jmcquillan

If memory serves me correctly, in the time when the words "under God" were added to the Pledge, this country was not far removed from victory in war, and our President was Eisenhower. The addition of the words was originated by the Knights of Columbus, I believe, but the follow-up was by the leadership, Executive and Legislative, of a nation very thankful for having succeeded in their efforts during the war. Remember that during that time, the predominant religions of the country were Christian or Jewish, and the words were added, I think, in as generic fashion as was understood in that day, a

Rooster7 said: "I don't think it would be appropriate if the Scoutmaster lectured the Scouts and their families as to the significance of those differences." Good point, and one that I always tried to keep right up front in my mind, for I knew no more than the rest of the crowd about the differences, and was always learning myself. I never pretended to minister to the troop. That was, as still is, beyond me.

In Scouting we already have a method by which we, as Scout Leaders, should be teaching manners. It's known as "setting the example". That should be sufficient.

If asked to lead a prayer... I usually found a way around it, for in my troop, the circumstances that NJCubScouter eluded to were real. We had Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, and two Chinese families (I admit to never really knowing what faith they held). I was never comfortable with a generic format with such a variety. My appreciation for the depth of belief and the differences between us all lead me to using that variety as a learning experience and tool for all in the troop. If asked to plan for a prayer at whatever troop function we had, I would always seek out members of each

At the very least, have him clean up his own mess...i.e. consequences for ones actions. I might side with sctmom but for the thought that "punishment" might over-ride lesson learning by some degree. Knowing the boy and the circumstances would attend to that issue, though. Did he know right from wrong? Was this a prank? Was this done with malice? I assume he doesn't do this at home....

From memory here, I don't have my book at the office... The SM is charged with performing that task, and no other, unless specifically charged by the SM due to extenuating circumstances (like illness and immediacy of need). That's why they call it the SM conference. Although I will say that in my time, I did have need to ask an ASM to fill in for me when circumstances prevented my attendance. But in each of those cases, the ASM asked had formerly been SM of the troop, and our philosophies were pretty much identical, so I felt quite at ease asking him. Again, just from memory...

Bingo, OGE. You hit the nail squarely on the head. Controlling a troops growth can very much depend on whether your troop is the "only game in town". A troop really doesn't want that if there's a large pool of potential Scouts. We faced that years ago in our troop. There were, and still are, two troops in town. Ours was growing leaps and bounds. From what we heard from the in-coming parent corps, our troop had the structure and program that parents were hoping their kids would pick. Obviously, they did. Our numbers climbed while the other troop in town stayed stagnant for a while, and then sta

I came home from my second tour in Vietnam with a few missing parts, and 2 Purple Hearts. That effort and sacrifice might have meant more, and might have been more tolerable, had the Commander in Chief had the slightest bit of sincerity in his concern for the troops he sent forth. eisely, you probably understand more than some. A deep sense of sincerity towards ones position and responsibilities shows forth without effort. And that's one thing that I like about GWB. There's no show there. It's real, and it's deep. He may be far more of a religious man than some who have occupied that office, a

One of the visible trademarks of Scouting has always been that of self-sufficiency in the boy. The ability to survive in the wild using the skills he learned in Scouting. Although the ax and hatchet are only small tools that do only one job, it's kind of sad to see them being left on the wayside as not necessary any more. With all due respect to the leave no trace and environmental movements, I still like to see the boys learning the old ways, how to do things with their hands, without electricity, without buttons to push, without the things we take for granted as necessities today. Having to

Woods tools all have their place, and as long as their use is taught, observed, and checked correctly and frequently, there should be no reason to eliminate any. Eliminating one is doing ourselves no favors. Teach it right and make sure it's being used correctly is the better way. With regard to fears that the blade may come in contact with the fingers of the other hand, I'd say that's a sign that they're not being used right. The fingers of the other hand should be nowhere near the point where the blade impacts the wood. And, unfortunately, there are no devices of protection for the

CubsRgr8

That is incorrect information. See section I of the Guide to Safe Scouting under "Youth Protection and the Adult Leadership" Again...I stand corrected. Hey, give the guy the patch, and the credit due for a job well done, if, indeed, he's done the job well.

If this fellow is serving as a Cubmaster, he's registered with his "primary" position being Cubmaster, not his "only" position. He should have dual-registration showing that he serves as the Tiger Den Leader, too. If he was registered as a Tiger Den Leader first, then he's probably dual registered. If so, that record should show his time in position. Use that argument, along with the other eloquent arguments you've stated here, and write a letter to, or call, the chairman of the "Council" Training Committee. Your District Chair sits on that committee, as do the other district chairs, and hopef

"I guess the people of Boston (or at least some of them) are liberal in this respect." One must remember that the Greater Boston area is, indeed, a bastion of liberalism, and more Democrat than Republican in a big way...but we have a Republican Governor...go figure. If a conservative point of view or policy is to be taken to task, it will happen here...for better or worse.

I always encouraged the PLC to set election guidelines that did not permit on Scout to serve consecutive terms. They've gone along with that, because they all would like a shot at the position themselves someday. They do, however, allow for a Scout to be re-elected to a second term after he's sat out for one term.