scoutldr

In my book, the first word is "On". I agree...find another troop. And send a letter to the IH, copy to the SM and SE. State the facts as to why you are transferring your membership (i.e., SM refused to adhere to the advancement rules of the BSA). Do not be emotional or libelous, despite the fact that this guy appears to be either a nut case or an egomaniacal jerk. Maybe both.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

Around here, one's name is dragged through the mud at the first inkling of anything wrong, for any crime. Then, of course, when acquitted, you never hear about it...that story is not "news" and is buried on Page 53.

I thought the official "party line" is that "scouts should be encouraged to wear as complete a uniform as possible."

On the Eagle Scout Application, there are spaces for listing the names and addresses of your references. The spaces are labeled: Parents/Guardians Religious Employer (if any) Education 2 others of your choice For a total of six references. The one marked "Employer" is the only one which appears to be optional. So, I guess technically, the requirement is to provide names and addresses. Actually getting reference letters is not specified and would be "adding to the requirements". Even if the references are not favorable, the requirement has still been met.

Check out the "Standard Price Guide to U.S. Scouting Collectibles" by George Cuhaj Should be able to search on "Cuhaj" on Amazon or Ebay and find it. Make sure you buy the latest edition (blue cover).

Pounder, here is the requirement: Eagle Scout Requirement 2: Demonstrate that you live by the principles of the Scout Oath and Law in your daily life. List the names of individuals who know you personally and would be willing to provide a recommendation on your behalf. If the blank on the application for "religious leader" is left blank, should the application even be processed by Council? As the District Rep to the BOR, I feel this put me in a very untenable position. If the Council registrar, SM, and CC have all signified that all requirements were met, who am I to disagree?

At the risk of being redundant... Rules and Regulations, Article XI, Section 1, Local Council and Unit Finance Clause 2, Disposition of Unit Funds Upon Termination of Local Council or Unit (b) Unit Obligations. In the event of the dissolution of a unit or the revocation or lapse of its charter, the unit committee shall apply unit funds and property to the payment of unit obligations and shall turn over the surplus, if any, to the local council, if there is one, or if there is no local ocuncil, dispose of the same in accordance with the direction of the Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America. In the case of a chartered organization, any funds or equipment which may have been secured as property of the unit shall be held in trust by the chartering organizaiton or the chartered local council, as may be agreed upon, pending reorganization of the unit or for the promotion of the program of the Boy Scouts of America. © Administration of Local Funds by Corporation. Any property or funds acquired by the Executive Board upon the dissolution of a Scouting unit or local council shall be administered so as to make effective, as far as posssible, the intentions and wishes of the donors. (d) Special Funds. Special funds created for specific purposes, acquired by a unit or local council, shall be vested in a bank, trust company or BSA Intravest Trust, in trust for the use of the unit or the local council, in accordance with the wishes of the donors, with the provision in the statement of the conditions governing the admiinistering of the funds that in the event of the dissolution of the unit or council or revocation or lapse of its charter said trustee or trustees will, after satisfying any clams against such fund, turn over to the Boy Scouts of America the balance for use by the Boy Scouts of America for the benefit of Scouting in such locality and for the specific purposes for which the fund was granted. If there is no suitable opportunity for the use of said fund in such locality, it may be used elsewhere. This is from the "Rules and Regulations", which, as has been alleged, we mere volunteers have no need to see. Our DE copied this and passsed it out at our last District Committee mtg, as it had recently been an issue. I believe that the use of the phrase "secured as property of the unit" is significant, in that it indicates that units can, indeed own property such as funds and equipment. I am correcting my training syllabus accordingly. I will leave it to NJScouter to interpret the fine legal points, but it's pretty clear to me. The troop committee has an obligation to see that the boys get their "Scout Account" money ("special funds"), and the rest goes to the Council, provided there is no intent to resurrect the unit by the CO. As BW is fond of saying, unless the posters here can quote the reference, what they post here is just hearsay and opinion. Caveat emptor.

I recently was invited to sit on an Eagle Board of Review. The scout had no letter of reference from a religious leader...because he did not have a religious leader. It was evident from the questions and answers that the scout had never had a religious component to his home life. His answer to "what does 'A Scout is Reverent' mean to you", was "I guess it means going to church and stuff." Maybe the Eagle Scout's application should never have made it that far, but it did. Should we have terminated the BOR and said, "sorry, close, but no cigar." This was a troop committee-run BOR. Another troop committee told me that the DC who sat on their last Eagle Board told them that religion questions were off limits. The scout met the joining requirements and that's all they needed to know. If we really start enforcing the BSA policy that I posted in the other forum, that Eagle percentage is gonna fall back to around 1%.

If troop elections are properly conducted, why is there even a question? The boy was either elected to a POR, or not. If he's nominated in an open forum, and declines, then everyone knows the score. The SM does not "allow" nor "disallow".

Just as a refresher: BSA Religious Principles (Reprinted from the 1992 edition of BSA's Advancement Guidelines: Council and District Functions.) The Boy Scouts of America has a definite position on religious principles. The following interpretative statement may help clarify this position. The Boy Scouts of America: Does not define what constitutes belief in God or the practice of religion. Does not require membership in a religious organization or association for enrollment in the movement but does prefer, and strongly encourages, membership and participation in the religious programs and activities of a church, synagogue, or other religious association. Respects the convictions of those who exercise their constitutional freedom to practice religion as individuals without formal membership in organized religious organizations. In a few cases, there are those who, by conviction, do not feel it necessary to formally belong to an organized form of religion and seek to practice religion in accordance with their own personal convictions. Every effort should be made to counsel with the boy and his parents to determine the true story of the religious convictions and practices as related to advancement in Scouting. Religious organizations have commended the Boy Scouts of America for encouraging youth to participate in organized religious activities. However, these same organizations reject any form of compulsion to enforce conformity to establish religious practices. If a boy says he is a member of a religious body, the standards by which he should be evaluated are those of that group. This is why an advancement committee usually requests a reference from his religious leader to indicate whether he has lived up to their expectations. Throughout life, Scouts are associated with people of different faiths. Scouts believe in religious freedom, respecting others whose religion may differ from theirs. Scouting believes in the right of all to worship God in their own way.

I have washed mine with good success...I put it in one of those mesh bags to keep it from winding up around the agitator and use the gentle cycle. Yes, the red thread is unravelling...the one I received in 1968 seems to be of much better quality, although it has shrunk noticeably :-(. The lodge did receive a batch recently with one half of the snap missing. I believe they were sent back...to Bangladesh or wherever they were made. The sash being part of the uniform, I believe it should NOT be worn with civilian clothes...unless by a ceremonial team or the aforementioned Elangomats, who

To provide an exception to that theory, I recently saw on Ebay an original Den Mother's Training Award...a medal suspended from a yellow and white pocket ribbon. I believe Cubmasters received the standard Key on a green ribbon with a Cub device on it. If a scouter earned the Key for in all phases of scouting, he would wear 4 (or more) devices on the ribbon and knot. It wasn't until the late 70's/early 80's that the Cub Scout training awards came out on yellow and blue neck ribbons. Now, neither are presented. Square knots are it, but there are more of them.

By ANNE GEARAN Associated Press Writer (AP) - The Supreme Court preserved the phrase "one nation, under God," in the Pledge of Allegiance, ruling Monday that a California atheist could not challenge the patriotic oath but sidestepping the broader question of separation of church and state. At least for now, the decision - which came on Flag Day - leaves untouched the practice in which millions of schoolchildren around the country begin the day by reciting the pledge. The court said atheist Michael Newdow could not sue to ban the pledge from his daughter's school and others because he did not have legal authority to speak for her. Newdow is in a protracted custody fight with the girl's mother. He does not have sufficient custody of the child to qualify as her legal representative, the court said. Eight justices voted to reverse a lower court ruling in Newdow's favor. Justice Antonin Scalia removed himself from participation in the case, presumably because of remarks he had made that seemed to telegraph his view that the pledge is constitutional. "When hard questions of domestic relations are sure to affect the outcome, the prudent course is for the federal court to stay its hand rather than reach out to resolve a weighty question of federal constitutional law," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court. "I may be the best father in the world," Newdow said shortly after the ruling was announced. "She spends 10 days a month with me. The suggestion that I don't have sufficient custody is just incredible. This is such a blow for parental rights." The 10-year-old's mother, Sandra Banning, had told the court she has no objection to the pledge. The full extent of the problems with the case was not apparent until she filed papers at the high court, Stevens wrote Monday. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist agreed with the outcome of the case, but still wrote separately to say that the pledge as recited by schoolchildren does not violate the Constitution. Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Clarence Thomas agreed with him. The ruling came on the day that Congress set aside to honor the national flag. The ruling also came exactly 50 years after Congress added the disputed words "under God" to what had been a secular patriotic oath. The high court's lengthy opinion overturns a ruling two years ago that the teacher-led pledge was unconstitutional in public schools. That appeals court decision set off a national uproar and would have stripped the reference to God from the version of the pledge said by about 9.6 million schoolchildren in California and other western states. Newdow's daughter, like most elementary school children, hears the Pledge of Allegiance recited daily. The First Amendment guarantees that government will not "establish" religion, wording that has come to mean a general ban on overt government sponsorship of religion in public schools and elsewhere. The Supreme Court has already said that schoolchildren cannot be required to recite the oath that begins, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America." The court has also repeatedly barred school-sponsored prayer from classrooms, playing fields and school ceremonies. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the language of the First Amendment and the Supreme Court's precedents make clear that tax-supported schools cannot lend their imprimatur to a declaration of fealty to "one nation under God." The Bush administration, the girl's school and Newdow all asked the Supreme Court to get involved in the case. The administration had asked the high court to rule against Newdow, either on the legal question of his ability to sue or on the constitutional issue. The administration argued that the reference to God in the pledge is more about ceremony and history than about religion. The reference is an "official acknowledgment of our nation's religious heritage," similar to the "In God We Trust" stamped on coins and bills, Solicitor General Theodore Olson argued to the court. It is far-fetched to say such references pose a real danger of imposing state-sponsored religion, Olson said. Newdow claims a judge recently gave him joint custody of the girl, whose name is not part of the legal papers filed with the Supreme Court. Newdow holds medical and legal degrees, and says he is an ordained minister. He argued his own case at the court in March. The case began when Newdow sued Congress, President Bush and others to eliminate the words "under God." He asked for no damages. On Monday, Newdow said he would continue that fight. "The pledge is still unconstitutional," he said. "What is being done to parents is unconstitutional." Newdow had numerous backers at the high court, although they were outnumbered by legal briefs in favor of keeping the wording of the pledge as it is. The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said he is disappointed. "The justices ducked this constitutional issue today, but it is likely to come back in the future," Lynn said. "Students should not feel compelled by school officials to subscribe to a particular religious belief in order to show love of country." On the other side, the American Center for Law and Justice said the ruling removes a cloud from the pledge. "While the court did not address the merits of the case, it is clear that the Pledge of Allegiance and the words 'under God' can continue to be recited by students across America," said Jay Sekulow, the group's chief counsel. Congress adopted the pledge as a national patriotic tribute in 1942, at the height of World War II. Congress added the phrase "under God" more than a decade later, in 1954, when the world had moved from hot war to cold. Supporters of the new wording said it would set the United States apart from godless communism. The case is Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 02-1624. (Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

In my unit (I mean the unit which allows me to serve it), the adults pay their own way totally. We always eat well, partly because we can afford it and partly to provide an example that you don't have to always eat PopTarts and canned spaghetti-O's. For summer camp, we are allowed two free adults, but if more want to come and help, we split the cost equally among all of us. We pay our own gas and take the IRS deduction. If I get audited, I'll probably have to give it back due to poor recordkeeping, but I'll take that risk. Fundraisers go to the Scout's accounts and for awards, etc. Most of the gear has been purchased by myself (CC) and the SM and ASM, and should the Troop fold, we reserve the right to retain ownership.

Just a small question...how did your Pack get chartered (or re-chartered) without a Unit Leader (CM)? Is someone fudging the paperwork? Have you called your District Commissioner and told him there's a problem?

I refuse to shop at Best Buy. They are all idiots. Great story!

Just my opinion: the Eagle COH is a troop function and, as such, should be planned and run by the SPL and PLC, with guidance from the SM. If parents want something special and are willing to fund it, they can make the offer to the SPL.

Then I am in favor of a separate area for Trainers, password protected. WB is just another training course. The same logic you presented applies to all training.

How about a separate section for Eagle Scouts with a secret password? Or one for Silver Beavers? Or one for Trainers? Or one for Commissioners (if there are any left)? NeiLup said in a different thread, "There is very, very , very little in Scouting that is "secret." Apparently not.

boleta, I took a look at your Troop by-laws and the first thing that jumped out at me is that you require Class 1 and Class 2 medical forms to be notarized. Do you also enforce that for adult physicals? Just curious as to what prompted this rule and how do you enforce it. BSA does not require it, and if I required that in our unit, no one would go to camp.

The effect it has on me is that my scout shirt costs me almost $40 while a shirt of similar quality from WalMart is $12.99. SOMEBODY's making a lot of money off of my volunteer service. I'll concede that unions are not the only ones at fault, and I apologize for attacking them. Most union workers I know are good, hardworking people, as are most non-union people. It's the American people. What's wrong with wanting more? What are you offering for the extra money? Increased productivity? Working more hours? Better quality? None of these things are happening. In fact, they are decreasing. They want more because they feel they are entitled. Yes, Beaver, that applies to management, as well. It is indeed appalling that management continue to get outrageous salaries and bonuses when profits and shareholder equity are droppping. I am a govt manager, and I have employees who are GS-12 and want to be GS-13 just because they have been there 20 years. I have to explain to them that, because they have not increased their skills or education or productivity, their worth to the taxpayer has not increased. If they want more money, they need to find a position with a higher degree of skill, output or responsibility and compete for it. We need to end this cycle of "entitlement-thinking" which is pervading our society. The original theme of this hijacked thread (sorry, FOG), was "Buy American". I used to believe that and bought only American built cars. My Jeep Grand Cherokee is an embarrassment. Multiple major repairs in the 2 years that I have had it. When I research the internet, all of the problems are common, well known, and preventable defects, yet Jeep refuses to recall them or cover the repairs. My next SUV (which I need for Scouting) will be a Nissan or Toyota. Sorry, I gave them a chance and they raped my wallet. I also need to do what I need to do to maximize my own family's prosperity.

It's not really germaine to compare today's Unions to the sweatshop conditions of the past generation. Unions did a lot of good during the Industrial Revolution in the "smokestack industries" to end oppressive, unsafe conditions, nepotism and discrimination. At the local shipyard here, the Steelworkers are preparing to go out on strike at midnight Sunday. Why? They have jobs with good salaries and benefits, a retirement plan, and guaranteed work into the future. But they want more. They don't care that it drives up inflation and cost to the taxpayers (govt contractor). But when the contract expires, the first thought is "STRIKE". Why? Because they can. Enough is enough.

I'll gladly pay double for my uniform so that a Union worker can drive a new 4x4 SUV and have a vacation home at the beach, 6 weeks vacation and satellite TV. I want his kids to have a better life than mine did.

As far as the IRS and BSA are concerned, the scout unit is not a legal entity. Whatever rules apply to the CO also apply to the unit funds, since the money technically is theirs, just entrusted to the use of the unit.

I've seen a lot of troops which have too many ASMs and not enough MCs. THey need to reverse the ratio, since many of the ASMs are serving committee functions anyway...or not serving any function at all. It's all in the nomenclature.