scoutldr

As far as I can tell, having just reviewed the current requirements, a scout who refuses to camp will not make it past "Scout". Tenderfoot, Second Class and First Class all require camping. He will not be eligible for OA. I would not approve him to be an SPL or PL, since in order to lead, you have to show up. I guess he could fulfill the POR by being a perennial Librarian, Scribe, or Den Chief (but even Cub Scouts camp once in awhile). So, my question to him would be, "what's the point"? Perhaps his time would be better spent in the Chess Club at school. Edited part: Before I get jumped on with both feet, I realize that Scouting is not ONLY about advancement. Kids can have fun without badges, and I would welcome that, as long as he's not a detrimental influence. Just so he and his parents are clear up front.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

Would be interesting to know the actual numbers. Council goals frequently do not reflect reality. My guess is, statistically, there was no change, or even a slight decline, as a lot of councils have experienced. I do know some Scouters in that council, and many still wear the REL CSP. Just as some scouters in our council refused to give up their red and white community strips when they were annexed into our council many many years ago.

I think Scouters are "community organizers". Birth certificates are public records and are hard to fake, why hasn't anyone produced one?

Not sure if this is a National rule, but in our Lodge, you must complete your Ordeal within one year of selection, or you start over (selection is null and void). That goes for both youth and adults. You can complete your Ordeal in a different Lodge, with permission of the Lodge Chiefs. You didn't say if you are a current BSA member, but #1 prerequisite is to be a registered member of a Scout unit, or District/Council level Scouter. Good Luck and welcome to the Forums!

Well, if the parents didn't go along with it, it wouldn't happen. Either start a revolution, or find another Pack. Those are your choices.

John, if common sense were common, we wouldn't have much to talk about here!

Welcome to the forums. I feel the same as you. In my school system, it would be an unexcused absence, and with too many of those, the child has to repeat the grade. Unless your cub is attending a private school with a different schedule, all Pack events should be scheduled so as to avoid conflicts with school calendars, holidays, religious observances, etc.

I, too respect the Judge's opinion. Could he elaborate as to what statute would be violated?

This is a tough one. I think the first "misstep" was agreeing to have the ECOH, a troop function, at the home of the scout. If it were, say, at the troop's normal meeting place, a simple cake and punch reception, hosted by the troop, could follow. Then if the scout's parents wanted to have a blow-out at their home, more power to them...just make it clear that it's being hosted by the parents, not the troop. Unfortunately, when you agreed to move the troop ECOH to their home, you lost control. The parents are within their rights to tell you to "get bent" if you try to enforce BSA rules in their home.

Pack, just goes to prove that the Govt can't be all things for all people. A concept the Democrat party seems to ignore.

Pack, there is now a law called COBRA, which addresses situations like yours. It enables continuation of health benefits when one is "between positions"... I think that is a good law, as I am not for the Darwinian approach in such situations. I am for the Govt providing incentives to employers to continue to offer health benefits to valued employees who are working their butts off to provide for their families...a value that is lacking in many communities. (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

I agree, we should not criticize those who make different life choices than we do. Just don't ask me to pay for it when it turns out your choice was not very smart. Following what Lisabob had to say in the other thread, I wish everyone made choices that enabled them to be successful and to be able to provide for their families. BUt where does it say that the taxpayer should make sure that your choices don't cause you or your family any pain? Rather than argue over whether health care (or education, or welfare, or add social program here) is a "right" or not, should we not be addressing the root causes? Why aren't kids staying in school long enough to be able to get good jobs that provide health benefits? Why are teenaged mothers having 4 kids before they're old enough to vote? Why aren't the deadbeat dads (and moms) being held accountable? Why is welfare being provided to those able-bodied who simply refuse to work, but yet can afford cigarettes, booze,cell phones and designer jeans? I choose to support scouting because it strives to instill values on how to be responsible citizens and make ethical choices...THAT's the solution, in my opinion. Unfortunately, the majority of those we reach would turn out ok anyway...we're not reaching those at risk. I'm not a hard-a**, really...I am just having enough trouble supporting my own family (which now includes my MIL), and as I approach retirement, I really don't have the resources or the inclination to support anyone else's. My wife and I put two sons through college without ANY assistance, and there isn't a whole lot left for us in our "golden years" (yes, I will get a "cushy" federal pension of about $1400 a month, plus my own savings, and my health insurance premiums will continue). Those who feel that others are worthy of their hard earned money, are free to stroke a check to the charity of their choice. Find a family without health insurance and pay their premiums for them. Or if you want to remain anonymous, start a "health insurance" fund through your church. They did that with Credit Unions, so What's stopping you? I think God would be pleased with that. Perhaps the BSA could provide low cost health insurance to registered volunteers in need? Why does the Government need to be involved??? Before anyone wonders, I do contribute a significant amount every paycheck to charity...to the tune of thousands of dollars a year. But charity should be something that WE choose to give with the amount and beneficiary of OUR choosing, according to our hearts...not something that the Govt extracts from our paychecks without even asking. The only "rights" we are born with are the right to life, liberty, and to "pursue" happiness and success. What you do with that right is up to you.

"I have good insurance and I'll keep it. Why not allow regular folks to subscribe to the health care plan the Congress has? Good enough for our government folks, ought to be good enough for everyone else." Call me a cynic, but as soon as there is National Health Insurance, your employers will be dropping their health plans like hot potatoes. It is a major expense for employers, and really cuts into their profits. Congress has the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan, of which I am also a member, as a federal employee. It is NOT free, I pay about $200 every pay day (biweekly) for "self and family", and can choose from a number of commercial insurance plans ranging from an HMO to Blue Cross/Blue Shield high option. Unfortunately, my "family" has gone from 4 to 2, but I still pay the same to subsidize those with 6 kids. The government subsidizes that premium, as an employee benefit, just like any number of any other employers offer. I resent the fact that you want to offer MY employee benefit to anyone who wants it. What benefits does YOUR employer offer, perhaps I want those for me and my family, too, even though I haven't earned them.

I'm lucky...I had two of those "one percenters". The oldest just turned 30 and came when I was a grad student and had no health insurance.

Our council has a campership program that will provide a maximum 50% of the fee. In the application, the scout is asked for a plan on how he is going to come up with the other half, through his own efforts such as mowing lawns, babysitting, unit fundraisers,etc. I know of a unit that plans fundraising such that ALL unit activities are paid for...the parents pay nothing. That would be preferable, since you don't have to sort out who is in "need" or not.

Our lodge recently went back to the original lodge flap as THE flap for all members. We are told that all the commemorative flaps are for collecting and trading only, not for uniform wear. Our flap has not changed in design since the lodge was formed in 1948, and when I was inducted in 1970, was limited to "one per lifetime". Years later, there was a huge protest, resulting in arrowmen burning their flaps in protest. Now you can buy all you want, no matter who you are. National also has done away with Lodge numbers, making many unhappy. As I recall, it was to eliminate the arguments that ensue when councils and lodges combine. Personally, I would think that "National" would have bigger fish to fry, rather than dictate what flaps should look like.

"I consider such charged discussions a waste of time" Glad our founding fathers didn't feel that way. Anyway, I tried. Sorry, OGE.

Never seen one, but I'm guessing it's a non-BSA patch. The only "legal" place to wear it would be as a "temporary" patch ON the right pocket, if at all.

"Trust but verify".... Welcome to the forums.

Godwin's Law? I get just as disgusted with political ads as the next guy. Don't tell me why the other guy sucks. Tell me what YOU are going to do and how are you going to pay for it. Why do I like McCain over Obama? While in retrospect, I believe the Iraq war was/is wrong, I think we can't just walk away from it, like Obama and Hillary want to do. McCain has the experience to extract us from this, while maintaining the political stability of the region. To me, the Iraq war is THE most important issue right now. NO MORE American sons and daughters should die for those people, who do NOT want democracy and are NOT going to change their attitudes toward us. As soon as we leave, I predict an Islamic theocracy will take over, not the "democracy" that we arrogantly think they need. But Bush started it, now it has to be turned over to someone who has the military, legislative, and diplomatic experience to finish it properly. YES, we need change, and we need health care reform and tax reform and solutions to the energy problem. But not while the country is at war. We need to focus and WIN the global war on terrorism, which is the #1 threat to our way of life. We defeated both Germany AND Japan in four years, because the country was FOCUSED on the mission, and all efforts went toward winning. The attitude among Americans was "what can I sacrifice to help win the war", not "what is the Government going to do for me." "Country First"

"Think of Alexander Hamilton, Napoleon Bonaparte, or Alexander the Great who all came to great prominence in their 20's." True, but back then, 15 was an adult, 30 was an old man and most were dead by 40. So if greatness was to be, they didn't have much time to get it done. McCain's choice is pleasing to me. I'll admit, I have gone through life as a conservative Republican, although I do not agree 100% with ANY platform. Maybe I'm more of a conservative independent libertarian. I like Lieberman, he's a good man with solid experience, but I didn't think that ticket was electable. In the past couple of weeks, I've been wavering...maybe it was the Kool-Aid fumes from the Obama rallies, and the lack of visibility and "pizazz" from the McCain camp. I like the way Obama is driven to "change" (God knows, we need it), but the lack of specificity and concrete fiscal plans bothers me. Too much like a used car salesman..."of COURSE you can afford these payments...everyone else does!" But my head and heart are clear now. McCain/Palin will have my vote. Too bad many others will vote purely on race or on how well they were "entertained".

CNY is correct. Signatures required are "Unit Committee Member" and "Scoutmaster". The Unit Committee can decide the process for approval, as long as they are not adding requirements. Edited to add: The above is my opinion and interpretation only.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

I don't think 72 is the new 52. But I do think 22 is the new 12.

Pamlico cancelled our week this year (and the week before) due to lack of interest, and refunded our money. If you go, be sure to have a Plan B (we didn't...didn't even occur to us that it might be cancelled).

What, us argue? Surely you jest!