Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


NJCubScouter last won the day on June 11

NJCubScouter had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1205 Excellent

About NJCubScouter

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Each of me sent a bill to the other, so we decided to call it even and let the accountant figure it out at the end of the year.
  2. The current BSA policy on this subject, announced on Jan. 30, 2017, is here: https://www.scoutingnewsroom.org/press-releases/bsa-addresses-gender-identity/ It has been discussed in this forum before. The policy is basically that the BSA considers a person to be the gender indicated on their membership application. I prefer the GSUSA policy, which looks like it was written by people who actually work with children, as opposed to the BSA policy, which looks like it was written by lawyers. (Apologies to myself.) As far as I know, the BSA has not had to deal with someone "switching back and forth." They tend to deal with things that have actually happened.
  3. That's been going on for years in my area, due to the merger of councils.
  4. Let's assume they could. But why would they?
  5. NJCubScouter

    New and comprehensive Family scouting FAQs issued:

    I think it is time for the BSA to stop "selling" their decision and instead look forward and say, here's how it's going to be, here's what volunteers are supposed to be doing about it, etc. They are never going to convince a lot of people that the decision-making process was a good one, and that includes me. If they keep pointing to one survey and not to others, they are just going to keep making people angry. And they can keep talking about the meetings that were held for volunteers in each council, but then they're just inviting people (like me) to point out (again) that the meeting in my council was held in the middle of the summer at 6 pm on a weekday, and the flier that they sent out said not a single word about girls in Scouting as the subject of the meeting. Instead it was "making Scouting more accessible to families." I figured out what it was about, because I read this forum, but the large majority of Scouters do not read this or any other online Scouting forum. So if I were National, I would stop talking about the process by which we got here, because I don't think very many people think it was a good process, except for those who are paid to think it was a good process. They are not going to convince anybody at this point. I think there are a lot of people like me who didn't really think this was a good idea in the first place, but are now willing to "live with it" and even help make it work if I am called upon to do so. We had a discussion about this at last night's troop committee meeting, and we all seemed to be in basically the same boat: Kind of wary of the whole thing, and we're not going out promoting it, but if a sufficient number of girls (and their parents who are willing to be SM/ASM of a girls' troop, and to join our committee) show up on our doorstep, and our CO is interested (which they probably will be), we all seem inclined to help them and become a "linked" troop. So, National, let's focus on where we are and where we are going. Too much looking back is not good for you, National. Try to convince us of that which we know is not true (i.e. that this was a good decision-making process), and you just make us ticked off, which kind of interferes with our "enthusiasm" for helping to make this work. (Or, as Rick says to Ilsa in "Casablanca," "I wouldn't bring up Paris if I were you. It's poor salesmanship.")
  6. Wow, you've got a lot going on there in a fairly short post. Specifically you have a lot of money and real estate changing hands, or not changing hands, opposite of the way it does now. It seems pretty unlikely that that is the future. (And I do realize you said it wasn't a prediction.)
  7. NJCubScouter

    New and comprehensive Family scouting FAQs issued:

    You know you're in trouble when a FAQ is so long that it needs a table of contents...
  8. NJCubScouter

    Linked troops won't work

    I don't know whether it is going to "work," but I do know that there is only one way it is going to "work." It will work if the people who are concerned about whether it is going to work put themselves in a position to make it work, and then make it work. Otherwise, you're correct, the people who want to take the easy way out are just going to turn it into a coed program.
  9. NJCubScouter

    Breaking Point

    And the champagne that she was not legally permitted to drink at her wedding.
  10. NJCubScouter

    New troop, big problems

    Verbal abuse of Scouts by leaders is not permitted. The leaders (at least the IH/COR and his wife the CC) are abusing their positions to benefit their son - which, if we are being honest, happens often, but there is a line of "way too far" and what you describe crosses that line. There is no rule that says the COR and CC can't be husband and wife - in fact that wouldn't make sense, because one person can be COR and CC at the same time - but it seems to me that if a person effectively owns the troop and his wife is CC, trouble is almost a certainty. And trouble there is, since it appears that the SM is not being allowed to do his job. Nor are you. The CC is not letting you do your job, which includes arranging BOR's. She definitely should not be selecting members for her son's BOR. I have extra sympathy for you here, because I am Advancement Chair in our troop, and have been through a situation where the CC was not letting me do my job. So I quit and was just an unassigned committee member until the CC was replaced by the person who had succeeded me as AC, so I then became AC again. I arrange the BOR's, recruit the members, and chair the BOR's - even when the CC is also a BOR member, which he often is. I feel very lucky to have a CC who understands what the roles are supposed to be, and I wish those in other troops the same. You already know what the answer is. You just need to keep your son at a minimal level of unhappiness for the next few days so he stays in Scouts long enough to move to another troop.
  11. NJCubScouter

    National Meeting: Affirmation of DRP

    Keep in mind we have had a lot of new members since then, and a lot of people who were participating then are no longer participating. I knew it has been discussed in the past, but was not industrious to go back and search for it.
  12. NJCubScouter

    National Meeting: Affirmation of DRP

    It is now clear to me that the BSA has said that it is a religious organization, and it has also said that it is NOT a religious organization, depending on the legal situation in which they found themselves. Check this out: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/01/16/is-boy-scouts-america-religious-organization.html Normally I would not be quoting from Fox News nor would I be quoting Bill O'Reilly, but I have no reason to doubt that the words quoted here were actually said. This demonstrates that the BSA has been inconsistent on this question. It is especially amusing to see the BSA attorney try to dance around the issue, but it eventually becomes clear that he does not think the term "religious organization" should be used for the BSA - even though the BSA has sometimes used the term for itself. For me, I agree with the BSA on the days when it says it is not a religious organization.
  13. NJCubScouter

    Breaking Point

    I think I have actually seen a grid for this in the past - but of course it would be out-of-date now. It was when they decided that Venturing crew members 18-20 were no longer "youth" and were not "adult leaders" but were now considered "adult participants," which resulted in there being (I think) 6 different categories of people for YP purposes.
  14. NJCubScouter

    Breaking Point

    And I think it's getting worse. I am still irritated about them taking a clearly-worded policy on use of alcohol at Scouting events and turning it into a mostly-meaningless mishmash - and at the same time they left the poorly-worded policy on smoking as is.