NJCubScouter

BS-87, I am probably going to regret asking this, but how is Marco Rubio not a natural-born citizen? His article on Wikipedia (the source of all knowledge both correct and incorrect, but this is probably correct) says he was born in Miami, Florida in 1971. The last time I checked, Florida was a state, and although my memory isn't always perfect, I am pretty sure it became one long before 1971. Doesn't that do it? Not that I would vote for him anyway. In all likelihood I will be voting for that other guy who you say is not a natural born citizen, but I am not going to ask you about him. I think its been pretty much resolved.

Not sexual harassment. But it would be a violation of the various statements by the BSA that people should not be asked their orientation and that the exclusion applies only to "avowed homosexuals." Of course, this is part of the whole issue that shortridge raises. There is no handbook, manual, training module or anything of that sort that mentions the subject at all. There are statements on bsalegal.org, there have been press releases and newspaper articles quoting "BSA spokesmen", there have been statements in legal briefs, and to my knowledge there has been one resolution adopted by the "national officers," which may be found here: http://www.scoutingforall.org/data/layer02/aaic/BoyscoutsBSA.pdf. (And yes, Scouting for All is an organization that opposes the exclusion policy, but this resolution seems to be the same one that I saw years ago on the BSA's own web site. That's another thing about this subject, trying to find the various statements on the Internet is like trying to find an individual raindrop two weeks after a hurricane. Press releases and newspapers articles tend to disappear after awhile, and material at both scouting.org and bsalegal.org does the same. Years ago I saw a statement somewhere about the "policy" regarding youth members who say they are gay, and it did NOT say that the exclusion applies only to adults -- it said something about "counseling" the youth, essentially to determine whether they really are gay, with at least the implication of a possible removal if they insist that they are. But go find that on the Internet now -- I have tried several times, and have not been able to find it.)

All I know is that my office was shaking pretty good for about 30 seconds, and I am not really close to Washington DC, or Virginia. I looked on the US Geological Survey site and there were reports of shaking as far north as Vermont and New Hampshire. (Actually there was one report from Chicago, but I would suspect that that person had their own personal instability going, rather than the one that was rattling the pictures on my wall.) And then a few hours later I saw a headline on the CNN web site, "Magnitude 5.8 Quake Shakes Virginia, DC, NY." Hello? There's nothing between DC and NY? It sort of reminds me of that other thread where someone linked to the Jon Stewart story on the Republican front-runners, where the Fox people mentioned the candidates who came in first, second and fourth in the Iowa straw poll, and left out the third place finisher, Ron Paul. Oh well, I've gotten used to New Jersey being ignored...

People don't want to pay taxes, but they do want their street repaired, or the school in their neighborhood to stay open, or a nice park (national, state or local) to go to, or for a pension or student loan to be available to the veteran or student in their family, or thousands upon thousands of other things that the government does. Certainly there is some "waste, fraud and corruption," but more often than not "waste" really means "spending that someone else benefits from instead of me." (Or, if dealing with members of Congress, "...instead of most of MY constituents.") Unfortunately, this sort of hypocrisy is inherent in a democratic system, and in OUR particular system, when there are really tough issues to deal with (as there are now), the system is basically designed to produce gridlock (as we have now.) To paraphrase someone (I'm not sure who), it's the worst system in the world, except for all the others.

Engineer61 says: Can't make school break trips and summer camp because you have to travel to another parent? For get the POR's. Not necessarily. Definitely not in "my" troop. Arrangements can always be made for unusual situations.

Am I the only one here who doesn't have a Facebook account? I'm not planning to get one, either. I guess that's the ultimate security measure: People can't see something that doesn't exist. So among other things, this means I cannot look at the Scouts' Facebook pages. (Or at least nothing past the front page; as you can tell I am not completely sure how it works.) No offense to anyone here, but quite frankly the idea of looking at the Facebook pages of other peoples' children sounds like a slightly creepy thing to do anyway. Not that it's a good idea for kids (or adults) to put on Facebook a lot of the things they put on there. (Or so I hear.)

I guess I should feel lucky that this kind of constant reshuffling does not go on in my council. This council is the product of a merger of two councils about ten years ago, and since that time (as far as I know) there has been one change in districts. At that time (about 6-7 years ago I would say) they merged one district out of existence (by splitting it in half and merging the pieces with different neighboring districts.) That's it. No combining and then splitting up, etc. Where there has been constant change is in the professional staffing of my district, with a number of appointments that seemed to last a year or less before the person was shuffled somewhere else. But maybe that's normal. I have never gotten involved enough in council/district affairs to know why things happen the way they do, and that's not entirely by accident; I have a strong feeling that I don't want to know.

Tampa Turtle says: I dislike the "too old for Eagle" argument. That should not be the focus for scouts. I think that's really up to the young man to decide -- particularly if you broaden the issue from "Eagle" to "advancement in general." I think that someone should explain to him the Boy Scout advancement program as well as the Venturing recognition program and what he would have to do to participate in each. He may not be interested in either -- in which case his main decision-making point would probably be which unit has a program that best suits his interests. Or maybe, once he understands that Venturing has a recognition program that involves activities appropriate for the the 14-21 age group, whereas in Boy Scouting, if he wanted to advance at all he would have to start with activities that are geared more to a 10-12 age group, that might influence his decision. But who knows? Maybe his sole interest is in camping, and ''maybe'' the troop has a better camping program than the crew. (It's probably the case somewhere.) Maybe the presence of young ladies in the crew will be a factor in his decision, one way or the other. There are a number of factors, but I don't think advancement should be excluded as a possible factor.

I also was very proud when my son earned the Den Chief Service Award -- the first of several things my son earned that I never did, including Eagle and the World Conservation Award.

John-in-KC, I hear that so much in this forum, that the Scouting program from 72-79 or so was a disaster, and words to that effect. I don't know when you were a Scout, but I was a Boy Scout from 1969 to 1976. I barely noticed any change when the 1972 handbook came out except that the advancement requirements for the lower ranks were organized differently (which didn't directly affect me since I made First Class under the old handbook), the number of merit badges for the ranks was different, the patches were more colorful, and the terminology for almost everything was different. Big deal. My troop had the same program before and after the change (and in fact it was more outdoor- and backpacking-oriented due to a change in leadership.) I went to Philmont in 1974 and it didn't seem like people were refusing to go because of the changes in the handbook. I think most of the "disaster" is a myth. If troops stopped going camping, shame on them. Don't blame a book. I hear a lot about the 1972 handbook from people in this forum who were Scouts either before or after the time period in question. I'd be interested in knowing what people think who were Scouts during the same time period that I was. Having said that, I do think that the way the requirements are organized now is better than in the "skill awards" era. I think some of the other changes were misguided, or just plain didn't work. But a "disaster"? Give me a break.

Ilford, are you saying that you are considering establishing your own advancement program? If so, would that be instead of, or in addition to, the one provided in the Scout Handbook? And what would you use as requirements for your skill awards?

Oh good, when I saw the title of this thread, and before I saw it was a message by Eamonn, I thought it might be another thread about the Chief Scout Executive and his staff by one of their admirers in the forum.

RememberSchiff: A Boy Scout camp with a telescope... and another telescope, and a planetarium, and a weathercam, and more, in it's science center donated by General Electric: http://www.bma2.org/Ockanickon/FOSC.html http://www.bma2.org/Ockanickon/Weather.html I was never actually in the science center, though my son was, many times. My car was parked partially within the "vision" of the weathercam a few times. I think there are some computers in there, too.

I have never heard of an event like that. I have heard of a charter presentation, although "my" troop doesn't actually do one of those either. I envision a 15-minute-or-so ceremony including someone saying "a few words" -- literally, a few. But not 3-4 hours of sitting around listening to stories, most of which I would guess everybody has heard before. In my troop the boys would not be the only ones not sitting still for that. You say the PLC is going to come up with something, but I don't see the point of the event at all. A slide show from summer camp and other "year in review" type presentations sound like a great thing for a Court of Honor -- 10-15 minutes per Court of Honor, in between the awarding of advancements and other recognitions. But as you say, keep the main focus on the boys.

SeattlePioneer asks: Is anyone getting the impression that new programs are being "rolled out" and traditional ones modified so often that things are losing focus and coherence? Well, me, for one. And a related concern is, who is going to do all the paperwork for all these new things? As I said, I think this program, by itself, is a good idea. I also think the new outdoor awards program, by itself, is a good idea. Same for that family award, whatever it's called. Same for Journey to Excellence, although as I have said, I think that might be too complicated all by itself. Same for... well, I forget. There are probably others. But when you put it all together, for many troops it is too much. I don't think my troop is participating in any of the things I have listed so far. I think part of the reason for that is that it is often enough of a burden to get done the things that absolutely HAVE to get done, i.e. rechartering, camping reservations, tour permits... excuse me, now its tour PLANS, advancement recordkeeping, financial records, membership applications and the rest. As I have said before, I think BSA national suffers from "good idea syndrome." They are good at adding "good ideas." They are not so good at viewing the total impact of all the good ideas and deleting an idea or two.

afscout said: Well, I've done my damage to myself and think it's best that this be my last post to this forum. I suggest that the rest of us leave it at that.

First of all, would it be too cynical to notice that the "technology" portion of the Boy Scout requirements is about TRANSPORTATION technology, including energy, and the "corporate partner" on this program is ExxonMobil? Maybe it would be, because this is not the entire program; for Boy Scouts, the projectile and space science, motion-engineering and math requirements are not here. I assume somewhere in the remainder of the requirements the Computers and Robotics merit badges will be mentioned, you can't get much more STEM-ish than robotics. So don't be too offended ExxonMobil, but while I have your attention, could you please lower the price of your gasoline, you highway-robbing bunch of... Ok, ok. I'll calm down. Second of all, how long is it going to be before someone says "this isn't what Scouting is all about"? It has happened in almost every other thread where someone brings up technology or computer-related MB's or programs. So guys, you don't have to this time. We know, you don't like it. No need to remind us. Third of all, I DO like this kind of program, just as I like that new Outdoor Award, but what I wonder about is, how exactly does this fit into the troop program? Or maybe to be more precise, who is supposed to bring this to the attention of the boys and "administer" it? Is it going to go into the handbook? But then of course the older boys won't see it because they already have their handbook; we basically have a bunch of older boys who are still working out of the 11th edition, and now the first printing of the 12th edition (if I have my numbers correct) is possibly going to become out of date already with the addition of this sort of thing, if it hasn't already. Neither the boys nor the adults in our troop rush out to buy the new printing of the handbook every time National gets a bright idea to change or add something. Is this considered "advancement"? Is it going to be in Troopmaster? Am I, as troop advancement coordinator, supposed to have anything to do with it? Should there be a troop "counselor" for this program? If so, our most likely candidate is someone who is already an assistant scoutmaster who is already fulfilling about three-quarters of one of the committee roles, and he shouldn't even be doing that... So many questions...

Although I know what I am about to say is considered heresy by some in this forum, I don't regard decades-old Scouting literature as being "official" at all anymore, especially a book that is 98 years old. It served its purpose and now there are new books. And I know many people say the current books are terrible, and I would agree that some of the old books may have advice that is worth listening to, ideas worth considering, etc., but even that is not an "official" pronouncement of what the program is today. So personally I would not worry about inconsistencies in a book that was written by a variety of authors 98 years ago, and I would seek more recent advice. But, as they say, your mileage may vary, and I know that among the people who speak up about things like this, my opinion seems to be in the minority.

We still have a distributor in my area. It is in a sporting goods store. When my son started in Cub Scouts, there was another one, in a mens'/boys' clothing store, but they stopped carrying Scouting stuff, probably almost 10 years ago. Most of the families in my troop get their Scout uniforms and handbooks at the sporting goods store because it is much closer than either of the council shops. (Not sure if they are actually national shops or not.) I can't say the "customer service" experience at the sporting goods store is really great; there is nobody really staffing the "Scouting section", which is stuck in amongst everything else with no sign or anything, and you have to know what you need when you go in there because I don't think anyone in the store really knows. But it is there. I am not quite sure how this came up in the "Trail to Eagle Camp" section though.

I was in the Leadership Corps in the 1973-75 area, but we did not wear the forest green shirt or the beret. We wore the same shirt and hat as the rest of the troop, with the trapezoidal Leadership Corps patch on our shoulder, instead of a patrol patch. I still have my shirt with the Scout BSA strip and the Leadership Corps patch... and a Junior Assistant Scoutmaster patch, which I guess means I should have removed the Leadership Corps patch, but apparently never did. Interestingly, on emb's site (which is a great site, I have looked at it a number of times before) there is a photo of a forest green Scout BSA strip stapled to card which reads, "This Scout BSA strip is provided for use by members of the Leadership Corps only and should be sown over right pocket in place of Explorer strip." This would suggest that maybe all of the forest green shirts at the time were sold with the Explorer strip, but that they would give you (or sell you) the Scout BSA strip separately if you were buying the shirt to wear as a Leadership Corps member. If that's the case, then the shirt SctDad bought is not really a "hybrid" -- it's a shirt that was worn by a Leadership Corps member who apparently neglected to sew on the Scout BSA strip -- or never got the strip.

afscout, The issue of having to turn the application in before the 18th birthday is one that has been discussed several times in this forum. There is no such requirement -- at least not by national. There are some councils -- like mine -- that do require that it be turned in before the 18th birthday. So when you say this requirement did not exist in the mid 80's "unlike today," it isn't supposed to exist today, either. I do not know what would happen if the council refused to accept it after the birthday and someone appealed to national. National SHOULD overrule the council, but whether they would, I don't know. As far as I know, nobody in our council has "tested" it -- the council is fairly good at making this "requirement" clear in advance, so everybody knows about it and everybody (as far as I know) does it. In fact, my son's application received the unit signatures on a Thursday night and his birthday was on Sunday (as in three days later), so I (who works a few miles from the council office) was there on Friday afternoon with the application. None of this helps your friend, though. What I said above would suggest that IF he had appealed to national at the time his application was turned down by the council, he would have (or should have) been successful. He didn't do that. So here's a question that I do NOT remember being discussed here before: What's the time limit for an appeal? Is it a week? A month? 90 days? (There is a logical reason for thinking that might be the answer.) IS there a deadline? But whatever the deadline is, and even if there is no specific deadline, I find it very difficult to believe that you can wait 15 years. Unless you have a really, REALLY good reason, but short of being stranded somewhere on an iceberg or something, I don't think national is going to want to hear about this at this point.

OK bnelon, do you know when in the 3rd quarter that is going to be? Because as of a few days ago, it's the 3rd quarter. And I hope this going to be an actual release, not another now-you-see-it now-you-don't deal (complete with typos and some really shoddy editing that made it fairly clear it was not a completed product.)

It is very dangerous, TampaTurtle. Thousands of people die from inhaling it every year. Why has the government not stepped in and banned this substance?

I82much (I have that problem too sometimes), it's getting a little confusing. Your first post suggested that you were no longer CC, but your second post suggests that you still are. Which is correct? Also, did the ASM's husband want to be CC? Is that the real problem here?

I'll give a practical answer rather than a "rules" answer: If the CC in my troop did that on any significant issue, he/she would soon find him/herself a "committee of one." That would certainly cut down on "dissenting votes" in the future, but it would also cut down on having anybody else around to do the work of supporting of the troop.