erickelly65

Not exactly what you asked for but there is some evidence we humans are 'wired' to be spiritual.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/04/04/neurotheology/index.html

http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_12946169

BadenP...perhaps everything can be substantiated but you havent done so as of yet...

Perhaps you can look into joining the Commissioner Staff for your District.

The issue is exactly what does "guardian" mean in the G2SS (Custodian, Legal Guardian, Designee, etc.)

All this isnt an issue until something goes wrong. Any incident occuring to Junior at the event either at the hands of the parent, the adult his parent authorized or by some one else and the unit will be under some scrutiny. At that point the BSA, it's insurance company, lawyers (BSA's/Parent's) and law enforcement are going to be crawling all through every decision made by the unit for that event including how completely you followed the rules and if not why you didnt. It will be up to your leadership to answer those questions and depending on their answers they can expect to be protected by BSA or left to defend themselves.

Beavah

You erroneously make the assumption that the only option is to have junior sleep alone. Junior can sleep with other boys, Junior's parent can come along (male or female), Junior can stay home. If a parent wants to let junior sleep with grandpa or uncle joe or some friend of the family...that may be fine....but I would get it writing.

If you don't like the BSA policy on this, take it up with council.(

My opinion on this is that a parent needs to come...period.(This message has been edited by erickelly65)

Evmori, I disagree. Someone that is entrusted to watch junior over the weekend is not (necessarily) a legal gaurdian not in a legal sense nor in the intent of the BSA. As a scouter, parents entrust me with the care of their children on every campout. That does not mean that I am that child's legal guardian. Nor can that child share a tent with me. The Guide to Safe Scouting's rules on seperate accomodations still apply.

Actually to be honest, I dont see how any of this thread complies with this sites so-called "rules of decorum"

SR540Beaver...There is nothing wrong with that but I might ask why isnt this Jewish person more tolerant. As long as the city is open to all religious symbols.

A more real world example. MD Anderson Cancer Center, part of the University of Texas is a public hospital here in Houston. They, like most hospitals have a chapel in their facility. One could say this is a nondenominational, prehaps even non religious room and therefore ok. But MD Anderson also has a Muslim Chapel (Their name for it) in the hospital. This is an explicitly religious room in a state hospital. I see no problem with that but doesnt this the seperation of church and state line?(This message has been edited by erickelly65)

While perhaps a large portion of the Weatherman's actions were not targeted at killing people, it would be untrue to say they were opposed to doing so. In fact, they did have one such plan go bad and ended up killing a few of their own during the bomb production process.

This occurred in March 6th of 1970 while in prepartions for a plan to set off anti-personnel pipe bombs that evening at a dance for noncommissioned officers at the Fort Dix, New Jersey Army base

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich_Village_townhouse_explosion

Further they killed a police officer in February 1970, during the bombing of several police cars in Berkeley. They killed two more officers in 1981 after a bank robbery.

Did you mean William Ayers of the Weather Underground?

Interesting questions.

I don't believe a CC can unilaterally kick a leader out of the Troop. Each adult app takes the signature of the COR and the CC so I would think both would need to be in agreement.

I believe the CC can hold closed meetings of the committee but I can't see how that would be a good thing.

Finally, the CC serves at the discretion of the COR and ulimately the Chartering Organization Head and, if need be, can be removed by them.

Geithner was aware of the tax issue years before his nomination because the IRS discovered it in their audit in 2006.

This guy is now the Sec of Treasury and, therefore, runs the IRS. Incredible. This is really the best we can come up with as a country?

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090114/D95MTVI05.html

To paraphrase President Obama, I reject as false the choice between selecting qualified / experienced and law abiding when we fill government positions.

I also reject the idea that these were "honest mistakes" made on tax returns. These folks arent "johnny six-pack". They are supposed to be the best and brightest and I hold them to that standard they should have known better.

Because- As a youth, scouting was an incredible experience for me.

I wanted to share this experience with my son and his friends.

I wanted to give back to a program that I think does tremendous things for youth and, therefore, society.

And, of course, I wanted to have a great time doing all this.

Another twist for YPT training requirements and expirations is state law. My council is in Texas and we have to comply with the Youth Camp Protection Act that sets a variety of requirements for how camps are run (Boy Scout Summer Camps and Cub Scout Twilight and Day Camps must comply). This includes training requirements for Adults. This requires our leaders participating at these camps to retake YPT annually and provide such proof to camp leadership (along with several other documents.)

I have never heard of a requirement for YPT training to attend Scout Meeting though.

Gonzo1

I say ridiculous in the sense that in the order of priorities it shouldnt be on the radar screen. (At this point we dont know that it is in fact a policy anywhere)

I do agree with you on the uniform being an equalizer but at what cost. I am involved in a district with many low-income scouts and them putting together even a single complete uniform is a stretch.

As for inappropriate messages on shirts, I agree there should be a standard but prohibiting all non-bsa wear isnt the best answer in my opinion.

(This message has been edited by erickelly65)

FScouter

"We" havent established anything. At this point, we dont for sure know whether this was in fact bad info from a volunteer,a unit policy, a camp policy, a council policy etc. Nor do we know if it isnt policy anywhere either.

In fact, this isnt policy for my Council, I was speaking to the initial post from Diver66. However, it wouldn't be a suprise if some of the leadership in my council pushed for such an approach.

You asked where I got the idea someone would force me to buy BSA shirts. Well if it was, in fact, a policy (Be it at the Unit, Council or National level), to keep within policy it would make sense that I would need to provide my son with a week's worth of BSA appropriate attire. We dont have enough BSA wear at home ergo I would need to buy it.(This message has been edited by erickelly65)(This message has been edited by erickelly65)

Another ridiculous policy focusing energy on the wrong issues.

Having son in his first year of Boy Scouting, I can tell you flat out he doesnt have a week's worth of BSA t-shirts and I'm not buying him that many up front at the outrageous pricing the BSA charges for their stuff. If they force me, I will make sure and deduct the cost from my next years FOS donation.(This message has been edited by erickelly65)

Another ridiculous policy focusing energy on the wrong issues.

Having son in his first year of Boy Scouting, I can tell you flat out he doesnt have a week's worth of BSA t-shirts and I'm not buying him that many up front at the outrageous pricing the BSA charges for their stuff. If they force me, I will make sure and deduct the cost from my next years FOS donation.

Another ridiculous policy focusing energy on the wrong issues.

Having son in his first year of Boy Scouting, I can tell you flat out he doesnt have a week's worth of BSA t-shirts and I'm not buying him that many up front at the outrageous pricing the BSA charges for their stuff. If they force me, I will make sure and deduct the cost from my next years FOS donation.

I think yall are mixing apples and oranges. There is a difference between having too many parents and having parents involved that don't understand or follow the "scouting method". SO the issue related to this isnt if they are involved but how.

It must be nice to have the issue of having too much parental involvement. The norm I see is unit's having troubling filling the core adult leadership positions much less a cadre of surplus parents.

As for all this nostalgia about the days "when I was a kid", Well sorry but the world just isnt the same place. At a minimum, letting kids do alot of the things my generation could do as children would get you a vist from Child Protective Services. In addition, the world is just a rougher, less civil and more dangerous place then it used to be. Growing up we could leave our back door open, you would be an idiot to even think about doing that today. The list could go on and on.

As for Family Involvement. Before reading this thread, I had never heard a cry that there is too much "Family" in American Society! BSA should be doing everything it can to support family life and to teach these boys (soon to be men and fathers) the importance of and their responsibility to family.

As for "babying" kids, I agree we should not shield them from all the hickups, bumps and bruises that occur along their developmental trail. But the suggestion that parental involvment necessarily impedes putting on the scout program (or allowing kids to grow and learn on their own) is ridiculous.

Let me turn it around: why should I trust someone else to be my childs scout leader? What would make me think someone else could better teach my son to grow into a man? What are the odds, they have a longer, deeper and more complete understanding of the Scouting program then me? What would make me think my son would held to a higher standard by someone else then by me?

It was written above that someone thought the best Scoutmasters were ones that didnt have a son in the program. I agree with that from my experiences but the Scoutmasters that come to mind are excellent Scoutmasters now because they have been doing in for 15-20+ years. The fact that their sons (who are now grown) are no longer in the program has nothing to do with it. They are excellent because of their passion, knowledge, commitment and experience.

Evidently there were a few people on Black Book's list that had passed away (Such as Sigmound Freud) or moved elsewhere.

It was a list of people to be arrested should a german invasion of the UK be executed and successfull.

I have no problem with having non-denominational services at camp as long as they are optional.

I often attend them and find them interesting but they don't meet the spiritual obligations dictated by my faith.

Your council has a form requiring the name of the course they took? That is unique

Not really...my council does the same thing as part of unit recharter each year. We are required to complete a roster of our leaders including a CV of their training. I find it somewhat annoying as it doesnt seem to ever be used and every year all you get is a "Blank" form and to start over with rather than a list of your leaders and their training as understood by Council for you to edit.