NJCubScouter

Ed Mori says: At the unit level, we should be concerned with delivering a quality program regardless of the numbers. Obviously a good program is the key, but at the same time, I think units are encouraged to give attention to the numbers as well. One of the requirements for the Quality Unit Award (it may be optional) is that you are rechartering with at least the same number of boys as last year. (I have never seen the troop Quality Unit requirements, but this is on the list for packs, and I can't see why it wouldn't be for troops.) Now, some might say, run a good program and

I agree with most of what OldGreyEagle said. This is a minor point, but it is my impression that the "council" does sometimes initiate the formation of a new unit by trying to "sell" the program to a prospective chartered organization. In fact, I thought that was part of the job of a DE, usually when there are "gaps" in a particular area. I have never actually seen this happen (that I was aware of), but that is probably because I have always lived in areas where there were enough units that every boy was getting the opportunity to join and recruitment efforts were reaching every boy. (Well

packsaddle says: Each person should view their faith personally and leave popular opinion and politics out of it. Further argument is recreational but not very illuminating. I agree. Personally I would rather not know or hear about the religious beliefs of others, and I certainly do not want their views imposed upon me. I have a right to the latter, both as against the government and within the BSA. The BSA's declaration of religious principle says that this organization is "absolutely nonsectarian." When the BSA leadership imposes the religious views of the current, temporary ma

I agree with all the comments and suggestions made so far (except for Mike Long's first post, which he no longer agrees with either.) In consultation with the parents and the boys, you should (and can) find appropriate activities and challenges to keep these boys interested until they have met the time requirements for Arrow of Light or have turned 11. (But of course if you go by age, they will not all be able to join a troop at the same time.) Sctmom made several good, specific, suggestions. I would focus on the outdoor skills aspect (while remaining age-appropriate for 10-year-olds) whil

BobWhite says: The green web belt is only for Boy Scouts and adult leaders to wear. Webelos wear the blue web belt even if they are wearing the tan iniform shirt. That is not correct. Webelos wearing the tan uniform may wear either the green Boy Scout belt or the blue Cub Scout belt with Webelos buckle. Presumably they have kept the blue belt as an option because, as previously stated, the Academics and Sports belt loops do not fit the green belt. My source is the official BSA Supply Division online catalog, www.scoutstuff.org. When you go there, the "welcoming" photo include

dan says: I would call the parents and not the police! I would give the parents a chance to deal with it before I would put the scout through the legal system. That would be my preference too. And after reading my first post, I take back the statement that I would "probably" report the pot-possessing Scout to the police. I really don't know what I would do. BobWhite's solution was a good one under those circumstances. But obviously there is a line somewhere. After all I am not postive it is not Thyme! At least that would be my out for not calling the police. Well, I don

This is a good question but has no easy answer -- just more questions. In the pot examople, I suspect there are some (possibly including me, I'm not sure)who would have called local police AND the parents. I guess I would always try to err on the side of delivering the boy to his parents (even if they must come to you to accept delivery) rather than to the authorities, but somewhere there is a line. How about a Scout who hits another? "Just" a fight or a "scuffle"? In the words of my town's police chief, when commenting on the reluctance of school principals to call the police when a

Quixote says: NJ - when i read the first line of your post, i thought you and rooster were going to agree on something (thought the 2nd coming was right around the corner on that one ) Nope, it was just me being slightly facetious for the first few words of my post. I suspect that somewhere, at some point, Rooster and I must have agreed on something, though it certainly hasn't happened many times. After all, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. By the way, my people are still waiting for the first coming.

First I says: Perhaps, as an imperfect adult, I can empathize more readily with children who are imperfect. To which Rooster replied: Wow. "Wow"?, asks I in response. What do you mean, Wow? First I had to check a dictionary to make sure "empathize" means what I thought it meant, and it does. Actually it means "to experience empathy," but "empathy" has 2 meanings, and definition number 2 is: "the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present wi

Rooster says: On a more serious note, singing is not the actual object of the exercise. That's right. As near as I can figure out from the original post, the "actual object of the exercise" is to punish and to publicly humiliate a boy, or at the very least, embarrass him. When I was a Boy Scout, humiliation of boys through hazing rituals and otherwise was "part of the program" (at least within a unit) and was often encouraged or at least condoned by leaders. Fortunately, there is now a recognition that that is not supposed to be the case, though I am sure it remains the case to so

So as not to be seen as shilling for my own profession, I will just second OldGreyEagle's advice that you see a lawyer. There may be one or more who are members of your CO, or parents of boys in your troop, or if you have a lawyer he/she might be willing to discuss the matter briefly without charge. You have all kinds of potential issues here, depending on your state and local laws. If it were in New Jersey (which I strongly suspect it is not if the land value is only $1,000-$1,500 per acre) you would have all kinds of zoning laws and environmental regulations to deal with. For example

Quixote says: Sally Ride - First woman astronaut - she was on Challenger. When I first read this I thought you were saying that she died in the Challenger disaster, which would not be correct. Now that I look at it again, that may not be what you were saying. It is literally correct that she was on Challenger, twice in fact -- her first flight in 1983 and again in 1984. After Challenger was destroyed she served on the commission investigating the tragedy. And she definitely does belong on the list, thank you for mentioning her. It seems that until your post we had forgotten

A few more and a few comments: While I would agree with the placement of Vaclav Havel on the list, if he is there, then the list must also include Lech Walesa -- perhaps a bit higher on the list. While Havel brought a free and democratic Czechoslovakia out of the collapse of the Soviet bloc (and then allowed the natural de-merger of his own country), I think Walesa did more to bring about that collapse. He and his Solidarity movement demonstrated that a Communist country could have an opposition movement, and no matter what the Communists did to stop him, he eventually prevailed. And j

Rooster, in discussing the "moral standards" that are "enforced by the BSA", says: These standards are not from one religion (or "one type of religious belief"). They are, for the most part, reflected in the major religions of the world (Christianity, Judaism, Muslim, Hindu, etc.) That's not true, at least as to Christianity and Judaism. Both these religions are divided on the morality of homosexuality and the morality of excluding gays from full membership in their faith. There are openly gay Episcopalian priests and openly gay Reform Jewish rabbis, and these denominations (or "mov

I am not sure that the teaching in school has really changed that much in terms of facts, places and dates. Although it may include things that were formerly omitted (how did the Pilgrims feel, from what I have seen from my own childrens' school papers, they still do learn about Thomas Jefferson, the Civil War, Teddy Roosevelt and all the rest of it. I think the issue is not so much what kids learn in school, but what they retain. This also goes for adults. On these tests where college-age kids do so poorly, I suspect that adults of my generation would not do much better -- and we did

My question is, who within a troop should be making the decision as to whether attendance at religious services is mandatory; and secondarily, who should be making the decision as to what excuses are legitimate? My understanding of "boy run" is that the boys make the rules except where there would be a violation of BSA policy; or involving health and safety issues not specified by BSA policy (but which would almost always involve interpretations of BSA documents (Guide to Safe Scouting, Safe Swim Defense, etc.) anyway; or financial matters. I know that "discipline" is a hot subject and some

Thank you, sctmom, for actually reading what I wrote...

Quixote says: One behavior is normal, the other is not. very simple. And that relates to whether someone should be penalized for doing what is not "normal" how, exactly?

Quixote said: Whether you like it or not, there is a HUGE difference between being married and being an avowed homosexual. Didn't say there wasn't. What I did say is that there is no difference that has anything to do with what I was discussing. And since you have not said anything about the issue I was discussing, you have not really contradicted me.

On Rooster's original post: I agree that this is a strange-sounding case. In reality it may be a little less strange if, as I suspect, the "at least a year" refers not to his actual sentence but to his earliest parole eligibility date. If this was in New Jersey, and he had been sentenced to 5 years (which is within the range of options for this type of offense), after credits for working in prison and "good time," his first parole eligibility date would be 12 months and about a week (I don't have the chart in front of me.) Also, I don't know what type of facilities they have in New York, b

Rooster says: I'm not an avowed heterosexual. That is to say, I don't go around telling everyone that I'm a heterosexual. First of all, I think sctmom's point was that since the Scoutmaster in question apparently was not an avowed homosexual, the anti-gay policy would not have excluded him. The issue is not whether he is heterosexual, homosexual or something else (and I think experts in the field would mostly vote for something else.) The issue is what he did, and secondarily, why the methods adopted by the BSA to prevent this (which have nothing to do with one's orientation)

Unfortunately, respect for the beliefs of others is not "in style" right now in this country (and in many other countries as well.) This isn't the 60s and 70s. So many people are convinced that their way is the only right way, that maybe the national motto should be changed to "My way or the highway." This is especially true for people who think they have "found the answer" on religion, like a few of our regular posters here. And that attitude has become reflected within the BSA, through the imposition of one type of relgious belief as the national standard for adult leaders.(This message

A bit of clarification might produce better answers for you and might also help you better understand the situation and how you might deal with it. When you say "monthly leaders meeting," are you talking about the district (or council) roundtable? Who (as in what position) is questioning you about what is going on in your unit? Is this questioning going on while you are sitting around the meeting-table with other unit leaders, or is it off on the side when you attend a meeting? Are other unit leaders similarly questioned about what is going on in their units? And, are other unit leaders j

Well, a Cub Scout camping trip seems to have gotten in the way of me keeping up with this forum, but I have finally read everything posted since Friday morning. Chances are I will never have the time to write responses to everything I would have otherwise, but there were a couple things in Rooster's latest post that jumped out at me, so I'll say something about them and maybe catch up with the rest later (or maybe not.) Rooster says: Second, we would have contradictory standards. What kind of message does that send to the Scouts? It's immoral in the Mid-West but not on the West Coas

twin-wasp says: Personally, I advocate leaving it up to the sponsor and the troop committee. Today a committee can reject a volunteer because he is not of their religion. I think scouting would be better served if committees were free to accept or reject gays, with national and the council staying out of it. I am also all in favor of rules about what can and cannot be discussed with the boys. I also support the Supreme Court decision. Scouting is a private group, and the court should not impose membership rules. However, that does not mean that the rules that exist are just. We