Bob White

One thing that neither your group or mine can control is stupidity. A District Committee member who doesn't know the tenets of the organization he or she is leading is stupid, can we agree on that? Everybody has moments of stupidity. Stupidity however is not unconstitutional, nor is being religious. My understanding is that the state cannot support religion. But the state can support people being religious, in fact it is done all the time. The BSA is not a religion, it has never claimed to be, nor ever tried to have any of the features or elements of a religion. So how do you seek to control it constitutionally as you would a religion? The scouts were not given those price breaks because they were a religion or because they were religious. It was done because of the service being given to the local youth was seen as a good thing and the town chose to lend support. If they choose not to now, thats fine, but lets do it for the right reason. If religion was not a factor in getting the lease then it should not be a factor in ending it. The BSA got the low cost lease for being a non-profit organization. The only fair thing to do would be for the city to take back any special services given to any non-profit organization. Whether or not they are religious is not relevant to why the lease was made available.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

The only patches required on a BSA uniform thatI am aware of are; the program affiliation strip above the right hand pocket, the American Flag on the sleeve, a council shoulder patch, and the shoulder loops designated program service. Any Field uniform with those elements is complete and correct. All other patches are worn at the decision of the individual authorized to wear them and by unit choice. However, where the patches are positioned and when the awards can be worn are governed by the BSA.

But, the Boy Scouts did not claim to be a religion. They claimed to be religious. There is a marked distinction between the two. If the schools are to refuse support to groups or individuals who are are religious they would need to close their doors to the majority of the tax paying public. The US Government is religious, they recognize religious holidays, they have God mentioned in several governmental papers and in many government functions, God is mentioned on our money, in our oaths of office, the 10 Commandments formed the root of many of our laws our laws. There is nothing about being religious that is contrary to the constitution. The BSA has always been a religious organization, anyone who has been a member of a unit that followed the program would know that from their first day involved. Charter Organizations know also. I have been involved in started several scouting units and promoting the strong moral beliefs of scouting and their support of religious activity by the members is a feature we boast on. So to deny services to a BSA unit because they are religious, would be the same as denying my son access to those services because his family attends a church and so he is religious.

For fairness sake, I went back and reread the original post. I walk away unchanged. As a silly story (it structurally isn't a joke), it's fine up until the last two paragraphs. The writers point is to exagerate the humor in order to emphasize his point of the last two paragraphs. The problem is that his summary of the purpose of the uniform is greatly lacking. The sense of belonging that he points to as the only pupose of the uniform, at least the only one he offers, is but a sliver of the pupose of the uniform as a method in scouting. There lies my problem. He brushes off the uniform method as an unimportant factor in achieving the aims, and it is not. He fails to mention any of the other reasons for the uniform, either by choice or lack of knowledge. It leaves a very mistaken immpression on the purpose and use of the uniform method. So no matter how funny the intro may be it leads to a false summary, and so I find little value in the humor.

"The Scouts want San Diego taxpayers to continue to argue the case" Lets keep in mind that the scouters and parents of those scouts are San Diego taxpayers. The City has a responsibility to defend the local BSA council in this matter as they would any other entity. The fact that they cannot be treated better because they are a religious organization does not mean that you can treat them worse.

"I thought the 8 methods were a goal that could never be acheived" What ever gave you that idea. The Methods are just that "methods" they are how you do things, not what you do. You do not "achieve" a method, you "use" a method. You achieve goals. How we achieve the goals of scouting is through the use of the scouting methods. (Also when you say that Uniform is one of 8 methods you ignore Cub Scouting which has uniforming as one of seven methods. Different ages and stages, different methods, both sets include uniforming.) One poster quipped "johnsned post just shows that taking something over the top isn't a good idea!" Over the top? Would that be like suggesting that people you find humor impaired "should be shot!" You didn't think that suggestion was over the top? If that's what you find funny, you have some real personal problems(This message has been edited by Bob White)

It is very likely. Mike is a SM in Atlantic Beach, Fl, which is only a couple miles from San Pablo. Our prayers are with Mike, The scouts and scouters of the troop, and the family of the young man. Such a tragedy.

Campfire Fairy, Based on your other posts I am sure that what you say is probably true. but the fact is that your are still considered a youth in the scouting program, and selecting and approving adults is not the responsibility of the youth membership. Your Charter Organization and adult membership have a legal and moral resonsibility to know and follow the policies of the BSA and to select and approve all adult leaders. The fact that you were comfortable with the condition you camped under does not make it right and I am glad to know that nothing went wrong...this time.

"IMHO, any adult that is on a campout is a "leader" (small "l"), in that they are helping lead the unit." That is going to totally depend on the unit. there is certainly nothing in the scouting program to suggest that attitude that I am aware of. We leave tomorrow on a campout with 37 people including 6 Webelos and their fathers. Who the Webelos consider as leaders within their den is I suppose up to them. But the only leaders of the troop are the Scoutmaster and the three Assistant Scoutmasters. The others are Dads with a capital D but they are not the leaders of the Boy Scouts, or of the activity, not even with a "little l". They are not trained to lead a scout troop or a scout activity, nor do they know the scouts well enough for them to lead them in any way. Any time a parent accompanies the troop on an activity it is as an honored guest. They are there to experience a Boy Scout activity and to watch their sons develop, but they are not there to lead the Boy Scouts or any of the activities, and they all understand and accept that. We want them to be there to have fun and not worry about being responsible for any of the activity.

"For example, we often have moms or dads accompany our troop's campouts. Most of these are registered committee members or ASMs, but not all of them. So have we, but, they never go as leaders. They go as what they are, guests and parents. The leaders are always registered trained scouters. Parents are not trained in the methods, policies or procedures of scouting activities, and so they do not have leadership interaction with the scouts. Knowing YP is excellent but that teaches how to keep scouts safe, not how to lead a scouting activity. There are always a minimum of two leaders or we don't go, no matter how many parents might be going. This is not a requirement. However I see it as a "best practices" situation. I can think of one event in 3 years that we had to cancel. By the way I cannot help to think that to say "we know we did it wrong but everything went fine" is questionable leadership at best. Things could have just as easily gone very wrong, and all adults involved, and the CO, would have found themselves facing whatever followed without the benefit of support from their council or the BSA because they violated the YP policies and the activities policies of their program. It could have been a very costly mistake in many ways. I'm guessing since the incorrect leadership was in attendance that no tour permit was applied for or approved, compounding the problem even further.

Technical point of interest for anyone interested... As it was explained to me during a tour of the BSA National Headquarters, BSA publications edits and publishes all BSA materials. The various divisions then buy back the materials from BSA Publications. "Now, let's say that at the last minute, the registered female Venturing leader cancels but an unregistered female also plans to come along as a "leader." Do you cancel the trip? Judgement is permitted here in my opinion." My judgement would be, I would rather risk the scouts disappointment than risk their safety. Shame on me if, as a leader, a plan was allowed to hinge on the attendance of any one person. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Personal opinion. I think the purpose behind the BSA writings is to what is in the best interest of the safety of the scouts. I am hopefull that all the leaders reading these posts, and the ones leading units, have the same goal in mind. If so, why not follow the action that is in the best interest of the scouts. Would it really be a good idea to send as a unit "leader" someone who you do not have referennces on, who you do not have a criminal background check on, who has not had their character and abilities approved by the charter organization and committee chair? Is that allowed, evidently some think so. Is that the 'best' thing you can do for the safety of the scouts? I would hope your answer would be, no. Any person "leading" the scouts on a scout activity, should be a registered member of the BSA.

NeilUp, The Venture Leaders handbook speaks specifically of Venturing Activities. So are you agreeing that there must be a female present?

TwocubDad, You make it sound as if service to 400 scouting units is not as worhty of recognition as service to a single unit. Why, as you have implied, would doing service for a council wide area negate the fact that the service was for youth? Do you seriously believe that only unit leaders have direct impact on youth in a community, regardless of that community's size? By the way please read an actual Silver Beaver Nomination. It is for registered Scouters who do service to youth in their community. It states nothing about the service haveing to be for scouting, just to youth. The same is true of the District award of merit. It is for service to youth in the community. http://www.alamoarea-boyscouts.org/forms/pdf/92-103.pdf I will agree there are two things at play, but not two awards. More like two groups of people, those who understand the requirements and those who do not. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

I've got the yo-yo.

If an adult agrees to supervise another child for a parent or legal guardian during a cub scout activity, that does not make them a "legal guardian" of the scout. It only designates them as the supervising adult. Legal guardianship requires a court action. A supervising adult may not be alone with a scout, or share a tent with a scout, who is not his son or under his legal guardianship.

"but no knot if you receive a local award that is based on a nomination from your peers." Like the knots for District Award of Merit, Silver Beaver, Silver Buffalo, Silver Antelope, Spurgeon Award, St.George Cross, George Meany Award, Heroism Awards, Whitney Young Service Award,OA Distinguished Service Award, the Merit Medal? All of which are service award (or recognition award) knots where you are nominated by your peers. Most are for local accomplishments. They all come from national BSA because that is the branch responsible for the uniform. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

A new application, when an adult changes position, insures that the charter organization has knowledge of who is doing what in the unit, and who has direct contact with youth. The CO is ultimately responsible for selection and approvalof each adult leader. They have a right and an obligation to have the final say in who holds what position in THEIR scouting unit. The unit committee has a responsibility to keep the CO involved in the process and give them current, accurate, information as to who is doing what job in the unit.

Sorry Twocub, but the purpose of your post was unclear. You quote Eamonn and you quote me, but you don't say anything yourself. You give readers no choice but to presume the meaning. It would be helpful if you just said what the point was that you were trying to make by repeating us.

No. Just as Boy Scouting has a different set of rules for outings than Cub Scouts, Venturing has a different set of rules than Boy Scouts. You have to adapt your thinking to methods of each specific program. The coed youth program has different needs and requirements. The Venturing regulations set by the National Executive Committee do not say a male and female adult. It says a male and female adult leader. That means approved, registered, adults. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

You may keep your sword.

Page 333 of the Venturing Leader Manual, center column, heading Leadership Policy for All Trips and Outings. "Co-ed overnight activities require male and female adult leaders."

Twocubdad, Are you suggesting that volunteers on the council level do not do the work that they do for the benfefit of youth? If not, Then what was the point you were trying to make.

My concern johnsned is your willingness to assume that anyone who uses the uniform as a method to achieve an aim of scouting is some nitpicking, child harrassing, rule spouter. So to remedy that prejudice you seem willing to discount the value of the entire method. It is possible to respect and use the uniform without ridiculing, or embarrassing, anyone. There are no uniform police, there are just rude scouters, some of them wear the uniform correctly, but some of them do not. Both can do the program an injustice.

The scouts can do whatever they are taught how to do. How much do you involve scouts in long range planning? If you want them to be interested it has to be there plan. Do not worry about who will be leader down the road. If the task needs to be done now have it done by the scouts who are there now. The ones following can retain, build onto, or alter those plans as they come into leadership.