jrush

Personally, I expect the end of DADT in the military will spell the end of the BSA's policy on homosexuals. I think it's going to become more difficult for the BSA to bar homosexuals on moral grounds when openly practicing gays have the moral courage to put the nation ahead of their own lives. But, we'll see.

le V, have you gotten into granddaddy's "medicine" again?

Reagan was nothing more or less than a "big business" Republican who expanded the tent to make room for hawkish southern democrats and the religious right. He is revered for his ability to bring together a large constituency and shellack his Demmo opponent, for his ability to sign tax multiple hikes and a gun ban into law and still maintain the image of a "pro-rights" conservative.

His admin was no more scandalous than either Bush or Clinton or Obama's by the time his servie is over.

By the way, unless you can cite something, educated people dismiss your argument out of hand when you whip out the word "treason". It is defined by the US Constitution, not by le Voyageur or some talking head on TV.

I don't get the ire, either.

If you don't want yourself or your family frisked, don't fly commercial. Period. Take the bus. Or the train. Or drive. Or walk. Bike. Horseback. Job requires you to fly? Get a new job. Heck, get your pilot license and fly yourself. But noooo, people are too lazy for any option except the most convenient, and then they are sorry enough to complain about the manner in which that option is provided.

I'd just as soon hear someone on welfare complain about the size of their plasma TV.

You aren't going to stir up any trouble.

The BSA doesn't ban sheath knives. They simply advise scouters to avoid large sheath knives due to their impracticality.

Some councils (mostly you'll see this at the council-run camp) ban sheath knives to some extent, typically allowing fillet/fish knives.

In the councils that don't ban them, some troops will as a matter of policy.

As far as politicking for sheath knives in a troop which discourages or bans them (for whatever reason) you are facing an uphill battle, for one primary reason:

There is no camp chore in the scout handbook, fieldbook, requirements book, etc which requires the use of a fixed blade sheath knife. You can clean and cook fish without one. You can hunt and clean game without one. Yes, a 4" drop point fixed blade has it's advantages, but there have been many a deer cleaned with a Buck Folding Hunter.

Bottom line, you don't need them, and some councils/troops don't see the point of letting boys tote them around, given the disadvantages they possess (and they do have some disadvantages over folders).

OP, I recommend you get someone to sharpen the cooking knives in the chuck box and take a look at what kind of knife handling skills you're teaching, because while there are reasons to allow fixed blade sheath knives, your failures in those two areas aren't among them.

Well, an option is to have "field uniform" and "dress uniform" shirts. Field uniform shirt with minimum patches (let's face it, patches and sewing are the majority of the shirt cost by the time it's said and done). If it requires going near a pine tree, the field shirt goes. Meetings, COA, fundraisers, etc get the nice shirt.

For whatever reason, the boy is being hazed, which the Camp Director should have zero tolerance for.

The days of the junior CITs being given brown ball caps with "Staff Helper In Training" written on the front are (or at least should be) over.

NJCubscouter and quazse, that's why I said "IIRC"...I could be completely wrong...I should've said "IMO". My bad.

Given the BSA's description of the position, JASMs are for all intents and purposes 16 year old ASMs. IMO, if they're going to function as ASMs, they should act like ASMs. So, while they aren't required to take YPT, they *should* start to be cognizant of such requirements...because they are acting as ASMs. They are a different critter than a 16 year old Troop Guide. In a nutshell, they are part of the adult leadership group, not the youth leadership group (as the TG is). I don't think you're going to find a "rule" or "guideline" that JASMs aren't in Patrols, it's just that many troops don't because the whole point behind the Patrol Method is for the patrol to function under it's elected leader...including those "learning the hard way" moments and the PL actually being in charge of everyone in his patrol...which is affected when you have someone sitting in the patrol who doesn't typically answer to the PL. If they're acting as a working member of the patrol under the PL why would they be a JASM? A JASM could be assigned to an individual patrol as a guide/mentor to the PL (just like a TG), but if they're functioning as a TG why wouldn't they be wearing a TG POR patch? While there's no "rule" against a JASM being in a patrol, I just don't see what the purpose is. Bottom line, I mistakenly assumed some "shoulds" and "requires" into the position of JASM because of the difference in the JASM and Troop Guide positions.

Eagledad, the troop doesn't have to have a JASM. It's an optional POR. A troop could have multiple ASPLs, TGs, Instructors and Den Chiefs, so there's no shortage of things for those Eagle Scouts to do if they want a POR.

Yes, it's 16.

Troops often add an additional requirement that the young man be an Eagle, but that's not a BSA requirement.

IIRC the BSA also requires that the JASM follow all BSA policies regarding driving, 2-deep leadership, sleeping quarters, etc.

"By and large I like to lurk until someone says something arguably untrue about God or the Bible."

You know, it always reassures me when we have a self-appointed inquisitor who knows what is and is not true about God (at least, the Christian version of God) and the Bible, and can swoop in to intercept any untruths. What a relief.

I would counter that while the JASM has certain priviledges, he also has a new set of responsibilities. Arguably, he shouldn't be in a patrol watching or helping them make their menu for the upcoming campout, he should be with adults approving that menu. He should be able to perform any of the duties of an ASM except where age and maturity are legally and ethically required.

Flags are typically shipped folded into a square (to fit the square box) and there's certainly nothing wrong with storing them that way, either.

Lord only knows how I managed to participate in mutiple 50 milers and a trip to Philmont without mommy being able to contact me at a moment's notice, 24/7. And we wonder what's wrong with Scouting...

Yes, a cell phone can be useful (as neil just stated), but so can fixed blade knives, liquid fuel stoves, or any of the other things Troops restrict the use of, because they aren't necessary, and their usefullness is outweighed by the issues they cause.

If it bothers you that much, find another troop. The BSA doesn't exactly make it difficult to transfer.(This message has been edited by jrush)

BDPT, the problem with that is that they HAVE earned the right to "just be a Scout". True, they should continue to serve in positions of responsibility (elected or appointed) if they wish to, but they shouldn't be pressured (or worse yet, forced) to.

"just being a Scout" is exactly that...coming to meetings, participating in outdoor activities. There's nothing wrong with an Eagle who wants to stay in his patrol and help a younger PL be a success simply by setting the example of being a good follower. I didn't say "hang the uniform up and move on with life".

jblake, keep in mind my opinion (and that's all it is) is coming from military leadership training, but there isn't a thin line between leadership and responsibility. It's like noting the difference between leadership and management. The closer comparison is responsibility = management, because the PORs have a common thread of requiring good management skills. There's a reason only 4 POR patches actually have the word "leader".

Again, that's why there is virtually no leadership requirement. Even the Eagle project, what says "give leadership to others"; the potential Eagle doesn't even have to be leading other Scouts, and he doesn't have to be THE leader, but rather, "give leadership to".

Back to the OP...should an Eagle be able to be a SPL? Honestly? I would say no. There's nothing in his trail to Eagle that prepares him to lead the troop. He doesn't need to be a APL, PL or ASPL. He doesn't need to lead his fellow Scouts to complete his Eagle Project.

Personally, I think that's a recognition that not everybody is a leader. Leadership isn't all taught or learned...in many ways it is innate. You can improve it, but no amount of instruction, mentorship or experience can "make" a leader.

Troop336eagle, my suggestion is that the troop should elect their SPL as they see fit. If they want one of these 15 year old Eagles to be the SPL and he wants to be the SPL, great. If not, also great. The other 15 year old Eagles, gather them up and ask them what they want to do. Maybe they want to be Troop Guides or Instructors or Den Chiefs. If so, the SM can make those appointments. If not, and they just want to hang out, camp, do OA events or high adventure activities, that's fine as well. I wouldn't call your troop's situation an "issue". They also aren't "denying" anything to a younger Scout if they are SPL...as has been said, SPL isn't a requirement, and many of the PORs can be appointed.

Remember, a POR isn't even a requirement for Star and Life. We always seem to forget that...the requirement is "serve actively x months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility (or carry out a Scoutmaster-assigned leadership project to help the troop)" The SM can assign a leadership project to that Scout who can't seem to get elected to anything. By the time a Scout is a Life, there's no reason the SM couldn't appoint him to an appropriate POR.

Anyhow, just coral up your wad of Eagles and ask them what they want to do. Appoint them to appropriate PORs, let them run for elected position, or let them "just be Scouts".

jblake, to answer your question about PORs being required, IMO part of being an Eagle Scout isn't leadership, but responsibility. Hence, why a scout could conceivably become Eagle and never be a "leader" such as a PL, SPL, Troop Guide, Den Chief, etc...he can be a scribe, librarian, trainer or quartermaster and fulfill the requirement just as well. Hence, why the requirement is "position of responsibility", not "position of leadership".

The PORs are there for a Scout to learn the importance of responsibility to the organization. That's also why the requirement says "serve actively", not just "get elected/appointed to".

Anywhow, just my opinion.

Eagledad, when I say "encouraged", I mean troop leadership doing anything from holding elections to going to OA events with the boys. I don't mean "beating the war drums" about OA at every opportunity. I say that because some troops don't even hold OA elections...I would call that "discouragement", even if the leadership isn't actively bad-mouthing the OA.

My point was that everything an adult leader does, even ambivalence, makes an impression.

With multiple Lodge Chiefs from your troop, I'd say you're encouraging OA participation, even if you don't think you are...congrats to your program.

bigbovine, you brought up OA, but there's a reason you're missing regarding lack of interest.

The OA is the BSA's camping honor society. In a nutshell, while the OA is the "botherhood of cheerful service", and the lodge will do service activities and events, it is about additional opportunities for the boys to camp with their friends. The OA is also where the boys can camp without half a dozen moms in their campsite.

Also, the Troop not encouraging it *does* discourage it. How many troops have you seen that don't encourage camping or earning Eagle? Yes, a Troop is "youth run", but youth take a lot of cues from their adult leadership.

The OA also has some internal issues that (IMO) have been making it steadily less appealing to the boys, but that's another discussion.

northerntier sells the Bemiji version (IMO better construction, slash hand pockets, made in America) for $115.

BadenP, I didn't miss the point; I floated a theory as to why national would create a Venture shirt that doesn't have a pocket designed for the OA flap.

It would kinda make sense since a Crew can't hold OA elections.

Well, it's glued-together thread.

You can remove the flag with a steam iron and sew on a flag, but just so you know, the US flag patches in the scout shop are made in China, too.

I salvaged a flag off an old uniform and sewed it on...just to have at least one thing on my shirt that was made in America.

Merlyn, I agree with much of what you said, that the BSA has painted itself into a corner by using proper-noun "God" in the Oath and Law, and then turning around and accepting faiths which are outright nontheistic, and certainly don't center around worship of God, with their statement that they are "absolutely nonsecular" regarding religeous requirements. For that matter, it's not even a requirement...as has been said, the Oath says "do my best", not "you will". It's not Yoda and the force. That's why I said we don't get to unilaterally label someone an atheist and boot them out until they essentially self-identify. A young man might not have faith, but is trying to. It's not "do the District Advancement Chair's best", it's "do MY best".

You also missed my clarification of what I consider an aethist, but that's okay. One can't be expected to read everything. It's just a few posts up from this one. That being said, I didn't say my definition was any more valid than anyone else's...I said it allowed me to accept nontheistic faiths. If someone wants to say "if you don't believe in God you're an atheist, because that's what the dictionary says", that's fine, but good luck kicking a practicing buddhist out of the program.

My point wasn't to get fixated on the term "atheist"...I'm certainly not fixated on it personally. I got wrapped around it because the BSA does use the word on their BSA Legal site, leading to 10 pages of "the boy said there is no God...he's an atheist!" It was merely an attempt to show some people they don't have to equate God with faith when it comes to the BSA.

Of course the prices didn't go down, because the "profit" is one of national's funding streams. I'm surprised they didn't go up.

That being said, it doesn't make any sense for the BSA to accept a poor-quality uniform from the manufacturer, because they have a lifetime guarantee against defect. Come on, BSA, the things are made in China or Bangladesh or somewhere else where some embroidery, buttonholes and double stitching only adds a buck or two.

That being said, by the time you embroider the letters on, sew the flag on, overstitch the stress points and buttons, cut off the velcro and get buttonholes done, you have invested considerable time and money into the shirt and pants to make them what they should've been to start with.

Calico, you should hear what troops say when they see a 42nd Infantry Division patch, and we're talking about adults.

Packsaddle, I should've been more specific, and said "nothing beyond yourself of a spritual or philosophical nature exists"...I made the assumption that since the discussion was in regards to faith, I wouldn't have to be specific. Oops.