acco40

A troop really has two sets of issues - how does one define the "needy" and second what level of confidentiality should be expected from those requesting assistance.

I've used den chiefs as a WDL, I've assigned den chiefs as a Scoutmaster, and I've had both of my sons serve as a den leader. Yes, training is needed for the Scout but also for the WDL and CM. My oldest son had a good experience (the Webelos Den has two DCs and that helped them). My second son's experience didn't work out so well. That den didn't really give him any assignments or duties. the expectations for the DC should be made very clear to the DC, his Scoutmaster and ideally to his SPL. Also, the CM should be involved in setting up expectationsand the WDL should be aware too. I've found that older brother serving as DC for younger brother when mom/dad is the den leader is a recipe for disaster.

Is Boy Scouting Family camping? Cub Scouts - yes. Boy Scouts - no. Secondly, the vast majority of Scout leaders are not qualified to make judgment calls about financial aid. To make an informed decision on these matters would mean quite a bit of privacy issue would be brought up or conversely, a lot of blind trust would be needed.

Disallowing gay adults helps reduce the opportunity for inappropriate behavior. Yes, it might hurt your feelings but that is the price many (most?) parents are willing to pay. That's the key right there. The above is what many feel but that is not why the BSA publicly states they do not allow avowed gay leaders. I feel the "gay" issue should be treated just like the "smoking" issue. Don't exhibit that behavior in front of the scouts.

Voter suppression is rampant. Any system that allows the elderly to cast an absentee ballot for no other reason than their age, holds an election during a work day - seems biased to me! You'd think by now, I could vote on a weekend, on-line or over a period of 2-3 days. Make voter fraud a federal crime punishable by death by 49 cuts, allow only tax payers to vote (a step up from land owners) and you've got my support. And yes, I'm only half kidding. P.S. At the last federal election (Obama/Romney) I was in and out of my polling place in less than six minutes. FWIW, I believe my county is approx. 58% Republican, 40% Democratic and about 2% Libertarian.(This message has been edited by acco40)

The shoulder loops are much easier to recognize than position patches. But yes, some folks get on power trips. But again, some folks have a built in dislike for those wearing the silver or gold loops. When I was a unit commissioner, I would wear my silver loops and the proper position patch but most really had no idea what that insignia really meant. A favorite of the boys was the shoulder loops I took back from DIBC (Dorchester International Brotherhood Camporee) in Canada. Scouts Canada wears Beaver (yellow), Wolf (green), etc. loops that are not only a color but have a embroidered Beaver or Wolf on them. Well, my oldest son just had to wear the Beaver loops on his uniform - told the younger scouts that was what an SPL wears! Well, not to rain on his parade, I let it go for troop meetings and outings - you have to pick your battles.

I think many today have a very warped sense of what "freedom" really means. They had an article on the news about "black boxes" on all cars sold in the USA by 2014 - the contents of which can be viewed by law enforcement. One may argue the merits and cost of such a law but either way - we have not lost any freedoms. No one forces us to buy a car. To often, when one runs into a regulation or law one does not agree with, the "freedom" card, much like the "race" card by others is pulled out. Right now, our country is polarized politically. Nearly everyone feels abortion should be minimized - and there are a myriad of way to do that. Examples: by making it a criminal action, making contraceptive cheaper and more readily available, forced sterilization, etc. Unfortunately, as a society we don't seem to want to come together and really work on ways for trying to minimize this procedure. Instead, we (seems mostly male too, I might add) hurl rhetoric back and forth.

You must not be a Mensa member. One must have an IQ in the top 2%, as measured by a fellow Mensa psychologist and also pay the proper membership dues. I remember I was told, at the age of 15, that I should have the Mensa IQ test administered to me - which I did and met the 2% guideline. Now, being somewhat of a rebellious youth at that age, I made the choice not to pay the membership fee to join. Anyone care to guess what the advantages are for taking the test at 15? Now, respectfully, if I was interviewing an associate professor for a position at "my" university and I saw that they have Eagle Scout on their resum/CV, I would wonder more about why they thought an award earned at the age of 17 (or earlier) was still relevant today. Heck, I won a spelling bee in grade school, was a member of the NHS in high school, earned a myriad of Scouting awards (but not the Pinewood Derby ) but now, some 40 years later would not mention that (or my religion, political views or that fact that I'm member of the BSA) on my resum. Now, for a young adult just starting out in his career, I think it would be fine to include the fact they earned the Eagle award. I've encouraged my sons to do so.

The point I was trying to make was that the sexuality of Baden-Powell is irrelevant. Why can't most folks understand that? Merlyn, I thought you'd get a kick out of the fact that the advertisement on the top of the web page right now is for the Vineyard Church in Ann Arbor (last bastion of liberal thought?) and shows a "Darwin" fish (with tiny legs) kissing a "Jesus" fish. Let's just hope that one was female and the other male.

Before the "Michigan Madness" - the Detroit Area Council and Clinton Valley Council merged (Great Lakes Council emerged). This was an economic reality- it didn't create more jobs, it consolidated positions in an attempt to save money. A year or two later, State Wide council was formed (actually I believe it is not the entire state and it includes a sliver of Ohio too). As of January 1, 2013, Lost Lake Scout Reservation, Camp Agawam and Paul Bunyan Scout Camp. An extensive nine month review was conducted for each camps program strengths that evaluated facility conditions, location to population centers, attendance and financial sustainability. As a result, a recommendation to operate the following MCC 2013 camping programs was presented to the MCC Executive Committee and approved on September 10, 2012. Yeah, it was a money issue. Folks would rather have fewer "nicer" camps than more "rustic" camps. For now, the camps will be mothballed so to speak - not sold. At least that is what they are telling us now.

There are only two things I can't stand in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures... and the Dutch. Heck, B-P was gay so are we going to be cafeteria Scouters and pick and choose what we do and don't like from his program and call anyone who don't agree with us not true Scouts and to go find your own organization? So, if we don't believe in the divinity of the King/Queen of England, are we not Scouts? That was implied in B-Ps Promise too.

I wouldn't put my 2nd grade perfect attendance award or my Baptist Sunday school award on my resum (I was never even a Baptist!). However, if a high school age youth or seeking a entry level position, something like Eagle Scout award/rank would generally be neutral at worst. But yes, think of it this way - if an applicant stated he was the captain of the wrestling team you'd either think this shows dedication, leadership and respect from others about the applicant or simply, oh well, another dumb jock. In general, folks are cautioned about putting hobbies and certain "society" memberships on resum for certain types of positions. As for myself, if I saw that a young man that I was interviewing for a prospective entry level engineering position fresh out of college had earned Eagle - it would be a conversation starter that I could use to determine how well spoken and how well the applicant's communication capabilities were.

I remember that day - I was a seven year old second grader. We were actually released from school of few minutes early that day. I remember going home and telling my mother what happened and she kind of just nodded her head and went on with her normal routine. An hour or so later she heard it on the news and was shocked. I was taken aback because my little seven year old brain realized that she doubted my statement - it was so absurd to reality. A day later I know I was fascinated that on every channel (all three!) the exact same picture was on. Just think, in the period of about ten years (my formative years) I witnessed the assassination of a president, a presidential candidate, a civil rights leader, many civil rights protesters, the resignation of a president, a war that kill four students at home, 55,000 abroad and massive demonstrations worldwide, a raging cold war, British invasion, Cassius Clay/Muhammad Ali, riots in Watts, Detroit, space race & moon landing, summer of love, Six Day War and I'm sure I missed quite a bit more. I'm sure that period of time shaped my politics, my trust in Government and how I see the world - for better and worse.

But why the exclusivity to parents? If corporal punishment is beneficial to the child, why withhold others from granting benefit to your child?

There is a HUGE difference between corporal punishment and abuse. I use these methods on my children very sparingly. I would be livid if any other adult in authority tried to use them on MY child, and I would never think of using such tactics with a youth that is not my own son. That is what puzzles me. Either it is okay to use corporal punishment or it is not. I don't understand why you feel it is okay for you to use corporal punishment on your child but not me. Conversely, why would you be livid is another adult in authority used the exact same punishment for the exact same offense on your child. It doesn't make any sense to me.

qwazse - forgive me, I'm prone to sarcasm. There is no 20th Century Wood Badge, but there is a 21st Century Wood Badge or more correctly, Wood Badge for the 21st Century. Yeah, I think I may have wore out my welcome with some of the adults that always were telling me, the Scoutmaster, how to run things - the same folks that never went on any outings nor attended a PLC meeting. I'd usually politely listen and then ignore 99% of their input.

Yes. And BOR can be sequential on the same day. My oldest son did so and it does save on sewing!

When did "science" become political? When scientist started to receive funding from the government? I think it started before the global warming debate. Three Surgeon Generals (Koop, Satcher and Carmona - appointed by Reagan, Clinton and Bush) all criticized politicians (mostly Dubya) for trying to influence science. Carmona, even went public by stating before House committee that public health reports are withheld unless they're filled with praise for the administration. "It was Surgeon General Koop who pointed out and still says today 'Richard, we all have fought these battles, as have our predecessors going back over a century, but we have never seen it as partisan, as vindictive, as mean-spirited as it is today, and you clearly have it worse than any of us had.' " Spending on research on embryonic stem cells, the effects of sex education, space exploration, contraception and global warming became not based on science - but politics. It is sad. Maybe we need a few Merlyn's in elected office?

At work today someone stopped me and asked about my bright orange lanyard that hold my badge (I work for a defense company). It has the words of our (closing in 2013) scout camp. I told him it was the name of a Scout camp and the next question he had is "What the heck is going on with Scouting?" Not sure exactly what he was referencing (God, gays, girls or recent council consolidation and camp closings) - I found out he was inquiring about he recent "perversion file" blow back. Scout membership and community support is declining - and at a rapid pace in my area. Yes, exactly why is debatable (cost? perception? gay or religious issues?) but I say we (the BSA) can change the program without changing the mission - to teach youth to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law. That mission was not compromised by getting rid of the beekeeping merit badge. It wouldn't change by allowing Scout leaders who agree to uphold and obey the Scout Law and Oath and who happen to be gay.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Does the BSA "openly push the Catholic agenda" by allowing Catholics to join the BSA? But morality is Black and White. What is wrong is wrong. Won't get too many arguments here but who decides? But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. We'd sure have a lot of one eyed, or even blind, Scoutmasters it we followed that set of morals. The BSA, as they state, is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training. Therefore, why not allow gays, shellfish eaters, police officers who work on the Sabbath, divorcees, those who wear garments mingled with linen and wool, clean shaven folks, unclean women (should we ban female leaders for seven days every month?), those who curse, adulterers, gossipers, etc. but have them try to live by the Scout Oath and Law? Now that's a novel idea!

Seattle - there has always been societal pressure, peer pressure and even hormonal pressure to do certain activities that are not necessarily in line with the Scout Oath and Law. I just don't see any difference from gay individuals and heterosexual individuals wrt to that. Personally, I don't want my boys, well they are not 20 and 22, growing up to demonize gays. But I do want them to value certain behavior - those of the Oath and Law. My boys actually had a homosexual scoutmaster for a period of time - they just don't know it yet.

20th Century Wood Badge? Please, tell me what that is all about.

Thank God most children are a very resilient bunch - they seem to do fine even with screwed up parents. Some behaviors persist whether or not they are helpful. Spanking or hitting children is one. There is no research that proves striking a child makes him or her more obedient, study harder or become more polite. Often the opposite is true; hitting a kid can contribute to becoming obstinate, surly, oppositional or violent. I am not saying every parent who hits his or her kid is a child abuser. My experience has been that when parents become physical, its usually so theyll feel better not to educate the child. Personally, I am far from a perfect parent. The few times I have spanked my kids, I usually did it when I was the one who needed the time out. If parents waited 24 hours to spank their children, few would ever follow through. I will often hear from parents who say, I was hit as a kid and I turned out OK. Maybe. I, too, was hit if I mouthed off or was disrespectful. I didnt become a serial killer, but the times I got cracked never made me respect what my parent was saying or listen more closely. Some parents tell me they resent being told whether they have the right to strike their child. Ive had moms and dads get up into my face and rant about their God-given right to hit their children. Its not about God or Scripture, but parenting. Hitting may instill fear in kids, but I have yet to see it result in genuine respect. Setting limits? Absolutely. Not giving chance after chance; hey Im with you. But striking or hitting is usually done when parents have lost their temper or are out of control. There are a few moms or dads who make ritual out of spanking. They have the child go to a cupboard, pull out the paddle, pull down their pants and lay over the chair. While it can be argued that this type of punishment is not impulsive, it is difficult to consider this behavior as positive parenting. Instead it is ritualized humiliation. This type of corporal punishment may be as American as french fries, but the whole process reinforces, Ive got you, youre not going anywhere and I can do whatever I choose on my timetable. Not exactly a paragon of respect. A parent does not have to be bigger or stronger than his or her offspring to engender compliance. Ive seen some moms barely 5 foot tall have adolescent boys a full 10 inches taller submit to their mothers authority, because mom was consistent and loving when she punished. Sure, its easier to raise a child if there is a parental presence obviously bigger and stronger in the home. Mom or dads voice is raised, the scowl comes over his or her face and the kids scamper. This is about as violent as setting limits would ever need to be. Parents get compliance, like teachers, from setting an example of mutual respect and being clear with both expectations and consequences. Mitchell Rosen, M.A.

Dean - If most reasonable folks know the difference between discipline and outright abuse then why the "parents only" rule you and others seem to endorse? If a parent can backhand their child for back talk, why shouldn't I, a "reasonable person" be able to do the same to the same child?(This message has been edited by acco40)

I can think of a few things kids would do that where getting smacked in the mouth would be a just punishment. Please enlighten me. And if you feel a parent has that right, why not a Scoutmaster? Teacher? Coach? Grandparent? Stranger?