SR540Beaver

Well, what do you expect from the land of "fruits and nuts"? Gee, I wonder if all of the judges who are members of Augusta are going to have to give up golf?

Twodads, What "once official, always official" policy are you speaking of? BSA has changed uniforming policy periodically throughout the years. The city and state patches were replaced with council patches years and years ago. I quit in Webelos back around 1967 or '68 when we still wore the blue uniform exclusively and the city state patches. Of course, today Webelos can wear blue or tan officially and BSA does not supply or endorse the city state patches anymore. Every insignia guide I've seen shows the Council patch as official with no reference whatsoever to city, state patches. As an earlier poster said, the area they are in split off from their council and runs independent (didn't know you could do that) and I suspect they are having patches made for their uniforms.

WOOHOO, I beat Eisley to the punch on this one! I found this on CNN's website today. California to Review Whether Judges Can be Boy Scouts Saturday, December 21, 2002 Posted: 4:59 PM EST (2159 GMT) SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- The California Supreme Court is considering prohibiting state judges from being members of the Boy Scouts because of its refusal to admit gays, the chief justice said. The move, announced Thursday, comes months after San Francisco's judges and others cut ties with the organization for the same reason. The San Francisco Bar association and other groups recently asked the high court to revamp the rules. California judicial canons, controlled by the Supreme Court, already demand that judges divest themselves from groups that discriminate against women and minorities. Rules adopted seven years ago also forbid membership in organizations that discriminate against lesbians and gays but allow "nonprofit youth organizations," an exception for the Boy Scouts. "The court had an extensive discussion about this matter and has decided to take up the matter at a future administrative conference after it undertakes a further study of the proposals," Chief Justice Ronald M. George said in a brief statement. George did not indicate when the justices would reach a decision. Boy Scouts spokesman Gregg Shields called the proposal "wrong, inappropriate and unconstitutional." "The proposed policy would be just as inappropriate as a policy forbidding judges from being Roman Catholic or Baptist or Orthodox Jewish or any of numerous faiths which share the Boy Scouts' views," he told The New York Times. Two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Boy Scouts' policy against homosexuals. The scouts argued that their code, requiring members to be "morally straight" and "clean," excluded homosexuals. The court said the scouts were entitled to define their own principles.

twocubdad, Boy, I wish I could remember where I read this earlier this week. I was surprised too. I had always thought that the AOL was the only thing transferable to a Boy Scout uniform. But I did read earlier this week where the religious emblem earned in Cubs could also be worn. I'm just getting too old to remember things afer a few days. I think the difference is that the AOL is the only BSA patch that is transferable. The religious emblem is not earned thru the BSA, but can be worn on the uniform along with BSA patches. But apparently, it can move from the Cub uniform to the Boy uniform just like AOL. If I come across the reference again, I'll post it.

Scoutldr, Your kids must not have played baseball in little league. Varsity uniforms may be free and returned at the end of the season, but little league uniforms are not. The last season my son played, we had two uniforms and could make a third out of parts of the other two. A ball cap, a jersey, a vest, a t-shirt, socks and 2 pairs of pants set us back about $175.00. This team disbanded after the season, so you get to start all over with the next team. In three seasons of baseball (which included both a spring and a fall season) my son played for five different teams. That meant five different uniforms anywhere from $50 up to the $175.00. Add to that sliding pants, a supporter and cleats everytime they grow (this was between 5 yrs and 8 yrs) and you spend a small fortune. Oh yeah, there were the team dues too, which didn't cover all the expenses, so we had fund-raisers each season. We played on competitve teams, but the experience of the recreational teams was costly too. Scouts are a uniformed group. It bugs me to no end to see the kids mismatched and sloppy. I went to pack meeting this week and saw all manner of dress. From kids who did'nt even bother to put any part of their uniform on to kids walking around with their tails untucked, their shirts unbuttoned over t-shirts, no neckerchiefs, neckerchiefs over the collar, under the collar and some tied on without a slide. Some wore belts, some did'nt. None had on uniform pants. Patches are a hodge podge at best. The pack we are in is in an affluent enough neighborhood to afford uniforms easily, even if the quality is poor and the prices high. These are the same kids who's parents don't think twice about paying $175.00 for baseball uniforms and wouldn't dream of letting their kid show up for a game half dressed. Sorry, but the lessons scouting has to offer is 10 times more important than what any sport can teach....and I was quite a disciple about the lessons of sports. A scout needs to be proud of scouting and needs to show it partly thru his uniform. Uniform means uniform. Unifed in form. If they can't even dress the part, how can they live the part? If they are casual in dressing as a scout, they will be casual in being a scout. Now, if only BSA would update the uniforms to something the boys like, make it rugged, usable quality and affordable in price, everyone would be happy.

Korea, Disney does this with every film they own. They always have a limited offering and then take them off of the market. I've heard the marketing reasoning for this approach before, but can't recall it now.

ASM7, Amen! NJ, Tip 'o the hat in thanks and a greeting to you in jest. Best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive, gender neutral, winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most joyous traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, but with respect for the religious persuasion of others who choose to practice their own religion as well as those who choose not to practice a religion at all; Additionally, a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the generally accepted calendar year 2002, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions have helped make our society great, without regard to the race, creed, color, religious, or sexual preferences of the wishes. (Disclaimer: This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for her/himself or others and no responsibility for any unintended emotional stress these greetings may bring to those not caught up in the holiday spirit.)

Littlebillie, You may.

Just curious? Since Disney has the film out of print and has no plans of re-releasing it in the near future, where does Song of the South gets it's videos? Are tehy pirating the video and seeling it because there is a market for it? Their site does not address whether the videos are liscensed or not. It does make reference to the tapes being in new boxes with laser art.

Gnosticism and atheism are not related. Gnosticism accepts the existence of a supreme being, whether known or unknown. Atheism knows that others believe in a supreme being but rejects that notion as untrue. It is not that the supreme being has been hidden from them, it is that they do not believe a supreme being exists even when they have knowledge of others believing in one. They are two different animals entirely.

Johnsned, Maybe I missed it, but I never understood why the requirement existed for your group? Was it heavily LDS or some other faith? Why did they feel it was important to not sleep in the same camp? All I heard you say was that it had to do with religion. What was the specific reasoning? Don't get me wrong, I'm not being critical, just curious. I have been a Southern Baptist all of my 45 years. Our youth church summer camp was huge with thousands of teens there each week. We were not allowed to swim together because it was not considered "appropriate" either. The swim schedule was broken by age and sex. If the opposite sex even got close to the pool, they were run off by guards. We all thought it was pretty silly. Back home we all went to the same pools together to swim. There was a recreation area with several natural pools about 30 minutes drive from the church camp. One of the highlights of camp each year was when your individual church's youth group got to load up on the bus one afternoon out of the week and go swimming at the park. The church leadership had no problem with their kids swimming together, it was just the church camp's policy that the camp pool had to be segregated. The pool was huge, out in broad daylight, had many lifeguards and hundreds of swimmers. I remember many times climbing out of the pool because you couldn't move without bumping into people. The likelyhood of any hanky panky in the pool was extremely remote. But then we also had limits on how short our shorts could be too. The camp guards (all were about 100 years old) carried rulers and made you get on your knees so they could measure from the ground to your hem to make sure they were not too short. You were escorted back to your cabin to change if they were. You had to wear long pants to the services and girls had to wear skirts. Keep in mind, the tabernacle was a pavilion that seated 5000 and had open sides and no air conditioning. The temps in Oklahoma in July and August can easily exceed 100. We actually had kids pass out from the heat during services each day. The rules were the rules and if you wanted to go to camp, you had to follow them regardless of how silly they seemed or whether the staff could even offer a valid explanation for them. That is why I ask specifically why seperate sleeping quarters is such a must in your area?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most Woodbadge's have you bunk with a partner? If there are two men in a tent and two women in a teny 5 feet away from each other, just what is going to happen??? There is no single privacy for anyone. Heck, most latrines don't even have doors on the stalls! How can sleeping in a tent buddied up with a person of the same sex and having a tent next door housing people of the opposite sex be inappropriate? What if a man leaves town on business and his next neigbors wife goes to take care of a sick relative? Now you have two neighbors of the opposite sex, home alone, next door to each other with only a mere 15 feet between their houses. Can they be trusted not to have wild sex in the absence of their spouses? Would it be inappropriate for them to be home alone. Yes, a Scout has duty to God and part of that means being morally straight. It doesn't mean avoiding close proximiety to the opposite sex. What about a Scout being trustworthy? I wouldn't have married my wife if I didn't think I could trust her. The difference with the kosher food example is that you are not forcing everyone else to eat a kosher meal because one person is. The kosher meal is an issue for one person and provisions are made for that one person. The kosher person excludes themselve from eating what the others are. When you exclude a woman from sleeping in the patrol campsite, you are excluding her because of someone else's wants and needs, she is not excluding herself. You are desciminating against her and excluding her based on her gender where in the other case you are including the kosher person by letting them eat a different meal. I'd say the best decision is to provide three facilities. You could tell everyone that this is the patrol campsite and everyone is welcome to pitch there tent. Then you could say that for any who are not comfortable with have the opposite sex in the same campsite, the men will stay in a different camp and the women will stay in another different campsite. Now your patrol is split into three campsites and everyone is happy except that you've blown the whole patrol concept out of the water. But if that is what you have to do because some people are insecure about the strength of their convictions, then that is what you have to do.

SST, Like I said be proactive. Yes, call them and ask if you can attend a meeting to discuss your troop. Do invite the Webelos on a campout that is appropriate. A winter campout might be a good choice. It could kill two birds with one stone for many of the Webelos. One of the requirements for them is to visit a Scout troop and to camp with them. The other thing is earning a Polar Bear patch. My understanding is that most councils have their own Polar Bear patch for Webelos who camp one night in temps below freezing. Our den attempted this last weekend, but sadly the overnight temp only got to about 37 or 38. The test is to set out a bucket of water and have ice in it the next morning. We hope to go next month as we know the temps will be low enough. This last trip was good practice and we worked on fire safety. I'll ask the same thing someone else did, what about the Roundtable. All Scout Masters and Cub Masters should be in attendance. Present your plan to contact packs there. Some SM's may not like it, but I'll be willing to bet you get some of the CM's excited. You just made their life easier and opened a door of opportunity to them.

I'm sorry if I was insulting, I didn't mean to be. But please explain what the motivation and reason is for needing to segregate the men from the women for the 6 or 7 hours they will be asleep. That time seems to be less "dangerous" than the time they would be awake and interacting with one another. As for what sleeping with tents side by side in the same campsite has to do with team building, it is no different than building a fire together or cooking together. When you cease to do it as a unit, you cease being a team. You don't leave the outfield in the dugout when the infield takes the field. To split people who are a team/unit/patrol for a reason such as gender, race or religion is to divide the whole team concept.

johnsned, I think the issue is that a patrol functions as a unit. A patrol camps together. Do you let your scouts in a patrol set up their tents wherever they choose? Can they move 50, 100, 200 ft away from the camp and set up where they want? The folks at Woodbadge are supposed to function like a patrol so they can understand the patrol method and teach the patrol method. If they don't use the patrol method, why bother? Let's put a different twist on it. Instead of male and female, change it to black and white. Would you have a problem with Woodbadge or a scout troop segregating people of differet races? I have to agree (while anything is possible) that you can get pretty grubby over a 3 day period in the woods and with a large group of people functioning as a patrol, two people sneajing off into the woods or into a tent would quickly be known. If something is going to happen, it will be after and away from Woodbadge, not actually at it. And if that is the worry, then it begs the question of whether to allow women at all?

Hops, I guess the question is when should the uniform be worn? Is it just for dress and never intended for outdoor activity? Why not cover both bases? I've heard many scouters say that their summer (class B) uniform is their scout shorts, socks and a troop t-shirt. By the way, many will tell you that there is no such thing as a class A or class B uniform. The uniform is the only uniform. You are either wearing it or not wearing it. Should scouts be wearing street clothes camping out or some sort of uniform? Not all camping is done at a scout owned facility. Shouldn't people camping alongside scouts in a state park, national park, etc. be able to tell you are a scout troop as opposed to a bunch of teenage boys on vacation? Most troops require wearing the uniform while traveling to a campsite. Why not expect the same in the campsite? That is why I suggested a heavier duty all purpose winter/summer adjustable uniform that can meet many requirements from dress to travel to field. When my son played baseball, we had two basic uniforms and parts from each could be used together to make a third uniform. Everyone was informed what the uniform for a game would be and was expected to be dressed properly. If you showed up dressed wrong or without a belt or hat, chances are you would be riding the pine the whole game. This was grade school kids. Couldn't we expect the same degree of discipline from our teen age scouts? By the way, baseball uniforms can cost a lot more than a scout uniform.

Hops, The need for a long sleeve shirt is for any activity during winter period. I see many scouts who opt to buy only one shirt and it is short sleeve. During the winter, they wear a variety of different colored long sleeve shirts underneath their uniform shirt. Whether it is to a meeting, a campout or a community activity. It distracts from a "uniformed" look. Many scouts don't wear a uniform during summer campouts either. Just for traveling and flag ceremonies. The idea is to have a uniform that is usable in the field also, not just ceremonies or dress.

This thread is so old, I don't remember if I said this here or not, so I'll possibly just say it again. I'd like to see an all purpose uniform. By that I mean instead of shorts and pants and long sleeves and short sleeves, how about one pant and one shirt that has zip on/off sleeves and legs. One uniform for any season instead of two seperate uniforms. The pants need double knnes and crotches and the shirts need double elbows. Make them roomy enough to wear long johns underneath. What would be really cool is if there was a seperately purchased flannel liner that could snapped in and out of the pants. The pockets on the pants need to be bigger, including usable cargo pockets. A couple of D ring sewn into the waistband for snaping gear to would be nice. Adjustable tab waistbands for a custom fit would be nice too. While we are at it, lose the neckerchiefs. They serve no purpose other than window dressing. I think that is the part of the uniform that makes many of the boys not want to wear their uniform because they think it looks "dorky". My son has tried to talk a number of his friends into joining and everyone of them has complained about having to wear the uniform. Perhaps a more modern (cool) uniform would entice more boys to join. I don't think they need to look like a BDU dressed combat soldier, but they need to have a uniform that is distinctive and usable in the outdoors. I think it could be made in such a way as to look sharp for dress too. Instead of the neckerchief, perhaps different color combo hats with a more modern cut could be worn. Just a few ideas I had if I were charged with making up a uniform for an outdoor oriented group.

le Voy, Been dipping into the wild mushrooms again??? Just joking. Include me with NJ on being totally confused by your post.

sst3rd, Please, please, please do what you are thinking of doing. While many people are plugged into scouting, there actually are a large number of Cub parents who know nothing about Boy Scouts. Who is going to tell them? Hopefully the Cub leaders and the Boy Scout leaders. Too many times a casual approach is taken to this from both sides. It has always been explained to me that the decision of which troop to go to is the boy's with a little mature guidance from parents. No troop has an automatic lock on a pack for transition. Most parents let their kids join the Cub pack from their local school or church sight unseen and find it isn't all they hoped for. If the parents can't or don't want to get behind the pack after they find out what it is like, imagine how thrilled they are going to be when Boy Scout transition rolls around. Sell your troop with pride. Be proactive and show them what you have to offer. My son is a Webelos 1 and I've already started scoping out the local troops around us. I figure why wait until the last minute when he only has a couple of months left as a Webelos 2? I talked to our Cub Master this weekend about it and he agreed that it is never too early to look. He has campouts planned for us this next spring with two different troops. Again, those troops that just expect parents and boys to know everything about Boy Scouts (when they have no reason to know anything) and to just join by default should get what they deserve. Nothing! You get out of something what you put into it. Sell your troop and force the others to do the same. You may catch ome heat, but scouting in your area will be better for it in the long run.

NJ, Not to speak for pack38, just my 2 cents worth. I think what he is getting at is that scouts (like many other organizations or entities today) are constantly being hassled by a tiny little fractional segment of society who chooses to go against the current to be accepted as part of the mainstream. Most scouters find these alternative lifestyles to be something that they simply cannot endorse. Why should 9 people in some sort of group have to change their plans because the 10th person wishes it. To the 9 other people who are in agreement, the desires or the 10th person really don't matter. That 10th person needs to find people of like mind to associate with. Not be a party pooper for the other 9. Why do people want to join something they don't agree with and then seek to change it's makeup to their liking and in the process completely destroy what it was they wanted to join in the first place? Scouts do not endorse atheists or gays. Why do atheiests and gays want so badly to be a part of Scouts? There are other equal quality programs that will gladly take them.

I wanted to provide an update on this incident. When we showed up for the den meeting last night, the Cub Master had my son's cards in hand and returned them to him. There were a lot of people around at the time and he said he could give me some details later. I told him it wasn't important, I was just glad they were returned. My son was told by another scout that they had been found under a sofa cushion in an adjoining room. All's well that ends well. My hope is that the person responsible learned a lesson that will prevent him from doing this in the future. A short story. When I was 4 or 5 we were visiting my grandmother out of town. All of us kids walked over to a little mom and pop grocery store a block or two over from my grandmother's house. I saw a lone gumball inside a box of receipts on the counter. I knew that taking it was wrong and waited until the shopkeeper wasn't looking before I snagged it. I reasoned to myself that if it was in the box, it must be trash. But I still know it was wrong. By the time I got home, the shopkeeper had called my dad and he was waiting for me. He marched my tiny hiney back to the store to apologize and pay for it. That was the first and LAST thing I ever stole.

Eagledad, Just curious as to how you lit the neckerchiefs on fire without them burning up? Does the cloth come from planet Krypton like Superman's suit?

Sager, I've only spanked my 9 year old son twice in his life. He has been swatted as often as he needed it though. I've been lucky though, he has been a pretty compliant child and seldom if ever defied us. My problem with what you said is that in the "war" of wills, you as an adult allowed a 2 year old to win. He got his way and didn't have to stay in bed and follow the rules. He was able to change the rules. Once they figure this out (and they can at that early of an age), they gain control of the family. But instead of having the reasoning ability and life experience of a 20 or 30 something person, they have a 2 year old's perspective. They know what they want (instant gratification) and they just found out how to get it. If being defiant and getting what they wanted worked once, they figure it will work again and when met with resistance, they will become more defiant. While we as humans are the intelligent and the highest life form on Earth, we are still basically an animal like any other creature. We need to take a cue from nature and follow our instincts. When a cub is about to do something that is dangerous or against the rules, the momma lion will give him a pop. She will do it as many times as it takes to get the message across. Now, she doesn't bite the cub and leave a gaping wound in his neck or slash him with her claws. He is her child and she loves him and is protecting him for the future. She pops him to let him know who is boss and in doing so teaches him how to live safely and sociably with the rest of the den. We have gotten so full of ourselves and listened to so much psychological babble that we begin to ignore nature and instinct. Limits are a good thing and so is authority. Would we let a Cub Scout climb an adult rock wall, especially without any safety gear? Of course not. But trust me, I know a number of Cub Scouts that would try it if you turned your back after telling them not to. Our job as scouters and as parents is to provide a safe and secure environment. We make rules for a reason and if we let the rules get broken, problems are sure to follow.

TJ, Almost every culture, society and religion throughout recorded history has seen homosexuality as deviant and immoral. It has only been in the last 20 years that the push has been on to accept homosexuality as "normal". Before you think I'm a gay basher, my best friend from college is gay and my sister is a lesbian. I'm well acquainted with the lifestyle. While I love them both dearly, I don't believe that their lifestyle is normal. Why people are gay is a mystery that may never be solved. And what people want to do in the privacy of their own home is their business that I don't care to stick my nose into. I don't go around touting my heterosexual sexuality and activities to everyone I meet and I don't want them to do it either. Bottom line for me is that it is deviant and immoral and if a private organization wants to exclude people like that, it is fine with me. Thru history and even today, the majority of people have disapproved, but have not gone out in lynching parties looking for gay people. It is the gays themseleves who have forced the issue and are reaping their own harvest. Sure, they are slowly making "advancements", but do you really want that? Really? What is next as we begin to break down the boundaries of society that has developed over thousands of years? What happens when the Man/Boy Love Association starts up a movement for us to accept that their lifestyle is "normal" and we should all be tolerant? They honestly believe that sexual relations between men and young boys is beneficial to the boy. Sometimes you have to draw a line in the sand and say...here, and no more.