nuclear power Why do you think that scientists and liberals are two separate groups? Almost all scientists are liberals. Most who know anything about nuclear power favor Thorium over plutonium reactors. However, governments favor plutonium because they can use the output to make weapons. Thorium is far cleaner, but cannot be used to make weapons. It is not opposition to nuclear power. It is opposition to filthy, dangerous technology which risks the planet for short-sighted production of unusable weaponry. > I ask you why so many liberals oppose animal research and testing Basic sympathy for another living creature that feels pain? I can't really speak to that one. It is not a major concern of mine. > I ask you why liberals insist that life does not begin at conception, when EVERY medical, obstetric, and scientific textbook stated that life began at conception, until Roe v. Wade - a purely political pretense. At the same time that every textbook said that black people do not have souls? I am not interested when life begins. Life lives in my nose in my boogers. I am interested when consciousness begins. It is not life that is precious. It is conscious awareness. It is the enjoyment of life that is precious. A 10 week old fetus to me is pushing the limits of what can be aborted without guilt. Before that, I am comfortable that there is no capability for self-awareness. > I ask you why the 1965 research of Daniel Patrick Moynihan on the negative social effects of welfare dependency and out-of-wedlock births on the African-American community was derided by (mostly white) liberals, even as it has become the accepted wisdom now. I am not a big fan of welfare myself, so I cannot really speak to that. I was a conservative myself until a few years ago, so I am not well versed in liberal arcana from when I was a child. > I ask you why any social research that affects liberal views on differences in gender, ethnicity, class, or sexual preference is automatically derided as unscientific? Political people and people with agendas deride anything that harms their position. You are, I am, we all do. > Now, you might notice, BSA24, that most of these anti-scientifiic obsessions of liberals have an actual real-world effect on people's lives, certainly much more so than a disbelief in the popular conception of what evolution is. How much does it really affect the body politic if someone believes in a biblically literal view of creation? I damages the nation's ability to do science so dramatically that we may lose control of the world and become a backward nation like Iran. It damages our future far more than possibly anything ever could. I believe it is the one, greatest challenge facing our country: The rejection of education, intelligence, reasoning, and science as values to strive for.

> Well BSA24 if you don't like the policy, your welcome to join some other youth group that doesn't have the policy. I am also welcome to stay in this youth group and disagree vocally and often with the policy. You sound just like the guys in the 1960's. "You are welcome to go live in a country where colored people are in charge if you think they should be our equals." Real nice. Warning to everyone: This is a generational issue. In 20 years people will look back on the fear of homosexuals and the viewing of them as immoral and judge harshly.

I don't believe the decline in membership will be fixed with anything that BSA currently finds themselves able to do simply because we are, for the most part, traditionalists, and we view change as defeat. Training will not fix the problem. There are two problems: Marketing & Socialization For any sales attempt, the things you need to succeed are * BRAND / REPUTATION * PRODUCT/SERVICE DEMAND * PRICE * LOW BARRIERS TO CONSUMPTION * HIGH BARRIERS TO EXIT Unfortunately, BSA has lost their brand. BSA is no longer the builder of future soldiers. BSA is now a church program that goes outside. Ask a lot of kids and they will say it is what nerds do. You have to change the brand reputation to attract them. Apple has their brand, and it is strong. BSA has their brand, and it is poisoned. In marketing, some would say that once a brand is as badly damaged as BSA's among the target audience, you have no choice but to rebrand at that point. BSA may not be recoverable. BSA uses the uniform and badges to symbolize the brand. Those are given in exchange for membership and accomplishments. If the brand is damaged, then what BSA offers to youth is compromised and unlikely to be accepted in exchange. It gets even more complicated when you consider the demographics of the current members pretty much define the brand. Put all of the tough guy ads out there you want, it will be useless if you walk into a scout hut and there's not a single kid who is tough. It is also entirely possible that scouting simply cannot survive any longer because the idea of national patriotism, religious belief, and the moral righteousness of hard physical labor are dying concepts in American culture as a whole. You can't sell castor oil any longer, and scouting may simply no longer be relevant to all but a niche market in the future.

AZ, That's not how the national election for the president works. It is determined by an electoral college. Each state gets their votes based on their own determination within their own process. The national polls are irrelevant and only tell us a national polling response. That response is no better than the cover story on the National Enquirer. Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, and some others are the battle ground states. Those determine the next president. The other states have already virtually voted and are unlikely to swing significantly. What do the polls say in the battleground states? http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/ecalculator#?battleground You might want to check out that map before you call the race for Romney. The biggest factors seem to be the Economy, Christian Right vs. Everyone Else, and Romney is a mormon. I've been predicting for a year that the right cannot get themselves to the polls to elect Romney. He's just not what they want and does not motivate the base. Plus, he is already infamous for saying stupid things that end up on video which are, frankly, embarrassing. I think once the debates start, we'll see a jittery, stuttering Romney vs. the Chicagoland's highly polished spinmeister, and from there it will be over for Romney.

> Encouraging birth control leads to abortion That is one of those beliefs out there that people just keep on saying even though it is laughably wrong. In fact, I nominate this statement for poster child of why liberals think conservatives are uneducated in science. This one and the whole not believing in evolution thing are the things that liberals laugh at so hard that our beer spills and we fall out of our chairs. That's how hard we laugh. Imagine an entire auditorium of scientists pointing at you and laughing so hard it hurts. That is the level this illogical sort of folksy stupid belief rises to.(This message has been edited by bsa24)

BSA24, where in your wildest dreams would you come up with the notion that "an ASM is supposed to do it?" Because that's who is supposed to do these things. The SM is responsible for the scouting program in the unit. His job is to ensure that the program happens. He can divide up various responsibilities for portions of the program up amongst his ASM's. These days, in a big troop, the SM is bogged down with conferences with boys. He isn't going to have time and energy to do this. His best bet is to delegate it to an ASM - or the troop chaplain. This is program work, fellas. This is not committee work. It is not administrative. It is program. Introducing the youth to a badge should be done by the SM or the ASM's, not the guys who are supposed to be doing the troop's paperwork and administrative secretarial functions.

Ignorant people at grocery stores agreeing with you doesn't make something right. I remember people in the 1960's saying that MLK was just some ------ stirring up trouble amongst the "colored folks". They would all backslap and reward each other for expressing their dismay and disgust for him and his movement. He was a communist. He was a radical. He needed to learn his place. Many times I heard people say he should be put down. They were wrong then. People are wrong about the membership policy today. One day, in the future, it is my hope that people will finally, once and for all, stop labeling people as groups and making sweeping decisions about what they are allowed to do based on those labels, and instead will consider other human beings on the content of their character rather than whatever the newest group label is that we all decide is the class nerd of the human race. I would have hoped that more scouters, who were probably not captain of the football team in high school, would understand what it means to be picked on and ostracized, would be more understanding.(This message has been edited by bsa24)

Like-minded? Have you not been reading the forums here? None of us are like minded. I hear that boy scouts can earn merit badges there without even lifting a finger (from the boys). In fact, the boys in our troop joke that the best way to get to 100+ merit badges is to make sure you attend summer camp and also to attend two jamborees. (This message has been edited by bsa24)

May I ask a stupid question? What good is the jamboree, and why does anyone go? I would not know. I have been involved in scouting since the 1960's, and I have never been to one, and from what I have seen and read about them, I have no idea why anyone else goes to what is apparently a huge bore-fest when they could just go backpacking instead.

>> The truth is the US is overpopulated already > Why do you think that? Because I have to sit in traffic. We need 90% fewer people so I can drive to work in the morning. Besides, your statistic includes huge uninhabitable tracts of land in the midwest and west where almost no one lives. > We do not need to become China, where then government starts enforcing only one child per family sanctions. Right. We need to start enforcing that RIGHT NOW, before we become like China. Why are Americans still making so many babies? We need to stop it. Human population levels are the source of almost all of humanity's biggest problems. Lower our population levels by 90%, and pollution, global warming, oil consumption, traffic congestion, easily obtainable land, agriculture, and just about everything else gets better. Nothing gets better with more people. Everything gets better with fewer. (This message has been edited by bsa24)

This is a pointless position. In a pack, an assistant cubmaster is supposed to do this. In a troop, an ASM is supposed to do it. It doesn't need a position patch or a position. Thanks, BSA, for wasting our time on this when there are other things that need attention.

I'm glad they are handing out the pills. If the kids are born, they will be born into rotten conditions. A parent who thought they were done parenting now has to raise a baby. The actual bio parent is too young to impart anything but a tragic life. Republicans don't want to pay the welfare that is generated by lower class kids making babies. Love the unborn, resent the born for leaning on them for money. I'll tell you a secret about liberals - we don't want to pay for those kids to be on welfare either. We'd rather see that money go to something more constructive than unwanted lower class humans who commit crimes and need constant police intervention. The truth is the US is overpopulated already, and on the morning after, there's nothing as sophisticated inside a woman than what I just picked out of my nose and flicked into the trash can next to my desk. It's a glob of cells smaller and less intelligent than the viruses and T-cells that make the boogers in my nose. We're not talking about late term abortions. We're talking about basically inducing menstruation. It happens all the time and no one notices or calls it a tragedy. So, hand out the pills. By the bucket, please. And the condoms. And IUD's. And give lots disease and drug screening, and lots of education. Pour it on. And teach them biology, so that they understand the science behind conception, and what the morning after pill does. Because teens don't do abstinence. Not on purpose. (This message has been edited by bsa24)

Instead of just my previous "No taxation without first doing something for the units" rant, I'd also like to offer a helpful suggestion. It is a radical suggestion, but I honestly think it will work. The district committee should announce a date that they will all step down and become commissioners. Commissioners are usually the old leaders who were old boy scouts and they are supposed to help guide units along and keep them strong. The committee is where most of the politics and arguing happens, and when the older scouters occupy these positions, the same old stuff keeps happening, and the young guys don't feel like they are going to be welcomed or listened to. Therefore, I suggest finding a young guy and putting him on the ballot for chairman, take your old guy and make him commissioner, and let the old guys wear the red patches and give the district over to some younger folks with a total cleaning of the house. A good old boys club stays that way because the older folks, who think they are perfectly nice people, keep telling the younger folks that they don't want to do things their way. So, my suggestion is step down, step off, and give the wheel to the kids.

> The day the BSA changes its standards for money is the day I leave it. Such as: * Having uniforms made in China to save money (got an American Labor merit badge with a Made in China sticker on it) * Having FOS campaigns instead of tighter budgeting and financial planning * No longer providing tins with popcorn and selling $4 microwave popcorn for $25 * Changing the uniform repeatedly to get people to re-equip * Changing the merit badges required for eagle so that outdooring is not necessary (1972) * Changing the logo of BSA from the first class badge to tenderfoot to save on artwork * Lowering the quality of nearly everything with a BSA logo on it * Cooperating in any way shape or form with the LDS church because they threaten to pull out their financial support? BSA lost any hope of making a principled stand a long time ago in this regard.(This message has been edited by bsa24)

> screw you. Seattle, you have no argument. No logical position. No rationale to present that would convince me of your stance on this issue. Instead, you just call names. Way to go. Nicely done. We're all sold. You are a master of debate. Look, the district is a combination of committee (elected chairman and his appointees) and commissioners (elected commissioner and his appointees) plus a DE. The DE is basically a money hauler for BSA who makes sure the district doesn't get too far off program. The chairman is supposed to make sure there is fund raising, district camping events, district recruiting, and district advancement oversight (only into the Boy Scout program - not the Venturing, Varsity, or Cub Scout programs). 50% of those activities are raising money for BSA or selling memberships for BSA. The commissioners mostly exist to help with rechartering and whip everyone to turn it in. Few people around the nation see anything else. So 75 to 80% of what a unit sees from the district leadership is this: * Time to recharter. Turn in your check, please. * Time to do round up. Turn in your check, please. * Time for Popcorn. Turn in your check please. * Time for FOS campaign. Turn in your checks please. Other than that, you see fall and spring camporees, cub day camp, and a lot of political bickering about who is in charge of what event when. Units have no obligation to support any of that. Units are only obligated to recharter and pay their membership fees - but they don't have to use the district volunteers for it. They can just deal with the council office. You don't have to sell popcorn. You don't have to allow FOS campaigns in your meetings. You don't have to attend camporees. You don't have to go to day camp. The unit can do whatever it wants. That's a fact. There is nothing you can do about that unless you get the system changed so that the district has some power. It has none. If you want the unit's support, you must romance the units. You have to provide something in exchange. Politics 101 - you scratch my back, and I scratch yours. You can't go hat in hand to units and expect help. Read what Stephen Covey wrote about the emotional bank account. He says when you take from others, you make withdrawals. When you give, you make deposits. The district leaders generally show up at the doorstep with a $25,000 negative emotional bank account balance. It's no wonder you can't put on a camp for the poor kids. The rich units already feel like popcorn, FOS, and recruiting + low quality uniforms for a high price have mugged them at the point of a hiking stick. The district leaders will have to do something for the units to make up for that before they even ask for anything. Most will not. Most see themselves as wise old scout leaders who should be sought after and treasured - even obeyed. But they are wrong. The district exists to support and service the units. Not the other way around. BSA has districts set up for failure, because none of their assignments from BSA are supportive. They are TAKE TAKE TAKE TAKE TAKE. Learn to give, and stop calling people names in outrage of reality.

For AP Hill is public property. Any photos taken there are the property of the photographer. And, any photos pretty much taken anywhere ever in the United States are the property of the photographer. You don't have a right to not have your picture taken and published.

I don't think strong units have any obligation to help the district at all. If people working in the district can't pull together the people they need to lead things, then they need to accept that as feedback that not many people want them to provide the services in the first place. No one will staff the day camp? Too bad. Don't have one. Your district has spoken: bad idea. Do something else. If no one volunteers for that, then don't do that, either. This thread reflects _THE_ most important problem district leaders have. They think that the district is there to be serviced by units, because it brings some greater good. I'm here to tell you - that's socialism. You are attempting to force redistribution of leadership wealth where people do not want to spend it on their own. Socialism only works when there is the police power of government to force it. District leaders have no power. None at all. Zippo. If you are a district leader, and this bothers you, then quit being a district leader or learn how to serve instead of demand. It is about cheerful service to others. The units are who you serve. They are the bosses, not the employees. The district is LOWER than the units. Not higher.(This message has been edited by bsa24)

> Typical liberal nonsense. It's like cuttin' off humanitarian aid to the starvin' people of a foreign country because we don't like one policy position of their ruling party I'm a liberal, and I don't see where this has anything to do with that. It has to do with corporate HR stupidity. They have a program where if you volunteer with a charitable organization, they will pay that organization for your time. Other companies like Microsoft do similar. So if you are a scoutmaster for 20 hours a week, they will pay the troop for your 20 hours at an often handsome rate. So they've removed the scouts from this program, which means that only troops and packs who have Intel employees as leaders are impacted. Intel probably has no idea how BSA operates, how it is structured, or how the money is used by leaders. They probably don't care, because most HR people are morons who are incapable of working in other areas of business. I would like to see the policy changed, but I don't think withdrawing funding that national never saw will help. Rather, Intel should stop the program and offer to move all of the funding to national if they will change the policy. Or, simply make a handsome offer of a donation to FOS or James West, and then whisper during the handshake, "Change the damn policy." So let's leave out the "typical liberal" Sean Hannity indoctrination crap that defines everyone as black or white or liberal or conservative and builds false ideas about what the other side thinks. Truth is, troops and packs should not be receiving this money anyway, because it violates BSA fundraising policy and ignores that the donation should go to the CO, not the troop or pack, since they own the money.(This message has been edited by bsa24)