A Scout is... Trustworthy

"A scout is trustworthy. A scout tells the truth. He is honest, and he keeps his promises. People can depend on him." This is taken directly from the Boy Scout Handbook. I actually like the original version, from Robert Baden-Powell better. "A scout's honour is to be trusted. If a scout says 'On my honour it is so,' that means it is so, just as if he had taken a most solemn oath. Similarly, if a scout officer says to a scout, 'I trust you on your honor to do this,' the scout is bound to carry out the order to the very best of his ability, and to let nothing interfere with his doing so. If a scout were to break his honour by telling a lie, or by not carrying out an order exactly when trusted to do so, he would cease to be a scout, and must hand over his scout badge and never be allowed to wear it again."

What I really like about that original version is the way that it links trustworthiness with honor. Honor is a concept that we really don't think about anymore, but that doesn't make it any less important. As I see it, your honor is tied up with who you are. You could look at it as the image that you portray to the world, but I like to think of it as your image in the eyes of God. Another way of looking at it is the way people feel about you in a pinch, and this is where we get back to the concept of trustworthiness. In order for people to be able to count on you in a pinch, they have to be able to trust you. Ultimately, that comes down to your character.

Young people today seem awfully concerned about being "disrespected." The problem with this is that they think that respect is one of their inalienable rights. But that is not the case. Respect is the result of honor. Honor comes from trustworthiness. Trustworthiness is earned. This is a key component of scouting, and it starts from an early age. The Cub Scout motto, "Do your best," is chock full of trustworthiness. In order to be trustworthy, people need to know that they can count on you to give it your all at all times. Do you best - no one can ever expect any more than that. Scouts are taught, from an early age, that if they focus on being trustworthy and doing their absolute best at all times, they will, ultimately, earn respect.

I want to briefly go back to the religious element of trustworthiness and honor. In the conclusion of the Declaration of Independence, the signatories pledge to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. These guys really got the concept of honor. Their lives and their fortunes were pretty important, but the only thing that they considered to be sacred was their honor. Your trustworthiness, your honor, your character is what defines you. There are few institutions left in this country that teaches young men the concept of honor as being a compact between you and everyone in society (not just your teammates) and between you and God.

BSA 100

This past weekend, we spent the weekend camping with 5000+ of our closest friends, in celebration of the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Boy Scouts of America. The Boy Scouts is one of our country's great institutions, and its 100th birthday is a big deal. In the coming weeks, I plan to blog on the importance of the Boy Scouts' core values, but, for today, I thought that I would give my general impression of the Boy Scouts, and why all for of my children (yes, the girls, too) are part of the BSA.

The Boy Scouts do a remarkable job of taking boys and turning them into men; and when I say men, I mean young men that mothers would be proud of - young men that you would be proud to have date, or even marry your daughters. I remember, years ago, attending a dinner where young men from our area who had achieved the rank of Eagle Scout in the past year were being honored. As each of them were coming forward to receive their award, I noticed that these were not your average 16, 17 and 18 year old boys. I didn't know the young men, but just by three way they carried themselves - their posture, their air of confidence -you can tell that they were a cut above the typical teenage boy. My girls are in high school now, and I can attest to the fact that those young Eagle Scouts were much closer to the type of boy I would like my girls to bring home with them than 90% of the boys I see going into their high school.

I am often asked why it is that I insist that my children are involved in scouting. There are many, many, reasons.there is the fact that the values of the Boy Scouts largely coincide with my own, and are values I want to instill in my children. There is the fact that my children, as is the case with many children in this generation, don't spend nearly enough time outdoors. The number one reason, however, is this: The older our children get, the less influence we, as parents, have on them, and the more influence their friends have. Having my children involved in scouts allows me to help them pick their friends.

A lot has been made, in the last decade or so, of things that the Boy Scouts don't believe - associations that they choose not to make. In fact, it is my belief that far too much has been made of this. If the Boy Scouts were producing young men who were biased on the basis of condition, color or creed, it would be fair to criticize then for the associations that they choose not to make. The fact of the matter is that they do not. Although tolerance is not mentioned in the scout oath, law, motto, slogan or code, it must be being taught somewhere, because scouts, as a rule, are a tolerant bunch. That being the case, would be better served by focusing on the values that the scouts do teach, rather than emphasizing things that they do not.

I'm Taking My Ball...

What ever happened to being a good loser? Time after time in this election cycle, instead of losing graciously, giving a concession speech, and supporting the victor, the losing candidate has acted like a jilted lover that says, "If I can't have them, no one can."

First there was Charlie Crist. As far as Crist was concerned, the Florida Senate seat was already his. There may not have been a Kennedy seat in Massachusetts, but there was certainly a Crist seat in Florida. As is often the case in life, though, things didn't go according to plan. Along came young, handsome, charismatic, Marco Rubio, who defeated Crist handily in the Republican primary. A real man, at this point, would have shaken hands and wished his opponent luck in the general election. Not Charlie Crist, though. He went home and started doing math. Would it be possible, he wondered, to run as an Independent and pull enough votes to still win? In the end, he decided that he could, and, regardless of the fact that he had been a life-long Republican, what he really was for was himself, and he launched a campaign as an Independent.

Then there it the unusual case of Tom Tancredo. The former congressman from Colorado had not even run for Governor. He just decided that the two top Republican candidates for the post just weren't up to his standards. So, what does Tancredo do? Why the noble thing, of course. He threatened them. If the winner of the Republican primary didn't immediately withdraw from the race, leaving the door open for another, more suitable, Tancredo approved candidate to run, he would run against them as the candidate of the Constitution party. Well, true to his word, when the victor in the Republican primary didn't withdraw, Tancredo announced his candidacy, and with that, the life-long Republican nearly assured that a Democrat would reside in Colorado's governor's mansion for the next for years.

In the first few days after her loss in the Republican primary, it appeared that Lisa Murkowski was going to do the right thing, and concede gracefully. To her credit, she did at least concede, instead of demanding recount after recount, or worse, bringing the election to the courts and challenging the validity of votes. But instead of throwing heer support behind Joe Miller,she has kept her options open, and is considering mounting a write-in campaign. This is REALLY a case of thinking that a Senate seat has a family moniker attached to it. This seat was once held by Murkowski's father. She first obtained it, or should I say inherited it, when her father was elected governor, and appointed her to fill out the remainder of his term. She haas since been reelected, but I guess this just shows how difficult it is to give up one's inheritance.

I suppose, however, that I am being at least somewhat hypocritical, though, because this phenomenon is not restricted to Republicans. In 2006, primary voters, angered at his strong support of the Iraq war, defeated Joseph Lieberman in the Democratic primary. Lieberman proceeded to mount a successful campaign as an Independent in the general election. I, at the time, was thrilled by this. Maybe it is because I have always liked Lieberman, maybe it was because he was sticking it to the extreme elements of his party. Whatever the reason, or rationalization, I myself have not been completely consistent on this issue, and honesty requires that this be noted.