BSA24

If it were up to me, every Eagle badge received at National and every letter of resignation over an issue would be carefully stored away with identifying information. Names would not be removed from roles of recipients due to their dissent or their desire to leave. Instead, I would write them back, and I would tell them that I understand they disagree and feel strongly that they cannot be associated with us at this time. I would tell them that we will never deny them their award. I would also tell them that if things change in the future, to please reconsider. If any particular condition changed in the future, I would find the cataloged medals and letters and try to make contact with them and let them know. And then I would ask them to rejoin us and help us out. I'd then have their medals returned to them. I would never want to be punitive toward someone for expressing themselves. Just because someone tosses a medal at you in outrage doesn't mean they did not earn it. They still are the person who earned it. It is theirs to throw away. Our country would not be stronger if we expelled all of the liberals or all of the conservatives. We each fulfill our own purpose within our society. All voices together are needed. That people are afraid they will be expelled if their opinions become known is probably the worst criticism of BSA that anyone could make.

Flag etiquette is published by the government for the military and government offices to use in displaying the flag. Private owners of the flag are encouraged to follow it. Private owners of the flag do not have to follow it. The actual cloth flag is the private property of whomever paid for it. If they want to leave it in the rain, fly it tattered, fly it upside down, burn it, or write nasty things on it, it is their property to deface. I'm not really into trying to control other people's treatment of their flags any more than I scold them for letting their grass grow. It's their grass. It's their yard. I think it is nice in the Scouts how we are ceremonial around the flag. But living in a free capitalist country also means that flag worshippers are going to be offended by some. And that's OK, because it is better to be offended than oppressed. (This message has been edited by BSA24)

Not many politicians get their way by stomping out of the capitol angry never to return. As Eagle Scouts, they should know that. They should also have learned how to manage a long-term project. If they want change, they need to become the leaders who make the changes, not leave. That's why when people say they disagree with the policy I encourage them to join. Join us, change us! (This message has been edited by BSA24)

And when our scouts go to world jambo, every other nation in attendance will have gays and non-religious boys and girls from co-ed programs who don't say "A scout is reverent". And yet people here argue that there are some consequences if we go that way. Where is the evidence that Americans are too stupid to make it work and Europeans and Canadians can do it with no trouble?

Interesting that the conversations about homosexuality in the military have for the most part disintegrated into nothing after acceptance was finally accomplished, isn't it?

These guys had one made. You could probably use the same company and order more at a discount: http://www.scout119.org/Bob%20Beil%20Award/BobB.htm

LMAO @ American who thinks dissenting voice should be silent. Oh yeah. There's some real red-blooded American citizenship. And you think an organization I have paid taxes to support for more than 50 years should be able to decide whatever it likes even while maintaining a government charter on behalf of all citizens of the country? Scouts used to be about the outdoors. Apparently it has been hijacked in the last couple of decades by people who think it is about the religious right and being a republican. Maybe some of us would like to take it back and make it an outdoors program with a code of conduct again instead of a mormon ministry. As Americans our citizenship entitles us to our opinions and input into policy and decision making. As members of this "private organization" we also have a right to our opinions and we can also influence public opinion and the actions of the people on top to change. I don't want to be a Mormon. I want my scouting program to be something all Americans are proud of as an outdoor program for youth instead of something half of the country is ashamed of. Get used to disappointment. Or here's an alternative: Pay back all of the money and aid that has been given by the government over the last century using my tax money. Pay back rent for every jambo ever held at Ft. AP Hill. Pay back rent on every government building ever used at a discount or for free. Rescind the congressional charter, release the trademarks on the word "scouting" and "boy scouts" and the badges. Release the copyright on the handbook. All of that was done with my tax dollars. It was not done as a "private organization." I paid for it. And you think I should be silent about how things work from here on out? That we just call it even and I quit because you don't like criticism? I don't think that's going to happen. That doesn't even make any sense.

The rules exist for a purpose. But we have to do better than just follow rules. As leaders, we have to also consider the possibility that there may be times when the rule is less important than the results we get. If a bunch of leaders start wearing patrol patches, and they come up with some sort of induction ceremony for new leaders, and a cheer for themselves as a group, and that sort of thing, I think telling them they aren't supposed to wear the patch would be a stupid thing to do. Here's a group of people who have managed to turn being a volunteer leader into not only motivated fun for the boys but fun for themselves while setting a good example. And then someone wants to cite some guide book for uniforms and pretend there is some negative consequence from them wearing the patrol badge? Exactly what negative thing happens because someone has a patrol patch on their sleeve? Nothing. Is there any possible good? Yes. For me, that's all I need to know.

The CM does not report to the committee. Nowhere in the training or Cub Scout Leader Book will you find that statement. That is a misconception that certain committee chairs seem to perpetuate which is entirely false. The MC training online says the CC is the adviser to the CM. The Cubmaster is appointed by the Chartering Org Rep, and reports to him as do all adult leaders. The committee may be tasked by the COR to recruit a Cubmaster, (or due to his negligence, have to proactively do so), but at no point does the CM report to the committee. The "org chart turned upside down" is in the official training online for both the MC and CM to learn. The committee's purpose is to support the CM. He is the top leader of the unit. I think the misunderstanding is from the org chart published in the leader books and online training for so long. The entire chart fails to convey anything in the text around it, but people see that picture and just focus on it without doing the reading. It may seem like a quibble if your unit runs smoothly, but in a unit where there is a major disagreement, suddenly things can get very ugly. Just about anyone can be a committee chair. They are easily recruited and trained. Very, very few people can be an effective Cubmaster, get on stage, humiliate themselves, sing stupid songs in key, and make boys have fun while also leading an entire group of adults to get properly trained, uniformed, and do things the scout way. It may be rude to say, but the truth is that a good Cubmaster is worth 100 committee chairs. I agree that the org chart should go and the military analogies, including the one I provided, are dangerous, because then people start thinking they are "in charge", and in a volunteer organization where we are often desperate to get almost any warm body to help us, no one can ever act like they are "in charge" or there will be a revolt and the boys suffer. (This message has been edited by BSA24)

>If your lodge has issues, you need to provide feedback or it will only get worse. Did that already. The response: You are not required to participate. Did you expect that scouters in general respond differently to criticisms than the people here? Conduct a study? Run a survey? Try to gather data and be scientific? No. Instead, just dig in and say that they would rather do it "the right way" than they would see it survive. This is the problem with an organization that tells its members it is based on values instead of some other purpose. Values in people's minds trump everything. Better to die on a cross and be right than change. From reading my old handbook, it looks like back in the early 20th century, Scouting was an outdoor activity and the members were expected to conduct themselves as gentlemen according to a code of conduct. The difference today is that BSA says it is a values organization that does outdoor stuff. That one change probably explains almost every problem BSA is having today. It explains BSA's digging in on particular controversies, and it explains why OA members don't want to change their traditions or improve their program.

The Cubmaster is the top leader of the unit according to BSA guidelines. He gets mail from the council. The committee chair's job is to take the paperwork and meeting planning and other drudgery away from him. However, the CC's job is to support the program of the cubmaster and provide what is needed to enact it. Get him money, transportation, budgeting, a checking account, updated calendar, newsletters, and help him wrangle the people responsible together to support him. Advise and support the Cubmaster as best you can. Ensure the leaders in your unit get a voice in how things work. Your analogy is close, imo. The Cubmaster is the LT. The DL's are the squad leaders. The CC is the platoon sargent. The COR is off in some distant batallion command. If he shows up, salute appropriately, get his signature, let him pretend to be in charge, and then go back to work. His job is to approve the leaders and validate that the pack is happening and a good outreach program of his organization.

Stosh: pure genius. Love what you are doing!

The uniform insignia guide and the statement from the bylaws are two separate documents. They are not the same thing. The statement from the bylaws exists specifically to keep local council corporations for coming up with their own uniform guidelines. They have similar bylaws about other nationally managed program elements. Councils cannot come up with their own handbooks, they cannot come up with their own wood badge guidelines, etc. It has nothing to do with volunteers wearing their uniforms. It has to do only with publishing uniform specifications. There ARE penalties for local councils that try to come up with their own uniform guidelines. National might remove their charter, or they could penalize them in other ways to force compliance if they felt they could benefit from the battle. There are no penalties for volunteers wearing rainbow loops, dangling beads, totin' chip patches where the lodge flap goes, or jeans with their shirts. I assert that when there are no consequences for failure to follow a guideline, it is merely guidance and not a rule. Rule breaking has consequences. No consequences, no rules.

> If you don't like the OA you don't have to be part of it. Sigh. I wonder how many good organizations and businesses over the years died because of a prideful refusal to listen to, acknowledge, and act upon feedback. Many, I imagine. Very many.

No, it doesn't. The entire document doesn't apply to volunteers. The document itself is the binding agreement between councils and national. By-laws apply to the members of the corporation - the officers and employees. They do not apply to the customers - that's us - the volunteers. Just because you are a volunteer member of the Boy Scouts doesn't mean you are part of the corporation Boy Scouts of America. You are not. Neither am I. Note the people who are banned from making changes are specifically named: * any Scouting official or * local council or * any local executive board or committee Scouting officials, local councils, and local executive boards or committees are not to make alterations to the uniform. That means they cannot ask their volunteers and members to wear a different uniform or follow different guidelines than those published by national. It does not mean you personally have to have your patches on and in the right places under some sort of penalty.

Stay on message, please. A body part measuring contest doesn't help your argument, and you don't do any more than I do. Except eat, apparently.(This message has been edited by BSA24)

You may also wear your medal with the knot on your shirt at the same time. If you lose it, never fear, you can buy them by the basketful on ebay. The older ones are nicer than the medals made today anyway, and you can get one made out of silver instead of pewter.

"Clause 4. Prohibition of Alteration or Imitation. No alteration of, or additions to, the official uniforms, as described in the official publications, or the rules and regulations covering the wearing of the uniform and the proper combinations thereof on official occasions, may be authorized by any Scouting official or local council or any local executive board or committee, except the Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America after consideration by the Program Group Committee. Imitation of United States Army, Navy, or Marine Corps uniforms is prohibited, in accordance with the provisions of the organization's Congressional Charter." ..... These by-laws are designed to keep the franchiser, BSA national, in control of official uniform elements and design and deny local council corporations the ability to go their own way while chartered by BSA. This rule does not apply to scout volunteers in the field.

The camo rule must be a myth. There are national scout shops selling camo t-shirts with the boy scout logo on them. Blue = cub scouts Pine Green = Boy Scouts Red = Retired color of the boy scouts - no longer to be used Bright green = Venturing Silver = district/council Yellow = Regional/National All retired uniform parts are still valid for use on the uniform. So red loops are fine on Boy Scouts. Old hats, shirts, patches, etc are all still valid. There are no consequences for getting creative with your uniform. The insignia guide is there for you to reference if you would like your uniforms to be correct. There is nothing you can do about a volunteer who will not obey the insignia guide. Camo loops are definitely not on the list of approved uniform wear, but there's no one who can make them stop it. You are empowered to tell them you think it is a silly thing to do. You may also ask nicely that they wear the proper loops. That's really as far as you can go with uniform rules. Oh well.

> I do find it interesting that a group > that claims to espouse traditional scouting > and even has Baden-Powell in its name would > be inclusive where atheism is concerned. > B-P himself was opposed to atheism. I also > doubt he would have been supportive of co-ed > units which the BPSA supports. I doubt he wanted racially integrated units, either. I'm pretty sure he would have protested female leaders. I doubt he would have wanted a Chess merit badge, or even a Wood Badge for the 21st Century. I don't think anyone cares what he would have liked.

> So BSA which are ya gay or an atheist? Neither. Happily married for many decades. Two grown boys. Not a Christian, but definitely not an atheist. My beef is that I wear the uniform, and I would like to be proud to do so and not believe that dummies are ruining my reputation by association with their goofy ideas. I also find it absurd that all day long in my company the gay and atheist people we have, which are not many, but are there, are just as trustworthy, helpful, and loyal as anyone else, and my boys grow up to see that, but now ask me why we keep them out of the scouts since they seem to be decent folks. I like consistency. I like for things to make sense. It makes no sense to say that gay people are bad and smokers are good. It makes no sense to say that atheists teach the wrong things and but kids don't learn it is OK to be fat from fat scoutmasters. I'm a scouter who is registered and I get an opinion. My opinion is we look stupid. We look stupid to me, and we look stupid to a lot of America. And that's sad, because being in BSA used to be an honor, but now it is a political statement that I must be a Republican - something I would never be. We're all tarnished, imperfect, heavily flawed creatures. I don't see why we turn our noses up at some and draw this derision upon us. I don't like standing outside the grocery store selling popcorn and having people tell my boys they do not support us because we are bigots. One of my friends runs a non-BSA unit out of a local center, and they were fundraising and got lumped in with BSA by the people they were fundraising from. "I don't donate to bigots!" They were having to explain that they are not bigoted boy scouts, but other kinds of scouts. Our reputation is so badly damaged it is rubbing off on other organizations. The Girl Scouts have none of this silly policies, and they get complaint letters and news articles including them in condemnations of us just because people don't know better. The value of my eagle award accomplishment, and of all boy scouts who accomplish it, is reduced if the reputation of our organization is one of bigotry instead of outdoorsmanship. When most of America is screaming that we don't represent them, that's a problem. We can't lead on this issue. We have to follow. Or we are in danger of one day being in old photographs as something that used to exist like Hitler Youth which we thought was a good idea at the time, but now is viewed as hateful. Look at old pictures of people protesting integration in the 1960's. They look like idiots now. Now imagine 40 years from now. That's us. Reviled by all. (This message has been edited by BSA24)

The theme of all responses to these two trolls is this: We don't like being judged unless it is something we don't do like being gay or being an atheist. Then it is a matter of policy, rules, popularity, danger to the youth, or sin per some religious interpretation. Being fat and smoking are provably unhealthy choices that are bad examples for youth. Why make arguments in defense of these human failings and hold others as unforgivable? Can no one see the hypocrisy there?(This message has been edited by BSA24)

basement, All of the arguments you make as to why you should be a scout leader we are thankful to have apply also to the secret atheist and gay scout leaders we should be thankful to have instead of excluding.

I like it. If we are all to live by the scout oath and law, then everyone should use them in their programs. It makes no sense for our mission to be to instill it in people and yet dance around it with other oaths. I also think we should reduce the Scout Oath to Baden Powell's version: I promise: ... to do my best to do my duty to God and my country, ... to help other people, ... and to obey the Scout Law. Those are the proper three points of Oath that our three fingered symbolism represents. Note that it is the Cub Scout promise with "Law of the Pack" replaced by Scout Law. That will make it easier to learn for all ages.

Mike Rowe is 6' tall and less than 190 pounds. I doubt he can fill out a Large shirt. Sumo doesn't count, Scout Leaders. Keep those rationalization coming! They aren't making my point at all /sarcasm(This message has been edited by BSA24)