fboisseau

I have a quick question to satisfy my curiosity. We had a boy transfer from Hawaii. Under Second Class (I believe this is correct) his book had an additional requirement dealing with swimming (mainly using his clothes as a life jacket). The book was the same revision and had the same copyright listed in the front cover. So the question is are there slightly different/additional requirements for certian area or did I miss something when I looked at his book?

As I stated in my post from what I can remember the Pack Quality Unit award is primarly concerned with Program and Growth and not with advancement. I found the 2003 Quality Unit Application at this website http://www.tidewaterbsa.com/forms/cubqual.pdf and here is the break down of the major areas of focus for each requirement. Training ..........1 Required(#1) Youth Protection ..1 Required(#2) Program ...........1 Required(#3) 2 Optional(#5,#7) Recharter .........1 Required(#4) Advancement........1 Optional(#8) Boys Life..........1 Optional(#9) Growth.............2 Optional(#7**,#10) So based on the above breakdown there are 3 requirements (1 Required) are geared towards the Program and 2 requirements are geared towards growth. So my basic point holds true if a Pack focuses on delivering a good program and growth, the Pack will most likely earn Quality Unit. I will also point out that both Training and Youth Protection help you deliver a good program since they give you the tools to develope the Pack Program according to the rules of BSA. **Tiger Cubs is the basis for future growth of the Pack.

fotoscout It is not semantics. The goal of the program is to make good citizens out of boys. The tool that is used is the ranks since this is what boys this age focus on (the carrot if you will). Since one of the ways that the upper levels of BSA can use to measure succes is the rank awards they look at that in part to determine how the program is deliveried. By the way the only time that I can remember the number of boys that earn rank is used is for some Leader Knots. Quality unit from what I can remember is based on primarly growth and the activities that are planned during the year.

Here is the way the Pack that I work with handles this. The Pack meeting after a boy earns their rank badge they are recognized with a serious, but short ceremony (about 5 minutes). In June or May we then have a special pack meeting that usually takes place outside where everyone graduates to the next phase in the program. This is a very elaborate program usually involving a camp fire and every boy is graduated at the same time even if they have not earned their rank badge (The one that have not are allowed to work on it during the summer if they want). Why do we do this? First it allows for immediate recognition, which is what the boys need at this time. It also allows us to have a big memorable program that includes everyone that celebrates when they truly move on to the next phase in the program. Keep in mind that the rank badge is the tool not the goal of Cub Scouts. A Scout needs to be recognized when they earn the rank, because that is how the tool is used. If you focus on too much on the tool, you will lose sight of the goal which is what we celebrate with our big celebration, which is helping the boys grow and mature.

Merlyn_LeRoy Then get the terms of the lease adjusted so that it is open more often to other groups instead of the BSA. Do not destroy the benefit to the community, because you do not like the group that is providing that benefit. It is call negotiation. What you and your group(s) are engaged in is called "cutting your nose off to spite your face". I will also point out that whatever is negotiated between the BSA and the city should be used as a template for other groups. So if the city negotiated that the BSA could only reserve 50% of the time during a months for their programs at that facility. Then if another group let say the Young Boys Club, built a facility with a special city government lease then they could reserve it for only 50% of the time available during a month. (The percentage list above are just for reference and should not reflect what should be actually done, that should be left up to the negotiations.)

Merlyn_LeRoy, I would of though my first question was very simple. I was asking if you believed that the government should treat a religious organization differently then a non-religious organization, based on their beliefs. I now understand that you believe that the government should discriminate against religious organization just because of their beliefs. Next question, how many individuals constitute a group. Is that number 100000, 1000, 100, 2, or 1? See the difference between you and me is that I believe that if a group approaches the government with a proposal program, benefit, or facility that they will open to all individuals or groups equally and a request for a little support (such as money, or land). And given that the group is a legal entity, then the state should not discriminate based on thats group's beliefs. I believe that all citizens and groups of citizens should not be treated as second class citizens and be denied government support when they want to help society. You on the other hand believe that if a group is religious it should be treated as a group of second class citizens that should not be allowed help from the government when it wants to do something good for the community as a whole.

Merlyn_LeRoy Here is a synopses of our exchange on this subject. 1) You have stated that the government should not treat any group differently based on its religious or lack of religious beliefs? (See below) FBoisseau Posted: Merlyn_LeRoy, I have another question. Would you agree that the government should not treat any group differently based on its religious or lack of religious beliefs? -------- Merlyn_LeRoy Posted: I agree; I suppose you have something specific in mind? 2) The following below those states that the state should treat a religious organization differently because of its religious beliefs. (See below) The judge struck down the BSA lease because it was a special deal with a religious organization; this does not mean that all special deals are unlawful, nor that leases to religious organizations are unlawful, but specifically that leases made to religious organizations without competitive bidding are unlawful. The first set of exchanges between you and me, put you in the corner of agreeing that the state should not treat a religious organization any differently then a non-religious organization. The second set of statements supports the complete opposite position. Please explain how the two positions can be logically true.

Merlyn_LeRoy Last time I posted the below I did not get a reply from you, instead you disappeared for a while. Will you please respond to the following. ------- FBoisseau Posted: Merlyn_LeRoy, I have another question. Would you agree that the government should not treat any group differently based on its religious or lack of religious beliefs? -------- Merlyn_LeRoy Posted: I agree; I suppose you have something specific in mind? ---------- FBoisseau Posted: My point is this. From what I understand is that the city has entered into similar sweetheart deals with other organizations both religious and non-religious. If that is the case then the lease agreement with the BSA should stand. The city should be required to either enter into these types of agreements with all legal organization or none at all. If the problem is that the BSA was hogging the facilities during key months then the groups that also wish to use the facilities and were denied should work with the BSA and the city to resolve that problem. What this seems to others and me is not a disagreement on how BSA is handling the scheduling of use of the facilities, but an attempt to punish and discriminate against the BSA for its beliefs. If BSA refused to agree to a reasonable plan then the city would have had the right not to renew the lease. --------- Will you tell me where my logic is in error.

It was pointed out to me that the following part of my previous post on this topic could be confusing. "Now if we assume that all of the final product is gasoline (actuall only about 20 gallons is) we get a base cost of .8090 cents per a gallon. Add to that the Federal taxes of .184 cents per a gallon and the State of VA taxes of .175 per a gallon you get a cost of 1.168 a gallon.". It should read as follows. "Now if we assume that all of the final product is gasoline (actuall only about 20 gallons is) we get a base cost of .8090 per a gallon. Add to that the Federal taxes of .184 per a gallon and the State of VA taxes of .175 per a gallon you get a cost of 1.168 a gallon."

Woodsmith, I will address your two issues. First about the CC chair that strongly believes that you should divvy the boys up in to 6 to 7 patrols I have some items that you can point out to him. First I would create about 3-4 NSP patrols each with their own Troop Guide. This will do two things 1 it will allow you to focus on those boys and help them get their First Class in a year (this is a goal of the BSA program since it help retention). It will also give 3-4 current boys a chance to work on the POR for 12 months. Second ask him the following question. Would he like it if someone else choose the men that he hung out with? The boys in the patrol should be your friends and people you like to hang out with. If the boys do not like their patrol mates then they will want to leave. (Trust me on this my boy wanted to quit for a while, because my troop made this mistake. I was not aware of it when it happened or I would have stopped it). Lastly run do not walk down to your Scout shop and get the Scoutmaster handbook, SPL handbook, and PL handbook. All these books when discussing patrols state that the boys select the patrol that they want to be in. As for you second issue, as I stated above I would create 3-4 NSP patrols. After a year (not when a boy has earned 1st class) convert those NSP patrols to Regular patrols and allow the boys to rearrange themselves as needed.

At no time should the adults pick members of the patrols or even the patrol leaders (not the mention the SPL). My sugestion is for the boys in the New Scout Patrol once they have graduated (1 yr after joining) be allow to do one of the following 1) Join an already existing patrol or 2) Stay with their existing patrol. Keep in mind this should be each individual Scouts choice as to what they are going to do. Also keep in mind that anyother Scout in anyother patrol can move if they want to. I would just set a minimum (about 6) and a maximum (about 10) members in each patrol and let the boys move as needed and by their choice. If a patrol gets below the minimum members then they need to recruite new members or move to other patrols. If they get larger then the maximum number of members suggest that some move to smaller patrols or split to form new patrols.

Unfortunately I do not believe you could come up with an Uniform that is identified with Boy Scouts that boys, who do not wear or like to wear current one now, will wear willing. Why? Because the uniform would still be associated with Boy Scouts, it is not the style of the uniform that is the problem it is the myth associated with what the uniform represents is the problem.

Merlyn_LeRoy My point is this. From what I understand is that the city has entered into similar sweetheart deals with other organizations both religious and non-religious. If that is the case then the lease agreement with the BSA should stand. The city should be required to either enter into these types of agreements with all legal organization or none at all. If the problem is that the BSA was hogging the facilities during key months then the groups that also wish to use the facilities and were denied should work with the BSA and the city to resolve that problem. What this seems to others and me is not a disagreement on how BSA is handling the scheduling of use of the facilities, but an attempt to punish and discriminate against the BSA for its beliefs. If BSA refused to agree to a reasonable plan then the city would have had the right not to renew the lease.

Merlyn_LeRoy, I have another question. Would you agree that the government should not treat any group differently based on its religious or lack of religious beliefs?

Merlyn_LeRoy Has anyone from the homosexual and Atheists community step forward to maintain, and provide programs using the two properties that they are working so hard to get the BSA out of? If not what is going to happen to all the youth programs, that were not provided by BSA, that used and relied on these properties being maintained and safely operated?