fleetfootedfox

NeilLup, Shawnee Lodge doesn't limit the number of boys that can be elected by a troop, but you could be right about certain rules being left over from way back when. The history of the lodge goes back to about 1930.

Well said, belayer. Tormorrow I finish my Ordeal with my son and some other boys from his original cub scout den. I'll post somewhere on here about it afterwards.

ursus, you make a lot of good points, and I have found this to be a very stimulating conversation. Thanks for your input. I hope the adult leader you are talking about wasn't really going to attack a boy. If so, that's sad, but it's also a separate issue. In fact, you've brought up several side issues that I'm sure would warrant their own thread. Anyway, you said: "If we go around creating whatever rules we want to put in place only because it doesnt say anywhere that were not allowed to, there's a never ending open door to do what we want." Your statement seems to assum

Who decides these rules anyway?

I know of two lodges that have provision for a SM to be able to veto a candidate after the election "by refusing to sign the candidate's citation". They are Shawnee Lodge #51 and Anpetu-We Lodge, both in Greater St. Louis Area Council. Are there other lodges out there that have this rule?

This veto issue is way off topic from the original post, so I'm going to start a new thread. Thanks.

shortridge, You are quite right in pointing out that this is an issue of authority. However, just because there is no national rule saying you can do something doesn't mean you can't do it. For what it's worth, I don't care much for the veto idea and would hope it's something that's not abused. The same lodge also requires units to do their elections in a council camp at least every other year.

Maybe you should talk to him and his parents to make sure that there aren't other issues going on. For example, if your camp-outs are perceived as boring, they won't be worth the trouble of tent camping to the boy. If he has enough fun, he might be willing to put up with the aspects he doesn't like. So, like in wood badge, ask the boy "what do you want?" Or in this case, maybe "what would make you want to go camping?" Or maybe he has some personal issue. Bed wetting for example? Without invading the boy's privacy, maybe you should ask the parents if there's something that

Maybe you should talk to him and his parents to make sure that there aren't other issues going on. For example, if your camp-outs are perceived as boring, they won't be worth the trouble of tent camping to the boy. If he has enough fun, he might be willing to put up with the aspects he doesn't like. So, like in wood badge, ask the boy "what do you want?" Or in this case, maybe "what would make you want to go camping?" Or maybe he has some personal issue. Bed wetting for example? Without invading the boy's privacy, maybe you should ask the parents if there's something that

ursus - It is my understanding that national's rules are often really more guidelines, but for now if I assume you're right, how would I prove that to somebody else? What document, what specific quote could I use to make the point convincingly? Thanks.

Our lodge's bylaws state... "The unit leader may veto the election of any candidate after the election by refusing to sign the candidate's citation. However, if one candidate is vetoed, another may not be substituted in his place. The name will be dropped and the unit will have one candidate less than the number which were elected." "It is suggested that the unit leader should consult with the other adult leaders who are present at the election before exercising his veto. However, this is the option of the unit leader."

What if you substituted the word "OA" with "Scouting" and your son had said "If that's who goes into Scouting, I don't EVER want to be in Scouting!"? Hmm. Takes on a different light now. There are boys who think that way. In fact, I don't know your son, but is it possible there might be boys who would say that about him? How would that make you feel? But then you're saying you expect the OA to be something special and somehow inaccessible to people you think are undeserving. A lot of people think that, which is why some would like to go back to limiting membership more. Is that wha

I'm getting in on this discussion a bit late. Looks like it was actually started years ago. However, nobody has given the answers I would have expected to the original question. People have pointed out that there aren't rules on this, but I know in my lodge there are. Our lodge bylaws say the following about adult "elections": "Adult Scouter Election: Every registered unit adult Scouter present at the election may vote. Scouts may not vote on Scouter candidates." "Adult Scouters must be elected at a committee meeting prior to camp." I am also surprised that a SM would decide that

I am not a big fan of going much beyond the rules that have been set out by the BSA. I think some simple bylaws can be useful if people will actually follow them, but the worst any organization can do to somebody for ignoring their bylaws is to kick them out. Fortunately, bylaws can always be ammended, and the SM does not have some kind of veto power unless your troop has given him that power in the bylaws.

As somebody pointed out, if you are the committee chairman, it's your meeting. So, it's up to you whether or not there's an agenda, how votes will be taken, etc., unless such things are stipulated in your bylaws. The more formal meetings that you had past experience with probably followed some form of parliamentary procedure, the customary body of rules that govern how "deliberative bodies" conduct business in an orderly fashion. When you are in such a meeting, decisions are generally not made without a motion being made, seconded, discussed, and voted upon. Parliamentary procedure is

Okay. Maybe part of me did want to hear some advice, but I don't want to be psycho-analyzed. I also said "I don't expect any easy solutions, but misery loves company." I was pretty stressed that day and probably did not express myself well. Sorry for the confusion. As often happens, a lot of people read between the lines and offered advice that does not apply. Regardless, I really do appreciate everybody's thoughts on the topic.

I appreciate all the free advice, but I wasn't really asking for that. I wanted to know if other people have similar situations, and at least one person said he did. I certainly think any mention of divorce in this conversation is a bit extreme. I have known scouters who ended up in divorce, but I'm sure the scouting was not the main reason. Just to clarify, I am not in scouting for myself, although I think that as long as I'm spending the next many years doing it, I might as well enjoy it. After my boys are gone on to college, I may continue being involved in some way, or maybe not.

Thanks for all the comments. I especially like the list of famous scouts. Unfortunately, our pack has had some dads who were scouts themselves but still are not all that supportive of the program. One dad who was an Eagle Scout says he only stuck with it because his parents wanted him to. He goes on the camp-outs but lets his wife do everything else. Then there is another dad whose boy recently quit to spend more time on sports. I can respect that decision, but I think it's funny that after that I found out his dad was also an eagle scout, although neither of his parents ev

I was reading another topic that talked about the perceptions of the uniforms being geeky etc., and thought I'd start another related topic, because my problem is not so much the kids. My problem is that my wife and other adults think the uniforms (and patches, etc.) are geeky and so are a lot of the leaders. In fact, there is a perception among some of these parents that the "smarter and more athletic boys quit Scouting around 5th grade". This is a direct quote from an elementary school teacher whose son dropped out after Cub Scouts. My wife thinks that I'm reliving my childhood,

Somebody wanted to know about injury rates. According to this scientific study, soccer, volleyball and gymnastics were worse than the martial arts when it comes to injury rates. Unique Identifier 93060965 Authors Tenvergert EM. Ten Duis HJ. Klasen HJ. Institution Department of Traumatology, University Hospital of Groningen, The Netherlands. Title Trends in sports injuries, 1982-1988: an in-depth study on four types of sport. Source Journal of Sports Medicine & Physical Fitness. 32(2):214-20, 1992 Jun. Abbreviated Source J Sports Med Phys Fi

What is interesting to me is that according to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission Estimates for Sports Injuries 1998, the number of injuries from martial arts (23,018) was roughly the same as the number of injuries from bowling (23,130). (It really smarts when you drop that ball on your foot.) And I kid you not, bleachers (falling off of them?) caused almost as many injuries (19,161) as martial arts. Horseback riding (64,692) and dancing (38,427) caused more injuries than martial arts. (Now, you can't tell me there are more people doing horseback riding than martial arts.)