acco40

Bob, I was not advocating that the Lions, Elks, Kiwanis, etc. sponsor more units. I was just stating that in the past, community Scout houses, usually maintained by organizations such as these flourished. You are correct. These organizations, like Scouting itself, are community based and dying out. Now, it seems people want to join organizations that are "exclusive" and I don't mean that in a negative way. "Select" soccer teams are a good example. Organizations that take anyone (well almost anyone) like Scouting have no panache. What did Rodney Dangerfield once say, "I wouldn't join any organization that would have me as a member." I have no problems with Methodists, LDS, or Catholic institutions chartering Scouting units. Heck, the units I belong to are sponsored by a Catholic Church, a Presbyterian Church and an Episcopalian Church. In my neck of the woods the COs are also very "hands-off." I would just like to see the BSA market more to the mainstream. I firmly believe the "three Gs" issues have hurt funding and membership. While I don't think membership growth should be the holy grail of Scouting (sometimes I think Irving does), the BSA should do a better job representing the aims of Scouting to the public. I think the "traditional values" marketing is horrible. Traditional values, family values, etc., those terms have just as much negative connotation as positive in some circles. They are just pablum to me. They have no real weight and just sound like "feel good" to me. It should be marketing the three pillars of citizenship, character as well as mental and physical fitness. I try and teach the Scouts in our unit to have values and character, not directly what those values should be. Granted, they will observe my actions and make judgements on values based on my behavior but the actual teaching of what is right and wrong is the job of his family, not his Scout leader. In short, I may ask him to "do the right thing" but only his family can tell him what the right thing is.(This message has been edited by acco40)

No, I would not release enemy soldiers after 90 days. That is not the question. The question FOG, is what constitutes an "enemy soldier?" Let's say Mr. Ashcroft came in and detained Mr. Fat Old Guy. Should his claim that your are an enemy soldier be enough to detain you as long as he wishes or should Mr. Ashcroft be burdened with showing some sort of evidence that your are indeed an enemy soldier? Should his evidence, if any, need to be shown in a public court? Only a military court? Not at all?

In the past, more organizations such as Elks, Kiwanis, Moose, etc. were COs for units. Society was more community based. Now the predominant COs are Catholic, LDS, and other denominational religious organizations. Where is the BSA marketing itself? My opinion is it is marketing itself to non-demoninational Christian audiences. The "church of the outdoors" from the past is being replaced with organized religion. The tolerance and fairness of the past is being replaced by "no avowed homosexual leaders." Regardless if you think it should or should not go in this direction, it is not a recipe for growth. The BSA needs a new marketing strategy. What does it provide our youth? How does it do it? Most of the population either views it as a "camping club", "craft activity", "fundamentalist organization living in the past" or other such tripe. It is none of those. It is an excellent program for teaching citizenship, mental and physical fitness and ethics. It needs to promote that much better than it has.

Please show respect and refer to the "circuit" court. In my area of the woods, southeast Michigan, we have the nations largest concentration of Arabs. Many were rounded up and branded as "enemy combatants." I'm sure some were and a very small minority were not. The problem is, the U.S. Government can hold them, without charges, indefinately. This is wrong in my book. In these extraordinary times, I could see allowing the Government to hold for a set period of time, maybe 90 days or less, but if no charges are brought forward the detainees should be released. Also, if immigration violations are found, prosecute! But to hold with no charges until the "war on terror" is over (will it ever be over?) is unjust.

Ah, the old hat question! A hat is a part of the the uniform for the Cub Scout and Boy Scout program (Tiger, Wolf, Bear, Webelos and all Boy Scout ranks). The Cub Scout program has specific hats for each rank. The Boy Scout program allows Troops to select their headgear style; visored cap (baseball) or campaign style. While headgear is not an optional part of the uniform, a uniform is not required for Scouts. As stated previously, a uniform may be worn during a flag ceremony - indoors, outdoors, in church, etc. The proper placement for uniform headgear is - you guessed it, one's head. When not in uniform, it is customary to remove one's hat, especially for males, in church or during a flag ceremony.

SPL_15, if you have read many of the posts on this forum you would may have surmized from the quality of the posts that the problem doesn't seem to be adults posing as youth but youth posing as adults! Or maybe it is just a case of adults who have never grown up! That happens to be a common occurance with males.

Scouting is no longer view as politically centrist but leaning toward the right. Bad news if the real focus is growth.

I believe that "rumor" is at least one year old. BW, did you hear about the former Marine who would wear his dress blues to various locations collecting for the Toy for Tots program. He was skimming off the top and caught with about $2,000 in his pockets. He was not officially working for the TFT program. I'm proud to say that our place of business just donated over $43,000 dollars worth of cash/toys to the local Toy for Tots program. Merry Christmas everyone!

Fscouter has a good practical solution. I know that this will sound incredible to some but an Assistant Scoutmaster's (SA), primary duty is to assist the Scoutmaster! By being non-active, it defeats the purpose. However, non-active committee members is just as bad. Only the CO approves and removes Scouters (other than the Scouter themself) so as a SM, you may ask the SAs to resign (or anyone else for that matter). However, your minor concern may be the financial drag of carrying individuals, at $10 a pop, who do not really contribute anything and your major concern is probably that you have no real functioning SAs! That wouldbe a big concern of mine.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Fat Old Guy, what foreign country do you hit first when you head due south from Detroit? The answer is Canada. Can you tell me about the Greek city-states? Did they function more as states, nations or cities? Don't be to hard on the young fellows. Your local council has approval authority with respect to merit badge counselors. You're not going over the Citizenship trio in your troop meetings are you? If you don't believe the youth are learning anything from the MB counselors, go to the advancement committee and complain. Tell them you feel the MB counselors are "rubber stamping" certain MBs. I'm not trivializing your concern. I've seen it in my counsel too. I've also taken action. We need to police the adults, not the youth in this matter. P.S. "I am very clear when writing out Blue Cards for Scouts" - please don't tell me you fill out Blue Cards for the Scouts! The role of the SM is to provide a merit badge counselor option(s) to the Scout and to authorize (only from a prequisite perspective) approval for the Scout to work on the particular MB. As a counselor, you may introduce as much information as you see fit, in fact it is encouraged to go beyond the requirements, but it is wrong to require the Scout to do more than the listed requirements in order to earn the badge. Also, if a Scout wants to pursue Citizenship in the World and as a MB counselor you require him to take another Citizenship MB first as a prerequisite, please march on down to your local council office and remove yourself from the MB counselor list.(This message has been edited by acco40)

I rotated (boys elected asst. denner) the denner every month in my Webelos den. The denner would lead the den in the Pledge of Allegiance, hold the uniform inspections and pass out materials and supplies. Not much real leadership but it did get him used to being "out front" and introduced him to some minor details of leadership. Nothing like help plan or organize the meetings. Tha was left for my den chief! (you are hearing my muffled laughter in the background).

Face it, in some households, the boys are allowed to talk as they please. To the boy, that is acceptable behavior. Now some are not allowed to talk that way and are testing limits. I have one father/son pair in our troop that constantly rib each other about their looks, weight, actions, etc. They act as peers, not father/son. That is acceptable in their household and it bothers other adults in the troop. The other boys see the one boy talk to his father (an SA) and feel why not talk to the other SAs and SM that way. What I do is not to lecture but very calmly ask them to repeat themselves and then feign stupidity as if I did not know what they meant. This forces the boys to speak properly and civily to me. Pretty soon they learn that it takes more effort to use bad language around me than it does to use good appropriate language. Around their peers, that is their domain and I stay out of it. Don't preach and realize that not all families have the same value system with respect to speech. I remember when I cam home from college after my first year. Every other word out of my mouth was f this and d that. It was habit (a very poor one mind you) obtained from living with a bunch of lewd and crude 18-20 yr old males. I wasn't really aware of it until my father very calmly and discreetly told me that my language was not appropriate around my mother and ten year old sister. You may say that is a sexist attitude but you can believe that I was very embarrassed and I tried to clean up my act as soon as and as well as I could.

Amen brother. Amen.

Girls are much better at relationships and "people skills" at not only an earlier age but throughout life. Certain types of leadership benefits from this. Not too many autistic (or too much male brain) characteristics exist in females with respect to males. To girls, "team" takes on a different meaning. When my seven year old daughter played soccer, you passed the ball to another girl to be nice, not because she was open. Their concept of team is developed earlier but just differently than boys. Cooperation is the key, not winning as much.

FOG, Girls seem to understand the "cooperative" nature of teamwork before boys do. Boys learn the "might makes right" first and then teamwork later on. No doubt boys and girls are different but both can learn from their respective programs.

The Den Chief program, if run correctly, can be marvelous. However, troops like to use it as a training ground for potential leaders to "cut their teeth" and dens like to receive the "best leaders available" from the troop. I recently recommended a 1st Class Scout (11 yrs old, 9 mos. into the Boy Scout program) to a first year Webelos den. The den had solicited for a Den Chief. At his first den meeting, after the adults ran the arts and crafts part of the meeting, ALL of the adults left the new den chief alone with the boys downstairs and went upstairs to do some planning. The new den chief struggled. I was not present but thought that he was placed in an awkward situation. It was not the Pack that the den chief came out of so the boys were strangers to him. Nothing like a baptism by fire!

Let me be perfectly blunt for all the boneheads out there. The purpose of Scouting is not to produce Eagle Scouts. The purpose (aims to those who took the training) are to develop character, citizenship, and mental and physical fitness. I am saddened to see Eagle Scouts who have, IMO, not developed the above. I do not expect Eagle Scouts to be perfect. However, to see Eagle Scouts knowingly falsify what they are delivering to youth as Scouting because they have a beef with national does not show character or mental fitness. I have seen excellent men and boys who have gone through the Scouting program without obtaining the highest rank. I am proud of the program and of these men. Those who strive for Eagle as a resume builder or as part of a laundry list of accomplishments dishearten me. Earning a Scouting rank should be a result of participation in the program. To participate in the program to earn a rank, regardless of which one, is wrong.

It is my understanding that the Girl Scouts encourages "girl led" from day 1 (Daisys). That is even at the younger ages the girls are introduced to making decisions, albeit in very small steps initially, and then allowed to make more and more as they climb the ladder to brownies, junior girl scouts, etc. In our program, we seem to have 100% adult run in Cub Scouts and then try to transition to 100% boy led in Boy Scouts. Now, Cub Scouts may use denners (they should) but there is really no leadership training at all at their level, either formal or informal. We also know that the day they cross over into Boy Scouts, the transition is not immediate to 100% boy led, especially with a young troop. That is the goal, yes, but the reality can be different. I would like to see more of a transitional goal of leadership expertise being introduced in the Cub Scout level. I do know the concept of boy led seems very foreign to many new parents when they join Boy Scouts. I'd like to see less of a dichotomy between the two programs and have Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts more integrated similar to the GSUSA program. Thoughts?(This message has been edited by acco40)

Okay, look at this from a boys perspective. If I bring everything I'm supposed to bring, I have to sleep outside in the freezing cold. If I "forget" something, the troop will open up the nice toasty cabin for my "safety." Well, duh, guess what this encourages? We will be camping in mid January (in Michigan). It will be cold. We (primarily me, the SM) will do an equipment check before we go. First, I will show what I am bringing and explain why. Next week, the boys will show what they are brining and explain why. The boys will critique themselves on what they brought, both from a "too much" and from a "too little" perspective. As an adult leader with a fairly young troop my main concern is not that a Scout may not bring something but that they do not own the proper equipment. None of the Scouts have a driver's license or a job yet so I don't expect them to buy their own gear. They can only bring what mom and dad have bought them. I'm also really trying to educate the parents too. Do they have a proper thermal barrier between them and the ground. Are they properly attired? The biggest barrier is not the boys but convincing the parents that yes, your children can do this. Now let's plan it properly so it becomes an enjoyable event!

The BOR is needed as part of the check and balances of the program. The boys should have a confidant to go to if he has input about the behavior of the adult (SM & SA) leaders or boys in the troop. Scouts on the BOR may impeded this. No SM or SAs on the BOR too. No parents of Scouts. I see no problem right now. A BOR can still ask a Scout to demonstrate a skill. They DO NOT have the authority to pass judgement on that skill from a requirements point of view. For example, a Scout may be asked, did you know what a rescue knot is? (bowline) The Scout may tie the knot and beam with pride! He may also get flustered and have trouble. He may also be totally clueless. If the latter happens, the BOR can use that information to evaluate who is signing off on that requirement and to make judgements on how the program is functioning BUT THEY CAN NOT TAKE AWAY THAT REQUIREMENT IF IT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY SIGNED OFF. I for one would see a boy led BOR as a disaster. One aspect that is rarely done, but the program allows is to have a quasi boy led BOR (but don't call it that) to evaluate Scout Spirit. I know that SMs like to hold on to that req. exclusively but I do not believe the program prevents other "leaders" from signing-off. Just my two-cents worth. Oh, and when we sign up to be leaders, aren't we signing up to deliver the BSA program not the program as we envision it should be? Deliver the BSA program to the boys and if desired, work through other channels to get the program changed or improved as you see fit.

Knowing how FOG loves ruling by "national" down in Texas, it is my understanding that the SM or any other leader, may not revoke the "POR" requirement based on how that position of responsibility was conducted. For example, if a boy was elected SPL, and "served" in that position for six months and never really did anything, he met that requirement. However, the SM has discretion in the "Scout Spirit" requirement and the BOR has discretion in passing the boy. What the BOR does NOT have discretion in is invalidating requirements that have been signed off. For reference (courtesy of MacScouter) To make sure the Scout has completed the requirements for the ranks. To see how good an experience the Scout is having in the unit. To encourage the Scout to progress further. The BOR doe NOT test and should only check to see if all requirements have been signed off.

As a Michigander, cold weather camping gets cold! One thing that works very well is to go to the hardware store and buy chimney or flue insulation. The exterior is a shiny "aluminum foil" looking surface. Put this on the ground. Then put down your Therma-rest or other mattress pad and then your sleeping bag. A fleece line is a nice touch. If your bag tends to slip of the mattress pad, a small thin closed cell mat between the bag and pad helps reduce slippage. Don't forget the proper headwear to complete the ensemble.

He is a survivor, no doubt about that! I feel good that he spent the last few months in a hole in the ground fearing for his life and living like he did. Capturing him alive puts and end to the "myth" and must be humiliating to much of the Arab world. As many Arabs have stated in so many words, "He is a tyrant but he is our tyrant." The sick mind of many revere him for firing missiles into Israel and for challenging the USA. A trial in Iraq is best. His days are now numbered. Personally, I'd bury him right after I wrapped him in bacon.

First, if the above information was given to me second hand and I was the UC for those units, I would make a beeline to the next Troop Committee meeting and secondly, to the next Troop Meeting. Once present, I would sit back, observe, and volunteer my services in any way they see fit. Hopefully, Troop A would be concerned about their loss of Scouts (50% is a definitive warning sign). Now, some loss of boys can be expected. And if a small troop, a 50% loss could mean the loss of only a few boys. However, the key is why they left. Are the boys interested in advancement? Are advancement opportunities being made available to them? If not, why not? It is because of ignorance, purposeful or just an oversight? For Troop B, the outward signs look good. A couple of visits could determine if methods of scouting are being properly employed. Bottom line, I would need some real life interaction with the troops but Troop A does have warning signs of "in danger." Troop B gives off a "healthy" vibe but again, first person experience is required. Now for my test. You visit a Cub Scout Pack. The meeting seems to go well. The den leaders are active. The CC is hosting the meeting and tells me the Cubmaster called in sick an hour before the meeting. The meeting goes well but afterward in converstation with the CC, he tells me he is doing the work of CM, Treasurer, Registrar, Secretary as well as CC and is getting burned out. The CO (elementary school) is an ESL(English as a second language) school so many of the parents do not know English very well and feel uneasy volunteering as Scout leaders. What do you do?

To reiterate what la Voyageur stated, sleeping bag temperature ratings don't really mean anything. They carry as much weight as "natural" in the food business. It sounds nice but it is an unregulated term and means nothing. The "try it in the backyard first" is a great idea. Better find out it doesn't cut the mustard at home that some remote back woods.(This message has been edited by acco40)