NJCubScouter

I think that if you want to have a meaningful discussion about education, you should re-start the thread with the word "socialist" omitted. It is just a distraction from the real subject. Some people seem to think that any government program is "socialist", but that's not a definition that would be accepted by most scholars, and more importantly, it's not the way the word is understood by most people. I (and I think most people) view socialism, capitalism etc. as a description of an entire governmental system, not one program here or one private industry there. Public education is a government program, as is road repair, police, the military, etc. In this country these government programs exist in the context of a mostly free-market system, so we call our system a free-market or capitalist system. In that setting, government programs do not become "socialist programs". And if you want to get into theory here, government control of everything is not necessarily socialism, or even communism, it's totalitarianism. Socialism can, in theory, exist with a very minimal government or perhaps even no government at all. Socialism would not necessarily be a bad system to live under, if it were operated by perfect beings and not us pesky humans. Unfortunately, "socialist" has become one of those epithets that is thrown around as a means of character assassination. I sometimes listen to certain radio shows where President Obama is called a "socialist" and a "Marxist" and I just have to laugh at the absurdity of it all. These people have no clue what they're talking about, and sadly enough, some past posts in this forum suggest that some people here agree with this nonsense. So far I like (and agree with) Lisabob's post the most, and notice it talks about the subject of education without even mentioning "socialism." I think that's the way to go, if you really want a discussion of public education. And on that subject, I will wait before posting anything, if ever. As I have said in the past, I am a former member of my local school board, so I do have a few thoughts on the subject of public education, including the good, the bad and the ugly.

On changing the Adult Application again: I believe that in the discussion of the new Youth Protection requirements, there was mention that the Adult Application would be changed to reflect the new requirement (part of which is that a YP training certification must accompany the application; I'm not sure if that applies only to new leaders or also to existing leaders switching/adding positions.)

It seems to me from reading this thread and a few others in the past, that there are still some leaders out there who do not "get" the difference between Scout and Tenderfoot. When I became a Boy Scout, the joining rank (or badge) was Tenderfoot. "Scout" was created as part of the 1972 (or so) changes (which also included the introduction of skill awards and merit badge requirements for the lower ranks) and Tenderfoot was turned into a "real" rank. But I get the sense that even today, going on 40 years later, the nature of the Tenderfoot rank is still misunderstood by a few.

In 2001 there were still separate applications for the different youth programs, unlike the unified application that exists today. If you have any adult applications from 2001, those are out of date also, as they don't have the criminal background check information (among other things.)

Our troop gives the Scout badge to a boy who has earned Arrow of Light, once they submit the application and their parent signs off that they have completed the pamphlet requirements regarding child abuse. Personally I see nothing wrong with asking them to recite the Scout Oath and Law, tie the square knot and the few other requirements, even though they have already done them as Webelos.

Some may be interested to know that the Wikipedia Featured Article of the Day, right now, is the article about William Hillcourt (Green Bar Bill). (Which, for the un-Wiki-initiated, means there is a "teaser" for the article on Wikipedia's main page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page, and then if you click on the "William Hillcourt" link it will take you to the full article.) Featured Articles of the Day are usually changed somewhere between the late afternoon and evening, so this article is probably more than halfway through its turn in the spotlight. However, the article is always accessible by going to the main page and searching on the subject. Wikipedia has many other Scouting articles as well, some of which are pretty good, and at least one of which has been the subject of some controversy and "edit warring." (Take a wild guess.) But at least today they have chosen to give the spotlight to a real hero of Scouting and the one to which this site is dedicated.

"Camped through all four seasons in one weekend" Now that I think about it, if you count a hailstorm as winter precipitation, it happened to me, not just in a weekend, but in a couple of hours, at Philmont, and I assume many thousands of other Scouts have had the same experience there. Maybe for you folks from mountainous areas that is normal, but for a group of teenagers from New Jersey, the last thing we were expecting was to be attacked by iceballs from the sky in the middle of July on the top of an actual mountain. (I forget which one.) Of course, maybe that doesn't happen anymore, due to global warming.

That's a great list, dScouter. I especially like "camped through all four seasons in one weekend."

But Bando, why let facts get in the way of a good political narrative?

Our troop always (at least as long as I have been involved) goes to a camp with a dining hall and, as far as I know, no opportunity to do patrol cooking. I have lobbied for some variety in camp selection, both in going to different camps and in sometimes doing patrol cooking, but my view has not prevailed to date. I do like cheffy's troop's idea of splitting up the meals between patrol cooking and dining hall, but I think if that were done at a camp that has a very active program during the day, I would switch the meals around: Breakfast and lunch in the dining hall, dinner in the campsites, by patrol.

I think it is best to avoid generalizations like "this group isn't doing their jobs" or "that group is only in this for (state reason here)." Some people do a good job at what they do, some people don't, and there are many in between. Some do what they do for the right reasons, some not, and some a mixture. Hopefully, in any given place, you get the right mixture of people so that things go the right way. My sense is that the majority of the time in the BSA, things are done right, or mostly right. But it is the nature of a forum like that this that you usually don't hear when things went right, because there's usually little to no motivation to post about things that went right. As the old saying goes, dog bites man is not news, man bites dog is news. BSA can issue 20 new merit badges in a row with good requirements, good manuals, proper timing, etc. etc., but the ones we talk about are the centennial ("historic") MB's which were a colossal foulup. I didn't write very much about how things went with my son's Eagle because I had nothing to complain about, in fact people at both the troop and district level went out of their way to help him. But those kinds of stories don't end up as threads in this forum that go on for more than a year. It's just the way things are. (And yes, I realize I may have made a couple of generalizations in there, but I have tried to qualify them with "usually", "generally", etc.) One more generalization: In my experience, most people in an organization have a tendency to see themselves, or their department or whatever, as the center of the organization, and to see the purpose of the rest of the people in or around the organization to be so that they can do their jobs. This is true in voluntary organizations like the BSA as well as in businesses and other enterprises. I saw this when I was a school board member; every possible constituent group (paid or unpaid, or paying) saw themselves as the center of the universe, the driver of the boat, the straw that stirs the drink, etc. I also saw this many years ago when I worked for a media organization. The people who produced the "content" tended to see themselves as the center of universe, the reason for everybody else to be there, etc. Much to my surprise at the time, the people who sold the advertising saw themselves basically the same way, along the lines of, it's nice that you guys write this stuff to go in between our ads. I think it's just human nature.

Why not have them signed by Theodore Roosevelt, the only President who actually cared about the movement itself? To take nothing away from Teddy Roosevelt, a great President (at least for his time, and a few of the things he did were not so great, but anyway...) who did indeed promote Scouting -- What is your basis for saying that other Presidents did not care about the Scouting movement? Maybe they did not make as big a show of it as he did, but that hardly means anything, as he was the master showman among all Presidents.

Wheeler and Somers are the camps at Mt. Allamuchy Scout Reservation, though when I first went there as a Scout in the early 70's I believe it was all just Allamuchy, and later the two sides of the lake were named Frenches and... I don't remember, and now they are what they are now. This was the Morris-Sussex Council Camp. Camp Winnebago was the "local" camp of the Watchung Area Council when my son was in the Cub Scouts. What I did not realize is that the Watchung Area Council previously had a camp in Hunterdon County (the Camp Watchung discussed in this thread.) Morris-Sussex and Watchung Area councils merged into Patriots Path around 2000. The main council camp is Allamuchy (Somers and Wheeler). Cub Scout Day Camp is, as stated above, held in a part of the Watchung Reservation in (or near) Mountainside, Union County. This is not council property, but part of the Union County park system. Scouts use this property at other times as well; over the past 7 or so years there have been at least two camporees there that I can recall. Winnebago is used for the district-wide Cub Scout weekend camping trips and for training, and possibly other things as well.

How about just "Freedom Council"? Or is there already one of those?

Generally, the reference letters are from persons listed as references on the application. This is not required, but it does make things simpler. Have you already submitted the application? Who (not by name, but generally) is listed as the religious reference? My suggestion would be that if you list a parent as the religious reference, you get a letter from that parent which explains why it is that a parent is the religious reference. That is exactly what my son did. My wife wrote the "parent" letter and I wrote the "religion" letter, and we also decided it was best to still get two (not one) letter from references outside the family (I guess it was one teacher and one extracurricular activity mentor). So even though only three letters were actually required, under these circumstances we decided it was best to have four. And my son passed the BOR.

I'm sure BadenP meant that in the same humorous, satirical tone with which this thread was started. I agree with Frank, if truth and accuracy were the standards for the forum, a lot of posts (and posters) would have to be removed. Of course, what and who that would be would depend on who the decider(s) were. Since they presumably would be fallible human beings like the rest of us, it's probably not a good idea.

DeaconLance, Unfortunately, the link provided by Shortridge doesn't seem to be working anymore, and I could not find the same document by a Google search. (I found what appear to be older versions, and council-specific versions, but not the current document that is (or was?) on the BSA national web site a couple of days ago when I followed the link from Shortridge's post.) I don't think it said that it applied only to situations where everybody is expected to attend, in fact I thought it said that everybody is free to attend or not attend, but now I'm relying on my memory, which isn't always a good idea at my age. You mention Jamboree and Philmont, but those are special situations and I don't think this thread (or the document that I can't find) really applies to them. At Jamboree and Philmont you have a huge number of Scouts and Scouters in one place at one time, so there are enough members of each religion to warrant both a separate space for worship and a clergyperson(s) (or other prayer leader) for each faith. My understanding is that this thread applies mainly to troop camping trips, "regular" summer camps and the like, where the "scale" is not the same and you might have one boy from this religion, another from that one, etc. etc., so it makes more sense to have an interfaith service.

Gern, is today Don't-Make-A-Direct-Statement Day, and I missed the memo? I know that Calico's heart is in the right place, but I'm not aware of any rule or precedent in this forum that would justify the deletion of this thread. On the other hand, I would feel better about it being here if the initial post had made clear, after stating this false rumor, that it was false. If you (Gern) thought that everybody would "get it", you apparently have a higher opinion of humanity than I do. But hopefully, they will also read the three posts after your initial one, and "get it."

AlFansome, well, I did realize that possibility, but I didn't see a punch-line anywhere. I also figured that if I, a non-hater of the President, didn't quite get that it was a joke, those around here who have a much less favorable view of the President, would get it even less.

This is false. See: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/eaglescouts.asp http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/e/obama-eagle-scouts.htm Yes, these are Internet sites and therefore inherently suspect, but a lot of the information above comes from the Internet as well. And then there's Glenn Beck, who would never let the truth stand in the way of a good tirade against the President. And besides, snopes.com has built up a pretty good reputation for accurate research and objectivity (I have seen them verify and debunk rumors on both sides of the political aisle.) Interestingly, some of the material in the post above is quoted verbatim in one or both of the pages I linked to. As discussed in other threads, it did take awhile for the President's signature to appear on the certificates, but the evidence is that it is there now. I would look at my son's certificate to check, but he hasn't had his COH yet and according to one of these articles, the President's signature appears on certificates for young men who had their EBOR after a certain date, and my son's was a few months before that. (So why hasn't he had his COH yet, you may ask? You may, but not in this thread.) I read Gern's post a couple of times for some hint of irony, some recognition that this isn't true, some acknowledgment that Glenn Beck isn't someone you should quote if you want to convince someone of something, but I didn't see it. So if this was a little joke and I was fooled, well, it wouldn't be the first time. Just ask my son, the practical joke king.(This message has been edited by njcubscouter)

Deacon Lance: And yet, in the guidelines that someone linked to earlier, the BSA disagrees with you. They say that a service should be "particular" to one faith only if ALL the participants are members of that faith. A majority isn't enough. I think that's a good guideline.

Oh no! Don't go, Packsaddle! How could you give up this forum for a dream job in an island paradise? Er... well... um... I guess I answered my own question. Seriously, congratulations and best of luck with everything. You will be missed around here. You are one of the true gentlemen of the forum and your perspective is always a valuable (and sometimes a calming) one. And that has nothing to do with the fact that, on the most controversial issues around here, you and I agree about 99 percent of the time. (This message has been edited by njcubscouter)

Why does anybody have to be called an "idiot" here? You can disagree with what the judge and/or jury did without any of them being "idiots".

Liz, You should be aware that (at least according to some posters in this forum) some councils discourage, or even prohibit, a CO that is an organization that is created and exists solely to be a CO (such as Friends of Crew 123, Inc.) LisaBob has given some of the reasons. I really think your next stop is the DE, even before you explore this further with the head of your Area group. One thing that may have to be cleared up before you go much further is the question you raised of whether your Area is legally an organization. That may be an issue. Among other things, the Crew will probably want to have a bank account, for which it needs to have a Federal Tax ID number, for which it needs to be some sort of legally recognized organization. (Unless things are different in your state.) But hopefully your DE, or someone available to him, has experience with these kinds of issues. The DE may also have an organization already lined up that wishes to be a CO -- maybe one with a meeting place, storage space for equipment, financial assistance -- but has not found a unit leader. If that is the case, then you are in the driver's seat because you can choose from your available options.

There was also one in there that sounded very similar to the Vulcan "live long and prosper" salute. (Which is actually derived from a Jewish ritual gesture, with the idea provided by Leonard Nimoy who knew of the gesture from his youth.) Another interesting one was the one in the photo, to the left of the "Scout sign", with the index and middle fingers flat against the palm and the ring and pinky fingers straight up. I can't do that. My ring finger insists on bending forward at least 45 degrees from the vertical. However, my wife and son can do it with no problem. So I guess they would be better Hindus than I would?(This message has been edited by njcubscouter)