CalicoPenn

I think my allergies are acting up - can someone pass me a tissue to wipe my eyes with?

"Are you certain that "Republic" isn't? I've seen it capitalized sometimes, and I know that one of our country's nicknames used to be "the Republic" (as in, Battle Hymn of the Republic)." Good question because Republic is one of those instances where a word can be a proper noun, part of a proper noun, or is a common noun, depending on it's usage. Proper nouns refer to specific places, people or things. Republic becomes a proper noun when it refers to a specific place such as Republic, Missouri. If I'm going to the Target in Republic, then both Target and Republic are proper nouns. Most often, republic becomes PART of a proper noun - such as The Republic of North Korea, or The Daily Republic. In these cases, republic by itself is not a proper noun, but together with the other words that identify a specific place or publication, it beomes part of a proper noun. With "The Battle Hymn of the Republic", we're referring to a song title - which is a 6 word singular proper noun. None of the words taken separately are proper nouns but put all six words together and you've created a single proper noun. When it's not part of a specific name, or substitutes for a specific named entity, it becomes a common noun. In the Pledge the republic is meant as The United States of America - the common noun stands in for the proper noun, but remains a common noun. If you refer to "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" (proper noun) as just "the Hymn", hymn is a common noun that stands in for the proper noun. Other examples: Desert (common noun) / Gobi Desert (proper noun) Ocean (common noun) / Pacific Ocean (proper noun) Cake (common noun) / Calico's Cake (proper noun) Republic (common noun) / Plato's Republic (proper noun) Though republic identifies a form of political franchise, it's not specific enough to qualify on it's own as a proper noun, just as ocean, on it's own, is not specific enough to qualify as a proper noun.

In all seriousness, there are two proper nouns in the Pledge: "God" and "United States of America". All the other nouns are common nouns.

A bowline won't cook a hot dog worth eating. Leaflets three, let it be refers to the Watchtower. WEBELOS = WE BELieve in OSirus. A Scout is Hungry? Do you not have any teenagers that you would ask such a silly question? To build a campfire, you must first have a union membership card in the carpentry union. The square knot is also known as the Niedermeyer Knot (let's see how many get THAT reference). To treat a snakebite, bite the snake back. The US flag flys 24 hours a day on orbiting US Military Satellites and on the surface of the Moon. The first three words of the Constitution is "Yo, Listen Up!" When speaking in a auditorium, the US flag will probably be on my bad side. How many proper nouns are in the Pledge - none - not one noun in the Pledge knows the difference between a butter knife and a cheese knife. So how'd I do coach?

"We went to the single border flap, but most members do not like it. No way to know at what Honor Level a member stands." Well that's the whole point of having single color border flaps. All OA members are equally valued - there is no difference between an Ordeal member, a Brotherhood member and a Vigil Honor member (the only "honor" "level" in OA). The question shouldn't be "How can we tell if someone is a Brotherhood member if he isn't wearing a sash" but "Why do we need to be able to tell a Brotherhood member from an Ordeal member outside the ceremonial realm?". I come from a Lodge that never had different color borders for different "levels". It didn't matter to us - when we were working side by side at a work weekend, the guy standing next to me could have been a Candidate, and Ordeal member, a Brotherhood member, or a Vigil Honor member - I didn't care as long as he was pulling his weight. Maybe that's why I just can't understand why I would need to know why John Scout is an Ordeal member and Bill Scout is a Brotherhood member when we're not involved in ceremonies. An Arrowman is an Arrowman, no matter what "level". Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why it's neccessary for different colored borders on flaps - without using the "it's tradition" argument. I know from my experience with the folks from my Lodge, and most of the folks from Lodges in my area I've spoken with, that to a one, the Vigil Honor members seem quite humbled, and taken aback, by receiving the honor and wouldn't want to wear a different colored flap to set them apart. I think most of us in my Lodge who wear the Vigil triangle device on our Universal Ribbons do so because they were a gift to us, not because we felt we needed to wear it.

John, Yep - at the Brotherhood level, there is a duty to the Lodge - my earlier comment about Brotherhood members being first in line for Lodge projects was a reference to that. That's part of the re-dedication of the principles of the Order of the Arrow. Yet still, first and foremost, it is service to the Unit that has the most weight - conceivably, one can do one's duty to one's Lodge by promoting camping to the younger members of the Troop, or being an OA Representative in the Troop. I remember seeing those pocket sashes - always hated them - felt it was just some guys way of extracting money from Scouts and Scouters, especially the patch collectors. Lets face it, we can be obsessed about this stuff sometimes, and we often don't start to become more discriminating about what we collect until after a few years of collecting anything we can get our hands on. I don't think those pocket sashes were ever official BSA wear - I think they were private issue, like the Leni Lanape legend backpiece for Sashes.

It's not really a new rule - it's been around since 2007. Will it stop? That really depends on the Scout Executive in each Council and whether he decides to enforce it or not, and how much pressure they're getting from the higher ups at National BSA to conform with National OA policies, and how serious the National OA board is about this. There will likely always be Lodges that will ignore the policy with a wink and nod from the Scout Executive. There are those that will comply because the Scout Executive enforces it. There really is no penalty from National OA for ignoring the policy - at least none that I've been able to discern. In ten years, the policy may just disappear - no one can say for sure. That said, the Lodges that do the different color borders or different schemes tend to be a bit off-center when it comes to the policies of National OA anyway. Nick's experience with Brotherhood is an example of that. There is nothing in the policy or procedures of the Order of the Arrow requiring permission from an OA Rep to petition for Brotherhood, and nothing requiring an Ordeal member to dedicate oneself to the Lodge in order to become a Brotherhood member. The rules are simple - be an Ordeal member for at least 10 months, demonstrate a few simple things (handclasp, etc.), write a letter - the OA is supposed to be about service to ones Unit first and foremost, not to the Lodge and the OA. To be brutally frank, there is nothing so onerous about becoming a Brotherhood member, if following the policies of the Order of the Arrow and not some Lodges "adding to the requirements" that every Ordeal member inducted this year can't become a Brotherhood member next year. While I appreciate that Nick worked hard to become Brotherhood, I'm sorry that he had to do so. The vast majority of Brotherhood members never had to work hard at it. The Troop's OA Rep should be preparing and encouraging every Ordeal member of his Troop to become Brotherhood, even if the member never attended a Chapter meeting, or Lodge event, not acting as some kind of gatekeeper standing in someone's way. The act of obtaining Brotherhood is a re-dedication to the ideals of the Order of the Arrow.

No offense taken - you've got good questions - and are trying to understand. The sashes will continue to have the Brotherhood Stripes on them. That's the only public recognition that National OA allows for Brotherhood membership. It is also a universal recognition - no matter what Lodge you are from, a Brotherhood member will always have a sash with the Brotherhood stripes on them. Now for the tricky part of the concept and why different schemes, colors, borders aren't allowed on Lodge flaps, or "pocket rockets". When inducted into the Order of the Arrow, you are being inducted into a National program - NOT a local program. You become an Ordeal (or Brotherhood or Vigil Honor) member of the Order of the Arrow - NOT an Ordeal (etc.) member of Lakota Lodge 175 (my home lodge - used as an example). No matter what Lodge inducted you, or what Lodge you affiliate with, you are a member of the Order of the Arrow first, the Lodge second. Your Sash and Universal Ribbon indicate your membership in the National Order of the Arrow. A Lodge flap indicates your secondary membership (keyword - secondary) membership in the Lodge. You, and everyone else in your Lodge are an equal member of the Lodge - you aren't an Ordeal member of the Lodge, you aren't a Brotherhood member of the Lodge, you aren't a Vigil Honor member of the Lodge - you are an Order of the Arrow member in good standing with the Lodge. So since that's clear as mud - the shorthand is you would be a Brotherhood member of the National Order of the Arrow in the (local name) Lodge and not a Brotherhood member of the (local name)Lodge in the National Order of the Arrow. See the difference? I told you it might be a tricky concept to grasp.

Found negligent? What does that mean? Was this a court claim? An insurance claim? Why would you want to stay with a Troop that was found negligent in an incident leading to the injury of your son in the first place? Call the Scoutmaster and ask point blank what's going on - and do it right away. If he won't answer, tell him you want all of your son's records - immediately - if he won't give them to you, contact the Council office and ask the nice folks in the service center to get you a copy of all of your sons advancement records. Whatever you do, if the Scoutmaster won't give you a straight answer, don't even bother taking part in the "Kangaroo Court" they've apparently got planned. Once you have your sons records, find another Troop - you don't need to do any kind of transfer from one Troop to another - you can leave one and join another at anytime, for any reason. You don't need permission from the old Troop to join a new Troop. But be upfront with the new Scoutmaster as to why you are transferring units. Be prepared to pay a new registration fee - when you talk to the nice folks at the Council service center, ask them what the procedure is for transferring your son's official membership without having to re-register. They should be able to do it without involving the old Troop. Finally, once you have found a new Troop, send a letter to the head of the Chartering Organization and a copy to the Chartered Organization Rep (if you know - you should be able to get that information from the friendly Council service staff too) explaining why you have left the Troop and warning them that if their Unit's leaders makes an attempt to besmirch your son's name and reputation with the new Troop, or anyone else, you will hold the Chartered Organization responsible. Don't threaten any lawsuits, or anything like that - just use the phrase "hold you responsible" and let them read meaning in to it. Calico

There are two things at work here. As I understand it, National OA has requested (required) that Lodges stop issuing different flaps and patches for Ordeal, Brotherhood and Vigil - and this would be consistent with the ideals of the Order. They aren't ranks, and they aren't true levels of membership. With the sole exception of access to ceremonies, an Ordeal Member is on equal footing with a Brotherhood Member and a Vigil Honor Member. Brotherhood is a re-dedication to the ideals of the Order - if it means anything, it means that a Brotherhood Member is expected to be first in line when a Lodge or Chapter project is taking place. Vigil Honor is just that - an Honor - a recognition that the Order of the Arrow member is living the ideals of the Order in his Scouting, Order of the Arrow and private life. A different "pocket rocket" scheme for Ordeal, Brotherhood and Vigil Honor is not allowed. That's part one. Part two is that too many lodges have been marketing the "pocket rockets" as an alternative to the Universal Ribbon (aka Order of the Arrow pocket device - it's called a Universal Ribbon because it is the same design for every member of the Order of the Arrow). The "pocket rocket" is worn on the same pocket button as the Universal Ribbon - but here's the rub - the "Pocket Rocket" is a temporary patch - and you can only wear one temporary patch over the right pocket at a time. If you have a summer camp patch sewed on the pocket, the "pocket rocket" shouldn't be worn because it is also a temporary patch. If you have no other temporary patch on the shirt, then the "pocket rocket" would be correctly worn as it is. BUT - the Universal Ribbon can be worn when a temporary patch is worn (or even if one isn't). The Universal Ribbon can be considered a permanent part of the uniform - youth and adult - once one becomes a member of the Order of the Arrow. Unless they've changed things, you can wear the Universal Ribbon if you were inducted into the Order of the Arrow but haven't paid dues to be active in your Lodge. The Lodge Flap is supposed to indicate paid membership - the Universal Ribbon just indicates that you were inducted. It appears that National OA is trying to reign in the whole "substitution" thing - as they should. BTW, since you asked, there is no Brotherhood device for the Universal Ribbon. The only device for the Universal Ribbon is the Vigil Honor pin. When I completed my Ordeal, my Explorer Post Advisor made it a point of giving me a Universal Ribbon as a gift (in my Troop, the Scoutmaster did the same for those inducted through Troop elections). When I received the Vigil Honor, we were all asked to make sure to wear our Universal Ribbons to dinner - my Lodge then publicly recognized the new Vigil Honor inductees and the Lodge Chief pinned the Vigil Honor device on our Universal Ribbons - I thought that was a nice touch and a great way to publicly recognize the newest batch of Vigil Honor honorees.

The original sash (1915) was a Black "Band" with a white stripe (not arrow). Black robes were used instead of Native American-style Costumes (I will not call it regalia - unless you are a Native American, you are wearing a costume). It's said the black was meant to blend in with the black robes and the white stripe was the best contrast. Many conjectured that after 1915, the white stripe became a white arrow. However, no known original exists today, and many who remembered the white stripe on black sash never remembered a white arrow on black sash. In 1919, we do know that the red arrow on white sash was created. It wasn't until the 1920's that the OA became a national organization - and when it did go national, the white sash/red arrow was the official sash of the Order of the Arrow. It wasn't until 1950 that the red stripes were added to the sash to denote Brotherhood membership. Until that time, Ordeal members wore the sash over their right shoulder, Brotherhood members wore the sash over their left shoulder. The triangle device for Vigil was created about 1924 and was imposed over the arrow (from about 1934 to 1951, the triangle was larger in width than the sash). Throughout the history of the National Order of the Arrow, the sash has been white with a red arrow. The black sash was pre-national days. Nevertheless, National issued a commemorative Black Sash for the 75th anniversary as a souvenier for the 1990 NOAC. This sash was not meant to be worn - the sash was much shorter than the average sash, and had no snap clasp. In 1993, a black sash was made for the National Committee by the National Chairman as he stepped down from the post - this sash was wearable, but only 75 were made. For the 2006 NOAC, another black sash was created, and like the 1990 NOAC black sash, it was not made as a wearable sash - being only 38" long (wearable sashes are 60 to 72") and with no snaps. Any black sashes created now are simply commemorative in nature - one doesn't do anything to earn them. I believe both the 1990 and 2006 black sashes were available through Scout supply - one didn't need to go to NOAC to get one - but you couldn't wear it either.

Hmm - curious - the mention of flip turns leads me to another question. For those camps that have practice/warm-up/qualifying sessions, are the swims done in a pool like environment? Or does that apply to camps where swimming is in a lake, river, etc.? I'm wondering if infrastructure means there needs to be more structure to earning the mile swim at some camps because of limited availability of the resource? In a lake traverse, there would be little conflict between user groups while a pool situation wouold mean more scheduling is needed. One year, the camp decided that mile swims would be done around a string of rowboats at the waterfront - we were told because it would open up more Scouts to earning the Mile Swim since the waterfront staff could watch the Scouts instead of having folks accompany Scouts in a rowboat. The howls of protest over that decision apparently were pretty loud because the next year, it went right back to traversing the lake. Seems some Scouts were using the rowboating portion as practice for rowing merit badge, that many leaders liked the peace and quiet of being out on the lake, and the swimmers much preferred the lake. There were also questions about whether 15 laps around some rowboats really equalled a mile - while no one ever questioned the length of the lake traverse (which was advertised as at least 1 mile, but may be closer to 1 1/4 miles).

In 1970, according to the US Census Bureau, 8,581,000 students attended college that year. In 1980, 12,097,000 students attended college that year. In 1990, 13,819,000 students attended college that year. In 2000, 15,313,000 students attended college that year. Projected for 2010, 17,927,000 students attending college that year. Since 1970, that's an increase of 8,716,000 students attending college - per year - an increase of 101% in just 40 years. From 1970 to 2000, the number of college students increased 78%. During that same time period the number of colleges increased from 2,837 in 1970 to 4,182 in 2000 - an increase of 67%. Clearly capacity has lagged behind demand.

Congrats to you for recognizing an opportunity to let your son make his own decision and try out those wings of independence! I'm curious to know how your camp handles the mile swim - I've never heard of having to qualify for it before (other than the standard qualification of being a swimmer), nor have I ever seen practice sessions. Does your camp offer it just once per session? My camp allowed Scouts to do the mile swim any day, any time, as long as the Scout had someone qualified (usually a leader or older Scout) rowing the rowboat and following you on the course (a big triangle from West Camp to Family Camp to East Camp to West Camp), and the waterfront was open. With a two week session, I did it every day both weeks (including the last morning of camp - before breakfast - the waterfront staff in all three camps "opened" just for me - it was a big deal in that "Meatballs" kind of way) and twice on two different days (to make up for the first day and the day we spent river rafting) so I could reach my personal goal of 14 mile swims at camp (I was 14 at the time - and had very supportive Scout leaders and waterfront staffers). If you camp allows multiple mile swims, maybe next year he could do it twice. Calico

"I reckon there's a law of economics missing in that somewhere. Usually having more customers allows you better economies of scale by filling up your classes and distributing fixed costs among a larger pool of people. It would be really odd if havin' more students increased da per-student costs." Economies of scale works well if your capacity is greater than demand, but when demand outstrips capacity, you either need to increase capacity, reduce quality, or fail to meet demand. Colleges and universities, especially state/community run schools, are loathe to limit capacity, mostly because the big elephant in the room is an expectation by legislatures, governors, and the people that demand WILL be met. Parents and students won't put up with a reduction in quality, so schools increase capacity. On the surface, it seems to make sense that if more students are admitted, there is more money brought in, and that should cover the cost. Unfortunately it's not that simple. Per student costs often increase with the addition of new students. Utilities are used longer, more cleaning supplies used, more infrastructure is needed, etc. etc. etc. and there is no one for one proportionality involved. Example - say you have a required course taught by one professor - his capacity is 300 students - after 300, quality goes down. But, you have 550 students who need to take that course - so you need to hire another professor. This 2nd professor's capacity is also 300 people, but s/he's only teaching 250 students. If both professors make the same amount in salary and benefits, and 300 students pay enough to cover one professors salary, you have to make up for the "missing" 50 students somehow - in order to do that, you need to raise the tuition rate on all 550 students taking that class in order to meet the demand. You've just lost the economies of scale and won't achieve that again until 600 students are taking the course at one time. Use that same priniciple for everything else the College needs to provide. If capacity is 1 nurse for every 1000 students in your health center, and you have 1500 students, you now have 2 nurses - who makes up for the "missing" 500 students? If Wi Fi is $1,000 per month for every multiple of 1,000 students ($1.00 per student), and you have 1,500 students and have to pay an additional $1,000 per month, you're now paying $1.33 per student for WiFi - you have to make up that 33 cents per student somewhere.

The problem with looking at everything through one lens is that we become myopic and don't consider other causes and effects. For instance, as mentioned, tuition rate increases certainly outpaced the rate of inflation over the past 15 to 20 years or so - but if we only look at this through the lens of the put upon taxpayer, we come to the conclusion that the tuition increases are the result of an out of control administration and demands made by faculty/staff unions. Yet if we become serious about looking at other factors in to account, the boogieman of out of control spending starts to go away. Lisa mentioned one cause - an expectation over the past ten years or so of more elaborate housing, more services in housing, etc. Twenty years ago, people were happy with a basic concrete block walled box with two beds, two desks and two closets, and hopefully enough outlets to plug in a refrigerator, hot plate/microwave, a couple of lamps, and a stereo. Ten years ago, the desks needed to be bigger, the beds more comfortable, the walls less institutional, and phone, cable and internet connectivity was required, with even more outlets to plug in televisions and computers. Now, students are expecting WiFi in all the dorm rooms and every common area on campus, and are expecting instant notification on problems on campuses with daytime populations the size of suburbs of Chicago. Let's also not forget that 20 years ago, the precentage of high school graduates planning on going to college was much, much smaller than it is today. Taking into account the much larger number of students today, the tuition rate may not seem as bad - sure, it may have outpaced the rate of inflation, but likely has barely kept up with the number of students. There are consequences for increased number of students - and one of those is increased expenses, which need to be paid for somehow.

Out Of Council

I'm a bit unclear about something. The 2003 NOAC "trader" patch. Was it issued by your son's Lodge or was it issued by another Lodge? If it was issued by your son's Lodge - then it could be worn I suppose but you better prepare him for the inevitable questioning he's going to get from people who see a 2003 NOAC flap on a Scout who just became an Ordeal member of the Lodge in 2009. Frankly, unless there's a good (true) story to go with it (like this was my brothers Lodge flap, the one that was killed in Iraq last year), then it would probably be best if he wore his "plain jane" Lodge flap. You could suggest that wearing the current Lodge flap helps bind him to his brothers in the Lodge - that it's as much an emblem of the shared trials they all went through to earn the right to wear that Lodge flap as it is a patch that identifies him as a member of the Lodge. If, on the other hand, it was issued by another Lodge, then things get a bit clearer. Members may only wear Lodge flaps from the Lodge they are currently registered in. Back in my younger days, one of the coolest Lodge flaps ever was for the Malibu Lodge in California - it was a multi-color wonder with a shark on it. I did buy one for my collection - but never would have heard the end of it if I tried to wear it.

Perhaps we should consider this in a broader view. A Scout is Reverent is a point of the Scout Law that Scouts should be doing their best to adhere to in their everyday lives. No where does the BSA suggest that a Scout must attend religious services once per week. Can attending religious services be part of being Reverent? Yes - no doubt about that - but Scouts that never attend religious services can also be Reverent. In all of our lives, there come's times when, because of the choices we willingly make, we have to adjust to a different reality - temporarily or permanently. How we adjust to that new reality is a big test of our character. Taking a job that begins at 11:00 am on a Sunday while knowing that one attends church every Sunday morning means an adjustment may need to be made - and the burden to adjust is on the individual, not the employer. If the burden is too great to bear, the position should be declined. In my opinion, a good strength of character is shown either in accepting that regular Sunday morning services are out of the picture for a short period of time and adjusting accordingly, or in declining such a position because of a conviction that an obligation to attend Sunday services every week no matter what is paramount. A choice to "sneak in" late seems to undermine one's character - at least it does in my eyes - in that "I admire your dedication to go to church every Sunday but what about the committment you made to the camp and your co-workers?" kind of way. A good Camp Director will always make an exception for a special event, such as a sister being acolyted for the first time.

I'd be far more concerened about a leader who only see's things in black-and-white rather than in shades of gray, especially if that leader was an ASM who may have to discipline the Scouts. I agree with Beavah - bring Jack aboard, and let Mike make his own decision.

I find it ironic that is was a student uprising that brought the Mullah's to power and now the Mullah's are attempting to crush a student uprising. I think there may be far more going on behind the scenes that we will ever be made fully aware of. For the Ahmadinejad government to appear to defy the Supreme Leader who may have already approved the notion that the opposition had won by declaring victory and cracking down on protests suggests to me that Ahmadinejad may have some powerful friends in the Assembly of Experts (which is the group that elects the Supreme Leader and has the power to dismiss the Supreme Leader) who intervened with the Supreme Leader and convinced him to accept Ahmadinijad as being re-elected. I'm no expert on Irania politics but expect a new Supreme Leader to be elected within a year - that's my prediction.

There's something about this question that bothers me. What's missing is HOW you know this Scout told his Merit Badge Counselor that he had completed a specific requirement on a specific trip. Did the Scout brag about it to his friends? If so, that should lead to an immediate conference between him and his Scoutmaster. Did the information come from some Scouts who are griping? Information that may have no factual basis, just a "hunch"? Then the conference should be between those Scouts and the Scoutmaster on Scout Spirit. Or did the information come from some adult who contacted the Merit Badge Counselor to "check up" on the Scout and find out what this Scout has claimed? If that's the case, that adult needs to be told in no uncertain terms that s/he is never to call a Scout's Merit Badge Counselor ever again to "check up" on a Scout to make sure the Scout is doing everything he's "supposed" to be doing. That adult needs to be told that doing so, even though it may be "well meaning", may lead to the impression that the adult has some kind of agenda or vendetta towards the Scout. If you got the information from this third source, then don't even think of talking to the Scout - you can't very well model the first point of the Scout Law if you don't trust the Scouts themselves. (This message has been edited by CalicoPenn)

"I don't know how they obtain them, but maybe once every two years, we will have a Scout, who thinks he can check out a Maxim or Playboy magazine at camp, without his parents ever finding out." Here's a prime example of what I'm talking aboult when I suggest that people's definition of "porn" can be quite different. Most of us would agree that Playboy is porn. Soft-core, but porn nonetheless. Maxim, on the other hand, is right at that line. It's sold out in the open racks, available to anyone that can reach it. While inappropriate for Scouting, it's as much "porn" as the swimsuit edition of Sports Illustrated. There will be people who consider Maxim, or the swimsuit edition of Sports Illustrated to be "porn". It's doubtful that this would hold up as meeting the legal definition. Sure, let's call it inappropriate but let's also be careful that we don't automatically name every magazine that's inappropriate as "porn".

Wow, things sure have changed in Packs since I was a lad. Back then, Pack meetings were attended by the lads, their parents and their siblings. No one, let alone a Cub Scout, would have been able to bring a "porn" magazine to a Pack meeting without some adult finding out. Was this lad's parent(s) even at the Pack meeting? I find it difficult to believe that a parent would have let their son bring a "porn" magazine to a Pack meeting. Note my use of quotation marks around the word porn. I do this deliberately because we don't know what this witnessing parent (or the writer) considers to be a "porn" magazine. I have been around parents who consider Mad magazine, or certain comic books (like Wonder Woman (not kidding)) to be "porn" magazines, though most people would never accept such a designation. Now if it's Playboy (or worse), then you have an issue with the Boy and his parent(s) - as well as an issue with all the folks who missed a lad carrying a Playboy into a Pack meeting - and as Eamonn says, you know what needs to be done. If it's Mad Magazine, or a Wonder Woman comic book, then you have a problem you can't solve to the complaining parent's satisifaction. Calico

You have a Cub Scout Pack with no Den Leaders? None?? The you don't have a Cub Scout Pack, you have a "super" den, and you're the Den Leader. At this point, I suggest you start to think about your son's experience and your family's experience. Go visit another Cub Scout Pack - and if you like it, join it. If the Pack you're in folds because you aren't involved, then it was never meant to be. Don't let anyone guilt you into staying involved.