NJCubScouter

You ok there, Scouter99?

Sexual advances and sexual touching are to be reported as YP violations, and it sounds like this was done. It has nothing to do with "gay." Packsaddle is correct, at one point you say the perpetrator was a "scout" and at another point it was a "scouter." If the behavior was sexual in nature it is a YP violation regardless of the age and status of the perpetrator, though the consequences may be different.

Hmmm, maybe that was my problem. My father told me I could do it. Maybe I was rebelling against that. (In reality, I could have, I just didn't.)

Southpaw, thanks for the explanation. I knew it was something like that but I did not realize it was so "lockstep." I am sure there must be some reason for pushing the boys into a Team when (in my opinion) they are at the perfect age for exercising troop-wide leadership and really being able to instruct and guide the younger Scouts, but that reason is not, shall we say, immediately apparent to me. It is my understanding that the 11-year-old thing has something to do with the organization and beliefs of the church itself, so I won't go there.

I think that stopped being the case more than 100 years ago.

Well, that's the best-case scenario in that situation, at least from the driver's point of view.

Our troop uses Scoutlander. It is ok. It is not spectacular. It sometimes seems to have a mind of its own as to when reminders are sent out and to whom, although in all likelihood that is probably human error. I don't know for sure, because the humans in question always deny it's their fault.

This is just an example of something that to some degree is part of human nature, but I am seeing it more and more: A lot of people believe they have it tougher than everybody else. They use it as an excuse not to do the things they don't want to do. I remember asking someone if they would join the committee, mainly to do BOR's. Oh, no, this person said, I've been on the board of my older son's soccer league for five years (or something like that), and I've had enough. This person had (and has) TWO sons in the troop. Oh, so it's okay for me (who by that time had NO sons in the troop) to help support the program and do BOR's for YOUR sons, but you won't do them for anybody else's? (I didn't actually say that, and to be fair, this person has since taken on the job of coordinating our major annual fundraiser. But at the time I was a little taken aback.) As for being "hard" on someone, it is not asking too much to expect someone to do their "job", however it is they came to be in that job. You use the term "voluntold," but there is still a choice being made to be a member of an organization where the leaders have the power to tell you what volunteer position you are going to perform.

Did that really happen? If so, what was the outcome? If the "insurance stamp" is considered proof of insurance in MA, they should have to accept it elsewhere. (I've never heard of an insurance stamp on the registration, in NJ we have a separate insurance card too. And boy, do they get bent out of shape if you don't have it with you.)

Even if that were true, it has nothing to do with the current "flag" issues. Like I said before, the current issues are not about what "the" flag(s) meant in the 1860's, it is about what they meant in the 1960's and since then. I don't think anyone can deny that in the 1960's (and 50's), the adoption of those flags was all about race. It was adopted as a symbol of the fight to protect segregation and of white supremacy. I think those flags should have come down a long time ago.

Hmm. They don't say exactly the same thing, unless the material you have bolded above is interpreted to be followed by the words "if any." And the whole thing is worded oddly, at least to me. It seems to be directed toward someone from out of Pa. who finds himself or herself in that state for between one and 30 days and wants to volunteer to work with youth during that time, as opposed to someone who is already a volunteer somewhere else and is travelling as part of a troop to somewhere in Pa. But the council web site seems to suggest that it does apply to adults traveling with groups from out of state.

How about this, from the same council web site: http://newbirthoffreedom.org/2015/06/15/out-of-state-volunteers-coming-to-nbof-camps-this-summer/ I have to say, RS, your statement about out-of-state trips into Pa. caught my eye, because my troop is about to do their usual week of summer camp at a council camp in Pa., and they do 2 or 3 weekend trips a year in Pa. But I think the statement above covers it. (Assuming it is an accurate rendition of the law, but I tend to think that a BSA council would be very careful about making sure that if it is giving legal advice on its web site (which it is), the advice is correct.) The one issue for me would be that the out-of-state volunteer must be able to "provide proof of compliance with the laws of his or her state regarding background clearances and child protection laws." For someone from a state that has no specific legal requirements (like New Jersey), what are you supposed to show? I would think your driver's license would be enough, since it shows where you live. I'm not sure how you are supposed to prove that your state does not require background checks. I suppose the leaders from my troop could bring with them the entire set of New Jersey statutes and administrative regulations, and if anyone asks them for proof of compliance, they can just point to the 100+ volumes of books and say, "See, it doesn't say a word about it!" I'm kidding, but it does make one wonder.

dfolson, I have to admit I mis-read your initial post. I thought you were talking about your own son and responded from that perspective. Now I see you are the advancement chair and dealing with the Scout in that capacity. It's much more of a tightrope-walk for a parent. I don't think there is anything wrong with giving a Scout advice, such as about getting organized, making a plan, etc. I would first check with the Scoutmaster and any official or unofficial "Eagle advisers" that your troop may have to make sure a whole bunch of people aren't bombarding the Scout with the same advice. Added note: You mention that he has stopped working on MB's. Do you know what he has left to do? And you say he has a draft of a project plan but hasn't filled out the workbook. Does he have at least verbal approval from the project beneficiary, or his project still at the idea stage? The reason I ask these questions is that maybe he needs to work on one thing at a time. I have seen boys who need to be working on merit badges and their project at the same time, and if I boy gets "overwhelmed" easily as seems to be the case here, that may be a problem. But I guess it also depends on exactly how old he is. If his 16th birthday was last week, it's one thing and he can probably put together a plan to do one thing at a time and make it. If his 17th birthday is tomorrow, and he still has 8 Eagle-required MB's to do plus the project, he may not have that luxury. He can make it, but obviously he has to get going.

I'm trying to come up with a joke about that, but it's a futile Enterprise.

I've been there, in both roles in the story. When I was a 16-year-old Life Scout, I made a conscious decision that I was not going to do the work necessary to make Eagle, and I didn't. It was not that I was done with Scouting - I remained a Scout until my 18th birthday and was then an ASM until I started college. In my last two years in the troop I was SPL, JASM and went to Philmont. I just decided to give priority to leadership in the troop and to non-Scouting activities, rather than advancement. My father, who was the Scoutmaster, was disappointed with this, but he didn't try to push me. I think he had a direct conversation with me about it exactly once, and when he got the answer he wasn't looking for, didn't bother me about it again. (Well, he did, later, I was still hearing about it in my late 40's. My youngest brother had taken a LITTLE of the heat off by making Eagle himself, but not all of it.) I did somewhat regret my decision later, but that was long after there was anything I could do about it. I did think about what my father did and didn't do, and had to conclude that he did the right thing by letting me make my own decision and not pushing me, however foolish my decision may have seemed to him. So now (well, not NOW, my son is 23 now) I'm a father and troop committee member with a son who made Life at 15 and proceeded to procrastinate in a spectacular fashion. His story sounds much like that of your son. He wanted to do it, he just was doing it v e r y s l o w l y, and there were times when he decided he wasn't going to make it, at which time(s) I left him alone. Then he would start working on it again, and I would encourage him. I won't tell the whole story, suffice it to say that he did make it, and made it legitimately, but did it in a way that has become somewhat legendary in our troop. (Don't wait until the last minute, like ____________.") He packed a LOT of work, and a lot of paperwork, into the last 2 months before his birthday, and especially the last 3 weeks, which is when he actually did his project. About a month before his birthday, the general consensus was that there was no hope, but he did it anyway. It wasn't just the project, there were still a couple of required MB's up in the air. So, what about me? I was probably a bit more involved than I should have been. But I can honestly say that HE did the work. I did provide encouragement and advice, which I probably should have left to other leaders (and he got it from them too.) I was concerned that while I wanted him to make it, it needed to be HIS accomplishment. And in the end it was... with perhaps a little more "help" from Dad than would have been ideal, but it was still still his accomplishment. I don't know if that helps. It's not an easy thing, at least it wasn't for me.

At the risk of pulling this thread off on a tangent... Southpaw, you mention something that I have been a bit confused about. At a certain age (I guess it's 13 or 14), do ALL Boy Scouts in an LDS troop HAVE to move to a Varsity team? In other words, do LDS Boy Scout troops consist ONLY of boys below 13 or 14? And if you haven't been, for example, SPL by that birthday, you're never going to be? And you mention a two-year window, but doesn't the youth have the opportunity to continue to advance in the Varsity team? They have the same ranks as a Boy Scout troop, don't they? You'll have to excuse my ignorance, here in New Jersey I have "seen" one LDS troop in my life, and to my knowledge I have never "seen" a Varsity team. (I have seen Venture Patrols in non-LDS troops whose Scoutmasters have them incorrectly wearing the orange (or blaze or whatever it's called) shoulder loops that are supposed to be for Varsity, but that's a different story.)

Having spent about half a semester studying the 14th Amendment and its aftermath in law school, and digging back into my memory for what I learned, part of the explanation would be that until the mid-20th century, the federal courts generally treated the 14th Amendment as if it did not exist. Another part of the explanation is that even in the 14th Amendment itself, it was contemplated that the provisions of the amendment weren't necessarily going to enforce themselves, nor did the amendment itself provide all the detail that would be necessary. I believe it is section 5 of the amendment that says that Congress is authorized to pass appropriate legislation to carry out the purposes of the amendment. (Or something like that.) Another part of the explanation is that not all of the civil rights legislation of the second half of the 20th century relates to the 14th Amendment. That amendment deals with actions by governments. Parts of the 1964 Civil Rights Act governs actions by non-governmental entities and persons, for example the prohibitions on discrimination in employment and "public" accommodations, which despite their name are usually privately (i.e. non-governmentally) owned and operated. Those prohibitions are based, if memory from several decades ago serves me correctly, on the authority granted in the Commerce Clause. In the long span of human history covering every current and former nation on Earth, maybe it is. But in the United States, there was one "race" holding slaves and one "race" being slaves, so in context it really was about race.

The path of least resistance? Over the past few days I saw a couple of tv interviews with South Carolina Republican legislators who were basically acknowledging that by voting for the removal of the flag, they were probably causing the end of their own political careers. That does not seem like the path of least resistance to me. It was more like they were being forced to make a choice between doing the right thing or continuing to do the wrong thing, with the entire nation (including their own voters) watching, and they were deciding to do the right thing. Those legislators were probably taking the path of MOST resistance.

I got the same reminder Chisos received, last week. It appeared to be from National (noreply@@scouting.org) and said: "Our records indicate that your Youth Protection certification associated to Member ID xxxxxxxxx will expire within the next three months." And they were correct, too. So I actually retook the course that evening. I wonder if they keep statistics on how many people take the course the same day they receive the reminder. Not very many, I'm guessing, but I figured that if I did it, I wouldn't have to remember to do it some other day. As far as I am aware, nobody else in my unit would know about my training status until the recharter paperwork comes out later this year. Now, presumably, it will show that I am up to date.

Hmm. I just redid my YP training online at the end of last week. Amazingly, when I was finished I not only printed out the certificate, but saved it to a PDF so when I lose the piece of paper I still know where to find it (until my hard drive crashes, so I guess it's time for a backup.) Dare I look on myscouting.org now and check whether that PDF file is the sole remaining evidence that I retook the course? Or even the sole remaining evidence of my existence? Update: Yes, I dared. I seem to still exist. Must be my lucky day.

I am not going to comment on what some others have said about the Confederate flag issue. I am just going to give my own comments. I will first admit that I have not closely followed this issue over the years. I have never lived in the South. I am just a white guy from New Jersey, where we have our own issues, one of which is not what flag(s) should be flying at government buildings. I have learned a lot more about it recently than I knew previously. My understanding is that South Carolina (and some other Southern states) adopted some version of a Confederate flag or banner, or at least the central design of it, in or around the early 1960's, as a symbol of the state's resistence to federally imposed desegregation and civil rights for black people. I don't think anyone really disputes that. At that time, the state and local governments in those states had as their policy, whether official or unofficial or a little of both, that black people were not to enjoy equal rights, that they were second-class citizens, and were to be kept in their own second-rate schools, at the back of the bus, and away from lunch counters and other places frequented by white folks. The "flag", regardless of whether it was square or rectangular or actually looked like any flag used by the actual Confederacy, was a symbol of that attitude - specifically, the state's position that it was appropriate to deny basic rights to black people. So the issue is not what a particular piece of cloth or design meant in the 1860's, or if it even existed then. The issue is what it meant in the 1960's, and since then. Now, happily, things are different. Racism still exists to some degree, and the South is not alone in this. It still exists to a degree in New Jersey, and presumably everywhere else. The difference is that the official policy of every state is that people of all "races" are equal in the eyes of the law and cannot be denied the right to equality, at least not by the government. Perhaps this is accepted grudgingly in some places, but it is accepted. So we're all to be treated equally, right? Except, in South Carolina (at least for another few hours, I haven't seen the news today) and in some other Southern states, there is still a symbol on state grounds of the old attitude that black people are second-class citizens. So a black person is completely welcome to visit his or her state capital, and in some cases work in the state capital, be elected to serve their state and/or legislative district in the state capital, but... when they go there, they are still walking past a symbol of the attitude that the state can treat them as a second-class citizen. So they are no longer second-class citizens, but the symbol of their second-class status is there, on state property, staring them in the face. That just seems wrong to me, and I don't think the issue is really any more complicated than that.

christineka, I am going to try to ignore some of the things in your post, such as your 12-year-old almost-Life Scout who is in a hurry to make sure that no more than the minimum 6 months pass between his Life BOR and making Eagle. I am not sure some of the other forum members will be able to ignore it. (And I guess I didn't succeed in completely ignoring it, either. But I will make no further comment about it and try to answer your actual question.) If your son's troop has gone camping only once in six months as you said in the other thread, and if that turns out to be their usual pace (and hopefully they issue a calendar so you can know when they're going camping), then I do not think the troop is truly delivering a Scouting program. Opinions may differ as to what the minimum is, the BSA probably has an idea (probably whatever the lowest number on the lowest level of Journey to Excellence), but as someone else said in the other thread, many troops camp 10 to 12 times a year. Our troop camps 10 times a year, one of which is the week-long summer camp. (By troop tradition we don't camp in December, which is not to avoid the cold because if they were doing that they would probably skip February instead; it's just the way it is, and we don't camp in August.) I don't see how you can have a full Scouting program camping much less than that. A by-product (though not the goal) of a full camping schedule is that there are plenty of opportunities to fulfill various advancement requirements, including the 20 nights for Camping MB, and the camping requirements for OA. So a change needs to be made. How you go about doing that varies from troop to troop, and since you are in an LDS troop there may be things about the decision-making structure that I do not understand, and I will not try to guess. If there is a functioning troop committee, you might volunteer to join it. If there is a functioning PLC, your son can try to make his voice heard there, if he is in a position to do so. If he is not on the PLC, he can talk to his patrol leader, who is. If your son wants to join another troop that has a real camping schedule, and if there is an opportunity to do so, it might not be a bad idea.

Doors of what?

And by the way, does anyone know when this new edition of the Boy Scout Handbook is coming out? I assume "they" are talking about sometime before the end of this year, but does anyone know anything more specific?

Never heard of this before, but I think BadWolf is correct. And it would be up to each SM around the country to decide whether to sign a blue card for a counselor who is not registered with "our" district and is somewhere in the Northern Star Council doing "classes" over the Internet. Some might, some might not. Another interesting difference is that these seem to be "live" classes, with a real counselor, just using the Internet to communicate. From that article I got the impression that they were talking about just a Scout and his smartphone and a server somewhere, delivering the Merit Badge. That's not how it works and I don't think that is how it is going to work anytime soon.