moosetracker

Well, I attended that "Trail Life USA Town Meeting" last night. Attendance was sparse, mostly district people who plan to be involved in both organizations, plus a guy from the Royal Rangers willing to lend a hand to the new organization.

 

I was able to briefly examine a Trail Life handbook. At first glance the Scoutcraft seemed even thinner than that of the BSA. The "Leadership and Character" (anti-Scoutcraft) aspects were even more pronounced, which should not be a surprise since it is an organization of BSA expatriates.

 

My BSA Troop's former Chartered Organization Representative is the chief Trail Life commissioner in this area. I agreed to serve on his committee as an outdoor skills trainer if he can shepherd my application through the process.

 

It turns out that one factor limiting involvement on district levels, is that a volunteer application must include a letter of reference from your pastor, so those who agree with Trail Life principles, but are not members of a church are excluded from membership.

Yeah, they'll take the young'uns any flavor, they can be molded.. But you have to be the "right kind" of Christian to be an adult leader.. Catholics and protestants are ok (but I don't know if all Protestants as some are very liberal).. LDS is not the "right kind" of Christian.. Then anyone who is not Christian, or a stay at home Christian is not allowed either..

 

SSScout - don't know if it is a change from when you were an Eagle and today, but now you need someone to attest that you have a belief of some kind.. Doesn't need to be your priest.. Could be a parent or someone else in the community.

I'm giving up writing comments. My last two I posted under the right section and they were thrown into the thread but under the wrong post and not where I placed the comment..

 

So In answer to Sentinel947 23.15.. ~~Did the council support it, or did they do sermons telling their followers to go out and rally and picket and protest about it as a massive group?.. One is fine, one is not, regardless of if it supports my ideas or not..

They definitely went beyond preaching about sin.. They were stating who to vote for.. You had a lot of Catholics ALOT, walking away from that sermon with smoke blowing out of their ears.. Even my brother-in-law, who is basically Republican and all for Mitt Romney replacing Obama was livid with the speech they were forced to listen to during that funeral.. It was probably close to what his beliefs were, but had absolutely no place being spoken in a church.. They were not at a political pep rally.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I don't know exactly what was in the letter, and what was the "lead in...." and "....in summery" that were in the priests own words to fill out the letter in the Priests own words.. Was the letter simply filled with carefully molded innuendos, and the priest made it more or less toxic???.. That I don't know.. The one my husband, brother-in-law went to was inappropriate.. The one that hit the papers where (I think it was a arch-bishop) likened Obama to Hitler & Stalin hit the paper, and when people demanded an apology from him, he doubled down and the Catholic offices backed him up.. The ones where the priest basically read the letter, then talked about why the Catholic Church was wrong in having this read, and the pros & cons of both parties, and why the church should not wade into politics also hit the paper.. Fun week...

 

It rose to people trying to get the IRS's attention to have the Catholic church loose it's tax exemption, because there is something in the laws that churches using their pulpit for swaying elections was a reason for them to remove it.. The IRS kind of plugged their ears and looked the other way, they did not want to open that kettle of fish..

 

Then about a month later there was supposed to be some Sunday where all churches, Catholic Evangelical and whoever else waded into politics in a way they should not, were going to challenge the IRS law, (Don't know why, if they wanted to go to court on the issue or felt embolden and wanted to prove they could do what they want, and the IRS would do nothing)..Anyway on this particular Sunday all these churches were going to give sermon on who to vote for and why.. (All were Republican leaning).. The lead up to this day was big, then I waited to hear the aftermath, and what happened, and who stepped way over the line.. And.... Nothing.... I don't know if it took place, or all the churches chickened out or what..

 

But, all of that... ALL OF THAT... Is why I fear organized religion.. For me religion in America got very scary..

I'm giving up writing comments. My last two I posted under the right section and they were thrown into the thread but under the wrong post and not where I placed the comment..

 

So In answer to Sentinel947 23.15.. ~~Did the council support it, or did they do sermons telling their followers to go out and rally and picket and protest about it as a massive group?.. One is fine, one is not, regardless of if it supports my ideas or not..

They definitely went beyond preaching about sin.. They were stating who to vote for.. You had a lot of Catholics ALOT, walking away from that sermon with smoke blowing out of their ears.. Even my brother-in-law, who is basically Republican and all for Mitt Romney replacing Obama was livid with the speech they were forced to listen to during that funeral.. It was probably close to what his beliefs were, but had absolutely no place being spoken in a church.. They were not at a political pep rally.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

My understanding is our Council hasn't lost any units. The most conservative/fundamentalist Church in our area has a long time very active Troop, they still don't have any women leaders, but they are sticking around. I lost one scout, which is odd because we're a Catholic unit and the new policy is pretty much the same policy our schools have. I never had to confront the issue, but I think the previous policy was as much a violation of our rules as it was consistent with them.

 

I wonder how well the level of political activism in the Church correlates with the likelihood that they are leaving.

Well uprising may be strong, but he definitely mixed religion with politics and tried to force Catholics to all organize and protest and vote a certain way.. Dictating that all the priest read a certain political speech at all their services for a week, regardless of if the priest believed it or not.. My husband got his political speech dosed out at a Catholic funeral of all places!!.. I guess some priests who got into the speech too much expounded on it likening Obama to Hitlar or Stalin.. Other brave priest, noted what they were required to read, and then gave a sermon on why it was wrong to give a sermon on such crap..

 

For me Pope Benedict was a scary dude.. He said that God spoke to him and told him to step aside.. If so.. Thank you God..

 

Converting your religious members into a political army is wrong and dangerous.. Thankfully it all ended when they discovered the Republicans agenda against the poor.. It calmed down to both parties have pluses and minuses so make your own decision.

 

Then Pope Benedict left and this new pope is a breath of fresh air, even for us non-Catholics.. Especially those of us who fear religious leaders using their pulpit to create political armies in the name of God.

 

We still have the Conservative Protestants engaging in politicizing their religion though, so I still worry about them.. But my worries about Catholics have calmed down.

My understanding is our Council hasn't lost any units. The most conservative/fundamentalist Church in our area has a long time very active Troop, they still don't have any women leaders, but they are sticking around. I lost one scout, which is odd because we're a Catholic unit and the new policy is pretty much the same policy our schools have. I never had to confront the issue, but I think the previous policy was as much a violation of our rules as it was consistent with them.

 

I wonder how well the level of political activism in the Church correlates with the likelihood that they are leaving.

Exactly Sentinal.. I am not criticizing the parent for choosing not to associate with gays, just for stating it is because it is against his religious belief to do so.. Many people on these boards and in the news also keep siting Catholics as being one of the religions who was going to drop units if BSA accepted in homosexuals.. Yet the Catholic policy does not state that at all..

 

I don't think liberals are thinking the new Pope's words mean he is for same-sex marriage, but perhaps he will not promote uprisings and protests against it when it has nothing to do with his church or flock, and be content with the fact the Catholic church need not perform or bless same-sex marriages. But, more so, the Pope before him was trying to rile Catholics into political action against homosexuals not only in marriages, but also I do believe he may have split with the BSA over it.. The old Pope unlike this Pope did pull out and over emphasis some sins as being greater then others, and his views were definitely alienating liberal Catholics.. The new Pope's views heal and unify, the old Pope divided.. Everyone says the new Pope is not going against Catholic doctrine, but his interpretation is much more pleasant.

 

Sentinel - I am not Catholic.. Really I no longer associate with any organized religion, I moved away from organized religion due to 9/11, when I saw how they could brainwash and control people.. But, I was born and raised as a liberal protestant, in fact my father was a protestant minister, but he and my mother divorced when I was 7, so although my mom took me to church, I did not grow up with my father's influence except for long summer visits..

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

All I know is that homosexuals were active in scouting before the change in the 90's and people at council level knew it, and were fine with it.. Unfortunately when the change happened these people were already open and known in the scouting community.. So DADT couldn't work for them because they could not un-ring that bell and make everyone forget.. Were they as well known in the 60's I don't know, but in the 80's yes they were in scouting, well known and treated with respect.

 

It was not a friend of a friend.. Heard it from a person who was a DE at the time, and had to ask 2 people to leave who were good friends.. Heard it from someone who use to be a SM..

 

Agree with Rick-in-CA.. Had BSA left it as they had it where they did not take a side, they would not have infuriated liberals in having the policy, and they would not have infuriated Conservatives in removing the policy. They would have sailed right through this polarized debate by allowing the CO's to choose their own policy on the issue.. Instead setting it hurt them and removing it hurt them.. Therefore it was a self-destructive move and the policy should never have been created in the first place.

My understanding is our Council hasn't lost any units. The most conservative/fundamentalist Church in our area has a long time very active Troop, they still don't have any women leaders, but they are sticking around. I lost one scout, which is odd because we're a Catholic unit and the new policy is pretty much the same policy our schools have. I never had to confront the issue, but I think the previous policy was as much a violation of our rules as it was consistent with them.

 

I wonder how well the level of political activism in the Church correlates with the likelihood that they are leaving.

Who said being members of the BSA mean ALL YOUR TIME, as if you are permanently glued to the hip??.

 

How do you write a rule strictly for them that states Homosexuals can not be adult leaders, while ignoring drunks, adulators, prostitutes etc.. And reconcile that with the phrase "Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided." ??? It does not state the homosexual should be avoided, it states discrimination of a homosexual should be avoided..

 

if you are Catholic and do not wish to socialize AT ALL with homosexuals, you need to reconcile with the fact it is a personal decision, not something dictated by your faith..

 

Thanks Sentinel, I did not know of that statement in the Catholic publication from the Pope.. Although I did know the Catholic viewpoints have been evolving positively..

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

Actually I have heard stories of scouters that were openly gay Adult leaders in their units and councils, that were turned away when they created this policy.. So why indeed.., Maybe because the conservatives got their panties in a bind about what WAS the current policy, and the fact that units did fully accept and welcome these people into their membership..

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

True, but then you are saying in the '30's or 40's through the '70's or 80's the lack of a policy against homosexuals did not cause them to refuse to consider association with the BSA and found a BSA unit.

 

So BSA pulled away from it's origins of not taking sides to be taken over by the conservative viewpoint.. Now it is swinging back to it's origins of not taking sides.. BSA was off course, and is righting it's compass. They aren't there yet..

My understanding is our Council hasn't lost any units. The most conservative/fundamentalist Church in our area has a long time very active Troop, they still don't have any women leaders, but they are sticking around. I lost one scout, which is odd because we're a Catholic unit and the new policy is pretty much the same policy our schools have. I never had to confront the issue, but I think the previous policy was as much a violation of our rules as it was consistent with them.

 

I wonder how well the level of political activism in the Church correlates with the likelihood that they are leaving.

We had one cub whose parent left due to the vote.. The parent sited this issue as against his faith, but he was a member of our CO chuch, and the priest had no issue, and even tried to talk him off the ledge.. I think some people have allowed their politics to define their faith, rather then their church.

I agree with those here who have said that this spin off would probably have eventually happened even if the vote on the gay issue had not come up. There were (and still are) a group of people in the BSA that are not interested in, and have no intention of embracing the BSA values of pluralism (the BSA is “completely nonsectarian†and A Scout is Reverent - “... He respects the beliefs of others.â€Â). They want the BSA to be an explicitly conservative Christian organization that allowed others to join, as long as they agreed to follow conservative Christian values (after all, these are the only valid “valuesâ€Â). The vote was a signal that the BSA was no-longer moving in the direction they wished.

 

So it’s no surprise that Trail Life is an explicitly Christian organization (and only a certain kind of Christian at that), that has a policy on gays that is almost identical to the new BSA one (because it was really a religious issue, not one about gays). I have no problem with them and I wish them well. Trail Life (like the American Heritage Girls) is very up-front and honest about what they are, and provides an alternative to those scouters that don’t want to rub elbows with people of different faiths.

Eagledad = are you saying these conservative CO's were not involved in BSA until the BSA created the rule against homosexuals in the 1990's?? I could agree they were probably involved in pushing BSA into making this self-destructive policy in the first place.. But to influence BSA to do so, they were already members of BSA.

 

BSA is now going back to it's original stance on the issue.

 

Gorgia Mom - that has all that has been said.. You welcome children of all faiths, but feel adults of any faith other the Christian (and I don't know if AHG also considers LDS not Christian) as not worthy to be leaders.. The only reason I see for that is in the hopes of trying to convert them to your faith.. I could see children who really don't follow an organized religion perhaps joining.. But, if I was a Jewish parent or Buddist or whatever, I would not allow my child to join a group that states that their parents due to their faith are unworthy.

From what I understand, although excepting boys of all faith, and boys of little faith (as long as not atheist).. Their acceptance of adult Leadership is stricter and more intolerant.. If not serious Christians then you can not be an adult leader.. And they will not accept faiths like LDS as Christian because it doesn't strictly follow the bible.. I stumbled upon some discussion with an LDS mother who was upset with the rules, and many people who I assume were interested in founding TL's in their area, were trying to defend TL's rule on adult leadership became pretty nasty to her..

 

It might be a rule made in fear of LDS moving over and changing the program to be different as in BSA, but I think they could have easily prevented that by welcoming them, but making rules and making it clear that they would have to follow the program everyone else did..

 

Anyway, definitely not a secular organization.. The only reason I can assume they put out a welcome mat to the youth of other religions while barring their parents is some insane notion of trying to convert them.

If that's it Peregrinator, then it's a cop out.. I looked around & the LDS do believe in the trinity, they just call it by a different term.. Here is one explanation.

 

Do Mormons believe in the Trinity?

 

Mormons most commonly use the term “Godhead†to refer to the Trinity. The first article of faith for the Latter-day Saints reads: “We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.†Latter-day Saints believe God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are one in will and purpose but are not literally the same being or substance, as conceptions of the Holy Trinity commonly imply.

 

 

Whether it be they don't follow the Bible exclusively, or whether it is not believing in the trinity.. It is a cop out.. Why not have Catholic denounce protestants as true Christians because they don't believe in saints or elevate the mother Mary to the heights Catholics do... Why can't Protestants denounce Catholics as a true Christian because of all the statues they kiss the feet of..

 

The definition of a Christian is one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ Regardless of how they vary in the way they choose to interpret those teachings.

From what I understand, although excepting boys of all faith, and boys of little faith (as long as not atheist).. Their acceptance of adult Leadership is stricter and more intolerant.. If not serious Christians then you can not be an adult leader.. And they will not accept faiths like LDS as Christian because it doesn't strictly follow the bible.. I stumbled upon some discussion with an LDS mother who was upset with the rules, and many people who I assume were interested in founding TL's in their area, were trying to defend TL's rule on adult leadership became pretty nasty to her..

 

It might be a rule made in fear of LDS moving over and changing the program to be different as in BSA, but I think they could have easily prevented that by welcoming them, but making rules and making it clear that they would have to follow the program everyone else did..

 

Anyway, definitely not a secular organization.. The only reason I can assume they put out a welcome mat to the youth of other religions while barring their parents is some insane notion of trying to convert them.

As I stated, the not following the bible strictly is what they claim.. I just am wondering if there is more to not welcoming them. I mean Christian is religions that believe in Christ, which they do..

 

I guess a few units, may open to other children but not allow parents of other faiths to be leaders.. But that is not the rules of the BSA.. The scouts and the scouters can have any faith they wish, and their beliefs can vary from being very loyal church goers to not thinking much about it, and never belonging to an organized religion.

 

So if your United Methodist Church accepts scouts of any faith, but have adopted the rule that only UMC card carrying members can be the Adult leaders of the unit, you are a rarity and not the norm.

From what I understand, although excepting boys of all faith, and boys of little faith (as long as not atheist).. Their acceptance of adult Leadership is stricter and more intolerant.. If not serious Christians then you can not be an adult leader.. And they will not accept faiths like LDS as Christian because it doesn't strictly follow the bible.. I stumbled upon some discussion with an LDS mother who was upset with the rules, and many people who I assume were interested in founding TL's in their area, were trying to defend TL's rule on adult leadership became pretty nasty to her..

 

It might be a rule made in fear of LDS moving over and changing the program to be different as in BSA, but I think they could have easily prevented that by welcoming them, but making rules and making it clear that they would have to follow the program everyone else did..

 

Anyway, definitely not a secular organization.. The only reason I can assume they put out a welcome mat to the youth of other religions while barring their parents is some insane notion of trying to convert them.

Thanks EagleScout - I figured that.. I have seen full sized realistic looking chuckwagons.. They are awesome, and I am impressed with them..They also look like a lot of work and need to have people who are fully committed to a hobby that would include them. The ones I saw were for people doing Dutch oven cooking compititions.

 

I was just surprised that except for two post on building realistic chuckwagons, no one has building plans or stories of pitfalls they had while building their chuckwagon.. Sort of has me thinking not many people hold this even or know what it is..

 

I tried to post a photo of CS Chuckwagons, but the photo upload doesn't seem to work for me.. So here are some links.

 

There are two pictures.. The first one is what we want to build.. Skip the one that looks like someone put a hoop cover on a little red wagon.. We want handbuilt, with wooden wheels. Some districts would create rules that would not accept the little red wagon.

http://www.pack23.com/2012/03/27/538/

 

 

Hmm... Me thinks you both are getting a little bit too authentic.. I was surprised that no one else has done a cub scout chuckwagon.. Do your district/ councils do cub scout chuckwagons?.. Or is this a unique thing in my council?

 

 

 

New Topic.. The Chuckwagon... My Pack is building it.. I found one plan to build a CW on-line.. It was put out by the Nutfield District.. We have a Nutfield District in our council, but I don't know if it is our Nutfield..

 

http://www.morrisvillecubscouts.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/chuckwagonderbyinformation.pdf

 

Was wondering if anyone else knew of other plans so I could give them a few options.. Or helpful tips on what to include, or pitfalls we need to try to avoid.

 

We plan to crash a neighboring District's chuckwagon.. Our District hasn't held one for about 4 or 5 years.. I think it was the only one they ran that I know about.. I wasn't part of a pack so I do know how much fun the scouts had, but I was running a Training in an area where I watched them roll by getting to a station.. I did not think it went well.. I only noted about 5 or 6 wagons, and all the kids were very quiet and sort of looked like the western movie of a group of people who had been plodding along for weeks on the trail, and were bone weary and just plodding along zombie like.. The Chuckwagon we are going to is one that has run it for years, and my son being in a pack in this district went every year and had lots of fun.. It has at least 100 wagons.. They have to find a company nearby that will let us park and then they bus us in.. It's at the cub camp and they have things like the bb shooting range as one of the stations..

 

So... When I contacted my DE, about info on the neighboring Chuckwagon, and he replied "Yes, they hold one.. We should do one this year also.. I can put you in contact with someone who can help you organize it... I put my foot down and said .... Nope.. Nope.. Nope.. We are going to our neighboring Districts CW...

 

1) My pack is in no way shape or form ready to host any thing... We are a small group of just Tigers & wolves.. No one knows what a CW is, and we only have a few parents I would see as volunteering to help me..

2) No one in our districts (except maybe a few who built a CW 5 years back, and maybe not even them) knows what a CW is.. And the one 5 years back wasn't very successful, it had low attendance and it was not held at the right time of year or in the right venue (Piggy backed onto a BS camporee in order to have the place held free of charge, and removed from them having to plan it.. But it was then held in a parking lot and very late fall at a ski resort where the weather was very cold in a wind tunnel (of course you could always get rain even if put in warmer weather.)

 

So I told him it would be better that he not try to pull it off in the next 3 or 4 months, but rather take a year to year & ahalf and promote, advise and organize for a very well run, well planned event, with a lot of packs excited enough to take the time to build a CW and attend the event.

 

 

We play this relay game with M&M's but it could be substituted for those candy hearts.. The boys take a straw (I cut straw in half) and with suction have to keep the candy on the end of the straw and race it to the end where they shoot it into a pie tin (or something similar).. The team with the most candies in the pie tin at the end of the time is the winner.

 

You can do the balloon tied to the ankle where everyone has to try to break the other balloons but keep theirs unbroken.. Just use red & white balloons to keep with the theme.

Hmmm... I guess we typically hold our Pinewood in Feb. because the district level Pinewood is in March, so we end up with the B&G in March.. So seems we are a bit slower then most you guys..

 

I did not remember not having program after the B&G... But, then when my son went through most the advancement was done at home putting advancement into the den meeting was a change made about 2 to 3 years back.. I have no clue what we did though.. I know the Webelos was more schoolwork like and we did do the advancement in the den.. I also know we had something we were advancing in, because there was another den of the same rank, and they were just rushing through and getting all these awards, and our den had a pow-wow, on how we felt about them getting so much more bling then our den.. Our den decided it would be too stressful to always be advancing at that pace, and we wanted to have more fun then work.. The other den shortly after had some blow out, and the den imploded and absolutely no one in the den was left in the pack after that... So we definitely made the right decision. Perhaps our dens worked on the belt loops?? Maybe?? That was so long ago and my brain is very rusty.

Agree with you both that it could be met at any time.. Which is when I addressed it, I did say, if you are not ready.. Then no big deal..

 

But.. This is a group that is not zippity doo da-ing through the advancement.. So I am not holding them from the rank until the B&G.. This is more a group that does not understand why we have the rank advancement before the last meeting before Summer Recess.. So I would like to plant in their heads reasons why at least they should plan, organize and set as a target date March for finishing up rank advancement.. If earlier so be it.. If later so be it.. But, I really don't want them to set their target date as the June pack meeting when they move from on rank to the other due to their grade.. Again, I do know that a scout that doesn't make it can summer over at the old rank.. But, I still think that as their target date is cutting it close, and if they cut it close, some kids will slip through the cracks.. Therefore looking for good reason to put in their minds that target date should be March.. If don't make it, don't sweat it.. But, try for then..

 

Pack18 - This year we have plans to build a Chuckwagon and crash another districts CW.. Our district doesn't run them, except for one year about 4 or 5 years back.. A lot of packs built Chuckwagons and not they sit rotting in someones shed or barn.. Other then that our council doesn't run anything for the Cubs.. Now, our Webelos (which we don't have any) could go to the spring BS camporee, but not our other Cubs.. Our Pack is doing a pack campout.. Still, not as full an agenda as you guys seem to have going for you.. But, I did mention they can just have fun with no mind to advancement in the spring.. But, if they have no idea what to do, that might be more terrifying to them then exciting.

 

jblake - perhaps in your council crossover is a BS activity.. In mine, it is a CS activity.. Most packs have a B&G pot luck supper, perhaps with a raffle for cakes.. The BS troops who the Webs will cross over to are invited to attend.. After 3 different troops, I can tell you in all of them it is run the same way for all of them. It is also... run that way at the mock B&G at the Woodbadge training.

OK.. So at the CS committee meeting in discussing future pack meetings we hit March which is our Blue & Gold party.. And I asked the question, "How are you (Den Leaders) doing with advancement? Are your scouts going to make rank at this time? If not, no biggie, but it is what you should be targeting for."

 

Now, background is it is a very young pack with only Tigers and wolves... So no Webs to cross over.. So the question by one of the DL's is "Why is this time the target date?"..

 

 

Ahhh.... "Because it has always been this way?" (not really good..) kindof cushioned with "If we had Webs then this would be their crossover date.. So while celebrating their crossover we also try to celebrate everyones crossover." -and- "Once your done with rank advancement, then this gives you a few months to not worry so much about advancement, and you have time to kick back and just do fun things"..

 

All of it seemed like lame reasoning.. So, I don't know if we will see many boys get rank at our B&G..

 

Do others have better answers for this question of "Why"..

Don't you just love a poster asking a very broad question and then never posting any follow up information.

True Basement, but not to get your dander up, because I mean it sincerely.. Thank you for the way you handled it this time.. It was perfect!..

 

Perhaps they have no real problem, but just wanted to hear some war stories.. Don't know, it was very open, but never hinted they were having a problem.

 

But, would be nice if follow up questions or comments showed the OP came back to read the responses that they got.

I thought you still couldn't smoke in public. Still, BSA can definitely add to their rules on alcohol and smoking, I would think marijuana would more fall into the rules of alcohol then smoking as smoking is not in front of the scouts, and alcohol is not in front of the scouts or under the influence of..

I guess it depends on whose viewpoint you are looking at, as if not illegal, the person in question may think there is nothing wrong with what they have done..

 

The one I guess all were (finally) in agreement with.. Was the SM who the council finally removed.. He had his group within the troop of his preferred scouts and made up hurdles that only they got the opportunity to jump through in order to go on special trips.. Like to go on certain backpacking trips you had to take the backpacking MB with the SM only (no one else as MBC).. The SM declined to work with anyone he deemed unworthy of his time, therefore you couldn't ever go on certain trips.. For those he truly disliked he added extra hurdles not in the BSA advancement to earn eagle, refusing to sign off on the paperwork unless you did his requirements plus the BSA requirements.. He again set up rules around his requirements that allowed him to keep those he found unworthy from ever reaching success... Took a long time and many complaints before the Council looked into the matter though.

 

We had another SM (different troop as we left the first one with the game playing SM) who just wouldn't follow youth protection guidelines.. No proof he ever did anything wrong, and don't think he really did.. But, he felt rules didn't apply to him, he was above it all.. So would set up one big tent and adults & youth would sleep together in it, and he would invite his buddies non-scout associated adults on campouts and other events, and put scouts in cars with them, although we had absolutely no information on who they were.. Committee couldn't get him to follow rules, he would roll his eyes and do what he wanted.. Council didn't do anything, they still hadn't looked into complaint of SM #1 so I just had a reputation as someone who saw shadows around every corner.. Our family simply moved on to troop #3..

 

Our Troops Outdoor Coordinator started a Venture crew, without working with the Troop to have it work to everyones benefit, then tried to steal boys out of the troop for the Crew, by promising them girls, no uniforms, meetings only 2 times a month, and that she would get them to Eagle rank.. The troop almost collapsed, but rallied and we brought down the Venture crew instead... Pity, had she either worked with the troop in advance, or run her own separate program both could have survived peacefully. (This was in Troop #3)

 

A few others, but those are the 3 majors in my scouting career...

My parents got me to meetings, and got me to campouts. My father did not attend a single meeting or campout though (he would drop off then drive home, and another parent would show up on Sunday to pick us up). I was part of a big troop, and there was plenty of adult association available at the Troop level.

 

My sons are stuck with me as an ASM / SM (depending on the boy and the time). I leave them alone at meetings and campouts, and focus on serving the Troop - not my sons (directly). They benefit in ways others have pointed out - I know the calendar, I commit to the meetings and driving, and we don't put family stuff in competition with Troop activities. Does this give my boys more opportunities than some? Yes it does, but the same was done by my father - he knew that Scouts mattered to me (and I had ZERO athletic ability until a puberty growth spurt so that was not an issue for me).

 

The most important support from a parent is getting the boy to the meeting - that means NOT being the roadblock to participation. Next is helping ensure that the unit has the resources it needs to deliver the program. That can be drivers, committee members, donations, BOR staffing, merit badge counselors, etc. After that comes being a uniformed Scouter.

 

My dad knew that my unit had everything covered, and years later I found out that he wrote some nice checks to the Troop to help out others less fortunate. My sons' unit needed some Scouters, so I stepped up to that role (ending up as a Scoutmaster for a few years).

Agree Horizon.. Reading your post I have to alter mine which is posted earlier.. An involved parent doesn't mean they are in a direct leadership position.. Many of our parents worked on the Committee or help with Driving.. It though did need to be something more then monetary support.. Something that had the parents buy into the importance of the program, and the scouts see their parents showing an interest in Scouting..