NJCubScouter

FOG says: My point is that there is nothing in the constitution about "innocent until proven guilty" just as there is nothing about "separation of church and state." It is true that the words "innocent until proven guilty" are not stated in the constitution. It is not correct that there is nothing "about" it. The fifth and fourteenth amendments (applicable to the federal and state government, respectively) guarantee that there shall be no deprivation of life, liberty or property without "due process of law." The courts, left with that very vague statement, had to figure out what i

As to question 1, just to say what almost everybody else has said but in a different way: The hat is as much a part of the Cub Scout uniform as any other part. I personally feel the BSA should not have made parents buy a new hat four years in a row (Tiger, Wolf, Bear, Webelos) and it was not that way until the Bear hat was introduced about two years ago. One hat takes you through seven (+-) years in a Boy Scout troop, it could at least take you through 2 years as a Wolf/Bear. Just my opinion. My son was before that anyway, he entered Webelos in the last "class" before they came out with t

FScouter, I agree. Acco, in theory you are correct, but it sounds like that is NOT the way BOR's are in the troop in question. It sounds like it may be more like the "Where were you on the night of the 23rd" variety... "if you don't answer my question, you'z'll hafta deal wit my partna here, and he ain't in so good a mood." Or in other words, here's a rope kid, tie a square knot, but wait, let us blindfold you first. Or something like that. In other words the BORs may be intimidating because they are made to be intimidating, and they are not supposed to be.

Bob says: Keep in mind the COL is not required to please the city council to remain a scouting council. They only need to do so to retain some current city resources. The COL council does however have to please the BSA if they wish to remain a council. All of these statements are true in theory. However, theory doesn't balance the budget. I suspect that if an officer or professional in that council were writing the second sentence that Bob wrote, the word "only" would be nowhere to be seen. I seem to recall at some point there was a story that estimated how much the "some current

Laurie, Based on your contacts with council, what statements in the newspaper article are incorrect?

If I could edit my posts, I would probably take out the word "deception" in the last post. I was really just responding to Big Dog's use of the word "deceive" and decided not to dispute his use of that word. I don't want people to jump on just one word and ignore the whole point of what I am saying, which happens on a regular basis around here. Whether any "deception" is intended is beside the point. I do think the wording is "clever," "diplomatic" and the council (and national) are trying to "finesse" the situation and make everybody "happy." (Happiness meaning in this case, not being ev

Big Dog says: If the Philly council wants to allow avowed homosexuals to be leaders, do it. Break off from BSA and just do it. Well, I am sure you know that if they did that, they would not be the "Philly council" anymore... they would just be a bunch of men and women who want to provide the Scouting program for the boys and young men of their area, but who would have no legal right to use the name Boy Scouting (not sure about just "Scouting") or any of the program, uniforms, facilities, camps, money etc. etc. They'd have to start from scratch. And I'm not complaining about that, I

This all seems like a lot of meaningless wheel-spinning to me. The national policy is what it is, at least for now, and national has made very clear that councils have to abide by it, period. It seems to me that the Cradle of Liberty Council, out of a legitimate concern for losing its rent-free building and other resources, is trying to "trick" the city government, charitable organizations and others into thinking that it is not going to discriminate against gay people, while saying nothing that actually contradicts the national policy. It sounds like the city isn't buying it anyway, one of

Well, Adrian, it is indeed ironic, but I don't think irony captures the whole story here. It does not necessarily convey that anyone is responsible for the situation that we find ironic or that anyone should have acted differently from how he did. I have explained at length why I believe this new relevation makes Thurmond's public conduct "worse," more reprehensible, or in the word that I still think fits to at least a degree, hypotcrital. The word "hypocrisy" and its variants is irrelevant, however. The same principles apply regardless of what word is used. I do have one other th

Rooster says: Some say Thurmond has not changed because hes remained relatively silent on the issue. Well, he's definitely been "silent," in an absolute rather than a relative sense, for the past six months or so. (The link I posted earlier was his obituary from June of this year.) That was supposed to be funny, and in fact this entire thread was meant to be a bit light-hearted. I suppose, looking back on it, that the only people who could really appreciate the hypocrisy, or if you don't think that word fits, the irony, the inconsistency, the fathering-a-"negro"-child-and-then

hey, Happy Birthday, DS!

OK purcelce. Sorry if it seemed as if I was grumping at you earlier. It was not directed at you, obviously. Thanks for starting this thread, you should get a lot of interesting info if a lot of people participate.

FOG, you can suppose what you want. My personal life isn't any more relevant to this than yours is. The reason that Strom Thurmond's personal life is relevant is that he made his career -- literally, the best-known and most-remembered aspects of his entire, long career -- out of promoting discrimination and exclusion against a group of people, but he didn't extend that exclusion to the 16-year-old girl he slept with as an adult, and fathered a child with. I, on the other hand, haven't made my career out of excluding anyone from anything. But, ok, let's suppose that the aspect of my p

purcelce, I will respond in a private message. My answers to some of the questions will disclose imperfections in my son's troop, and based on what is going on in another thread right now, I am not interested in becoming Troop C.

That's what I figured, Rooster. I saw the wink. You know very well what I'm talking about. And Senator Jeffords, if that is who you meant, is now an Independent, as I am sure you know. Just in the interest of fair play, however, I did find this handy-dandy web site listing all kinds of scandals involving Republicans. And you're right, it is biased and partisan, and has nothing about any Democrats. (And it's a few years old and lists some people who are arguably not Republicans or who have left the party, like Pat Buchanan.) But, Rooster, you've already mentioned all the Democr

Rooster: Are there any Republican hypocrites? Or are all hypocrites Democrats?

Bob, OK, now we know all about Troop A. Please note that I have mostly agreed with you in this thread, and that in the majority of cases of "Bob vs. Ed" in earlier threads, I have agreed with you more than him. Sometimes I have posted my agreement, sometimes I have not. But as far as this forum member is concerned, right now this thread is not about Ed's troop or the use of program in a Scout troop, or emphasis on advancement or anything else but one thing. It is about the tactics that have been used in this thread, and to reach my own conclusion on that subject, I will ask you again:

One more thing, when I was looking for council guidelines for unit web sites, the few I read gave me the impression that national provides the councils with a standard template for these things, for their use. Guidelines for guidelines, if you will. But it is the council that actually adopts (or doesn't adopt) the guidelines and could potentially make changes to fit local needs, though I cannot think of an example of what such a local need might be.

Maybe DS can provide something, but I once tried to find guidelines when my son's old pack was re-starting its site, and this is basically what I learned. The BSA web site does have web site guidelines but they are only for use by councils. http://www.scouting.org/webmasters/standards/04.html This document mentions unit web sites but only from the standpoint of the council in determining whether to link its web site with unit (or district) sites. The adoption of web site guidelines for units is therefore left up to each council. I just did an internet search and turned up

FOG says: The point is that I would "have fun" with many girls that I wouldn't association with on a normal basis. When the crotch is involved, normal rules do not apply. Well, isn't that special. Is that what you tell the boys in your troop?

Rooster says: Your second bet (i.e., that someone would mention Robert Byrd and make a partisan point out of that) was a self-fulfilling prophecy, which you accomplished by attacking a conservative politician for a crime that you knew a well known liberal politician was guilty of, yet failed to even mention his name. A crime that I knew a well known liberal politician was gulity of? You know, I must have missed the news the day that it came out that Robert Byrd came home from a KKK rally one day at the age of 22 and impregnated his household's 16-year-old black maid. When did that

Looking at where we failed the Tiger program is starting to stick out like a sore thumb. We only recruited half the number that we did three years ago.Again I don't know why the decline? Eamonn, just to make it clear, is this a fact from your district alone, or is this a national statistic? I take it from your post that this is your district, but I am not positive. It would be interesting to see the "trend line" nationally in Tiger recruitment. Of course, the fact that the organization to which more BSA units are chartered than any other, does not permit the Tiger program in its p

And this just dawned on me... and maybe I missed it... but Bob, Is Troop B your troop?

Wait a minute... maybe I am being a little slow here, but: "Troop A" in Bob's original post is Ed Mori's specific troop? I'll wait for confirmation of that before giving my opinion of that method of discussion in this forum. (If you can't already guess.)

Oh, and Rooster, this subject has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. I don't know why you would even bring it up.