NJCubScouter

I wanted to add one more point, though in the time it took me to finish my post, I see sctmom beat me to it and said pretty much the same thing I was going to say. That point is: Don't worry so much. If you are giving the boys a good program, working from the Bear book and Program Helps and whatever related ideas you come up with, and the boys are receiving the patches and beads and belt loops and whatever that the book says they should get for what you are doing, and what they are doing at home, then you are doing a good job. Patches are nice to get and the boys should get them, but t

The Bear book covers almost everything the boys can earn (other than participation patches such as Pinewood Derby, Blue and Gold, or events that you decide on your own to make up a patch for.) You didn't specifically mention the Bear badge itself and the arrow points, but you did mention Progress Toward Ranks, so I assume you have the basic achievements and electives covered since they are the focus of the book. One thing you don't mention is the World Conservation Award; that is in the Bear Book. It is earned by completing certain achievements, plus a conservation service project. Whic

Before this thread disappears, just for the record, I never said nor suggested that anyone was going on a "sex tour," a phrase I am not familiar with but I guess I understand what it means. If anyone did suggest that, it was the person who started this thread with the title "A whole new meaning to "Be Prepared." However, I think the title was an attempt at humor and was not making the suggestion of a "sex tour" either. My post about the gay issue was also mostly an attempt at humor, by the way, which I thought was in keeping with the title of the thread.

I see no reason why the FOIA would apply to the BSA. As you say, it is not a governmental agency. It is a corporation, though with a charter granted by the U.S. Congress, rather than a charter from a state government as most corporations have. (Local BSA councils, to my knowledge, would be state-chartered not-for-profit corporations, and they also hold a "charter" from the BSA, though the word "charter" is being use to mean 2 different things here.)

fella says: But for a boy or girl with an earring I think it's no big deal, so many of them get their ears pierced these days. I didn't say earrings are a "big deal," either on males or females, it's just that it annoys me a bit, and I fail to understand why anyone would do it, especially for a man or boy. I know it is a "fad," but it's like my mother used to say, If your friends want to jump off a bridge, it doesn't mean you have to do it too. (I think everybody's mother said that.) I'm sure that my attitude is partly a generational thing, and partly the vicarious pain I experien

Rooster says: Homosexuals came after BSA, not the other way around. How do you get that? The BSA banned gays, and enforced the ban, before any gay person or group took any legal action. If you're claiming the ban always existed, it did not. If I recall the history from the "Dale" decision, the first evidence the BSA was able to come up with that gays were banned was an internal memo from the late 70's. I don't think there was any public statement until the early 80's, which I believe was in response to the first lawsuit. To look at the most "celebrated" case, that of James D

OGE, good points and thanks for the quotes. I have to wonder how this all works even for boys who DO have physical exams. Medical exams are fine for the more "traditional" things like hepatitis, t.b., etc., but what about HIV? As far as I know, HIV tests have not become routine for 11 year old boys. And someone can have the virus for years with no symptoms. And one thing you quoted from the G2SS concerns me: The reference to persons "suspected" of having a life-threatening communicable disease. I can see if a boy is coughing all the time or something, but for most diseases I am not

I don't think the subject of how to handle personal information has ever been mentioned in any training, roundtable, memo or anything else I have attended or seen. I was not aware of the "rule" on notification about communicable diseases until I read the first post in this thread. There should be some formalized instructions about this, especially now that privacy is becoming a larger and larger concern. If nothing else, I'd like someone to tell me how the health forms should be handled. For myself, I have never had any interest in reading them, we just collect them and have them in a big

By the way, I never noticed it before, but the original post in this thread mentioned, in addition to extra holes in one's head, and tatoos, the issue of "baggy pants." I'm not sure why this would be a problem, as I was not aware that the BSA has begun making uniform pants in a "baggy" style. I'm half-joking, I know that uniform pants would not necessarily be worn on an outdoor activity anyway, though if baggy pants were showing up on my camping trips, I would consider making the uniform pants a requirement at all times. Now, this comes from the ACM of a Cub pack in which nobody wears t

Gee Rooster, that is a great argument for local option, not just on bodily mutilation policies, but also for... well, I won't say it, because this is not the "Issue and Politics" forum. But you know what I mean. Rhymes with "may." Heh, heh.

Eisely's post made me think of a question: What does the BSA ask in this regard, if anything? I have filled out "Class 1" medical forms for my son, but I don't recall it asking about communicable diseases, or specifically about AIDS (or more generally, immunodeficiency conditions.) The last time I saw the full-scale medical form (Class 3?) was when I was going to summer camp in the 70s, and if course I don't remember what it said. AIDS and HIV had not been discovered yet anyway. I know there is a very short health form on the back of the Cub Scout youth application. I assume the Boy

I think Rooster's position can be boiled down to 1 or 2 sentences, this way: Even if scientists proved that people are "born gay," homosexual behavior would still be a "sin," and I guess more to the point, it would still justify exclusion of an openly gay leader from the BSA. If a second sentence is necessary, it would be that the born homosexual can avoid "sin" by abstaining. If I am oversimplifying here, please let me know, but I don't think I am. So: We're starting from the hypothesis (which I understand you do not accept, which is why it's called a hypothesis) that gay people are

OGE, medical privacy is not an area of the law I am very well-versed in, so I did a bit of research on the Internet. The first thing I learned when I did my search is that the acronym is HIPAA, not HIPPA. As I have said before, I make as many typos as the next guy, but when I do a Yahoo! search and it tells me "You might want to try 'HIPAA' instead," I just figured I'd mention it. I found a good site with a basic explanation, at www.hipaadvisory.com/regs/HIPAAprimer1.htm What this site tells me is that the HIPAA requirements apply to "health care organizations." It makes clear t

Rooster, I don't completely disagree with you. If a boy's appearance is "intimidating" or if it really does cross the line into "self mutilation," I think that adults who have responsibility for the boy outside the home do have the right to say something. Maybe even the obligation, if it's that bad. (Of course, if it's that bad, I don't think you're telling the boy or his parents anything they don't already know, and I doubt the boy is in Scouting at that point anyway. So the real question would be where the "grey area" begins and ends. I suspect we would probably disagree about where

I know, Rooster, that's what I thought when I saw Eisely's post. I'm glad you agree with me for once.

OK, I withdraw the comment about capture the flag. I think this thread is about something too serious to go hurtling so far off-topic so early. Come on guys (and gals), we can stay on-topic if we really try!(This message has been edited by NJCubScouter)

Gee Ed, really? I'm so shocked.

Eisely, that's a pretty mean-spirited Christmas Eve message, isn't it? I realize you couched it in "positive" terms by offering it as a "prayer", but the phrase "the folly of trying to undo the good that others do," shows your true intent. That would be the case even if I agreed with you that Merlyn is trying to undo the good that anybody else does, which I don't. If I did a numerical analysis of his posts, I suspect that about 30-40 percent would be statements of issues already decided by the Supreme Court, and his statements in that regard are, to my knowledge, always correct -- though se

Kwc: "Capture the flag" in the dark? Hmmm, I wonder what the "Guide to Safe Scouting" has to say about that one. Even if it says nothing specific, I suspect it has some statement to the effect of "use the sense God gave you." Since, as I recall from my Scout days, capture the flag was generally played on rough, wooded, hilly and often rocky terrain (otherwise how are you going to hide your position from the other team), doing it at night does not seem to comply with the "rule of common sense." And that's regardless of whether there might be a boy around with a blood-borne communicable dis

First of all, everything else aside, what a terrible story, and what a terrible thing that this man did to a child. An 11-month-old child, and his own child -- the mind just reels. What he did was, in a way, worse than killing the child outright, though I guess that raises a philosophical question that I can't answer. What is indisputable is that this man has killed his own child, in slow-motion, and has robbed him of his childhood, and eventually his life as well. Imagine being 11 years old and not only going through the agony of a debilitating disease that leaves you exposed to cancer, a

I said: Well, it's good to see that banning gays has caused all Scouts and Scouters to follow the straight and narrow path of strict morality. And Korea said: NJ: cheap shot, big time. Does every issue have to be related to the BSA gay ban for you? Lighten up a little bit, Atlas, set the world down off your shoulders for a few minutes, and enjoy life. You don't know me, my Scouts, or my brother SM who's going, or the values we model. I do know my Scouts, and they're not going on a sex tour. Neither is my brother SM, who's a loyal husband, dedicated father, excellent middle scho

Rooster says: I do object to the Scoutmaster who would promote these things to the boys. Even if their worthiness was not a subject of debate, a Scoutmaster should not be using his influence to promote fads or fashion. His duty is to help build character. In other words, Rooster, you think it is fine for a Scoutmaster to express his opinion, even though such expression may contradict the boy's parents, as long as it is YOUR opinion. In this case I happen to generally agree with your opinion, but I don't think that either of our opinions are the proper basis for a policy that says wh

I personally hate the whole piercing and "body art" craze. I didn't even like it when my wife allowed our daughters to get their ears pierced. Now my oldest daughter (age 20) has a pierced navel. Her boyfriend has tatoos and earring, and yesterday he got his eyebrow pierced. I think he is an idiot. (Of course, I thought that already. ) He and my daughter spent about a half hour fooling with some sort of cleanser for his eyebrow to make sure it didn't get infected. I could have told them they could avoid infection much more easily by not putting extra holes in their heads, but of cour

Well, it's good to see that banning gays has caused all Scouts and Scouters to follow the straight and narrow path of strict morality.

The "religious exemption" probably does not apply to the BSA, but it doesn't matter. Under the "Dale" decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, New York's new statute cannot constitutionally be applied to the BSA. New York's statute is, in meaning if not exact language, the same as the New Jersey statute involved in the "Dale" case. I read the New York statute and it does include "public accomodations" in the list of "places" where anti-gay discrimination is prohibited; it is the "public accomodation" section that the New Jersey Supreme Court said was applicable to the BSA. The "Dale" case g