Troop24

I am not picking on the author of the site I am simply asking if it is authorized usage of the image: http://www.the912project.us/ If you go to the landing page you can select "Preparedness" and it is represented by the Second Class Badge.

We ran through the Troop Leadership Training with the newly elected Troop leadership this weekend. The look on the faces of the patrol leaders was priceless when we covered the fact that one of their responsibilities was to recruit new members to the troop! Too bad I did not have my camera ready.

By the way, the SM has backed off considerably from his earlier stance on mandatory attendance of the invitee . . . he now says "a Scout is Trustworthy!"

"If it bothers yeh, just don't click on any of the advertisements and you'll be fine. Or use a better browser than Microsoft's. Like all banner ads, da ones here are redirects and scouter Terry doesn't have any direct control over 'em . It's possible one has expired."

I use Firefox as my browser with the Adblock Plus add-on so all of those banner ads and redirects are blocked, Beav. Yet, Norton still marks Scouter as unsafe on my PC, too. Maybe it really is a problem.

Scoutfish,

I agree with ParkMan, perhaps there just needs to be a little more clearly defined set of parameters outlined by the DL concerning parental sign-offs. But, the bottom line here is a Scout is trustworthy. If your son (and you, the CM) is being true to the Scouting program, he will know if he actually completed all the requirements and then he can truthfully inform his DL of his accomplishment. That may come after a friendly conversation of tell me how you did it and did you have fun between him and his DL, but what harm is that?

Penn's Woods Council runs in my blood. Learned to camp at Wopsononock and my mother Lodge is Nachamawat. I may not do my Scouting there now but I will forever be a PA Scout!

Welcome to the forum, Ken.

I personally do not think this is hazing. Rather I think this is clearly an example of battery (whether it is sexual or not is best left up to those like Beavah, that practice in the realm of legalese). But I do agree that the SM must do the appropriate thing and report it now, after the fact, to the SE and let the proper authorities handle the outcome.

I am not particularly in favor of expulsion, however. Why can't we come up with a process where the Scout/Venturer has a process defined where he can redeem himself and become a better more productive member of the Troop/Crew? Why should we be in the business of excluding or removing anyone from this program when its goals are building better citizens?

I received an email from one of the DE's in my council June 1, was forwarded the same email by my SM and the Troop Secretary and this morning (June 2) at 5:00 I received an email from MyScouting informing me of the change of policy. I think that is a pretty quick response time, especially from National. I think using MyScouting is a rather inventive way to handle it.

I have chosen not to be "friends" with my Scouts on Facebook. I am an ASM and I know for a fact that there are times that we adults need time around the campfire to compare notes and just plain let our hair down with out interference from the fellas. I feel just as strongly that the guys need that time around the campfire to simply be boys and do those things that boys do when there are no adults around to rebuke them.

I do not need the fellas drawing inferences about my behavior and moral compass based upon something one of my "friends" may have posted that I may not exactly share the same opinion on. But since it appears on my wall they may think I agree with it. Let the boys have there time and me have my time.

Basementdweller said:

"The scout is Gay, Knew he was, Waited till after his BOR or ceremony to come out of closet.

He was living a lie, a sad statement of putting an award that high.

It is sad he felt compelled to earn an award from an organization who does not support his beliefs. He is perpetuating the issue not helping.

A moral contradiction."

The first thought I had regarding this was that it sort of parallels all of the honorable members of the Armed Forces that are serving their Country despite of the fact that they are gay. "Don't ask, don't tell" has been the policy since 1993, probably the life span of the Scout in question, why would he have any question but to act the way he did. This Scout would probably think there is no problem keeping his orientation to himself because that is what he had to do in order to stay involved in a program he enjoyed. Much like those members of the Armed Forces, if they want to continue to serve and be promoted they need to remain quiet. Yet their reward is monetary compensation, while our Scout is compensated with mentorship and learning life's lessons.

Beavah "Orientation is orientation, not activity, eh? Yah, sure, if the lad is having sex (doesn't really matter who/what with) with folks, then that becomes an issue. But to my mind as a conservative Christian fellow, orientation isn't a sin. It's a challenge and a burden. It's what yeh do about those feelings and attractions that counts" Just ask Jimmy Carter, eh? Sometimes you need to keep your thoughts to yourself, no?

What a wonderful response Calico. I don't think I could have said it any better. Thanks.

Both CalicoPenn and Eagle92 give solid responses stating that the legend is not authorized to be worm. I am not sure why any Scout would think it is thrifty to spend money on an item that he would not be able to effectively display. But that is not for me to decide.

Calico you were going strong until you mentioned that with a sash back the sash is too hard to fold and wear on the belt. . . you know it is not authorized to be worn on the belt either, right?

Eagle if everyone knows that the wear of the sash back is not authorized why would your lodge condone it if even for the lodge chief? Simply a silly idea IMHO.

Just sayin'

Hey BDPT00 when did Scouting become your organization? I thought it was all about the kids and not about the adults! I have been following other threads on here recently about awards and such that seemed to be leaning that way a least. FWIW homosexuality is not a choice.

just sayin'

BrentAllen said " And I imagine if your local county Democrat club wanted to charter a Troop and limit membership to only Democrats, they could probably do that, as well. I'm not sure how many 11 year olds would know whether they are a Democrat, Republican or other, . . ." and I just thought I would play a little on that theme. I am not sure there are many eleven year olds that can truly proclaim what religion they will espouse in adulthood either except that of which they are are exposed to from birth by their parents. I think we forget sometimes how impressionable these young fellas are that we are mentoring in our troops, crews, and ships.

Just sayin' . . .

I tried to spin off a new thread but had troubles. . .

The staff members of the dining hall should revisit the Scout law and reflect upon their actions in snatching the hats off of any youth or adult entering their facility. It is patently not Scout like behavior. What would make anyone think that this type of behavior is appropriate? How could they later sit in review of any Scout seeking advancement in rank after failing to live up to the Scout Law in front of them and the entire Scouting community at summer camp? What purpose is served by embarrassing someone for wearing a hat into a building? How are we ever going to retain and recruit new Scouts with this type of insensitive behavior?

What has happened to using a kind word and the simple polite reminder to get the person to remove their headgear? We recently toured a U. S. Navy submarine that was under retrofit and we were required to wear hard hats throughout our time aboard the sub. The one exception was when we entered the galley when we were politely told it is tradition to remove your headgear when entering there. Simple enough.

Are the fellas sure that the girls aren't burying their noses in their own t-shirts to avoid the Axe? I know I would be!

I had already ordered a couple from our local Scout store, to save myself the shipping costs, and I will let you know of they are radically different than the ones I linked to.

SctDad,

My pleasure. That chart is one of the few things we got gigged on last year at summer camp so I decided we needed a better plan. Eventually we will have one for each patrol box, but right now I want at least one for the main bulletin board so the SPL can appoint a fire marshal and we can be prepared!

Here is a copy I found online: http://xrl.in/571e I ordered the paper copy from our local council Scout store. It costs .49 and I plan on having two copies laminated for repeated use.

I would imagine it is supposed to be a temporary patch, yet, I think it should be able to be worn by those who were in Scouting during this centennial year as long as they want to wear it. What would be the harm in that? I still see people wearing Jamboree patches from the 1960's with pride and I think this is sort of the same thing.

I spoke with another ASM at the meeting this evening and he supports your efforts and ideas as posted in this thread. I think maybe I will talk with the SM this weekend on our camp-out during a less stressful time. Silly how little road blocks like this can derail a Scout's future career and some can't see it. Thanks again.

Thanks for the responses everyone. Now I just have to figure out how to convince the SM that he is adding to the requirement. He will not accept anything short of meeting attendance for this. We are a pretty small troop and I think he his trying to bolster our numbers through youth led recruiting. But forcing their hands is not the way to achieve it. Like some here have pointed out we have to deliver a fun program that the boys want and they will encourage their friends to come visit all on their own.

Pizza could be or not be pie. . . but let's not disparage the "back Easter's" that like it thin and crispy over you poor lost souls that think thick crust is the only way to eat pizza. I say the thinner and crispier the better!!

Now back to the original list:

1. Key Lime

2. Lemon Meringue

3. Cherry (I always get the slice with a pit in it!)

4. Apple

5. Shoo Fly

There I even limited my list to five, unlike some of you that can't seem to count.

Please let me apologize from the outset if this has already been discussed but I have been unable to find any reference to it.

I have a question about First Class requirement 10. It simply says to invite someone who is eligible to join or rejoin Scouting. Is it adding to the requirement to actually have the invitee attend a meeting? If the Scout explains that he has invited his friend to attend the troop meeting and that he explained to the new potential Scout the benefits of Scouting but the boy does not want to attend a meeting does that mean he did not invite him?

As a member of one of those "social networking" sites myself, it has been suggested to me by one of my Scouts mother's that I add her son as a friend. Like Basementdweller I have not done that. Something too familiar about that action for me, I think. It allows the Scout too much access to my personal life and friends. There is a fine line between adult association and social networking . . .

83_Eagle, I think that the social networking sites are very public and things posted there, whether words or photos, will last forever, it is the Internet after all.

While I understand that it is important to expose the Scouts to new experiences and opportunities I must admit I am a bit mystified by the desire to remain true to the swimming requirements for First Class. If the Scout is truly afraid of the water and can not after repeated attempts of mentoring by peers and adults be cajoled into overcoming this hurdle; why are we dead-set on ending his advancement possibilities before he can attain first class? He does not have to earn the swimming merit badge, instead he can opt out and earn the hiking or cycling badges instead. So why the do we need to put so much emphasis on swimming in T-2-1?