Stosh

Some things remain a constant, other things are fickle and change to suit one's agenda. I think there's a better track record for constant reliability than fickle winds of change. I seriously don't think anyone's empathy is a reliable source to put one's trust in.

I'm a bit confused here.... BSA doesn't mind an optional piece of the uniform to be worn with a non-uniform? If it's not official uniform parts why would or should they care?

Could be, but the dad as mentor/role model for their son isn't such a bad idea. It improves and strengthens the father position in the family while showing young boys how to grow up to be such community builders for their family and friends. The course of today's society pretty much negates the role of the male and females can raise both sex children without a male influence. This we see the problems with our culture deepening. Programs like this might go a long way to stem the tide and using an outdoor experience is a nice touch. Makes for a nice retreat setting for the emphasis of the program.

Welcome, sounds like you got bit by the scouting bug pretty badly. Don't worry, it's not fatal.

Regardless of it's origin, the 10 Commandments pretty much sum up the minimum requirements for civilization. The only time problems arise is when one can trace back to one of these commandments and it not being adhered to. Now those pertain to the community as a whole. The break down of the individual's morality (gluttony, lust, greed, etc.) will produce a whole bunch of problems on a lesser scale unless the mob mentality steps in and if everyone else is doing it... and then all hell breaks loose.

The path towards co-ed seems to further complicate the program as well. Of course the hypocrisy of BSA doesn't help much either. For example, in Boy Scouting a female SM and a female ASM can take boys into the woods, but an all male leadership can't take a co-ed Venturing Crew into the woods. If BSA goes coed, then the male/female adult leadershp of Venturing will now also apply to both the Cub and Boy level scouting as well. My little girl is going to go with a bunch of boys and male adults? I don't think so, not with the litigious society we live in with a boogie man (emphasis on man) predator out there lurking behind every tree. Two moms can be den leaders for the cubs of all boys, but two males will never wash as den leaders for coed dens. That's pre-pubescent, now with co-ed Boy Scouts, troops will need to recruit female leadership, too. Those situations were two guys took the two freebie adult spots at summer camp will now mean a male/female team will be the freebies. I wonder how long before the wives get wind of that setup?\ I just see G2SS growing to the point where it rivals the dictionary in terms of number of pages.

Of course a moral code can be derived separate from religion. If religious moral code, or a code derived from an outside source of supreme power, i.e. God/god, then the onus of judgement is from that source. As a community, the person adheres to the code out of respect and awareness of that supreme power as does everyone else that believes in that power. On the other hand if there is no supreme power to direct, guide, or answer to, then the individual needs only to create a moral code that best works out for them. As situations arise that require a moral choice, the non-supreme being person can alter their moral code according to what is in their best interest at the time because any direction, guiding or answering to is to oneself's own best interest. It appears that they have a moral code and they do, but they answer only to themselves.

Respect in its original Latin origin means to value enough to give it a second look. Of course over the years it has taken on other meanings which could imply just about anything nowadays.

But they believe there is no god..... so they do believe. It's just happens to be exactly the opposite of what I believe. I have no problem with that because it's their problem. As long as they don't make it my problem, I'm good with it. Actually many atheists do believe in somethings. It dates back to the time of Aristotle and other early Greek philosophers. A lot of modern atheism has it's roots there in the plurality of their teachings. By the way, the belief there is no god is also the direct opposite of the premise of Scouting's duty towards a god. This is why atheism isn't accepted. Their belief claim is there is nothing there to believe in.

YOU DON"T DRINK COFFEE???? I can see right off the bat we're not going to get a long. WELCOME, and most importantly, RELAX, this forum with all it's warts and scars is still one of the best Roundtables ever.

For me the issue is one's perspective on right and wrong. We are all aware of the fact that we all answer to our actions and how they are judged. If someone, or in the case of a theism, something else, is making the judgments of right or wrong our actions might be different than one who answers only to themselves. Sure that individual may do things in a certain way to avoid the wrath of others but is basically no concerned about any theistic involvement and if they feel they could get away with it, then it's an okay thing for them to do. A little like driving 5 over the speed limit. Self justification that everyone else is doing it makes it okay for me. But when one has a moral code that is not inherently something they made up for themselves, then there has to be an outward focus on the welfare of more than just oneself. It's not just a set of rules, but a covenant/contract with others that is necessary to link individuals together in a trusting community of individuals. The individual foregoes their individual focus for the welfare and benefit of others. They then realize that the benefit is thus returned to them in belonging to that community. Animals in nature live in either common community or as loners seeking a mate only for convenience of propagating the species. Some even mate for life at a level far better than humans. Others' survival depends on the herd or pack or flock for the survival of all. Yet as humans we have the ability to discern the differences and the causes of such dynamics. Is it something man makes up for himself or is there something there that man understands and realizes that if left to his own recourse the human species would have no more value than any other animal on the planet? One's belief system dictates their action. I didn't say religion, I didn't say faith, I said belief system. Some believe in a greater power, others believe there is no greater power. But their belief system dictates their actions. Those that answer to a belief in a greater power act and react different than those that answer only to themselves or those whom they select to answer to. So Scouting has a value system based on a higher power that promotes development of community rather than individualism. Scouting taps into that dynamic calling it such things as the Brotherhood of Scouting, grouping up as various units, promoting certain values for the betterment of others, and this can be expressed in many different forms, but one must realize that the Lone Scout is an exception, not the rule in the organization. Even so, although physically separated, they are still part of the Brotherhood and are held to the same standard as the others. So the choice is up to each Scout as to how they view the awareness of this connection. Is it just the rules of Scouting, i.e. the Scout Law? or is there more? What then is that "more"? I guess it just depends on what one's belief system is.

I have a neighbor Alice Kravitz that would like to know as well.

I don't spend all my time on the internet forum. Just 2 hours ago I was up in my back 40 cutting brush putting in a campsite for the Mrs. and Me. I have 9 acres. 8 of them woodland hunting ground on a south facing slope. Great deer hunting and when I camp in my "backyard" it is far more primitive than any KOA, State Park or backpack back country. That's where I go to get away from life and let the tensions out.... and that includes the internet too. My router doesn't reach that far thankfully.

So just have each boy bring their own water bottle filled and when the boys show up just do what you can. If it doesn't get done for lack of help, so be it. Webelos is the stepping stone for moving into boy-led Boy Scouts. Turn to them for the help you need, they are at that age where it can start. Just make sure everyone is having fun and don't worry about the slacker parents. If things aren't getting done up to the level they want to see, then they can step up or take what's offered. The next meeting starts out with: "Well, boys, it would seem that the parents are all busy, so we're going to have to do our best with what we have. In Boy Scouts, they do all the stuff for the meetings, let's just start out slowly and play a game. Who wants to help set it up?" If you can't get the boys to volunteer, you've got a pretty hefty up-hill battle to fight. Trust your boys, they will surprise you.

From the wording of the alternative promise, it sounds like this gentleman would like to open up the religious definition to including the Pantheism of Scouting as an acceptable religion. One must always be careful what string one is pulling lest they tip another issue into the picture. On my honour, I promise that I will do my best To uphold our Scout values, to do my duty to the Queen, To help other people And to keep the Scout Law. This would be all well and good, but as we find on this forum the definition of upholding Scout values does indeed run contrary for some to their religious beliefs. Then what does one do? I really don't believe "our Scout values" is a worthwhile alternative to one's religious beliefs. As a theist, I wouldn't accept this oath because it excludes religion from the oath. For me upholding our Scout values and keeping the Scout Law are the same thing.

I can see a scheduled SMC with the parent as a good thing for first year scouts. I find that parents who are concerned about issues their son may have are also involved in the troop in other ways so that regular contact with the SM, SPL and PL occur on an ongoing basis. If an uninvolved parent called me out of the blue with such a request, red flags would fly.

I'm trying to figure out what you mean by "Switch Hats?" I only have a single position, Committee Chair. Yes, I s'pose it's for both Troop and Crew, but it is one position. Please explain. I've been in this position for many years and it's quite simple. When one is wearing the Scout hat all issues related to Boy Scouts apply and how one interacts with the scouts revolve around that program. There is the boy-led thing that needs to be honored and addressed constantly and then there's the patrol-method with clear distinctions as to the different patrols and their individual and independent relationships. The decisions made by the committee must be focused appropriately at this time along these lines and what is in the best interest of those boys registered either singular or dual with the troop and crew. Now one needs to take off the Scout hat and put on the Crew hat. The structure is far different. There is the president and his/her officers and they do not use the patrol-method although they are youth run. Their focus is singularly on high adventure and activities with a few maybe looking for Venturing awards, but nothing like the advancement structure of Boy Scouts. Their activities are tend to be more expensive and more challenging than what the troop members as a whole can handle and thus must not dumb themselves down to a young scout level so they can participate as if it was a troop activity. Seriously the two different roles expected of the CC and Committee members is farther apart than what most assume. I NEVER wore a Venturing uniform at a Venture Crew activity but I ALWAYS wear a Boy Scout uniform at a Troop activity. Those are my cues to switch hats for the program I'm supposed to be involved with. Because of this clear cut distinction the work I did for either program did not overlapped in any way with the work I did for the other. Your set up does not have that distinction and thus opens itself up to naturally occurring conflict that will result in the confusion of who's wearing what hat at what time? I have always gone with the Venture Patrol emphasis where I could remain within the Boy Scout program and still do many of the same things that a Venturing Crew would do but the Patrol-Method would apply and the activities would fall under the guidance of the SM and not a CA. Yes, the women would not be involved, but the boys would continue with their advancement and high adventure would be their secondary priority. In a crew High Adventure and awards would have those priorities reversed.

That's the nice thing about being up Nort', cool evening around the fire are the most precious times to unwind there is. If you fall asleep at the fire, someone tosses a blanket over you and leaves you there.

Just depends on how much you love it. Been at it for 35+ years and haven't burned out yet.

My favorite is, "Do do what you do do best." I'm sure the moderators will be all over that one because we all do do know what do do is.

Welcome to the wonderful world of toop-crew merged politics. This way when feelings get hurt two units get disrupted. The crew has problems???? Who from the troop wants to join that program run by the same people? The troop has problems???? Eventually it will have an impact on the crew. Don't feel bad, this happens all the time and people never really seem to catch on that two programs run by the same people are going to have the same problems in both. All this drama, paper work and politics just so the venture patrol can have gals involved. Cut the bond between the two and let each group independently work on their own separate problems and programs.

Welcome to the forum. I'm not a Cub leader so I don't need to keep up with the new program, but there are plenty of knowledgeable others on the forum that can answer your questions.

Now that I can understand.... It's a great opportunity for the boys!

Let's assume the BSA program is FOR THE BOYS. Let's further assume that the program is designed for the character and moral development of young men. Add to that the assumption the best run programs are boy-led, patrol-method in nature. Then as the last piece of the puzzle, the advancement program of the BSA is to help the boy develop and achieve personal success in his efforts. How then can a SM justify a clandestine meeting behind the scenes between the him/her and the boy's parent? Shouldn't this type of meeting at least involve the boy in question? Maybe add to that meeting the PL of the boy and maybe the SPL if necessary? What's going to be be discussed? Hearsay conversations with no way of confirmation? What possibly can be decided without the principle players involved? Surely any adult wouldn't want to have the CC and parents talking about them in an off-the-record conversation set up behind the scenes. I would think the same respect due an adult should be extended to the youth as well. Lead by example.