NJCubScouter

I think the more relevant part of that same comment on the blog is this: In other words, the relevant consideration is not so much what the athlete/marching band member would do, but what the coach/band director would do. Would the athlete or marching band member be PERMITTED to play in the game or participate in the band competition (or whatever) without wearing the uniform? No, they wouldn't. And if we are going to use the sports/Scouting analogy, I agree with blw2, the BOR is definitely part of the "game". (Perhaps my perception is infuenced by the fact that in our troop, the BOR's take place during troop meetings, where the Scout is expected to be in uniform anyway.) Personally I believe the rule SHOULD be that a unit is permitted to require that a Scout be in uniform for a BOR, IF the Scout owns a uniform, and if the Scout owns only a partial uniform, then he must be wearing that. (In our troop every Scout owns a uniform, and if the Scout and his family cannot afford one, a uniform will essentially be provided for him, at least as a "loaner.") If the uniform is "in the laundry", "in my room", or whatever, a troop should be ALLOWED to say, come back next week when you're ready. (Which would work in our troop since we do BOR's "on demand", potentially every week. It would be a different story if a troop does the BOR's much less frequently.) But that's not the rule.

I walked to patrol meetings. In the snow. Uphill. Both ways.

Ah, good, more useless nomenclature.

I think this is true of youth in general regardless of which side of the Atlantic or which neighborhood you are from. I was more referring to a couple of the kids who seemed so distracted by the chaos going on around them that they momentarily forgot the English (or any other) language. That also is a universal thing regardless of which side of the ocean you're on.

I think that except for people involved in the OA, very few Scouters even know there is an "Area" in the organizational chart between Region and Council. I know it exists but have never seen any actual evidence of it as a Scouter (not counting this forum.) I have known a couple of people who wore the "Regional Committee" committee patch but have never seen anyone wearing Area insignia. I wonder if the BSA could merge the Areas into the Regions and save some money, without sacrificing whatever it is that they do. Of course, some people in this forum would be happy to do away with National and/or councils as well.

Unless it's already political, which depends on all the circumstances. In the case written about by the original poster, I don't think we have enough information to know whether it is or it isn't. BSA regulations allow limited involvement in events viewed as "political", limited to the flag ceremony itself. But I think a unit can legitimately decide that it does not want to participate at all. On a general note, I think all of us make decisions based at least in part on politics and/or ideology a lot more often than some of us may realize.

<Moderator hat on> This thread crossed the line into I&P awhile back, in my opinion. It was not your post that did it, and if it gets moved, it will not be your post that does it. But it has not been moved as of this time. I have taken a wait-and-see attitude. None of the other moderators have moved it, though any of them could do so at any time, and I would agree with their action. But it's not an emergency, as far as I am concerned. Nobody has complained that the thread is here. (Not to say that one complaint, or ten, would necessarily require that it be moved, but it is a factor.) We'll see. <Moderator hat off>

Cambridgeskip, it's always been my perception that everything sounds more intelligent when spoken with a British accent. Some of the statements heard in this video challenge that perception, but it's still true.

Condolences to his family, Scouts and all.

About 10 different comments suggest themselves here, but for now I won't make any of them.

I've always figured that Life and Eagle are both ranks, so if my brother and my son are both Eagles for Life, then I am a Life for Life. I can tell myself that, anyway. But I still don't get service stars for the time I spent away from Scouting, from about halfway through college until I became a Bear den leader for my son's den about 22 years later. It sounds to me like this guy would be just as happy playing by the rules and getting his service stars for registered service.

Hm, it's starting to sound political again, which is as good enough reason as any to stay away. It's not a BSA regulation, but it is a legitimate response.

Well, mainly he asked whether it was prohibited under BSA rules. He did also ask for any "insights", but I think some of the responses could be interpreted as saying it was not appropriate to decline the invitation to participate in the ceremony. Of course it is appropriate to decline, just as it is appropriate to accept. That is what I was getting at.

This thread started with a troop whose committee (apparently) decided that they did not want the troop to participate in a particular activity. As usual in this forum, it has mutated far beyond that, and people have "added" facts that were not provided by the original poster. The results, unfortunately, are predictable. Nobody, as far as I know, has suggested that the the troop's participation would violate BSA regulations. I asked some questions designed to learn whether this event could be considered a "political activity" (which would depend on what activities are taking place at the event other than the flag ceremony itself. I don't think I got an answer. If the activities are partly "political" in nature, then the troop's visible involvement in the event would have to end after the flag ceremony itself. I am not saying that's necessarily the case. I am just asking. Other than that, the troop can participate, or not participate. It's really up to them. If they don't want to participate because the ceremony because it is taking place at a business, or because the owner of the business has taken political positions they don't like, it's their concern. It's not up to us to tell them what to do. I'm not sure how service hours got into it. I don't think the original poster mentioned them. I personally don't think Scouts should get service hours for a flag ceremony, but in our troop the Scoutmasters have believed otherwise, and its their call.

A thread from a couple of months back suggests otherwise.

And the gold medal for bureaucratic hoop-jumping goes to...

I wouldn't worry about having started a debate, it is a very easy thing to do in this forum without even trying. And by the way, welcome to the forum!

I didn't say that or anything like that, but I don't have time right now to go syllable-by-syllable as to how you have twisted my words around, and how you have selectively chosen facts regarding the organization in question. I also wonder whether this is any way this thread can stay in "Open Discussion" at this point.

To determine the answer to that, I think you would need to know, among other things, whether there are going to be any speeches at this ceremony, who is speaking, and what the subjects of the speeches are. After knowing that, you would have a clearer picture of whether it is a "political event", although people might still disagree about whether it is political or not. I believe the policy on political events is that the Scouts could do the flag ceremony but then "retire" so that their presence cannot be interpreted as an "endorsement" of what is being said. I am paraphrasing the policy there, but that is the gist of it.

I think this has been the policy for years. Since it is at the council camp and you have the proper supervision in place, and since two units are participating (the troop and the pack) maybe your council would agree to call this a "council activity" without requiring you to make any other changes. It's worth a phone call to find out.

If it were me, I wouldn't have the same qualms. Target is not known for their political lobbying. In my area, they are known for their long, long lines at checkout (at least at night, when I go) because they usually have 2 out of 18 registers open. Which is one of the ways they keep their prices low. But I digress...

Thanks everyone for the sanity check. I will choose to interpret that as a compliment.

Oh! Well, now that I have the whole picture, I think the objections are perfectly understandable. Not because it is a "business" and not because it is "social/religious", but because it being Chik-fil-A turns it into a political issue. This is a business that has been very loudly and vocally on one side of the political divide over certain issues in this country (which may be social and religious issues, but that does not make them any less political) and I think a BSA unit should stay away from that. If I were on your troop committee, I would have voted against it too - but again, not because it's a business, but because it's political. If it were Joe's Diner I wouldn't have a problem with it, especially if Joe were very active in the community and/or Scouting and was clearly doing this as a community service.

I already made a comment on this, but I'll make another one. What the BSA has a "policy" on - or at least guidance, in the various handbooks and training - is that unit meetings should be run in an orderly manner and follow a planned program of activities, instruction, etc. In theory, once in awhile that could include discussion of "issues of the day", although we don't do that in our troop. But it doesn't sound like this particular meeting was run in the way suggested by the BSA. It sounds like a free-for-all. (And I don't mean to be so holier-than-thou, sometimes in my troop we do have some meetings that seem to degenerate into a free-for-all, which is when an adult needs to step in and remind the SPL that this is Boy Scout meeting, not a playground.)

I am not sure whether you are making that statement/question seriously or not. In my area nobody would know whether a particular business supported Scouting in the area. They might have a plaque or thank you letter or something on the wall but I doubt whether even 1 percent of people look at those things.