acco40

Or as George Burns said in the movies when taking the oath, "So help me me."

One big distinction that I make is the difference between announced and unannounced (did somebody say announcement?) absences. I stress the importance of letting your patrol leader (not ASM, not SM, not CC, etc.) know in advance if you are not going to attend a troop meeting, camping trip, event, etc. If one does not, that shows poor scout spirit in my book. P.S. Ed, I like your troops web site. Very good job! Our troop had a "three absences" rule that stated if a scout had three absences or more per year a meeting with the Scoutmaster was needed. To my knowledge this was rarely if ever enforced. One of my pet peeves is having rules that are not endorced. Right now, we are in the process of reviewing and updating our troop bylaws. One of the changes that I recommend is changing the three absences rule to "three UNEXCUSED absences." An unexcused absence is any absence where the parol leader was not notified or where the patrol leader was notified but the SM did not deem the reason as worthy. The main goal is to teach the scout that their absence affects not just themselves but the troop as a whole. In practice, if prior notification is given, we rarely judge the absence as unexcused regardless of the reason given. As related to scout advancement, as many others have stated, the "shows scout spirit" requirement has a broad umbrella that includes attendance in my opinion. We treat the term "active" as simply a "registered scouter", i.e. has paid his $7.00 (soon to be $10?) membership fee. Therefore, theoretically, a rank advancement could be denied for lack of attendance due to not showing scout spirit. (Sort of like the military eqivalent of conduct unbecoming an officer. It leaves a large area for interpretation.)(This message has been edited by acco40)

scomman, you write that "You can take this to mean that leaving the hat on in full uniform is acceptable or not." If so, why not teach the boys this and that YOUR interpretation is to remove your hat. And by the way, just because the boys do not wear their hats does not mean it is not part of the uniform, it is!

The key difference between the interpretation of scomman and myself is I interpret the BSA adults and youths in uniform (full field uniform) to be in uniform and scomman does not. The interpretation that the flag code use of the term uniform means "military" uniform and only military uniform I disagree with. I one happens to read the full flag code, one would also notice that those popular post 9/11 flags flying from so many automobiles these days is a definite no-no.

Irony alert!! A poster talks about the world going to the proverbial hell in a handbasket because of the "electronic baby sitter" and then we get a multiple poster diatribe about a TV show!! I love it. Television has good and bad. It is not inherently evil. Tell teenage boys that girls like a man with good manners and believe me, their manners improve markedly! For the record, I whole heartedly agree with jcquillan and Ed, lead by example.(This message has been edited by acco40)

I always thought that one of the requirements for scout leaders was at least 20 lbs of extra heft!! I sure qualify! What is the thirteenth point of the scout law? A scout is hungry! Seriously, physical education has seem to have taken a back seat in our society. Nobody questions remedial reading for a boy who can't read in the 4th grade. But PE classes have been cancelled in many school districts for lack of funds. Very few require PE every day. We tend to downplay physical requirements too much in my opinion. On my honor, I will do my best To do my duty to God and my country and obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; TO KEEP MYSELF PHYSICALLY STRONG, mentally awake and morally straight.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Excellent comment dogau (k9gold). With the boys leading the service it teaches not only reverence but public speaking, confidence, etc. It also lessons the probability of "preaching" IMO.

Quixote, to quote an ex-president, "I feel your pain." Last summer, my younger son (at the time just turned 9, finished Bear) attended Cub Scout day camp. As you already know, one of the requirements to attend is to have a parent serve as a volunteer for at least a day. My older son, (1st Class Scout), volunteered to help out too and it did not work out well at all. He did not use any craft supplies and we are required to bring our own lunch so by volunteering he created no cost to the council. However, as he helped escort the boys from activity to activity he was reprimanded by adult volunteers and staff at every stage telling him he should not be there, can't partake in the activities (he had no intention to) etc. Granted, many of the "Cub Scout" gang who are not at all involved in boy scouts don't understand the concept of trying to teach the older boys leadership, responsibility, etc. But he was treated very discourteously in my book. And yes, we checked with council months ahead, he was officially registered, etc. He didn't just tag along at the last minute. All this happened at the same time the council was threatening to close down the day camps because of a lack of volunteers! It seems to me the official message was that they were welcome but the actual message was that they are not. Now later this summer I'll be taking my 2nd year Webelos den to Webelos Residence camp (five days, four nights) and will be taking my two den chiefs along too. The den chiefs pay the same $50 fee (advance fee, $60 normal fee) that the adult leaders do, primarily for food. That is something I have no problem with at all. The boys pay $110 (advance fee, $120 normal fee) and I'm guessing the increased cost is due to craft supplies primarily. One thing I lobbied our pack committee to do is to give a 10% "scholarship" for summer camp (day or residence, not both) of the money the boys earned selling popcorn. For example, if your son sold $500 worth of popcorn, he would be eligible to a $50 "scholarship" towards his camping fee. This encourages camping and popcorn sales. For our den chiefs, I had a special spring time Trails End store sale to raise money to cover their fee. So after a week of Boy Scout summer camp in June, July weekend camp (Boy Scout), August Webelos Residence camp (5 days), August weekend Boy Scout camp, August weekend (3 day) Wood Badge Camp, my wife wants to go camping for a week with the family this summer! I think I've spent more time in my sleeping bag than my bed at home.

Let me recap what I have seen posted, admonish adults for bad etiquette - bad, admonish boys - okay. Remove hats in a church, good, except if hair has been lost due to illness, or maybe if in military uniform or except if against your religious teachings, or except if ... At what magic age do you go from a boy to adult? I need to know so I can properly admonish. Don't you see, if we treat the boys with the same respect that we treat the adults, they just might act like adults. If we continually treat them like children, guess what. I'm not saying never to be critical in public. But you see, even as "educated" adults we have an honest difference of opinion about wearing a uniform hat indoors. Why critique a boy in public over that issue. Let him know what you feel is proper in private. I don't know how many times I was told at summer camp, by boys who did not even know me, to remove my official troop hat while I was outdoors, in full field uniform, saluting, at attention during the flag ceremony. Guess where they picked up that behavior? I'm guessing it was from a scout leader who never hesitated to do the same to the boys for whatever reason. It reminds me of the controversy we can all relate to about giving the scout sign in a group setting. The unwritten rule is that when someone gives the scout sign, be quiet! What do many leaders do the minute the sign goes up? They immediately violate the rule by calling out "signs up!" The boys then emulate this deplorable practice. See we can all learn, even as adults. (This message has been edited by acco40)

Huh? I'm sorry Ed, I don't understand your previous post.

Great to see a thread where most all of us are in total agreement! I second the great stories, good advice comments. I had a second year scout try to earn the swimming badge merit badge this year at summer camp. He came to me indignant and told me that "First they would not let me wear my mask and then when I held my nose they said I couldn't do that too!" Boy was he mad. He thought that was totally unreasonable. By the way, some counselors allow wearing the mask (believing it does not aid the swimmer, just helps him overcome his fears) and other do not (if he can't swim comfortably without a mask, he can't swim!). I was told two things by a Council Executive at summer camp. 1) They are reviewing the swimming requirements, not for the merit badge but for 1st Class because many are not able to meet it 2) Rifle Shooting - they limit it to second year summer campers now and the ability to place three rounds at 50 ft in the size of a quarter is difficult for many. they are thinking oflimiting this merit badge to third year campers and up inthe future. I'm not saying I agree with the above, just stating what I was told. Yes, too many are advancement oriented to the extreme.

Ed, think before you vote! (That was said in jest everyone!) This past year in my troop we have had three boys who were not citizens of the United States (nor were their parents). Why should we make them recite the Pledge of Allegiance to the US Flag to "pass in rank." That is ludicrous.

Sorry I could not let this one pass. Loss of hair for medical reasons? Come on, I call that vanity. Chemotherapy and or illness (medical reasons) may have caused the hair loss but wearing a hat does not alleviate any illness that I am aware of.

Army, Navy, Scouts, they may all have different rules and regulations concerning the issue. My original point was not what was the proper etiquette but simply that it is considered bad etiquette to point out bad etiquette in public! In other words, while we may debate the proper etiquette for removing ones uniform hat while indoors for a flag ceremony, it is not acceptable to admonish someone who does not follow what you may believe is correct in front of everyone else. We have some parents who do not stand and place their hands over their hearts (forgetfulness?) during the Pledge of Allegiance. I would not dream of yelling out to them to stand up during the Pledge recitation. I may quietly explain to them later on in private that we are teaching the boys that it is customary to stand and place ones hands over their heart while in "civies." However, if you are taking a poll, I agree with Fscouter, while in full field uniform, the removal of ones hat is not required under the state circumstances.

Its Trail Day, A clarification please. You mentioned that you expect that at a non-denominational event such as most scout functions that the service be non-denominational. Later you mentioned that you expected to hear Christian prayers as well as others, i.e. a balance. To me that is two different things. I don't necessarily equate non-denominational with multi-denominational. Should a poll be taken of attendees religions? That would be rude in my book. Where do you stop? Let's say I have a Jewish prayer and a Christian prayer. Am I over looking someone else? It is well intentioned but I just don't see that as practical. It reminds me of a troop meeting we had before summer camp. Our Scoutmaster got up before everyone at the conclusion of our Court of Honor and asked the parents if any of the boys were on medications. Then he proceeded to ask each parent who raised their hand what medication that boy was taking. I just sat there and cringed. Yes, he needed that information for summer camp but I view that information as quasi-private. Not something to be broadcast in front of all of the boys, parents, COR, leaders, guests, etc. Again, it was simply a matter of etiquette in my estimation.

Rooster, you hit the nail on the head. What he (Quixote) may find obedient, I find distateful (pompous). That does not make one intolerant. We disagree, that is all. I don't question his right, maybe his motives (I really don't know the individual). Others' faith lead them on crusades, pilgrimages, missions, suicidal bombings, service to others, charitable works, jihads, solicitations, and on and on. Some of these actions I find distasteful, others admirable, some blasphemous, etc. As for that fact that I should recognize the verse he quotes, you should know that many interpretations exist. One could easily interpret that passage "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." {Or, He said to them, "Go into the world and preach the good news to all creation.} That the "them" in reference were the apostles themselves, not us. He commissioned the apostles to go into all the world and preach to every creature. I know that the majority Christian view of that passage is that it is the primary duty of Christians to "spread the word" so to speak. However, that it not necessarily the universal interpretation. While on the subject of Mark, as a "believer" when speaking his name do you drive out demons, speak in tongues, pick up snakes with your hands, drink deadly poison, and heal the sick? If not, why do you selectively follow biblical instructions? If a scout wanted to show his faith by bringing poisonous snakes to the troop meeting I would object. I don't feel that action would make me intolerant either. Now to put things in perspective, while I feel that the snake bit would be a "health and safety issue" and my protestations would be rather stringent my dislike of denominational prayer of the likes that I assume you would make I would probably bite my tongue, show no outward disdain or disrespect. But no, I would not like it. I don't want to get into a discussion of scripture interpretation. Please, just realize that just because someones religious faith dictates that the individual act in a particular manner does not mean that I have to like that particular action and not liking it does not necessarily show intolerance.

Rooster, what makes you think I was attacking? What I do not like is outward expressions that some make about their religious beliefs. I view it as a pompous act some of the times. For example your statement, "As a Christian, I have to question ..." Why not just state, "I have to question ..." What does having to be a Christian have to do with it? To some, it implies, whether it was meant to be taken in that regard or not, that if one was not a Christian, a different thought would be expressed. Religion to me is a very private matter. I am not a big believer in ritual, headdresses, beads, icons, chants, etc. Others are, no big deal. I believe you are equating not liking something with intolerance. I do not like loud suits. However, I do tolerate others who wear them. I was raised protestant. My wife and children are Catholic. Probably because of my background, when I see a Crucifix, I see a human nailed to a cross and it conjures up feelings of pain and suffering for me. I remember my first venture into a Catholic hospital and seeing a Crucifix over the bed. Not my cup of tea. Give me a plain old "rugged cross" any day. I'm sure others see a very different image from it. Would I want one in my home, no. Does that make me intolerant, of course not. In my other posts I have expressed a displeasure in hearing others display outwardly denominational prayer in a diverse group setting. That does not mean I am intolerant. When it occurs I tolerate it. I am not debating anyones rights. Of course individuals have the right to pray in the way they would like. They can also eat with their fingers. I just feel it is in bad taste. For example, I find it very trite when posters feel the need to quote a biblical verse in their posts, i.e. Mark 16:15, etc. My quotation or reference to Ecclesiastes was meant to inject a little levity, obviously it went above most peoples head. To get away from religion but on a similar vein, take the topic of respect for the flag. We hold our troop meetings in the basement of a Church (our Charter Organization). When in our field uniforms the boys perform an opening and closing flag ceremony as I'm sure most of you do too. There is always one particular scoutmaster who admonishes a boy or two to remove their hat during the ceremony. His belief is that we are indoors and that one removes their hat as a sign of respect for the flag. My view is that if the hat is part of the uniform, stay in uniform. Also, if he wants to show respect for the flag in that manner, good for him but don't impose his beliefs on others. Lead by example I say.

Rooster, I am curious how you can delve the intentions of either Mr. Mori or Merlyn. Any clues?

Being mistaken? The word dujour is "misspoke" something which our politicians, who never lie, often do.

What boggles my mind are people who feel the need to wear their religion on their sleeves and proclaim such things as "A Statement of Faith" on a chat forum. Why would you be so presumptuous to believe that I or anyone else cares about your faith? acco40 Ecclesiastes 1 (Everything is Meaningless)

I know I'll get a lot of disagreement on this but ... On page one of The Scoutmaster Handbook, it shows Scoutmaster Badges and lo and behold it includes one that has the words Scoutmaster above the BSA emblem and one that says Assistant Scoutmaster above the BSA Emblem. The whole SM Handbook uses the term Scoutmaster generically for both ASM and SM. Sort of like the term Colonel in the military, it includes Lt. Colonels. Personally, I believe that ASMs are under utilized in many troops. Why not have the ASM who is in charge of a new patrol give the SM confernce for Scout, Tenderfoot, & Second Class to those boys? Doesn't he need to get to know the boys as well? The biggest problem I see most SMs make is not to delegate properly. They don't delegate and then complain if the ASMs don't do enough to help out. The converse is if he has an ASM who is a "go getter" he feels he is encroaching on his authority or territory. Be secure in your position and give ASMs enough duties to feel worth while.

On a lighter note, some background information on how the "under God" was inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance (don't worry, you don't have to subscribe): http://detnews.com/2002/religion/0207/14/a06-536645.htm Hey sctmom, you may want to edit your last post, "This is about me now my daughter" makes no sense. I believe you typed "now" instead of "not"?

ScouterKid, You have a dilema. If your SM won't let you or the SPL, i.e. the PLC have input into your activities outside of munu planning I suggest the following: 1) Talk to your committee chair and explain the situation in a factual, non-complaining manner. If you need to bring "back-up" about the troop being boy-led, use the SM Handbook, Patrol Leaders Guide, Committee handbook, etc. 2) Talk with your Unit Commissioner. 3) Talk with your Charter Organization Representative. 4) Go directly to your Council hierarchy. I would suggest doing the above not by yourself but with your SPL and other Patrol leaders if at all possible. I would even cordially let your SM know your plan. Good luck and let me know what transpires.

Talk with your senior patrol leader. The SPL and not the Scoutmaster, should be organizing and manageing the troop meetings. The senior patrol leader is in charge of troop meetings from beginning to end (directly from The SM Handbook). As for the camping trips, as the ASPL, were you involved with the annual troop planning meeting(s)? If not either you should have been or the previous ASPL was. The patrol leaders' council along with the SM and other key adult leaders should have been involved with planning the year's events. If not, change the program for next year!!! Good luck and don't be bashful about jumping in and trying to change the troop meetings and camping events.

Pardon me while I philosophize for a bit. I don't want to appear sexist, but if you asked most males 50 to 100 years ago if they thought life was "fun" they would look at you funny and say life was something to be endured. The idea that life should be "fun" is a rather recent idea. Jobs, raising a family, military service, etc. were duties that were honored. I'm NOT saying those were the "good old days" but I think it is something to think about to keep the problems of today in perspective. Parents and their children do seem to over commit to various things these days. My wife is always talking about signing up one of our boys for something or other. I smile and say of course, but out of religious education, music, sports, scouts and school, which one would you like him to give up to add the new endeavor? I always remember discussions I had in college and in my 20's and 30's when my peers would say "I wish my parents made me stick with ______ (fill in the blank, piano lessons, scouts, etc.). History does seem to change what we remember. As parents, I feel it is in the best interest of our children to expose them to a wide variety of interests and support them in their decisions if they want to pursue any of them or not. My boys took martial arts classes for three years but the time, money, and committment began to become too much. If they wanted to pursue it further, I would have supported it but their interest was waning. My oldest son wants to pursue the marching band and play football. Not quite a "doable" choice. Scouterkid, what is it that you do not like about scouting? The boys or leaders of your troop/patrol? The overall program itself? Camping and the outdoors? If you live in a heavily populated area, I'm guessing many troops are available to you. Are your parents (Dad) pushing you? Politely ask him to back-off. A boy in my troop has a mother who in his words "won't let me quit." She has told me that we are the only male influence in his life. I try to make scouts as enjoyable as possible for the boy. Secretly, I think the boy enjoys scouting. He rarely misses any camping trip. If you feel comfortable, talk to the SM or any ASM you feel comfortable with about your concerns. I wish you the best.