Stosh

My point was: what is more immoral VFW/AL CHARTERING a unit or Hooters SPONSORING one activity? Both sell alcohol.....

Rock 'n' Roll is immoral.......

I don't know of many VFW posts and American Legion posts out there that don't have a bar connected to them and hold raffles on a regular basis, yet no conservative groups are out there making a big stink about them chartering BSA units. Then there are the beauty pageants at the fair.... How is that not just as demeaning to women as Hooters and the women don't get any money unless they win.

We had a curfew of 10:00 pm for minors in the town I grew up in. One could be out doing whatever one wanted to do after curfew, but it was reserved as another fine when doing something one wasn't supposed to be doing in the first place. If one caught caught speeding after curfew, one got two tickets, one for speeding and one for being out after curfew. If the police saw someone out driving around and they knew they were under 18, they would ignore it as long as one was driving appropriately. Being out after curfew was as much a parental issue as it was the child's. If your kid was out playing in the park with his buddies, no big deal. If they were in the park after curfew shooting off fireworks, then it's a whole different story. Then Mom and Dad got yelled at too.

So is wearing a hat in church...unless you're Jewish, then NOT wearing a hat in church is immoral. Oh, by the way, of the 7 species of locus in the Middle East, 4 are Kosher and 3 are not. One could go straight to hell for eating the wrong ones.

Why would any self-respecting pirate want to wear a flag on his head?

Playing cards and dancing is immoral too.

Talk to the local EMS or Fire Departments for assistance on that. If they don't involve you in one of their practice drills, they will at least teach you how to run one of your own. By the way I do such "emergency drills" all the time with my boys. We can be on a hike and I simply say. "Little Timmy just got bit by a snake, or broke his leg, or fell down the well... again." After they get over the Deer-in-the-headlight look, they generally do a pretty fair job of attending to the situation.

Tell him that as long as you're paying for the coffee, you get to talk for the first half hour. He can take notes, but he can't comment on anything you say until 30 minutes have passed. Then let him vent all he wants. At least you have forced him to listen. If he doesn't agree with that up front, then one might want to re-evaluate the friendship. I always want to hear what my friends have to say, especially when it might concern me or my situation in life.

Well the two issues have nothing to do with each other, but that's not the perception given to the hundreds of comments to the news stories on non-BSA sites. The apology for attire was stupid. As far as the photos are concerned, the parents did sign a release, if they don't want their kids photos on corporate sponsors, then don't send your kid. Companies sponsor organizations like this for the media coverage and advertising. If one didn't know Hooters was sponsoring the event, then one needs to do due diligence next time, the parents need to take responsibility and quit getting worked up about nothing. If the local high school swim team sponsored a swim day at day camp and showed up in swimwear, are the parents going to be bent out of shape? Sorry, modern norms are such that on any given night, these same boys are watching "stuff" on TV and or internet far worse than Hooters girls.

When I was a kid my mom said the same thing.... except added the caveat, "otherwise it's a long wait for breakfast." As a kid I ate a lot of PBJ before bedtime.

@@desertrat77, sure, no problem. I read the original news article on a website that handled comments to the article and the overwhelming tone indicated that once the BSA opened the door for a more relaxed stance on the homosexual issues, why are they now getting all that hypocritically excited about the heterosexual issues. The Pandora's Box has been opened. As a number of people pointed out, pretty girls, some of who could be Cub Scout moms are trying to make a living and their place of employment is doing something nice for the boys. It is the hypocrisy of the adult mind that turns it into a negative sexual issue. None of these Cubs are even aware of the issues the adults are bantering around. Pretty women = bad, homosexual men = good. The rest of the comments pretty much went on to make a joke about the BSA's policies and attitudes. Unfortunately I kinda agree with them. I have no problem with any business out there that wants to do something nice for the kids being able to do so. If the parents have their undies in a wad, then they can keep their boy home.

If he is a friend, why are all the ASM's giving the impression that they are going to gang up on him. Why not just YOU and the SM have a cup of coffee. As a friend and as an ASM it is your responsibility to ASSIST him in being a good SM! When the SM looks good, you look good. I was the Administrative Assistant to the General Manager of a large manufacturing operation dealing with international sales. Whenever anyone would ask me what my job was, I could either go into a long spiel about the 10,000 things I did every day or I could just say, "It's my job to make my boss look good." for 15 years option #2 worked well for me. If one is a friend, be a friend. Time to buy him coffee.

So what's the problem? Pretty women are bad for the boys? Any one of these women can be a Cub Scout leader if they fill out an application. People who have a problem with this are the same ones that started the slippery slope with exactly who gets to be a SM and who doesn't. Get used to it. This is how life is going to be from now on for the Scouts.

My point exactly, once the flag has been cut up IT IS NO LONGER THE U. S. ENSIGN, and is now just rags to be discarded. When I retire the Flag, I retire the Flag, not just cut up pieces of cloth. And by the way, what the military does is not the same as what civilians do. The US Flag Code is for civilians and the military has it's own flag code of protocol.

But of course, it's his only proof he is entitled to a BOR.

Only the Charter Organization Representative can make the decision on who is SM. CC and committee are responsible only for the program of the unit, not the personnel. One can visit with the COR. If he says the SM is doing what is what the CO wants, then the discussion is over. Move on to a different troop with a different CO and COR.

Cutting the flag into pieces makes it no flag, just rags to burn. Every flag I have ever retired was burned folded into it's traditional triangular form. They were retired as a flag, not rags.

Any troop that requires the boys to wear a uniform for a BOR can go to a different troop and get that requirement passed. If I had committee members that insisted on that, I'd find 3 different people to run the BOR's in our troop. This is definitely a power-game played by adults to over ride the intent of the BOR and advancement requirements. Sorry, but the boys deserve better than that when they have earned their rank.

First of all, welcome to the forum. Secondly of all, just walk away, this is a no-win situation. Politics are more important to these folks than what's best for the boys.

My boys are new, trying to get their act together, not doing very well. Athletic shorts, no shirt tucked in, etc. looking rather sloppy. I wore must my scout shirt tonight, didn't tuck it in. didn't scout salute for flags, but did the civilian salute. Boys noticed and after a quick discussion, it was decided the troop would be full uniform, shirt, belt and pants. BSA hats optional, patrol neckers required. I guess they didn't like the way I looked. One of my older boys had full uniform, other had no uniform. I think the discussion went well.

Hmmm..... Isn't a full uniform a full uniform that one only has to meet inspection for the flag ceremony? I have boys that show up in whatever clothing, put their scout shirt on, do the flags and meeting and take off the shirt at the end. They met the requirements in their own mind, but truth be told, I would rather have them forego the shirt and quit pretending to look like a scout. If a uniform is not required, just forget the expense and just go with whatever one has and Jolly Roger and/or CSA battle flag bandanas for everyone. It's meant to be fun after all and coughing up big bucks for a full uniform is not on 99.9% of the parents' radar anyway. Quit making a sham of it. Just do the civilian salute and be done with it. If Venturer's don't need uniforms and generally don't have one anyway, why should the Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts? A new necker for every year of Cubs? That's kind of a give away that the only reason the uniform is a valid part of the program is the funds it generates for the program. It's a battle worth giving up on. Not worth it, and you'll never win.

I am led to believe the "optional" parts of the uniform mean that the troop has the option to wear the BSA cap, the BSA campaign hat, the historical BSA beret or the BSA garrison cap, or no headgear at all. I do believe that when it comes to the neckerchief, the same line of thought applies. A BSA style necker with appropriate BSA indications on it. If one really wishes to delve into this particular issue. "From the halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli" indicate that the US Marines fought in the Mexican War (Montezuma) and against the Barbary Coast pirates (Tripoli). Wearing the Jolly Roger flag/bandana is even less patriotic than the CSA Army of Northern Virginia flag/bandana. In any case, either might not be appropriate for a Scout to be wearing even if not in uniform. Put a US Flag bandana on and see how well that idea gets accepted regardless of how much "fun" it might be. Just remember that privateers, i.e. pirates, buccaneers, plied their "trade" on international waters plundering, pillaging and murdering people for personal gain, while indicating no allegiance or loyalty to any government or code of law. Is this an appropriate way to show American citizenship as a Scout? Oh, but it's FUN! Some people think burning crosses is fun too. One need be heedful of the message they convey by the actions they take.

I doubt if the patrol can camp unsupervised at someone's lake-side cabin's lawn......

By the way..... Wild Parsnip is listed in some books as of the PARSLEY family.... Other books put it in the CARROT family. The common name is not a valid way of identifying plants. Wild Parsnip in Alaska is called Pushky. Identifying 10 plants for the sake of advancement to FC shouldn't be that hard. Just remember there's stuff out there that unless one has done extensive research on is potentially harmful if not flat out deadly. Don't rely on just one book or one website either.