Rules and Values (again...)

[nolesrule]

I spent a good 30 minutes writing a response but realized my entire point has gone over your head. All I will say is the world is just not as simple a place as you make it out to be, and that there will always be exceptions to your premise, whether you can see them or not.

 

But I get the feeling I could give you a million real-world and/or hypothetical examples and you would still disagree.

 

And I'll leave it at that.

 

And in these posts, I never once condoned lying or misleading when giving one's word. There's certainly no integrity in that.

[Gold Winger]

I don't miss your point, integrity and honor to you are situational.

[David CO]

Like many of my generation, I enjoyed and learned lessons from the morality dramas and sitcoms of the early 60's, Spin and Marty, Leave It To Beaver, Gunsmoke, etc. Perhaps my ethical development was not so much situational as it was situational comedy.

 

One of my favorite shows was the Andy Griffith Show. I am very pleased that this, and a few others of my cherished oldies have gained popularity with the kids and grandkids.

 

On the show, Andy and Barney were both law officers and they were both good, decent, and ethical people. But of the two, Andy was the better officer.

 

Sure, Barney was the one who wore the uniform correctly. Barney could quote the manual from front to back. Barney was truly and honestly dedicated to his work.

 

But even as a child, I "got it", and the grandkids still "get it". Barney used the rules to compensate for his lack of genuine competence and social skills.

 

[OldGreyEagle]

Thank you Beavah, I guess you are talking on a much higher plane than I am

 

To be fair, I beleive JBlake, and I know he will let us know if I am wrong, worked with BSA officials to get a waiver for the arterillery portion of the Guide to Safe Scouting because it is what the crew does. Jblake knew the rules, applied for and got an exception to the rules and I see that as being responsible, he didnt ignore the rules he addressed them and the BSA acted rationally. Not always a behavior attributed to them here or anywhere.

[Gold Winger]

Denver, you missed a couple of important things with Andy Griffith. Andy was the star of the show and Barney was the comic relief. Be that as it may, if Andy said that he was going to do something, he did it.

[packsaddle]

I guess this thread should be titled, "Leave it to Beavah".

Sorry, couldn't resist. I'll skulk back into my hole now.

 

Nope, not so fast, I need to offer a quote that nolesrule might enjoy:

"For every complex problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple--and wrong."

H.L. Mencken

 

I can only wonder how he would respond to the news of these previous couple of weeks. Back to the hole...

[Beavah]

Yah, hey, now we've got both "leave it to Beavah" and da Andy Griffith show, eh? I have to admit, David CO's illustration with Andy Griffith and Barney Fife I think is spot-on to what we see in Scoutin' and on da forums sometimes.

 

OGE, I was just usin' scouter.com characters for amusement and humor, eh? I don't reckon Lisa'bob is armin' her troop with red jello squirtguns. That's somethin' I saw a patrol at camp doin' once that I thought was really creative and funny. I think they got da idea from a first aid class.

 

There are lots more historical re-enactment crews out there than jblake's, eh? Most of 'em just kept doin' what they were doin'. I doubt jblake suspended all his activities while he was waitin' for folks to clarify either, eh? But choose another example... a legislature's zero tolerance policy for sexual harassment, and a peck on the cheek given by a 6-year-old kindergartener. Was the rational intent of the lawgivers really to expel such a student? Clearly not. So it is ethical and right to ignore the law in that case.

 

Even the courts in adjudicating cases will look to the legislative history to interpret the rational intent of the lawgivers, beyond the simple text of the law, based on this longstandin' western ethical tradition.

 

It is in part what Jesus meant by "the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath." He was overridin' da human text of the law in favor of the rational intent of God the lawgiver.

 

Another way of thinkin' about it is "one should not employ the law in ways which make da law look ridiculous" and thereby diminish its just purpose for the common welfare.

 

So it would be improper to try to apply da G2SS rule prohibiting ever swimming in water over 12 feet deep to a group snorkeling in the ocean or swimmin' an open-water triathalon or mile swim. That would diminish obedience to da rule for when it is intended - roped swim areas with lots of kids to be watched. So we ignore da rule in the former cases, but still adhere to it as a rule in the latter.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Bob White]

I think Don raises an excellent point, if that is your value structure is based on 1960's sitcoms. I would hope that most of the rest of us draw on more meaningful and more deeply rooted values that that.

 

If he is using TV shows, let alone TV shows from from 40 years ago, to establish beliefs based on "life experience" he would do better to base them on real life than on Barney Fife's make believe life.

 

To assume that a person cannot be knowledgeable of rules without being ineffective lacks logic. To suggest that a person can violate the rules of a community (not because the rules are unfair, but only because they are personally inconvenient) and still be considered to have good ethics is a fantasy.

[BadenP]

Gold Winger you are beginning to sound like the little guy in Austin Powers mimmicking his evil leader, Minime to Bob White, lol.

 

The truth is that all scout leaders know the importance of rules and most follow them to the best of their abilities. Once you reach a certain age in life you learn that very few things are true absolutes. Most things are open to change and interpretation, and no one interpretation is the necessarily correct one, especially Bob Whites. This thread proves this point to a certanity. The fact is that scouting has survived a hundred years not because of a myriad of rules but because the program is FUN, the kids feel challenged, experience leadership, and develop a sense of who they are and what they are capable of achieving, period. What kind of boys a unit puts out is far more more important than how the leader interprets the patrol method or who can sit on a BOR. In the greater scheme of scouting these things are trivial, and certain people who harp constantly on others for these things are equally trivial, redundant, and unimportant.

 

We are ALL human beings and because of that we are ALL imperfect. Anyone who volunteers their time to be a scout leader and works hard to create the right environment for our youth to excel in life should be commended and not denigrated by those whose own overinflated egos and self importance overides everything else in their lives.

[OldGreyEagle]

Beavah, I understand most of your comments have texture and nuance I do not readily pick up on and I blame me.

 

I used Jblake as an example of how to do things right, he saw an issue, he handled that issue and got it resolved just as a man of charactor should. I made no mention of Lisabob

[ASM59]

I've resisted posting on this one since I saw that Beavah started it. But I just can't resist any more. I really have found parts of this humorous, while other parts I find confusing if not troubling.

 

Baden says, "Anyone who volunteers their time to be a scout leader and works hard to create the right environment for our youth to excel in life should be commended and not denigrated by those whose own overinflated egos and self importance overides everything else in their lives."

 

Please help me understand what you are saying. If I pull you aside at summer camp or a camporee to let you know that I think you or someone in your Troop is not following the rules, then I am denigrating you and/or your other adult volunteer. Is that what you are saying?

 

ASM59

 

[BadenP]

ASM

 

The denigrating I was referring to was the conduct of one or two posters on this forum who seem to get a perverse pleasure in condemning other scouters thinking their opinion or interpretation is the only correct one. In your scenario it would depend on the rule, is it one that would endanger others, if so then you need to let me know, however if it is something like one of the boys was not uniformed properly then I might question your intent. You see it is all a matter of degree.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

[ASM59]

Baden...,

 

Thanks for clarifying. I understand you point about how some are reacting.

 

You also pointed out that, "The fact is that scouting has survived a hundred years not because of a myriad of rules but because the program is FUN, the kids feel challenged, experience leadership, and develop a sense of who they are and what they are capable of achieving, period. What kind of boys a unit puts out is far more more important than how the leader interprets the patrol method or who can sit on a BOR."

 

I can agree with your thoughts on this as long as people can also understand that Scouting may have survived for so long and the program may be FUN because of the way the program is run. How it's run is defined by the rules. That's how I look at it and if it looks like someone is not familiar with the rules, under the right circumstances, I may feel like sharing the rules with that person. This is to be helpful, not to judge, as I've been accused. I am always careful in sharing my thoughts/advice so as not to sound judgemental or harsh. And as pointed out, I will do so in private and let the person decide to accept or apply the advice.

 

I've been attacked because of my views on the rules, and I'll admit that I was brought up in a family and I dare say a culture that looks at things as Black and White with very little Gray area. So, I tend to be a stickler for following the rules. But as has been pointed out, I do try to focus on the major things (such things that could be dangerous or damaging). So, no I would never walk up to another Scouter and say, "Hey, did you know that your Scout over there has his Shirt untucked?" But, if I saw the same Scout throwing his open knife at a tree while others were standing near or behind the tree, you better believe I'd say something. I would not lecture the leader about his undisciplined Scout or how he should hand out any discipline (trust me I know leaders that would lecture). I'd simply leave it up to the Scout's leader(s) to handle the situation.

 

ASM59

[gwd-scouter]

GoldWinger quotes "People can change their minds. There are ways to do that while retaining your integrity." and then writes: Maybe for you but not for me.

 

I find this statement mystifying. Are you really saying that once you make a decision, nothing could persuade you to change your mind? You find those that change their minds, perhaps because they've received some clarifying information, to have questionable integrity?

[Gold Winger]

If I say that I'm going to do something and then "change my mind" what value does my word have?