When is behavior un-scoutlike.

[ljnrsu]

Un-scoutlike behavior is when either the Scout Oath or Scout Law has been violated.

 

I disagree that it is private. Scouts and Scouters recite them in public, in front of their units in opening ceremonies,or in front of other Scouters at Roundtables and other Scouting functions.

 

It is required of a Scout for rank advancement to show "scout spirit by living the Scout Oath and Scout Law in your everyday life"

 

As Scouters we hold Scouts responsible for "scout spirit". Scouts can be removed from activities or outings for un-scoutlike behavior. We as Scouters can ask questions about how Scouts follow the Oath and Law and deny advancement at BOR's for not following the Oath and Law.

 

Shouldn't we as Scouters be held to the same standards that Scouts are. How can we as Scouters judge a Scouts behavior while we are not being held to the same standards?

 

If we as Scouters/Leaders are to be role models for Scouts than we should be held to the same or higher standards than is required of Scouts.

 

 

[Bob White]

No one has questioned "should we be". The point I was making is that you cannot always be all points at once. That they are not always compatable. Sometimes you must choose which serves the greatest good in the situation you are in. Ethical decision making.

 

 

[Eamonn]

Hi ljnrsu,

With all due respect I really don't see that where the Oath is recited changes the Oath.

Take a look at the words:

On my honor

The person making the oath is giving his word, his promise.

. . I will do my best . . .

This isn't some cookie cutter thing, there is no one size fits all.

Surely when a Scout when a Scout come up for a BOR we take into account him as an individual, the progress that he has made and his understanding of the oath and law.

Some Lads are by nature a lot kinder than others, Some have to work at being kind, much the same can be said for being brave, I think I could go through all the points of the law and the oath.

I agree that Scouts can be removed from activities or outing for misbehavior which more than lightly would fall under the heading of un-scoutlike behavior.

Still I see my Oath and Law as a work in progress, every day I try to do a little better. Some days I mess up real bad, on the days I do well I raise the bar a little higher for the next day.

Eamonn.

 

[scoutldr]

And that is exactly what they are doing! Some Councils are already giving leaders 1 year fom the time they register to get trained or they are not letting their membership renew. While national has said that that this is not their prefered method (they would rather have the leaders learn and follow the program because that is the committment they made), they are not stopping the councils from doing it. My guess is that if some councils can make this work it will becone a national practice. I hope it does. Many CO's have dropped the ball when it comes to selecting good leaders. You cannot lead a program that you do not know and understand.

The Council in which I am registered tried this.  The Executive Board decreed it without having the courtesy of speaking to the District Training Committees who were expected to make it work.  Scouters at all levels were outraged at being dictated to and the idea died a quiet death when they realized that the majority of units would not be rechartered at the end of the year. 

 

[Bob White]

Most of the units in your district would not be able to recharter if the key leaders were required to be trained??

 

Well good luck there Scoutldr. It seems a choice of losing scouts and scouters due to poor unit perograms, or closing the weak units down and directing the scouts over to the few units that know the program?

 

Which way do you think would benefit the boys the most?

[ljnrsu]

Eamonn

 Still I see my Oath and Law as a work in progress, every day I try to do a little better. Some days I mess up real bad, on the days I do well I raise the bar a little higher for the next day.

 I totally agree with what you say. Yes, following the Oath and Law is personel. Scouts and Scouters alike should follow it to the best of their ability.

 What I was trying to point out with the public part was that it is personel but not private. Scouts and Scouters alike can and should be taken to task for "violations" of the Oath and Law.

 The idea in the original post that depending on cirumstances you are allowed to violate the Oath and Law without being called to task on it just does not work. Just because someone else is abusive or unkind does not give you free reign to respond in kind without violating the Oath and Law.

 This is a written forum the words we chose and how we use them sets the tone of our replies. As a previous post has stated It is possible to disagree, to correct, or even to rebuke what someone has said without attacking the person  You do not have to stoop to someone elses level to get your point across. There is no need to become abusive in your replies in order to defend your belief's. We would not talk to our children or Scouts that way, but here they can read what we write.

 

 

[Bob White]

ljnrsu

welcome to the discussion. I believe you have not only misunderstod my post but the Scout Law as well. If you look at the mission of the BSA you will see it is to teach how to make ethical decision based on the oat and law. There will be situations when you cannot use every point at every moment and you will need selcect based on the values represented in the Law what decision you will make.

 

My decision when faced with faceless individuals using factless, illinformed, and thoughtless language to villify the BSA was to defend it based on my loayalty to the men and women and youth who make up this program. My original posts were polite, factual,informed and toatally IGNORED by the posters.

 

From that point on they were no longer owed courtesy for they intent waas not of a courteous intent. You cannot attack the people and values I am loyal to with the malice they have used and expect or recieve coutesy in return. I was direct. I called a spade a spade.

 

These are bullies nothing less. And when a bully attacks your friends you cannot respond with, "oh dear me, please excuse my interruption but if it wouldn't be a bother could you refrain from pummelling my friend. Thanks ever so much."

 

No, You reach in and pull them back. And if need be you stand betwen the bully and your friend. That's scoutlike!

 

I challenged them to show evidence of their knowledge and information. I still do.

 

Thanks for you input.

BoB White

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Bob White writes:

I challenged them to show evidence of their knowledge and information. I still do.

 

Hey Bob, I've challenged you to show evidence of this response of yours to Prairie_Scouter:

 

"Public schools can no longer sponsor Scout units.

 

Absolutely untrue.

 

You have yet to show evidence of your knowledge and information on this point. The BSA has publically stated through their national director of registration that all units chartered to public schools will be rechartered before the next chartering cycle, and that public schools and other government entities will not be accepted as chartering organizations in the future.

 

So far, your one attempt at "explaining" it referred to statements I made BEFORE THE BSA ANNOUNCED THIS CHANGE, which is completely dishonest of you.

 

Your response of "absolutely untrue" is absolutely untrue, and you have yet to retract it or justify it.

[Bob White]

Merlyn fellow ummm well, fellow,

 

Let me say this one time please. I did answer you, you simply did not like my answer. We want to thank you for all the times you have shown up to announce the latest lawsuit against the BSA or its chartering organizations by the ACLU.

 

Thank you also for all your glee in efforts to hurt the BSA simply because you are not allowed to play in it.

 

It's your efforts to start these suits..OH wait you had nothing to do with actually starting them.

 

Well anyway at least your efforts to determine the outome...OH wait, you have no effect on the outcome at all do you?

 

Well at least your efforts to keep us informed...Wait a minute..we all have radios, newpapers,TV, and current news on the internet without you.

 

Well at least your efforts to ...whatever it is you actually do to have a meaningful life, other than to brag to scouters that we are being sued by the ACLU.

 

As always your posts are...well... they certainly are posts aren't they.

 

Anchors aweigh, Merlyn!

 

B:)b White

 

If it will help anyone to feel better about this post please feel free to imagine little blue birds flitting in and out of the viewing area on your monitor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest OldGreyEagle]

In another life, as I have commented on from time to time, I was the Director of a Radiology Dept, well actually three, but this occurred in Alton, Illinois. Alton is just a few miles north of St Louis on the banks of the mighty Mississippi, except for the summer of 1993 when it was in the middle of the Mississippi but I digress.

 

One of the radiologists (thats the doctor who reads x-rays and does angioplasties) was as technically brilliant a clinician as you could possibly ask for. I personally assisted him in a number of cases where he was able to produce results where other radiologists failed. His sense of touch and timing was sheer genius. If you dont understand what I am trying to say, just know he was a top performer and he saved lives. The problem was he knew it and wasnt shy about tooting his own horn. He came in with a reputation of having a bad attitude and after the technical staff saw the results of his work, we were astounded and said whatever attitude this guy has, we can work with it because its all for the benefit of our patients. About six months later the attitude really kicked in. Snide demeaning remarks about the staff, about certain physicians on staff and finally his own partners. He must have thought he was immune from following society's conventions because he was so technically brilliant. And again, I must say he was. But his behavior and personal style was so abrasive that the staff began to hate working with him. He had a manner that could put you on edge and would guarantee that you would make mistakes because you were so preoccupied on not making mistakes, if you know what I mean. He got into shouting matches with the dept chairman, with me as technical director and with the hospital administrator. He had the dept nurse blow up at him one day, she told him off in no uncertain terms what she thought of him and all he did was stand there and smirk at her. When she was done, or at least taking a breath, he said, so when can we get this case started or should we let butterfingers (his nickname for a fellow doc) do it.

The woman was so distraught she would have quit if she werent a single mother. The bottom line was he could not be reasoned with. He could not be convinced as brilliant a doctor that he was, that there was anything wrong with the way he acted. He felt his skill as a doctor allowed him to be king boor. The man finally left because he was tired of dealing with the idiots, and that was nearly everyone at the hospital. From the Housekeeping staff to the head of the medical staff. He bounced around from hospital to hospital usually wearing out his welcome in 3-5 years. He was confronted many times with requests, demands, etc. to alter his behavior and his patented response was, so who will save your patients? Finally, I have heard he found a hospital that puts up with his antics because they value his technical skill, realizing they may lose employees not as valuable as he

The question is, do you have to accept people for who they are and over look character flaws or accept lesser skill in a person with a much more congenial nature. I dont remember my parents working this hard at life.

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Bob White writes:

I did answer you, you simply did not like my answer.

 

No Bob, you avoided answering. Your "absolutely untrue" statement to Prairie_Scouter is nothing more nor less than a deliberate lie. And once again you avoid answering, because it's obvious to everyone who has read the BSA letter to the ACLU that your statement is a lie, or anyone who has seen the BSA memo sent to all councils to recharter BSA units that your statement is a lie.

 

And yes Bob, the ACLU letter to the BSA that resulted in dropping all public school charters actually was due partly to my effort; Adam Schwartz sent the letter after I generated a list of BSA units chartered by government agencies for the Scouting For All website. You'll notice that his letter to the BSA states that 300 BSA units are chartered by government entities in Illinois - he got that figure from our database:

http://www.scoutingforall.org/packtroop/pax.php?st=IL

 

Adam Schwartz's letter is here:

http://www.aclu-il.org/news/archives/bsaletter.pdf

"It has come to our attention that some 300 local governmental units in the state of Illinois, and thousands more elsewhere in the United States, continue to directly sponsor Boy Scout Troops and Cub Scout Packs."

 

I'm the one who BROUGHT it to their attention.

 

Now, it really doesn't make much difference to me if you continue to lie and try to claim that public schools can still charter BSA units, but I may publically call you on it and call you a liar for doing so.

[Bob White]

And I understand the subtleties of your story OGE, BUT

 

I have never claimed to be an expert. I have never said that anyone who did not do it my way was wrong. I have never been rude or unhelpful to any poster who ever asked for help. I have never suggested that any ever do things my way, or condemned them for not doing so. All I have said "is this is what the program says" and I have given in nearly every case the resources to find that in. In some cases I gave personal experiences but I never insisted others do it the same or criticize those who didn't.

 

I have challenged those who malign a program that has done great things for tens of millions of people over the years. I have no patience for ayone who refuses to folow the program even though they chase scouts from their pack or troop. I have no patience for those who make their own rules in order to control other people and other peoples children.

 

At one time in this forums history that was two people,now it seems we have a half dozen (including the original two). Is it any wonder that membership has dipped when you read what these registered and 'active' unit volunteers think of the program and how they trat the scouts they are supposed to be serving.

 

Every one of us, well almost everyone here, agreed to follow the program, its policies and procedures. A few have not kept that promise and they deserve to be challenged about that.

 

If only one new leader was to follow in their path think of how many scouts will be affected. What if two did, or three.

 

 

 

[ljnrsu]

Bob

Thank you for the welcome.

 

It is very possible that I have misunderstood your post. Since you do not know my Scouting tenure I will take the second half of your sentence as a question.

 

I have been very lucky to have used every edition of the Boy Scout Handbook starting with the sixth edition in my Scout and Scouting tenure.I started in Cubs in 1960. Earned Eagle in 1971 just prior to my 18th b'day, made Life and completed Eagle project shortly before turning 16, was enjoying the journey and almost forgot the destination. Was a District Commissioner 1974-1976 while attending college in New Brunswick NJ. In Jan 1977 became ASM in the Troop I earned Eagle, 3 months later was asked to become SM a position I held until May 1982 when I left to get married and start a family of my own . Was fortunate to take training for those positions at Schiff in Mendham NJ. National's Training site at that time. Rentered Scouting as ASM in 1996 when oldest son joined Boy Scouts,Mom wanted Cubs. I still am ASM in that same Troop and a Counselor for 6 Eagle required Merit Badges. Along the way I have earned the Scouters Training award twice with different Boy Scout Troops and the Scoutmasters Key. Almost forgot also served on Councils Eagle BOR committee from 1978-late 1985.

 

So, yes Bob I do believe I understand the Scout Law,Aims and Methods. And I am current in Boy Scout Training NLE,SM/ASM specific,outdoor skills,YPT,Safe Swim,Safety Afloat.

 

It is my opinion that a decision that violates the Scout Law is not an ethical decision under Scouting Aims.

 

To defend someone from physical harm yes. To verbally abuse,belittle or berate someone no it is not ethical. But that is my opinion.

 

I have a feeling that in this case Bob we are going to have to agree to disagree.

 

If someone choses to ignore you there is little if anything that can be done.

 

 

[Eamonn]

"There are 3 posters on this forum who have met me"

I am one of the three!!

Just for the record Bob is a really nice fellow.

At the Jamboree I didn't see any signs of a tail, or horns. In fact he was doing a wonderful job and couldn't have been nicer.

Hey Bob, OJ says Hi and thanks for the Frisbee.

[Zahnada]

"These are bullies nothing less."

 

Bob,

 

I'm going to be blunt with you. I know it's obvious that I have never been in the "Bob White Fan Club." But I also have tried to walk the middle ground of compromise and understanding in this forum. These discussions serve many purposes. Often, it's to find information, resources or help. At which times, you excel. Nobody in this forum can debate your knowledge, passion or commitment to Boy Scouts. When a scouter asks for aid, a post by Bob White is generally enough to solve the issue. And we all thank you for sharing that with us.

 

But these forums serve other purposes as well. Sometimes it's to debate the methods or program of scouting. Maybe it's a debate on scouting politics. Perhaps, there's a discussion where a poster wants to share new ideas or insights into scouting that he/she feels will do a great service to the boys. With only a few exceptions, the posters on this board desire nothing more than to serve their youth in the best possible way. And these people, no matter how different their views, can often find just the smallest middle ground during a discussion. Rooster and TJ can take a moment to admire each other's passion. FOG once paused and admitted he's abrasive. Most people in here can say with someone they vehemently disagree with, "I understand why you feel the way you do. This is what I think..."

 

I've never seen this with you, Bob. I've never seen you even show an attempt towards understanding a position other than your own. I've never seen you try to open your mind to looking at the program differently. What's aggravating about debating with you is that you never listen or try to listen. You're a man who has a lot to teach the members of this forum. But you're not interested in teaching or educating. You do not guide, you push.

 

Occasionally, people confront you on your behavior. Then you slip away and disappear for awhile. Suddenly, the atmosphere in this forum is much lighter. Debates are more civil. If nothing else, the topic of the debates stays on the issue. Have you noticed that when you get involved in a debate, it often turns the discussion to be about you? Instead of "uniform vs. no uniform" it's "Bob White vs. the anti-Bob Whites." You bring a negative aura to this forum. You also bring out the worst in many posters.

 

I'll be honest. There was a time when my faith and love in scouting waned. I would step away from these forums disgusted with scouting. How could an organization I loved have members who are so mean to each other? How could they fight so much? Is this what I want these boys to become? Is this the example they should follow?

 

As to your original question, I will only say that this forum has had behavior that is very un-scoutlike. And yes, you are often the victim of some of the worst attacks. But it is not because you are a martyr. There are many posters here who can spread the truths about the program without creating enemies. You need to take a good look at your attitude, Bob. Why do you feel that you've antagonized so many people? Why is it necessary to have this entire thread? Maybe because, in this forum, you are a bully. Nothing less.