CalicoPenn

I was in College, in the school's student center, watching the launch on TV - and then was called to one of the dorms to treat a student who collapsed because Christa McAuliffe was one of her teachers at Concord High School.

Seems were concentrating on the wrong thing here - camp school certification. This volunteer, for whatever reason, is cranky. That in and of itself is no big deal - except that it is affecting the enjoyment of the Cubs, it's affecting the program, and it's hacking parents off. I'm going to disagree with Basement on the looking for an excuse. Tiger Cub parents don't look for excuses to leave, they look for reasons to stay. If they've been having a positive experience in the pack, and their first taste of a district event leaves a sour taste in their mouth, how many of them might be wondering "is this what Cub Scouts is really like?" At least one Cubmaster is worried that he's going to lose parents and Cubs because of this volunteer. I think the camp school certification discussion is diverting us from the real issue here, which I believe is found in the following excerpts: "We've had problems with her in the past as you may have read. A lot of folks do not want to work with her, nor attend events run by her. Day Camp attendance has increased b/c I have served as an intermediary between her and staff, and folks deal more with me than her. In fact several staffer have point blank told me, that they will only deal with me." and "Discussions with her have occured in the past, I did one of them as a DE 14 years ago, and it seems like it makes a short term change, but nothing long term." and "Problem is we are so small a district, and about 1/2 the active Packs do not participate on the district level. Partly b/c we have not had an active CS RT to get info out, partly b/c of teh activity chair. I'm working on the RT part though." We aren't talking about a single incident of crankiness (we all have bad days). This is a pattern. People don't want to work with her. Active Packs are avoiding District events which may partly be due to her. Volunteers have walked away from her. Now parents are starting to mention it, and not in a positive way. If counseling could devastate the day camp, what do you think inaction will do? Forget about the camp school certification issue - that's an issue easily solved - either get someone trained or borrow a certified CD from elsewhere - a neighboring district or council - for the year. Using that as an excuse to avoid making the hard choices is just wimpy - there, I said it. Look at the broader picture - how much more damage is the District going to let this toxic asset do to the District's program and reputation before someone takes action? What's the point of holding CS Roundtables if the Packs aren't going avail themselves of District activities in the first place. Eagle92 - taking on Roundtable is great - unfortunately, I don't think you can fully solve that issue without the District solving the Activity Chair issue as well.

This isn't just a problem with a 17 year old scout. This is also a problem of a serious lack of adult leadership and supervision, not just at this camp, but at summer camp as well - and I wouldn't send any one out on any outings with these so-called leaders. Tossing knives at a wall across a room? He's going home - and getting the bill for the drywall repair. BTW - he "repaired" it with toothpaste? I'd be hacked off enough right now to send an e-mail to the Scout Executive (you can contact most councils through their web sites) stating that your son's troop was camping at the local scout camp and one of the scouts damaged the walls - was he aware of that? When the Scout Exec contacts the SM or CC and lets them know the troop is banned from council properties until they pay the repair bills, and possibly for longer than that, maybe that will get the adult "leaders" attention. #2? Sounds like the adult leaders didn't learn about the duct tape or bunk tying incidents until you told them, if they didn't investigate why there was a commotion in that room in the first place - just another example of the lack of sense the "leaders" had. If the leaders had known what was going on? He should have gone home. #3? Not going home (unless told in advance not to go out on the ice because it was dangerous) but would certainly lead to a lecture to ALL of the Scouts on the dangers of thin ice. #4? Going home #5? Going home I'm sorry to say, if these leaders don't step things up and take their responsibilities to provide a safe environment for your son and the other boys, the only real options you have is to become the COR and fire them, or find a new Troop. Correcting a typo(This message has been edited by calicopenn)

It's February - CSDC isn't in two weeks. Still plenty of time to make sure it gets off the ground. It's time for her to retire - now. Either she goes voluntarily after being given a chance to retire gracefully, or she is told point blank that her services to the District are appreciated but no longer neeed - effective immediately, and that she will turn over all records, supplies and materials belonging to the District. Then you move on. A simple call from the COR to the District Chairman stating that the women is to be removed from the position or the Pack will no longer support the District by attending any activity, providing any leadership, and will no longer allow FOS presentations will make that process move really quickly - you just have to make sure the District Chairman knows it isn't a bluff. Or is there some other reason why this one woman has the entire lot of the folks in District positions afraid to take this step?

First - there is no such thing as a minor leadership position. They are all important in their own way. Second - if the lad can't explain himself well, it may or may not be related to his disability or just may or may not be related to his being 11 years old. Third - if he's got the time in POR, and has met the other requirements, why should he wait because you think he should wait? The program is set up so that advancement this fast by a determined individual can happen - do you really want to claim you're smarter than the BSA? Fourth - if there was a problem with POR performance, where was the mentoring throughout this time period? Why wasn't it mentioned before and the lad worked with to improve? It's a bit late to bring it up for this POR now, don't you think? Fifth - by your own admission, he has been extremely active in the Troop, and maybe the most active. Well no wonder he's been advancing so rapidly - he's determined. If this were my unit, we'd be giving the lad his SM Conference and BOR at the next meeting, then presenting his Star Rank at that meeting in front of all his friends, who he is now moving away from. Not because it's the nice thing to do, but because it's the right thing to do.

Absolutely - there is no issue with an Ordeal member being a Chapter Chief - and the fact that the chapter doesn't have one goes quite a ways, I think, in helping to put your other question into focus. Since this is a bit new, and you don't have the book yet, I'll fill you in on something basic about the OA that sometimes get's lost or is misunderstood. Ordeal, Brotherhood and Vigil Honor are not ranks. In the OA, an Ordeal member has the same rights and privileges as a Vigil Honor member. Ordeal is the first step - and one can remain an Ordeal member throughout their OA career (and OA follows one into adulthood - if your son joins with his son as an adult, he just has to pay Lodge dues to the Lodge of his council, after proving his membership, and he's a member - no having to do the Ordeal again.) In fact, the first duty of an Arrowman is to his unit, and so if he only serves his unit, and never gets active in the chapter, he is still a member in good standing! Brotherhood is a re-affirmation of the bonds of the...well, brotherhood of the Order. After 10-months, if your son decides that he wants to take that next step, it's a pretty simple process. In a way, he'd be saying that he is taking the message of the Order and affirming his standing. A Vigil Honor member is chosen from amongst the members of the OA - he does have to have been a Brotherhood member for at least 2 years, but it's not something one applies for, or campaigns to get. It's a recognition by one's peers that one is living to the high ideals of the Brotherhood of Cheerful Service. The number of Vigil Honor members a Lodge can induct every year is limited by Lodge size, and the number of adults inducted each year is further limited by the number of youth inducted (generally 1 to 1, and if you can iduct an odd number, say 15, the extra must go to a youth) and it is a very humbling honor. The Order is about service. Here is the way I see it. An Ordeal member helps when asked, a Brotherhood member asks if they can help, a Vigil Honor member just picks up the broom and starts helping. To reiterate though, they aren't positions of rank or privilege. There's no separate red carpet entrance for Vigil Honor members, and most of the Vigil Honor members I've ever met will be the first ones to let a hungry Ordeal member get in front of them at the food line. If your son is interested, you should find out who the Chapter Advisor is. Inexperience and being new to the Order shouldn't make a difference to any Chapter Advisor worth their salt - and if it takes that fresh blood, and that kind of can do enthusiasm to help jump start the Chapter, then I say best of luck!

"Paulbots", "Paulistas". I can't help but think of another personality driven political cult - the Birchers. Iran? I believe they are trying to become the Middle East superpower. They poke at Israel because they think it makes them look stronger than the true Middle East powers like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and the Arab League which generally is at peace with Israel most of the time. They sabre rattle against the US because that was a successful strategy of the Soviet Union back in the day so they think that will work now. I think they're also trying to show that they're independent of Russia and China when many perceive them as easily swayed by those countries. Or we can see them in an irrational light, like BS-87 does (uness he's kidding - and I honestly doubt that) but that doesn't actually lead to anything but lunacy. Greek? About 487 billion in debt. They borrowed heavily for the Olympics, and because they couldn't get their act together enough to prevent the wide=-spread corruption amongst the political class and tax cheating amongst the people. Greece is what you get when you get when you lower taxes and cut spending without regard to whether it's harmful or not - in other words, it's the very picture of what this country will look like if the tea party and neocons are successful. Let's just declare War on Greece, spend 487 billion in that war in one year by paying off their debt, without losing a single person in combat, then seize the 487 billion from the folks we paid off in order to pay for the war debt. The Euro? I agree - it's doomed - and always has been. The European Union is an attempt to turn Europe into the United States of America by turning the countries of Europe into defacto states of a central government. The thing is, the US works because the original states agreed in the beginning to create a union with a division of powers between the federal government and the state government, and subsequent states voluntarily came into that model whereas the European Union consists of a number of countries that retain their individual identity in everything they do, including defense and general welfare, except for an allegedly consolidated currency that hasn't served to actually consolidate an economy of Europe. Everytime the European Union makes new rules governing things like cheese, fruit, wine, etc., they lose that much more support. I think that house of cards will collapse within the next 20 years. China? China needs us as much as we borrow from them - they borrow from us to prop up and stabilize their own economy - they can't afford to demand repayment of our debt to them - and if we were to decide to just pay them, it would send their economy into an inflationary death spiral. While the right wingers get their panties in a twist over North Korea and Iran, serious people worry more about a conflict between India and Pakistan, a much greater threat.

Sorry you're having this kind of experience. Typically, the membership cards, a sash, a lodge flap, and often a book, are presented to the new members right after they complete Ordeal, including the ceremonies. Is there someone in the Troop that is a member of the OA that can find out what's going on? Your son may be asking the wrong adults - if they aren't members of the Order themselves, they just may not know - but someone should know - otherwise, a call to the Scout Service Center should get you some answers.

Papa, That's not too much government, that's too much idiots working at the copy shop not knowing what the heck they're talking about.

Project Manager: An often highly paid person who stands between the person doing the work and the client, usually mucking things up for everyone involved. I just don't get the angst that's been expressed here. This new workbook seems to simplify things but apparently some just can't work unless things are made so complicated that it makes a Rorschach blot look like a perfectly drawn triangle. I'm particularly troubled by the notion that the District folks need to oversee what the Units are doing because the Units can't be trusted. Creating a new nature trail doesn't take a 30-page proposal. I have yet to see an Eagle project that needed a 30-page proposal in order to be successful. I can see absolutely no need to have to expand any of these boxes in order to create a good proposal. If the members of the project review think they need more information than a simple description, then the District has the wrong people on the review board. Just for an example - a hypothetical new nature trail: Proposal: Create a new .75 mile wood chipped nature trail through XYZ's west 80 acres with (2) 6-foot long foot bridges over seasonally wet portions of the trail and (6) 8"x10" information sign boards on 4' tall 4x4 posts for the nature center to post trail information on evenly spaced throughout. XYZ will use their own brush hog to rough out the trail once it is laid out. Benefit: Will expand XYZ's nature trails into a little used portion of their property. How long: (4) 6-hour days Leadership: # of people: 20 Where recruit: Family, Scout Troop, School, XYZ (Beneficiary) Most difficult about leading them: People will be spread out along the trail, working on different parts of the project. Materials: Wood chips (provided by XYZ) 4x4 lumber; 2x4 lumber, 3/4 inch plywood, wood screws, water sealer treatment, tread netting (for added traction on bridges, lathing and marking tape for locating trail route. Supplies: First aid kit, rope, twine, garbage bags, sunscreen, drinking water and/or gatorade, work gloves, insect repellent Tools: Post hole diggers, rechargable drills with screwdriver head bits, hand saws, levels, bow saws, pruning shears, loppers, wheelbarrels, shovels, hammer Permits: Per the Village of ABC, no building permits are required. Preliminary Cost: Materials: $300 - possible donation by John's Lumber Supplies: $150 - First aid kit from Troop 111. Remainder donation of Scout's Grandparents Tools: Loaned by XYZ and project friends Other: Food possible donation by Charlies Grocery and D&B's Diner Project Phases: 1) Complete Final Plan 2) Determine work day dates with XYZ 3) Recruit volunteers and draw up work schedules 4) Gather materials and supplies 5) Lay-out trail and supervise, with XYZ Facilities Manager, the trail rough-out. 6) Clear trail, spread woodchips, install sign posts, build and install foot bridges. 7) Ribbon-cutting and lead first nature hike down trail with Volunteers, XYC Staff, and any other interested parties 8) Complete reports Logistics: Materials will be delivered by John's Lumber; supplies to be transported by Scout's parents, volunteers to arrange own transportation or carpool from Troop meeting site. Tour plan will be needed and Mr. Smith, ASM, has agreed to help fill out and file the plan. Safety: Use of power drills restricted to Scouts 14 and over, Totin Chip needed to use bow saws, be aware of heat and sun issues and dehydration, be prepared for cuts, blisters and bruises. Further Planning: Draw up plans for foot bridges with final measurements and get approval from XYZ. Draw up plans for sign posts and get approval from XYZ. Create detailed materials list with quantities based on drawings. Create map of planned route before laying it out. Create work-day schedules (what do do, where and when). So - everything above will fit perfectly fine in the boxes provided, without shrinking text, and provides more than enough detail for someone to know exactly what the project is going to be. It's a 3-page proposal - and there really isn't a need to make it any larger. One of the things I do as part of my job is to write grant applications - this is about the same amount of detail one gives for most grant proposals these days (there are exceptions - government grants are really intensive but most granting organizations have gone away from the 50 page bound in full color proposals of the past). Now this took me less than 15 minutes to create, including typing as I went along, but I have experience writing proposals - it will take a Scout more time, but it's really all that is needed. We need less project management, and more doing of the projects. I don't see anything about project management in the workbook, I do see the word leadership - and that is not the same thing.

Interesting take - I would just add that the term "useful" needs to come in to play in the written work as well - using "useful", James Patterson, who seems to publish a book a week sometimes, wouldn't get a copyright at all, nor would 50-cent for any of his rap songs. Of course, they'd probably disagree so we would be seeing court battles over a determination if something is useful or not.(This message has been edited by calicopenn)

No - I was not a Lone Scout, nor was I homeschooled - I came up in traditional units and went to some of the best public schools in the nation (thanks to folks in suburban Chicago being willing to actually pay more in taxes so that folks got a good education). But I respect the Lone Scout program, both in it's past incarnation and in its current incarnation. Whatever brings the Scouting program to as many people as possible is a good thing in my book. I'd rather not get caught up in a debate over homeschooling, either - people homeschool for a number of reasons, and while many homeschoolers take advantage of youth groups and park district programs to provide their children with extra-curricular activities, many homeschoolers prefer not to do so, for their own reasons. I really don't care if the Lone Scout is in a suburban area surrounded by multiple units, or in a rural area where there are no nearby units, if the Lone Scout program brings Scouting to people who would otherwise not be served, then more power to it. It's a program of the BSA - and I'll repeat again - if you can't deal with Lone Scouting or with a Lone Scout with an open mind (and open heart), then when it comes time for an Eagle Project Review or Eagle Board of Review, then do the honorable thing and bow out - even if you're the DAC. Is it possible that a Lone Scout family might try to game the system? Sure - as much as it's possible that a Scout from a traditional unit might try to game the system. Heck, there isn't a man-made system anywhere that a small number of people aren't circumventing or trying to game. From coupon clipping to voting to driver's licenses to taxes to, yes, even Eagle Scout ranks, there are always ways to game the system. It's time for us as a society to grow-the-heck up and accept that we do our best to prevent it but that we can't prevent the most determined from figuring out a workaround and that sometimes, the "cure" is more damaging than the problem. Kicking Lone Scouting around because someone thinks someone they've met or heard about is gaming the system for Eagle is insulting to the majority of honorable Lone Scouts. It's as insulting as kicking around the Boy Scouts of America because some Scouts and Scout Leaders happened to get lost, or because some ASM got caught molesting some Scouts, or claiming that the program has somehow been diminished because of "leadership development".

"Lone Scout is a really sad and pathetic way to experience scouting......I doubt it follows the vision of BP, Seton or Beard." A bit of history seems to be in order. Lone Scouting was founded in the United States in 1915 by William D. Boyce. That name should be familiar to folks as he is the founder of the Boy Scouts of America (though in some places, including some BSA literature, he's listed as one of the founders or helping to organize along with Seton and Beard but Seton and Beard actually merged their respective youth organizations in to the BSA after Boyce got the organizational ball rolling, so to speak). Boyce was inspired to create the Lone Scouts by the Lonecraft program of the British Boy Scout Association. That should be familiar as that is the organization Baden-Powell founded and was active in. Boyce modeled some of the Lone Scout program on Seton's Woodcraft Indian program. So would Baden Powell have supported Lone Scouting? Seeing as it was inspired by his organization's Lonecraft program, I think it's safe to say yes. Would Seton and Beard have supported Lone Scouting? Seton encouraged and allowed Boyce to use parts of his Woodcraft Indian program for the Lone Scouts so in Seton's case, I think it's safe to say yes. Boyce started Lone Scouting separately from the BSA because of a disagreement with James West over the creation of the program. West didn't believe Lone Scouting would be successful so he did not want to use BSA resources on the program. After Boyce started the program and showed it was meeting an unmet need, and at the urging of both Seton and Beard, West attempted for years to get Boyce to agree to merge Lone Scouting into the BSA. Hmm - Beard was one of those encouring West to try to get a merger going - I think it's safe to say that yes, Beard supported Lone Scouting. The BSA and Lone Scouting merged in 1924. It's been an integral part of Scouting history, and of the history of the Boy Scouts. It certainly deserves to be recognized as a legitimate program of the BSA. BTW - thought folks might like to know who some notable Lone Scouts are: Broderick Crawford - Actor Douglas Fairbanks Jr. - Actor Burl Ives - well known Snowman Model (and actor/singer) Harry Morgan - Actor (Colonel Potter) Fred MacMurray - Actor - Folks might remember him as the Scoutmaster in the movie Follow Me Boys Huburt Humphrey - Vice President of the United States Orval Faubus - six term Governor of Arkansas

The BSA lists homeschooling as just one of the possibilities why they would accept a Lone Scout. It doesn't really matter why a parent of a presumably homeschooled Scout has chosen Lone Scouting over joining a nearby unit. The BSA allows him to be a Lone Scout. Being snarky about it just doesn't make a difference. If a person can't accept that a Scout is a Lone Scout even though there are nearby units, then the honorable thing for that person to do is to not sit on any project reviews or Eagle Board of Reviews for Lone Scouts so as not to allow their personal opinions on the matter to affect the success or failure of the Lone Scout. Back to the original subject at hand, as I read Blacksmith's original post (sorry - need to differentiate between Moose and Mom), he's not really talking about an Eagle Board of Review, he's talking about an Eagle Project Review. At least that's my take when he talks about the mother coming in to the project approval and telling her son not to agree to any fundraising. (And if I'm wrong, perhaps Blacksmith can clarify). According to the new advancement guide under 9.0.2.1 (1), a Scout "will be allowed, ih he choosed, to have a parent, unit leader, or other adult present as an observer at any time he is discussing his proposal or project with someone who is reviewing it." Perhaps Mom answered more than the review panel would have liked but I'd ask why the panel didn't interrupt and suggest that the Lad be allowed to answer more of the questions. On the issue of the fundraising, I would hope that any adult the lad chooses as an observer, be it parent, Scoutmaster, ASM, mentor, etc, would be speaking up and giving that kind of advice to a Scout who may be being pressured (and not suggesting that it was happening in this case - but I have seen it numerous times before) by a Review Board to add things to a project like a fundraiser which is not required for a project. The folks are their to observe, but the review board should expect that they will be advocates for the Scout as well. As far as a parent not being allowed to sit in an Eagle Scout board of Review - I'd go with the information in the box, and not the information in the narrative. It's only a hunch, but it seems that the information in the box, which contradicts the information in the narrative, is likely to be a reminder about BSA policy on parental participation and how parental presence cannot be denied for anything if the parent insists on observing. In the case of a Lone Scout, the parent is most often the Lone Scout's counselor as well, I'd say the equivalent of a unit leader - since there are no other unit leaders to act as an observer/advocate for a Lone Scout, flexibility rather than insistence that the rules are "set in stone", is the way to go, especially since the BSA openly states that there needs to be some flexibility in some areas. Since the make-up of the BOR, including who can and can't observe, isn't actually part of the requirements that Scout must meet, there is flexibility there that can't be granted over whether a Scout has earned the number of required and elective merit badges he needs.

Think I'd prefer Secretary of the Interior anyway - National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges? Yeah - more my speed.

For a while, I wished President Obama was an Eagle Scout - but now that I think about it, I'm kind of glad he isn't, just so we don't have to listen to some whack-a-doodles demanding his merit badge records.

Well, I tried fiftyfour and sixtyfour but they didn't work - they end in R not 4

Dang, I lost out on Pack's vote and never had a chance to make my promise of an Apple/Peach Caramel Cobbler in every dutch oven! Guess I'll have to hold out hope for a Cabinet position - Secretary of the Interior would be good.(This message has been edited by CalicoPenn)

I would define routine maintenance as maintenance that is done on at least an annual basis, if not more often. I might even stretch that to include maintenance done on a biennial or triennial basis, depending on the project. Mowing the lawn is routine maintenance. Washing windows is routine maintenance. Polishing the floors is routine maintenance. Installing and removing window screens is routine maintenance. Clearing an established trail after a season or two is routine maintenance. On the other hand, just because something is maintenance in scope, doesn't mean it's routine maintenance. I wouldn't consider painting a building as routine maintenance. It is maintenance, but it's not done on a routine basis. It might not be something that is done for 7 to 10 years (or longer). However, that doesn't neccessarily mean all painting is not routine. The beneficiary organization may paint a day care nursery walls every year - I'd call that routine and wouldn't allow it as an Eagle project. They may paint parking bollards and stops, hydrants, and other miscellaneous items on an annual or bienniel basis - I'd call that routine. Some things we'd automatically dismiss as routine maintenance might turn out not to be. You might have an established trail that has been neglected for years that a Scout wants to rehabilitate - though it may essentially be the same type of labor involved, I'd argue that it isn't routine maintenance, it's rehabilitating a neglected trail and getting it back into shape so that routine maintenance can be performed on it. This is where those biennial and triennial routine maintenance comes in to play - if the beneficiary has a history of doing this work every three years, and this year is that third year, then it's not a neglected trail - it's routine maintenance. But if it's been 10 or 15 years since the last time someone's done maintenance? I'd call it non-routine. Oh, and just to point out a possibility, if a trail is regularly maintained but there's been severe storm damage and a Scout would like to take that on as a project, I'd let it go through as well. Just because something is routinely maintained doesn't mean it shouldn't be eligible for a project if there is extenuating circumstances. Removing and installing window screens is routine maintenance, but I would suggest that removing old window screens, building new window screens, and installing the new ones is not routine. I'd even be cautious about declaring weeding as routine. The beneficiary may have a corner of their property that has been negelected for years that a Scout might take on to turn into something useful (a sitting/reflection area, a labyrinth, a tot playground, or whatever) and weeding may be part of that project. As long as it's a part of a larger project and is not just weeding, listing weeding as an activity shouldn't be cause for denial. That's how I'd look at a project to see if it's routine maintenance. As for your particular example of the shelter on the AT - I'd probably agree that it wouldn't be eligible as a project, but not because it's a painting job. Most of the shelters on the AT are regularly maintained. Many are touched on at least once a year, and many are touched every two to three years. Unless this particular shelter is falling into disrepair because no one has been maintaining it (and you'll know because the roof might be falling in or floor boards are rotting away) then it's pretty likely that someone, usually an AT hiking club, has it on their routine maintenance list.(This message has been edited by calicopenn)

Since we're in a game playing mood, I need help with this new-fangled crossword puzzle I'm working on. It's called Sudoku and I'm stuck. I need a 9 letter word ending in 4.

Its the Scoutmaster of Troop 324, staying in Camp Osprey, drinking Orange Juice and adding requirement - or the person in the northernmost camp. The poor guy in the second most northern camp, with all his stifling, no wonder he has a hard time controlling the bullies. Or was that Professor Plum, in the Drawing Room, with the Lead Pipe? What game are we playing again?

I've got to say that this is probably one of those rare instances where putting the quote back into context doesn't actually change the meaning of the quote. Romney is quoted as saying he personally believes all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation. He also says he supports the right of the BSA to decide for itslef on the issue, but that doesn't modify his personal belief that all people should be allowed to participate in any way. And I find nothing in Romney's quote to suggest that "all" refers to "only those under 18". But then again, I tend to be a stickler when it comes to the term "all". I believe that actually means "All" and not "All minus some" (or even "All minus 1"). Big picture, I suspect the statement will lose him a total of about Zero Votes - my hunch is those that would disagree with him on this wouldn't be voting for him anyway.

Ask yourself this: "Is it traditional in your Troop for new scout patrols to give a gift to their Troop Guide, for patrols to give a gift to the SPL, for anyone to give gifts to the QM, Scribe, etc. at the end of their terms?" Dollars to donuts, not one person reading this forum has ever seen that tradition is a Boy Scout Troop. Why, then, would it be a tradition in a program set up to emulate a Scout Troop?

So how do we determine what is a religious institution and what isn't? I mean beyond actual churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples which is pretty obvious. What makes one hospital a religious institution and another hospital not a religious institution? Does adding the word Catholic, or Methodist, or Baptist make a hospital a religious institution? Theological seminaries operated by the church are probably religious institutions, but are Notre Dame or Wheaton College or Brigham Young University religious institutions because they have a grounding in particular religious belief? What about something like Catholic Charities or Lutheran Charities? Like the BSA, there are different ways that Catholic Charities runs. Some are run specifically as Arch-diocese or diocese programs. Others aren't controlled by the diocese but operate with the support of the diocese. The ones run as direct diocesan programs are likely religious institutions but are the others just because they have the word Catholic in their name? At what point is the line drawn? Is the BSA a religious institution but the Girl Scouts aren't? Where does it end? Would a business named Amalgamated Mining and Minerals get an exemption by changing it's name to Amalgamated Lutheran Mining and Minerals and claiming it's a religious institution? And why can't federal funding play a role in the decision making process? Catholic Charities, USA for example (and please don't accuse me of bashing Catholics or Catholic Charities - I like them - both - this just happens to be what I researched) - more than half of their funding in 2010 came from the federal government - not from the church, not from donations - from taxpayer dollars. I'm sure they put that money to good use, because they are a good organization - so why can't the federal government tell them that if they provide health care insurance to their employees, it must include coverage for women's health issues, or for mental health issues, etc. etc. Personally, I'd be far more sympathetic to the religious institution argument in that case if the bulk of their funding wasn't coming from the taxpayers. Finally, and this is probably the 1,200 pound gorilla in the room, why are we so quick to forgive what we know is discrimination the moment someone says its their religious viewpoint?

Your ASM is a retired Marine Corps officer of 20 years. For 20 years, he's been told what to wear, how to wear it and when to wear it. He's been uniformed from inside out. Now that he's out of the military, he has decided he prefers to wear jeans, and now a bunch of civilians in an organization that used uniforms as a method while not requiring anyone to actually wear a uniform is presuming to tell him how to dress? And you wonder why he's being passive-aggressively defiant? You've not yet answered the question about how he is as an ASM otherwise. You've already indicated that he has been supportive enough to raise or donate over $1,000 in a year and a half to ensure others get a chance to go to camp, etc. So what's the real issue? I'd be looking back over the last 18 months and reflecting on how much he's positively affected the lives of the Scouts already - either directly by helping them afford to attend camp or indirectly, by helping their friends afford to attend camp with them, then I'd be wondering how different things would have been if he wasn't there. Given a choice between buying a pair of uniform pants for myself, or buying a uniform for a Scout in need, I'm wearing jeans and buying the uniform for the Scout. If he's telling you he can't afford it, I'd believe him at face value and be thinking it's because he's giving what he would spend on himself to others. I'd be asking myself at this point why it's so important to me to have my ASM wearing scout pants and then doing an ego check. There's a lot of talk about "setting the example". Ask yourself this - what's the bigger role modeling here - wearing a full uniform, or being generous in charity? Honestly, don't you folks have more important things to worry about than what kind of pants an ASM is wearing?