DeanRx

The biggest reasons school districts have zero tolerance policies is not for safety. Its so administrators can wash their hands of any and all decision making. If you don't have a zero tolerance policy and you punish one kid (because he had the knife in the locker room and threatened another student), but let the straight A kid with a knife locked in his car off with a warning, then the kid in the locker room (and their parents and a good lawyer) will file a discrimination lawsuit on the district because the rule was not applied equally in two very different situations. The largest problem is zero tolerance does not allow for two things: 1) The INTENT of the action 2) The fact that kids will make mistakes Therefore we have the adults that are supposed to be guiding young minds into adulthood, instead leveling draconian rules against kids with the ever looming threat of screwing up your future for any minor slip up. The girl who loans a friend an Ibuprofen because her friend is having menstral cramps gets the same punishment as the kid who is skipping out on math class to deal crack on the playground. Administrators (and most law firms representing school districts) are too afraid to actually use JUDGEMENT to ascertain the INTENT of someone breaking a policy and then acting in an appropriate manner. Its much easier to throw the book at everyone and not be accused of special treatment or prejudice in a single given case. Besides, they can (and most often do) hide behind the mantra of, "Well its spelled out in the student handbook policies, every student is required to sign that they have read and will abide by said policy." So if you break the policy, you only have yourself to blame. Its a sad state of affairs. To get suspended over something like that is rediculous. But so too are the parents that would have been on CCN that night crying "why didn't the school DO something" when the kid decided to take the knife out and stab somebody on campus with it. Its not fair and its not right, but its the way of the world. I remind my 8 year old all the time - school is NOT a democracy, it a monarchy ran by the principle. You are in his kingdom durring the school day and you must abide by his rules even if I as an adult think some of them are quite stupid. Even if I don't agree with the rule, if you break it - I will side with the principle - end of story. Bottom line - this kid getting in trouble sucks. But he did have a knife on school property when he shouldn't have had it. Period.

For Scouts - "The Dangerous Book for Boys" - scouting needs to be the adventure these pages talk about For Scouting adults - "Last Child in the Woods" by Richard Louv - while it draws a few far fetched conclusions, the overall hypothesis that kids (both genders) need free-play in nature as a supliment to well-rounded growth is well supported. We as parents need to be reminded that kids in the forest are not going to hurt themselves, are not going to die, and left to their own devices will likely learn more than we can teach them with programs structured down to every minute of the day. For a Cubmaster / Scoutmaster - "Managing to Have Fun" (sorry forgot the author) - talks about management strategies that incorporate humor and positive reinforcement in the group dynamic. How to motivate people to get things down and have fun while doing it. These are all pretty simple reads - nothing too complex or deep, but they all give real world examples one can easily put into action.

John-in-KC... Dude - you need to go to bed !! Its late here in CA, its REALLY late in MO. BTW - how'd you like the beating my Huskers put on the Tigers tongiht ? Pretty sweet comeback

Its "traditionally" done as part of the Bear achievements for rank, but there is nothing I have found that states that a cub must be in their "bear" year or earn the Bear rank prior to earning the Whittling Chip. This came up in our unit this summer at cub-camp. Only had ONE wolf scout attend with a bunch of Bears and Webelos. The "lone Wolf" as he was know at our camp did the requirements and thus I awarded him his "whittling chip" at the next pack show along with the bears that had earned it at camp as well. Funny - had a couple pack parents (including members of the pack committee) question if he could earn it. I told them, show me where it says he can't, because I couldn't find it. Just because its "tradition" or "how we've always done it in OUR unit" does NOT mean its BSA policy. Tradition and policy are often confused in our organization I have found.

Can I answer your question with a couple of my own? 1) What have YOU personally observed, seen or heard from the scout to tell you he's an atheist? Unless he is openly professing this belief, then you really have no basis to judge his faith (or lack thereof). If he IS openly expressing such beliefs, then your issue is not with the scout, but with the unit leadership that has allowed the scout to continue to advance in the unit. Or is his lack of belief in a "higher power" something you are aware of second or third hand? If so, then you must discount it as rumor and inuendo - not fact. 2) If he is an atheist (assuming this is truely his thoughts in his heart, not just some questioning of his faith, or an act to be a defiant teen, etc...) - really do you think you making an example of his situation and making his Eagle application / award more difficult than any other applicants from your unit does much to remedy the situation? Maybe he's in a confused state about his faith right now, or maybe he does know with certainy where his heart stands. Either way - you make an issue out of this and hold up his Eagle because of it - the only certain thing it will do is drive him away from scouts, likely drive him further away from faith, and likely cause a fracture within your unit's core leadership (as you cannot really make an example of this scout without implicating the SM). I know folks like to get wrapped up about the atheist and gay issues in scouting. They are at the heart of some very basic beliefs in right vs wrong for most people. However, the scout law and BSA policy really gives no more weight to these two issues than any other points of the scout law. I've seen far more scouts that could / should have their rank advancement questioned or held-up (Eagle or otherwise) for lack of cleanliness, lack of scout-spirit, or lack being friendly, or lack of being cheerful or obedient. However, we rarely see posts about leaders wringing their hands over these tenents of the scout law... just those that invoke an emotional response on moral grounds. Then there's the whole thought of is it really the Committee Chair's place to question what the SM and BOR have signed off on? As a Cubmaster, I have had several scouts put in for awards / rank advancement that I'm pretty dang sure the scout has not completed all the requirements for. But per BSA policy, if the Akela (parent / guardian) signs off that the cub has "done their best" and the Den Leader is willing to sign off on it - then I have no recourse. In fact, I am specificly prohibited from testing, reviewing, or otherwise holding any type of BOR for cub ranks above what is required in the handbook. Same goes for the Eagle rank. If the unit leaders SM, ASM, etc. support the scout, he's completed his project and he passes his BOR, then I'm not sure its really the CC's place to second guess the unit leadership. Personally, I'd tread lightly and pick you battle VERY wisely on this one. The backlash / fallout with this scout and within the unit might not be worth the "moral victory" you are looking for. Not an easy decision - best of luck, whatever course of action you decide to take. Dean

I would agree with the OP. While I am not aware of the threads he is referencing, I have personally taken "time outs" from these boards for the very reason that a good number of regular posters seem more inclined to want to debate, degrade, and call-out those that have different opinions than their own, instead of offer constructive feedback. Aside from being un-scoutlike, it serves no one but the aggresive poster's ego to place such things on these boards. This should be a place to come together and learn from each other's expiriences and grow the program. The longer I am in scouting, the less tolerance I have for those that feel the need to be rule nazi's, uniform nazi's or any other self-appointed rule enforces within the organization. Hey if it works for you, then great. Just don't force it down the throat of others because you have a need to be "right". Do not preach it as gospel, unless you can reference an actual written BSA policy regarding the matter at hand. Above all - be civil to each other and we can advance the cause to which we are drawn. Funny that I feel I have gotten some of the best scouting advice and felt disgusted by the adults we have in the program - all from the same forum. That speaks to me that everyone needs to type as if the person you are responding to is a parent standing in front of you, not a nameless / faceless entity in cyberspace. It would do us all good. OK - jumping down off the soapbox for now. Dean

Thought the adult application asks for a SSN for the background check? HOW can someone provide an SSN without being a US citizen? Wonder what BSA says about being in the US legally to hold such position within a unit? Hard to recruit those hispanic units national is pushing for if we're going to get hung up on little things like legal status and SSN's... but I digress....

While not licensed to practice in NY, I am a doctor of pharmacy in real life... There is a HUGE difference between dispensing medications (either directly from a practitioner's office or persuant to a legal prescription written by a legally licensed provider) and "passing meds" on behalf of a patient persuant to the prescription label as provided by the dispensing pharmacy. Now - if a scout leader takes it upon themself to dispense (i.e. Johnny is acting up, so I think I'll give him one of Jimmy's pills - they seem to work for Jimmy...) then yes, they are committing a crime if said drug is either a controlled substance or even just a legend drug (i.e. requires a prescription / non over-the-counter). If its an OTC drug and they have the parent's permission (i.e. give them Benadryl if they have bad allergies), then you can use some of Johnny's for Jimmy, but you better have the permission slip and know what the heck you are doing with regards to OTC dosing. This is a HUGE difference than an adult agreeing to make sure a minor scout takes their medication at the right dose, at the right time presuant to a legal prescription (in a legally labelled pharmacy bottle) while said scout is at a unit or council overnight / resident camp. Yes, you are assuming some legal responsibility, mostly that you will only give it as labelled on the prescription bottle, but as far as I'm aware, you are not breaking any laws in any state that I've ever practiced (5 states now). If you alter the dose or give scout A's meds to scout B, well then we can talk about breaking laws. All this being said, it is a big responsiblity and I think BSA has it right. Unit adult scouter's may assume responsiblity for passing out meds (but should not feel forced to). I don't know WHY a council ran camp would want to centralize this practice for several reasons... 1) With a camp of 300-400 kids (the one I just got back from on Wednesday) - the camp would need at least ONE full time staff (in addition to the medical officer) to do nothing but keep track of and administer the meds for the scouts at camp. Most camps are doing good to get ONE qualified medical officer on staff and they are kept busy with health forms and tending to minor 1st aid and illness issues (barf, poop, and cuts as I refer to them). 2) If a camp expects a scout to report for meds at the medical hut, then who accompanies said scout each day (or multiple times per day). Seems like a good amount of camp time would be spent standing in line to get your meds at an average sized scout camp. You must send an adult or at least the scout's buddy with them, so there is a big chunk of time away from program time. Not alot of down time at the camps I've been to... gee want to miss your range time to stand in line for 1 kid's Ritalin? Didn't think so. 3) If you centralize the process, you greatly increase the likihood of med handling errors occuring. If I have two ADD scouts in my group, I have to worry about keeping two scout's meds seperate. If you have 50 scout's ADD meds together and they all show up in the morning for their daily dose, what are the chances that someone is going to get someone else's drug by mistake? 4) If you centralize the process (and everyone in camp knows this)... Hmmm makes an easy target for a dishonest person to hit and score a decent amount of medications or controlled substances with very little resistence. However, if the meds are in camp with the units, then everyone in camp doesn't know where they are kept and it makes it harder to steal them. Bottom line - you are NOT breaking the law if you agree to take on medication administration duties for scouts in your care. You ARE assuming some responsibilities above and beyond the normal leadership role and because of this, you should 1) feel comfortable and knowledgable about what you are doing, what the med is for, what the dose is, what its storage and handling requirements are, etc... 2) not feel like this is an expectation. Med passing is a FAVOR you are willing to do to facilitate a scout coming to camp that might otherwise have a barrier to attending / participating. You do so as a volunteer and on your own terms. Its just like giving a scout a ride to scout camp. Yes, you CAN do it. Yes, there are procedures that you best follow to mitigate liability God forbid something goes wrong. No, you are not required to let a kid ride with you if you are not comfortable with it. You need not give a reason, if you are not comfortable with it, then don't volunteer to do it. Med passing is no different. One more pearl of wisdom. Advise your parents of scouts needing to bring medicaitons to camp to go to there pharmacy in advance and request a "school labelled" bottle for the med. This is an 'extra' bottle labelled the same as the orginal prescription bottle. Then the PARENT should place just enough of the med needed for the # of days at camp into the "school bottle", so that the unit leaders can have correctly labelled medicaions at camp in quantities adequate for camp without taking Jr's month long supply of controlled substance to a 3 night or one week long camp. Good luck - use common sense - only volunteer to take on reasonable responsibilities you feel comfortable doing and you'll be just fine.

Yeah Evmori - you got me there... they'd probsbly all quit without the door prizes Its the only quality thing we're doing.

evmori- I'd be glad to have you come an observe one of our pack shows next time you're in the San Diego area... you might learn a thing or two. Funny you seem to KNOW what we need to be doing or not doing in our pack meetings. Every meeting has at least one song, one skit, one game and various awards. We have a pack that is 5 years old now and started with 6 scouts. I just got an application for our 7th Tiger this fall in the new Tiger Den and that puts us one scout shy of 60 in the pack in 5 years in existience, so we must be doing something right. Its not breaking any scout rule, our kids and families enjoy it, so what do YOU care if our pack does or does not have door prizes at our meetings? You asked why - I gave you my answers.... Guess you were really just asking so you could bag on someone - well good for you - you must be a better scouter than I am.(This message has been edited by DeanRx)

evmori- I'll give a couple reasons we do them... 1) Its FUN to 'win' something. If you are a scout that is not getting an award of some type that month, what is your incentive to show up to the pack meeting? Boring if you get to sit for an hour watching others get called up on stage. Yeah, you get to be in a skit or sing a song, or help with the colors (maybe if its your Den's turn), but if you've already gotten your rank badge and have no belt loops or arrow points being awarded - why be there? Sorry, but thats a very true statement for kids of the cubs age. It helps keep those not getting awards engaged in the meeting. 2) It is a GREAT diversion / transision between portions of the program. After a few awards, it breaks up the monotony of the same thing happening. Also, if I have a transision in which I'm waiting for a speaker to come forward, or they have something to set up (i.e. Den setting props in place for a skit), instead of having "dead air" time during the meeting (which leads to rowdiness) - I tell everyone to check their ticket stub and have a quick drawing. By the time I've handed out a pack of Pok-e-mon cards to the lucky winner, the skit is ready to go and I've succeeded in holding the boy's attention and diverting chaos in the pack meeting. It works very, very well.... A 3rd reason I can think of is it is a tool of being on time. Scouts can only get a door prize ticket BEFORE the meeting starts. All our meetings start right on time now, very few if any stragglers showing up late. There is a method to the madness...

As an interesting aside from the article refernced... The BSA national finance guy advises that "products in the $5 to $7 range usually sell best". Funny that the entry level item in popcorn sales starts at $10 (and is an extremely small can for your money - some might even argue that the product received doesn't meet the standard of fair market value for the size). I know the article was written in 1999, but this is where the Girl Scouts have us beat. Even though they are overpriced, more folks have no problem paying $4 / box for some cookies. Wish BSA would follow its own advice and get the units a $5 item in the near future.

We do "drawings" for door prizes at most every meeting. Its a way to break the boredom if a scout has to sit through several awards that he is not getting. Cubs get restless and it also gives the next presenter time to get to the stage and get set-up / etc... if I keep them going with a raffle. Usually 2 to 3 a pack meeting. Anything from a pack of gum, to a camping safety whistle, to a collapsable cup, etc... Once or twice a year, we'll have a big ticket item at the end of the pack show. Example, one year for Space Derby we gave away two tickets to a travelling Star Trek Exhibit at a local museum. We do a "pit the cubmaster" every fall for the scouts that sell a certain dollar amount of popcorn, the get to splat me with a whipped cream pie in the face. That meeting, we raffled off two Marie Calander's Pies. Total cost in the past year was less than $150 for 'door prize' supplies for the pack meetings. It comes out of unit funds. No one buys a chance to win anything. As for the 'no gambling' rule - guess I shouldn't let the boys play blackjack on the pack campouts anymore

I was wondering how long it would take before black bears figured this out. They are some of the most adaptive creatures in the world. Guess now we'll need to bear bag our bear canisters, and set-up an electric fence perimeter around the tree the lift line is tied to. Here's a thought - if a bear wants your food, they'll eventually figure out a way to get it. Best solution is to make yourself a hard target with good campsite selection, good campsite practices (i.e. cook, eat, clean in an area well away from sleeping area - change clothes after cooking and keep cooking clothes out of tents - etc...), and multiple bear protections for foodstuff. Hope this doesn't lead to more calls for closing off wilderness areas from humans for the sake of the bears. That would be a shame.

While I tend to agree... anyone know of a manufacturer in the US that is capable of providing the lot quantities needed for bulk merit badge purchases that BSA makes for the scout shops? I don't, but I'm not in that line of business. We do order specialized patches for unit activies from a local patch maker, but they run $3 plus per patch. With 3 to 5 colors per merit badge, I would guess even at large quantity they would charge $1.50 plus for them (assuming a stateside maker could even handle the lot sizes). Anyone want to pay $3 to $4 + per merit badge? Didn't think so. That's assuming we could find a maker to make them in the U.S.A. I don't like it either, but its not like the car you drive the scouts in, the food you feed them, or even the camping gear you use on a regular basis was likely made inside the 50 states. Its one of the main reasons our country is in the pickle we find ourselves in now, but the BSA national is just doing what every other corporate buyer does to maximize the bottom line. They buy from the cheapest supplier that can meet their volume needs. If they're anything like every other industry, they probably don't even use the same supplier everytime. Best way to drive cost down is to get two or more manufactuers to try and outbid each other for the work. Then once you use one, you go back to the other in 6 months and see if they'll undercut by 3% of what you're paying. Once the contract is up, you jump ship to the new supplier and play the game with supplier #1 in the next business quarter. Happens everyday, everwhere, in every country on the globe. Don't get mad at China (or the BSA) just because the Chinese government is better at playing the capitalism game than the country that invented it. Now, if you want to talk fair trade with regards to wages, working conditions, environmental impact, insurance, workers comp, etc... that's a seperate topic best reserved for the "politics" boards...

I have a very hard time justifying any type of 'reward' or 'recognition' for a task that is done as part of a rank requirement and also (if not more importantly) should be done because the scout is learning to be a leader and provide service for the greater good of the unit. To dangle a reward will only teach the scouts that a job is only worth doing if one gets some type of payment for the service rendered. To me the POR portions of the rank requirements are there to encourage the patrol method, but more importantly to teach the scout in the POR the importance and satisfaction of doing something for others while expecting nothing in return. I understand your difficulty, but the solution may not be the best if it undermines the intent of the POR requirement to being with. To me, it would be like having a scout receive a plague from the local city government for park trail imporvements he organized as an Eagle project. The point is to lead and provide service. The point is NOT to get paid (in any form of recognition)for said leadership or service. If you want to recognize that a given scout stood up and took on a POR that is usually hard to fill in the unit, then fine... ask the SM to make a point about what they did in their POR at the time the next rank is awarded as part of the rank advancement ceremony. However, I would be inclined to say no to any additional recognition (i.e. certificate, plague, seperate award) for a given POR. POR's should be learning opportunities for the scout and those he leads, not a chance to gain special recognition from the unit.

You are going to always have some that sign up, but don't participate. Some, but usually fewer, are clueless enough to think they should be entitled to a "refund" after they've paid. I would chalk it up to a learning curve. But I would NOT refund for non-participation. If you make this a regular practice, what do you say to the parent that shows up in April and states, "Well we paid registration and dues, but Johnny hasn't been active and didn't go to camp or on any unit campouts this year, so we'd like 50% of our fees returned to us..." Once the check is written, the money belongs to the unit and it should be stated up front that refunds are not allowed (unless for a specific outing and the unit can avoid / recoup the cost - i.e. 6 register for residient camp and one of the 6 decides not to go and you can still get the money back from council... then I might be willing to give them a refund). Otherwise - your unit will be broke (financially) in no time. Hard to believe there are folks out there with the audacity to actually ask for such a refund, but some folks view themselves as the "customer" in every situation.... and in the USA the "customer" is always right. As I explained to one father who was upset about us not giving a refund. You paid dues to be a member of an organization and our unit. It was their choice to do so and it was also their choice to not participate in the various events we held throughout the scouting year. Does the grocery store refund you for the fruit you buy, but fail to eat before it goes to rot?

Sounds like a fun and exciting addition to summer camp. Just a couple of thoughts... Why PWC's and not actual power boats? Harder to fall off / out of a motorized boat than a jet ski. Easier to loose control of a jet ski. Seems it should be the other way around. Are scouts allowed to pilot power boats? We we're when I was a lad. I'm still in cubbies w/ my son, so I'll have to look that up on the G2SS online. Also, if jet skis are OK on the water, WHY not ATV's / dune buggy's on land? Scouts can ride in non-motorized aircraft, but cannot pilot a propelled plane. They can't drive a car as part of a scout outing. They can't drive ATV's or even paint ball. But an engine on the water... on one of the most unstable platforms availible.... yup... lets give that one a test run. It sounds like fun. It really does. I just don't understand the logic behind the decision to allow PWC's before or in lieu of ATV's or personal motorized vehicles on land. You can teach right-of-way and safe boating techniques in a sail powered craft very easily. The only teaching moment you create with a motorized craft is the "no wake" rule. While important, its not really something that takes practice... it just takes common sense and the knowledge to SLOW DOWN when you're supposed to. I just don't see much gained by the risk involved in this one... and I'm one who is usually pushing for less stringent rules with regards to activities and the G2SS. If they want to run a power boat... let 'em put a trolling motor on the back of a row boat and have at it. My 2 cents...

I often wonder how much outside influence plays into the decline in scouting enrolment in the U.S.? I will be the first to agree that keeping the "outing" in scouting is paramount to its success. The oath and law and the lifelong guiding points they offer is a close 2nd. Uniform, take it or leave it... I've never heard of it being a defining reason of why a scout stays or leaves. They might discuss how dorky or how functional it is, but its not a deciding factor in if they stay or go. Membership is driven by matriculation from cubs to BS. How many actually join boy scouts without spending time in a cub unit? Very few I would venture to guess. However, how much time, effort, training, emphasis do the local councils place on developing quality cub packs? In the SD area, I'd say its minimal at best. They run good day camps, they have a couple Fun w/ Sons each year, but thats about it. The majority of the training and time spent at council and district round-tables is spent on BS activities. The majority of the things discussed, cubs are not even eligible to participate in. If national wants to boost numbers, they should go after the recruitment efforts in the Tiger and Wolf year, not a specific ethnic group. Also, the idea of expanding to a "lion cub" program is an extremely poor idea. Its difficult enough to provide a program that is engaging for everyone from 1st thru 5th grade. Bringing in even younger kids "dumbs down" the program and further encourages burnout and feeling of scouting as irrelevant to me by the time they are Web-II. On to those "outside" influences I spoke of earlier. Bad press beat up the BSA throughout the 1990's... pedophile issues, anti-gay issues, and to some degree anti-agnostic issues. I think we're still recovering from that. Not sure BSA will ever recover from it. BSA likes to promote itself as a "wholesome" choice for boys, but in doing so, it has made itself (and continues to make itself) the target of some deserved and some undeserved public lawsuits with regards to accusations of discriminatory practices. This is ongoing in a U.S. society that is virtually split 50 /50 on the acceptance of gay marriage. We now have a society that a majority believes "Don't Ask Don't Tell" should be repealed for the military. We have at least one major church in the US that recently voted to sanction gay and lesbian clergy. Many people know or are related to one or more openly gay people. I'm not saying we have to like or even condone the lifestyle (I don't), but we need to seriously consider as an organization how much it costs us in members, in money spent, and in manpower to continue to uphold a stance that flies in the face of at least 50% of the U.S. population's beliefs. We also need to consider the hypocrisy of teaching morals without teaching tolerance. There's a BIG differenc between, "You're not welcome." and "I don't agree with your lifestyle, but I respect your right to it, you are welcome at the campfire so long as you don't promote said lifestyle." Now, I do not advocate for openly gay attitudes in the scouts. I think any and all sexuality issues (Homo and Hetero) needs to be refered to a trusted adult in the scout's family, or a clergy member, or a school counselor. Basically, it should be a non-issue, non-discussed topic in the scouting environment. (other than YPG related issues) I have seen 1st hand in the SDIC council the impact of BSA policy vs the USGSA policy with regards to this issue. BSA has had land use permits revoked or in most cases stiffled. Their council HQ which happens to sit inside a city park boundry is continually under seige from lawsuits and because of this has been able to have little to no infastructure improvements, expansion, etc... for as long as most anyone remembers. Girl Scouts, who sit right next door in the same park, have expanded, improved and refurbished their HQ and have the capital money and city parks approval to do so because they do not spend their time and $ in the courtroom defending their anti-gay policy. (b/c they don't have one to defend) How many would leave if gays were allowed to join? I don't know. Some probably would. But where would they go? Not like there is a back-up anti-gay BSA waiting in the wings. How many would we gain if we included "everyone" with the understanding that discussing or promoting ANY view on sexuality is a no-no in scoutland? Has national ever done any research into this, or are they firmly rooted in the belief systems of the many churches that act as CO's to units that they cannot break from this stance? Coinsiding with the uptick in anti-gay lawsuits in the 90's was the disappearance of many civic organizations as CO's (other than churches), because of fears (whether real or perceived) of being labelled prejudiced if they supported "prejudiced" scout units. Many units now struggle to gain an audience in the public school systems of many cities for the same reason. This has a very direct and real impact on recruitment efforts. When I was in cub scouts, a good number of the units were sponsored by school PTO's, now virtually none are. A lucky few can still ask to use public school facilities for meetings, but that is few and far between now. This is due to the same reason that schools and PTO's don't want to be CO's... they don't want the negative label. To me the writing is on the wall. We may not agree, but public opinion (right or wrong) has shifted to where a majority thinks "whatever he / she thinks / does behind closed doors is not my business". This is especially true in areas of human sexuality and religion. Its a very 'live and let live' mentality and I think BSA has grossly missed the boat on this one. A scout is reverent. This I agree. But we go to great lengths to qaulify that point of the law that it means they believe in a higher power. When is the last time anyone rounded up those that chose to sit out the "scout's own" service and asked them why they weren't there? It doesn't happen and shouldn't happen. If the scout chooses not to participate b/c he doesn't have the belief, but he keeps it to himself, then I see no problem with that. I just feel BSA has hung its future on a couple points that have it at odds with the tide of public opinion in the U.S. Some will state, "That's good, its one of the reasons we're in scouts...." But how many will say, "I don't want to be associated with a group that thinks its OK to exclude b/c they disagree with one aspect of a person's life...." If BSA had a national policy against blacks joining, we'd already be dead as a organization. Heck for that matter, if we had a national policy excluding LDS, we'd be a dead organization. But we can't seem to learn that lesson with other minority groups. (Yes LDS - by definition and numbers your religion is a minority in the US). Its also why I find the push to recruit a specific race to be a laughable hypocrisy on the part of our organization. You can join BSA if you're an illegal alien who is straight and fears God, but a natural born citizen who questions his faith or sexuality is not welcome? Again, not to bash LDS as their religion no longer promotes this stance, but you can be a practicing polygamist and join BSA (so long as you adheare to a religion) This tends to confuse folks, even some of us within the organization. BSA needs to do some soul-searching if it wants to be a viable youth organization in another 100 years.

I tend to look at this in a wider sense... Yes, its easy to lay the issue at the feet of the Camp Director or Council(they should have a chaplain on staff), or to lay the issue at the feet of the staffer and state "well, he should have known the schedule when they took the job..." My take is this... This relatively small issue (in the grand scheme of things) is a wonderful opportunitiy for this young man and staff member to LEARN about the challenges of juggling many aspects of his life. Better he struggle with this now, and know where his heart stands and how to communicate requests effectively to a workplace supervisor, than not learn it and have to face the issue in the "real world" when a work schedule conflicts with his sick child or their recital, sporting event, etc... He has an opportunity to LEARN how to ask for a time exception and explain WHY he needs it. He has the oppostunity to COMMUNICATE effectively. He has an opportunity to NEGOTIATE that if he can be a little late due to church, then he is willing to do x, y, z ... in addition to his normal duties, or come in early or stay late another day to make up the time. In short, its a chance for him to find common ground and create a win-win for both himself AND his camp director. Maybe this means HE volunteers to lead a non-denom service for the camp or at least the camp staffers that want it. This shows initiative, problem solving ability, helps out his camp, and still allows him to uphold his commitment to his faith. Bottom line - we all face situations daily that involve making a choice between two things we know are the right thing to do. I've left work early knowing full well my boss won't like it, but my kid was sick and needed care - the wife was the only one staffing at her job that day (couldn't leave) and I get sick leave and she doesn't. Does that make me a un "trustworthy" scout because of my choice? In my employer's eyes, maybe. In my child'd eyes, I doubt it. Thousands of parents make that kind fo choice on a daily basis. Its not that there is a RIGHT choice, but a choice must be made none the less. Does it matter if he's late because of church vs late because he's goofing off? In a perfect world, I'd say yes. In reality, I'd say no. If I'm gone from work for a sick child the productivity lost to my employer is the same as if I skip out to go play golf. Even if I can justify one reason more readily in my mind than the other. This is a learning opportunity for this scout. As a parent, I would encourage talking with him about how he handled the tardiness, how / if he fully informed his supervisor, and avenues on how to overcome similar issues in the future (because they will happen to everyone from time to time). Then lay out some options with him and let him make the choice. Then he can live with the consequnce. The consequence may be no big deal, or it may be that he doesn't get asked to be staff next year (can't see a Camp Dir. doing that but then again, I've never been a camp dir.) Either way, he'll be able to stand by his choice and accept the outcome. Thats really what we're trying to accomplish via scouting anyways, right?

San Diego Imperial Council has THREE levels of summer camps for the cubs... 1) Each District holds a weeklong day-camp (M-F 0800 - 1500) - open to ALL cubbies 2) There is a Webelos only weeklong resident camp (Sun-Sat) - Web I & II only 3) There is a 1/2 week Cub/Web resident camp (Sun-Wed) - open to Wolf, Bear and Webs

Best college night out: a platter of Gates BBQ - 1 loaf wonder bread - 6 pack of beer - and tickets to the cheap seats in "wrap around right field" at the K. Those were some fun summer nights

BadenP- Thanks for stating what many of us in the "border states" already know to be true (even if the local councils aren't permitted to state it). I think BSA has historically, and to some extent recently, unintentionally divided its units based on a common community connection. Whether that be LDS, Catholic, or other church, or other civic organization based on the Chartered Organization for the given unit (i.e. Free Mason, Knights of Columbus, Rotary, etc...) I am very glad and VERY proud that my son is in a very diverse pack. We have LDS scouts in a non-LDS unit, we have Catholics, Jews, Hindus, and every flavor of national heritage (many 1st generation) hispanic, latino, indian, french, scottish, Samoan (sp?), and philipino... we have gifted kids and autistic kids and every flavor of intellect in between (some flux from genius to moron within one meeting !!) It makes for a great group and teaches the kids how to get along with folks from very varried backgrounds... which most of us will have to do on a routine basis as adults, and which (I've always thought - is a primary goal of what we are trying to do in scouting). I really have problems with "targetted" units. I find it quite curious that units are allowed to "target" a given segment of the population. One man's 'common connection' is easily another man's prejudice. Funny, you never see a "targetted" recruiting for 'whites only, protestant' scout units.... Maybe they could get those nice folks in the sheets to have their church be the Chartered Organization? Like I said - one man's "targetted" audience is another man's prejudice / discriminator. To me what national is doing with targetted unit recruitment is no better than a unit that does NOT allow minorities into their unit. Targetting fragments people, fosters fear and resentment of those different than our own, and ultimately works against what BSA stands for. Yes, there will be predominantly hispanic or black or white units, because the neighborhoods they serve are demographically that way. But to limit recruitment to ONE race / religion is a very short step from not inviting all to join. That's not an organization I want to see BSA turned into. Would a black kid feel comfortable in our unit? I don't know. But I do know that we would not turn them away if they wanted to join... any and all welcome. I leave the 'feeling left out / not good enough / not cool enough / not (whatever) enough' attitudes to the sports leagues and other youth organizations that teach from a very young age that one is only welcome when one fits into the mold and can perform well immediately. I think of BSA as the place where the kids from all walks can come and be part of the group and part of the team. If this is not BSA, then I want out. Just wondering if Mr. Mazzucca's vision for hispanic units includes alternate paperwork written in ENGLISH for those you show up to round-up night and don't happen to speak the majority's language? If the OP's question is "How common are units targetted for a specific demographic group?".... My reply would be, "Far more often than is prudent for the overall health and wellfare of BSA as an organization. The youth are better served by being inclusive than devisive in our recruiting strategies." Maybe one day - the powers that be at National will figure this out.

baggsjr- Welcome to the virtual campfire. What part of KC are you in? I went to school there at UMKC, but lived up north in Gladstone for the time I was in college. Fun town, I miss it sometimes. Good to see some younger blood on the forum boards. Welcome (from San Diego-Imperial Council scouter) Dean

To run or not to run.... that is the question.... Well, if you are feeling burned out and you have held the positions needed to fullfill your rank requirements, then I would consider the "not running" part. You are not avoiding your responsibilities as much as you would be clearing the way for some fresh blood to have an opportunity to lead. If you find it in your heart to run, then by all means, do so. This is a tough choice that only you can make for yourself. Adult life is full of these, so good you get the practice on one like this I might suggest, if you don't want to run, you call up a few of your buddies and personally encourage them to do it. Tell them you have done the job before and will be there to help them and lend guidance. If they ask why you aren't doing it - tell them you have already had your turn, plus as a Life scout - you are beginning to think about an Eagle project and how much time and planning it will take. You don't want to let your Patrol down by not doing your best at your duties because you are busy with an Eagle project, so you thought it would be a good time to support someone else who wants to step-up and take the reins. Think "salesman" or "business" merit badge... you need to "sell" your freinds on why it should be THEM doing it this go around and not YOU again - they are valid points and its wouldn't be a lie. Best of luck - I know you'll do the right thing for you and your Patrol / unit.