NJCubScouter

Comments on a few of Rooster's observations: Very few activities designed to bring families together (i.e., a pack picnic and softball game something along those lines). This may be true for Boy Scout troops, I don't know. My son's troop (meaning he's a member) has had family picnics in past years, though this year they instead had a "family camping trip" including whitewater rafting. In reality it was not very different from a regular camping trip. However, when you say "pack," I would be surprised to learn that there are a lot of Cub Scout packs with no or few family-oriented

kwc says: They need to be able to discern that a bottle of wine is off limits and a bottle of cooking sherry is not the same thing. Without a doubt you will teach your 15 year old son not to have sex with his girlfriend, but are you going to teach him to equate kissing her as the same thing because it is sexual too? I think the second of these sentences reveals a problem with the first, and that is a lack of any distinction between the role of a parent and that of a Scouter. You obviously recognize that the second subject is primarily the role of the parent, but in fact both of them

Yes, Ed, "blotto" is the same as three sheets to the wind. I do not think it is the main issue here, however. It would be interesting to see an authoritative statement of the reasons for the policy, and if there is more than one reason, what the primary issue is. When I get home I am going to check my son's handbook and see what is in there about alcohol. I think there was something in there about alcohol even back when I was a boy, riding my dinosaur to troop meetings. If the attitude in the book is the "just say no" approach that I would expect to see there in 2003, then I rea

I mainly agree with TwoCubDad here. The cooking sherry, if it is so salty that it is undrinkable, or if it actually contains no alcohol, may not in and of itself violate the rule against "use" of "alcoholic beverages." But it is a road that does not need to be started down. There are other things to eat. I also think that bringing the bottle of non-alcoholic and/or undrinkable cooking sherry may violate the "spirit" of the rule. (Pun intended.) In the factual scenario that was presented, a youth (the quartermaster) saw right away that there was a questionable item being brought on th

I remember pictures of Linda Ronstadt in her Cub Scout uniform Acco, but please don't say it was so long ago. I remember another example, either from 1975 or 76. Somewhere on or in the cover of one of Fleetwood Mac's albums (I believe it is the one simply entitled "Fleetwood Mac", which was actually about their ninth or tenth album, but I digress) is a photo of the group including Stevie Nicks wearing a Cub Scout shirt. I do not think she was wearing any other uniform parts. It must not have been a bad photo, as I still remember it. More recently, there was a photo that went around i

OGE, next time I am at my father's house I could look up the First Class requirements from 1965... or for that matter, the requirements for any rank from some time in the 40s (I believe) through today. I believe that the handbook you are talking about is the same set of requirements as the ones I used through the rank of First Class (1969-1973) -- before switching to what I call the red beret handbook which came out around '72, and which totally changed the rank requirements. (Anyone remember Skill Awards? Or when they changed "rank" to "progress awards"? Leadership Corps? That all ca

FatOldGuy says: I think that the use of the term Nazi to refer to a dictatorial person started long before Seinfeld took to the stage. It did. I said Seinfeld "popularized" it, which he did. I could have said "many people use 'Nazi' to refer to..." It doesn't matter. What matters is that it is offensive to some people to use a word that signifies the murder of millions of people to indicate someone who merely is arbitrary about who can apply for a Quality Unit Award, or any of the other things that the annoying registrars of the world like to do. But the council registrar didn't

Trucker, welcome to the forums. As for whether what you said has anything to do with the subject, I wouldn't even venture a guess as to what the subject of this thread is right about now. Sometimes these threads take on a life of their own... though in this case "life" is probably an exaggeration, it seems like more of an "un-dead" quality...

Could I make a tiny little request here? I know Seinfeld popularized this use of the word "Nazi" for people who make our lives inconvenient or unpleasant by their arbitrary rules or other unreasonable behavior, so it is difficult to complain when the "general public" does it. However, I have to tell you that it really does bother some people (including me, obviously, or I wouldn't be mentioning it.) Unless the person in your Scout Shop is actually an adherent of an ideology that supports mass murder based on religious and racial characteristics, he or she is not a "Nazi." I know you di

Absolutely right, TwoCubDad. That is what I was trying to say earlier, but you said it better.

Thanks Dave. Although I had not specifically thought of the chaperoning/counseling function (which makes a lot of sense!), your post does confirm what I thought about the claim made by FatOldGuy, that the function of the female leader on a co-ed outing is NOT to "protect" the girls from the "evil", "predatory" male leader(s) -- except for the 2-deep leadership that is part of YP, which can be fulfilled equally well by 2 men, 2 women, or 1 of each, regardless of the composition of the youth membership. This has implications for FatOldGuy's statements about gays as predatory toward boys, b

Why, thank you, packsaddle!

OGE asks, I assume rhetorically, The only issue is, how would BSA verify a males, or females for that matter heterosexuality? Of course, it couldn't. At least, not without adopting a highly intrusive attitude that would probably drive away all volunteers. And it has said that it will not even try. The statements on the "gay policy" specifically say that the BSA will not ask anyone about the sexual orientation. Only if someone announces ("avows") that they are gay does the policy come into play. Now, this forum has gone-around a few times about how many and which people one has

FatOldGuy says: GSUSA requires that a woman be on all excursions. BSA requires that a woman be present if female youth are present, this rule pretty much applies only to Venturing (section of G2SS on adult Leadership, page 5). Why are these rules in place? Because heterosexual men are seen as predators when it comes to young women. Oddly, no one finds the rule that requires a woman be present with girls to be unreasonable. I would argue that homosexual men should be considered as predatory toward young men as heterosexual men are toward young women. It then follows that a heterosexu

Dsteele says: It is a rule that applies most specifically to co-ed Venture Crews and Explorer posts. It normally doesn't come up with Boy Scout Troops, but should probably apply if it does. First of all, I'm not sure, but I think that last sentence is at least halfway a Yogi Berra-ism. Like "It ain't over till its over" or "Nobody ever goes there anymore, it's too crowded." I mean that in a good way. Second and more importantly, I am wondering what the rationale(s) is/are for that rule. Is it: a) A Youth Protection rule in the sense that the adult female leader is th

I think I see the problem here. It is a question of logical reasoning. Bob says: When you say "My troop" often enough you act as if you are "the boss". The Scoutmasters who say say "if you don't like the way I do it find someone else" see it as "my troop". The leaders who set their own rules rather than follow the scouting methods see it as "my troop". The SM who takes offense to scouts who are absent due to school, family, or sports conflicts see it as "My troop". The SM who "tells" the committee what to do sees it as "My Troop". When you say "my troop" you behave like it's "My Troop".

By the way, when I observe the SPL of my... er, my son's... er, the troop in which my son is a Scout, I wish he would consider it "his troop." I think the SPL's father (the SM) also wishes his son would consider it "his troop." That's part of the problem with this SPL, he seems to think any boys not in the "senior patrol" are those "new kids" and that he doesn't want to have anything to do with them, either directly or through their "new kid" patrol leader. A little "ownership" of the troop on this SPL's part would be more than welcome to all of us people standing on the sidelines, and I wo

Getting back to OGE's "slavery" reference, I have heard SM's refer to the troop as "my boys." I don't think they are claiming legal title or anything. I think it is more a "term of endearment," in a good sort of way, expressing kinship with the boys. Kids talk this way now, "my peeps," which I guess started in one ethnic community, but my daughters throw in expressions like that too once in awhile. It's a matter of semantics. If you mean something in a bad way, it's bad, but if you mean it in a good way, it's good, as long as you say it in a way that others can tell which is which.

OGE, if I understand what you are asking, you are talking about "ownership" in the more "modern" sense of being a "stakeholder" or having responsibility for something, as opposed to legal "ownership." In that sense, and not to duck the question, I would say that the troop is like a "joint venture" and is "owned" collectively, but that each person's actual "ownership rights and responsibilities" extends only to the role and position they hold in the troop. If that concept is accepted, then I as a Committee Member and a youth member of the troop with no leadership position are both part of

Yak, that looks like more proof of my second-favorite saying, Be careful what you wish for, you may get it. My favorite, by the way, is "No good deed goes unpunished," which is also evidenced in this forum from time to time (though not this time.)

Merlyn, I want to make sure I am understanding you. You are not equating the absence of belief in an "anthropomorphic" or "personal" God with atheism, are you? My understanding has been that someone with that belief CAN be an atheist, or can instead still believe in a concept of a "creator" or "God" (under whatever name) and thus be a Deist -- not an atheist. My way of telling the difference would be that if someone says "I do not believe in (g)od," they are an atheist, but if someone says, "I do not believe in a personal god," they are trying to indicate that they are NOT an atheist -- but

Craneace says: ... it is courious to me that some profess atheism and some profess Christianity, but each one seems to condem the other for their opinion. Like OGE, I am having difficulty thinking of a second person who has "professed" atheism on this board. I seem to recall one awhile back but I do not remember the name and I am not sure about it. Then I think there was another person who was criticizing everybody and everything including religion (but while also supporting the BSA's "membership policy", but I did not believe a word that person said about anything anyway. An

SMT376, you say: Question, since most of these boys will be working on 1st class by May 04 if they do this could it be counted as a service project? I will leave the actual answer to that to others, but I just want to make sure we are all understanding each other and that the rank requirements have not changed in the last few weeks. Do you mean that the boys will have EARNED First Class and will be "working on" Star? There is a service requirement for Star (and for Second Class, Life and of course Eagle), but none for First Class. Right?

FatOldGuy: Just out of curiosity, where is that rule, anyway? (The one about an adult female leader must be present if there are girls along.) It makes sense, but where is it published as an actual rule? I did not remember it from YP training, and I just checked the YP guidelines online and it isn't there. Is it a special Venture crew thing, because that is the only kind of unit that is co-ed? (That term is probably out-dated, but then so am I.) Evidently the leaders of my son's troop don't know about it either. My son's first camping trip was billed as a "family outing," but it was re

DS: What I think this demonstrates is something I have known about this forum, but which some people refuse to "get", and that is this: ALMOST everybody on this board -- and I mean everybody with 3 or 4 exceptions that I can think of in the 18 or so months I have been posting here -- is fundamentally PRO-BSA. "We" (there's that word again) do not all necessarily agree with all of its policies, but it is OUR organization. We love it. It is part of our lives. It is part of our families. My son is the third generation of Scouts in my family, and my father reached his 65th year in S