acco40

You can ask your dog to overturn the decision if you want - it is your right. However, Rumsfeld has told the "green suiters" where to go too many times already so I don't think he wants to waste too much political capital on this.

Having the great big spine that I have, I'd refer the boy to the troop Chaplain. That committee position is reponsible for promoting regular participation of each member in the activities of the religious organization of the members choice. Seriously, I'd just congratulate the boy on his interest in obtaining the religious award affiliated with his religion of choice. The goal is not to recieve a "token" to wear on ones shirt. It is to further the Scouts knowledge about his religion.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Lynda J, not necessarily true. Your troop has no longer been CONTINUOUSLY chartered since 1956 ( a very good year mind you. It brought me into the world! ) so you can't have thoe nifty add-ons on your unit numerals. But, unless your troop rechartered as a different troop it has a history going back to 1956. Our troop was established in 1924. It has changed COs and even had the charter lapse for some time but all that history is still retained by our council.

I agree OGE. The ACLU is in the business of defending civil liberties. Usually, civil liberties only come under attack when a majority impinges on a minority. Thus, the ACLU has brought many cases to court that the vast majority of Americans did not like. I, for one, admire that. When "we" think in terms of generality, we tend to agree on many things. But when nasty details rear their ugly heads, we seem to forget or lessen our belief in civil liberties. Should journalists have the right to keep their sources anonymous? Do all Americans deserve due process under the law? When Illinois Nazis wanted to demonstrate, the ACLU defended them. Most of us want the right, as stated in the US constitution, to peacefully assemble. Should we allow Nazis? Should we allow them only in certain places, i.e. not in predominantly Jewish neighborhoods? The details get ugly. Did some of the actions of Ashcroft/Homeland Security violate basic civil liberties? Should we expect some compromise in our civil liberties in these trying times? All good questions.

To repeat what others have stated - check the "archives" for an older Gettysburg thread. In 2003 we arrived on a Friday, late afternoon, set up our tents at McMillan (?) Woods and did the tour of the town that evening (Historic Gettysburg Trail). The next day we completed the nine mile Billy Yank Trail. The next day we completed the three mile Johnny Reb trail (much hillier) and visited the Eisenhower home and the visitors center. It was tight to fininsh it all but well worth it. It was one of our most memorable troop outings.

nldscout - that is all well and good but when the US Army or West Point sponsors a unit the money flows rather freely sometimes. Out at Selfridge the troop committee chair out-ranks the base commander so when the CM requests monetary support from the CO - it happens! With the CO now becoming a different entity I would bet that things WILL be different. It is all speculation for now.

Trail Pounder, are you a secret plant by the Democratic Party to discredit Republicans? The ACLU is 100% Democrat??? Is that why they "rushed" to defend that stalwart Democrat Mr. Limbaugh in his court case? Maybe the ACLU tries to defend civil liberties!!! My goodness, if that were the case no wonder they came up with such a name for their organization!! Now, if you believe civil liberties are the domain of one particular party alone I think you need some basic civics classes.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Backpacker - Albright seemed to do okay. I'm not a fan of Rice but her sex should not be an issue. If certain cultures have a problem with it - that is something they need to address.

Here is a weird take on this issue - The USA (that's US Army) has Chaplains of many faiths as commissioned officers. Although these chaplains will "administer" to those of different faiths, the chaplains themselves represent particular faiths, they are not non-denominational. Now these faiths are, by definition, discriminatory (most). Does the ACLU or anyone else see a problem with that? I don't, but you can see how the plot thickens. And Merlyn, I'm confused with your statement implying that I did not read your post or the press release very carefully. It stated that the ACLU has "raised concerns" and that "decisions are pending" with respect to Jambo. My question was what impact this decision will have on the 2005 Jamboree. It still stands.

Can I use that link to ask Mr. Rumsfeld to give Mr. Powell his job?

Powell was a non-partisan public servant and had trouble functioning in the very partisan Bush White House. His diagreeements with Rumsfeld and others, his "set-up" at the UN and other things led to his resignation. I'll miss him. Ashcroft retired for health reasons in m book. Abraham - well look at how many transportation secretarys filled out their terms. Many Presidents change their modus operandi when they have no other elections to look forward to. Maybe Bush will become less partisan and go looking for that "legacy" that too many second term presidents look for. Nice post 11/16 Hunt.

At the Cub level, the main reason the boys are not in uniform (no such thing as "full uniform") is due to a lack of effort. A lack of effort on their parents to go buy the uniform. A lack of efforts aonthe volunteer leaders to set the example. The boys usually do not balk at wearing the uniform. At the Boy Scout level, some of the boys do balk at wearing the uniform even when they own it. Again, the adults that they most often come into contact with - unit leaders, should set the example. Now, the field uniform is not always appropriate attire in the great outdoors. The BSA addresses this and does not suggest that the field uniform be worn for all occasions. The uniform should not be "required" any more than the patrols, adult association, outings, advancement, etc. Learn the program you pledged to deliver and then deliver that program. YOu owe it to the youth.

NWScouter, does each Lutheran sect have their own brand of coffee? (a little religious humor there folks.) I don't understand the position of the WELS. Is it not within their power to charter a BSA unit and only allow members of their faith to join? Now, the may run into the great "unwashed" at district, council, area, region (or is it region, area) and national events but that is the risk one takes living in a pluralistic society.

Merlyn, the DOD and the ACLU are 100% correct with the law. You may not like it but that does not make it lawful. It really is that simple - the BSA, a private organization as determined by our courts, may practice religious discrimination. The USG, as prescribed by law, may not. Therefore, the USG may not sponsor BSA groups. It is not that complicated. Now, no Army base allows equal access to all. That would be preposterous to do in the face of our current defense situation. My question, does any of this have any impact on Fort AP Hill sponsoring the National Jamboree? While participants pay to attend Jambo, I am not clear on if the BSA "rents" the facilities or not. I have heard from certain resources (i.e. PBSs Frontline) that the USG spends about $5,000,000 in taxpayers money to support Jambo. Any legal beagles out there that know the facts care to weigh in?(This message has been edited by acco40)

Touche!

"Very few adult leaders were in uniform as well. I wore the shirt." And you think the problem starts with the Council?? Also, you are either in uniform or not. A neckerchief, slide and hat are part of the Cub Scout uniform and are not optional. Kids at this age emulate what they see. My biggest beef with Cub Scouts was not that they were wearing the shirt, neckerchief and hat but no socks and pants/short; it was that they would wear the shirt with the shirt tails out, patches in the wrong place, neckerchiefs secured by knots, etc. They were not shown to respect the uniform. Heck, I try to get our troop committee to wear a uniform, as they should, for boards of review and they are worse than the kids. And then the adults wonder where the boys get the idea that the uniform is optional.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Boleta, you've got one thing right. In order to have lost to Bush, one would have had to run a very very disorganized campaign and Kerry nailed that one. My take - 20% voted for Bush, 31% voted against "the Democrats", 40% voted against Bush and about 9% voted for Kerry.

We are in violent agreement on that one FScouter!

Because it was a Cub Scout function and to be "in uniform" for Cub Scouts includes the hat (for appropriate program - Tiger, Wolf, Bear or Webelos), neckerchief (appropriate program again), slide, shirt, belt, pants (or shorts), socks, appropriate shoes (leather or canvas only - neat in appearance), AND his membership card - I'd venture to say 0%. Now, I admit, I don't recall if Cub Scouts has an activity uniform. That would allow for a change of shirts. But remember, during this time of year (I live in Michigan) many times the BSA uniform is not proper attire for the elements on a campout.

Oops, double post.(This message has been edited by acco40)

I understand the new regulations for joining the Boy Scouts. To me nothing changed except that they added a new hard minimum age requirement of 10. No more 9 year olds who happened to finish the fifth grade or have earned the AOL are allowed anymore. Just to be argumentative - what if the religious right (are you out there Rooster?) demand that age begins at the date of conception - not the date of birth? Seriously, I have heard others state a hard age requirement for AOL. There was a soft age requirement before, 10.5 years old, but that could be superseded by completing the fourth grade early. Has anything changed for AOL? Does a hard age requirement exist for earning the AOL?

FScouter - I don't want to sound negative but your statement "Ultimately, the Scoutmaster is accountable for the amount of work accomplished by the boys holding positions of responsibility." is something I disagree with. I know some fully believe it and obviously you and possibly BW and others are in that camp but not me. For me, ultimately, the Scout is accountable for the amount of work he accomplishes. I have seen too many posts state that no matter why a "failure" occurs, the pat answer was that the Scoutmaster did not train the boys sufficiently. While this may be true in 99% of the cases it is not true in 100% IMO. Yes, the adult leaders are responsible for coaching, teaching, mentoring, etc. but is a students failure always the fault of the teacher? Is a teams failure always the result of a coach? Ideally, we should not be in the business of finding fault but in the business of trying to find out what works. Maybe I get too defensive but I don't like to see a de facto conclusion of the "leaders failed" when things go wrong. I know coaches sometimes take this tact publicly but privately I know the athletes get a different perspective! Allowing things to "go wrong" can be an excellent learning tool and I use it judiciously. Now in this specific examples, it is the ASPL who is responsible for making sure that the Historian and Librarian are aware of their designated duties and assist them in carrying them out - not the Scoutmaster directly. It is the Scoutmaster(s) job to make sure the ASPL understands his ASPL duties. In reality, it is the responsibility of both to make sure these junior leadership position responsibilities are well defined, communicated and the Scouts responsibility that they are carried out. I also like to let the Scout holding the particular position to tailor the position responsibility to his strong suits. I think we are all in agreement that it is a team effort but in my book the ultimate responsibility lies with the person holding the "job." Similarly, if I fail in the SM position, the ultimate responsibility for that falls with me, not the CO, the committee or the district training staff.

Well since my wife and I are both district volunteers and my youngest son has made 100% of every service, troop meeting, camping outing, fundraiser, etc. I'd say that a district volunteer has shown up for every single unit function for the past three years. However, something tells me that is not the answer or scenario you were looking to analyze. Our unit commissioner has attended every "formal" invite we have extended to him. I say formal because is have told him he has an open invitition to come visit any troop or committee meeting he would like. Generally, we don't invite DEs to COHs. We do run into the DE and other district volunteers at summer camp, camporees, etc. I do remember a few years ago I invited the DE to our B&G. However, the B&G was in mid-Febraury along with many other Blue & Golds and he did not attend. I assume it was because of a scheduling conflict but did not ask why (that would have been rude IMO).

Fellow Michigander, After many years of research on this forum, rules become guidelines when the person involved doesn't like the rule! With respect to the Guide to Safe Scouting (many times shown as G2SS here) there is a part that states: BSA Rules and Policies Bold type throughout the Guide to Safe Scouting denotes BSA rules and policies.

Johnny just saved the free world from disaster by going back home and shutting off his mother's iron. Now, as his Scoutmaster, I want the free world to know all about his heroics! Where do I begin? I've never called a radio station, newspaper, etc. Have no fear! My friendly Council volunteers have provided the answer!! Check out: http://cvc-bsa.org/aboutcvc/presskit.htm Seriously - Yes, communication is a two way street. But like most volunteer organizations, some of us are experts in certain fields where others are clueless. Sometimes, a unit alone does not have the resources and the help of a district or council volunteer helps wonders.