Fishsqueezer

Kudu Bad form to speculate on someones motives? I'm sorry, but to fully understand ones position it requires an understanding of where they are coming from. Is it bad form for a Democrat to try to understand the basis of a Republican position? How is it possible for you to sway my opinion if there is always the question in my mind of why you want to sway it? I will try the common usage thing once more. The common usage of football is the game - not a league. When someone says football they think of the game - not the NFL or AFC. The NFL is not football, it is a league of professional

Kudu My apologies for you feeling personally attacked. I'm not exactly sure how my asking "why" questions would be construed as a personal attack though. I merely asked why you presented the "special congressional action" the way you did and why you are so concerned that America gets the same diversity of scouting organizations that you enjoy. I was merely seeking information about why you do or say what you do. If you feel that is a personal attack, then I guess I will have to refrain from asking you questions or seeking information. Actually I believe you are incorrect to assert th

Kudu I read through the complaint and the opposition case really is the stronger one. The BSA demonstrated its rights more than did "youthscouts". If you noted, in all the definitions the word scout, when used as a verb, always meant the action of seeking as in scout out the enemy position. When used as a noun it only had two definitions - that of a scout ship that does the action of scouting and, low and behold, a Boy Scout or Girl Scout. So if all those dictionaries say the common noun usage of scout is Boy Scout and Girl Scout then that fairly well establishes the fact. We shall s

Kudu, I compliment you on your knowledge of scouting history. I daresay you could compile your posts into a scouting history book. I would say, however, that your references to previous use of scouts is irrelevant to the case. The words federal and express were in very common usage prior to the company trademarking the name. That doesn't negate their trademark due to common usage of the abbreviation of their name. Common usage is established after the brand trademark as you stated in your post. Boy Scouts of American was trademarked - the other scout names were not. A first dibs kind of t

Kudu I think my Nike was right on, but if you don't like that comparison then look at common usage that has also been protected under trademark - think "what can brown do for you" with UPS and FedEx for Federal Express. The common usage was associated with the trade name and therefore came under trademark protection. Scouts, scouting, and boy scouts are all common usages of Boy Scouts of America and therefore can be legitimately claimed under the trademark and as you say, even B-P wanted to protect the name scouts. The fact that England has 3 different scout groups and the name could not

Kudu I will have to cede the bylaws question to you since I have not made the effort to obtain a copy. Since we have been in this discussion I have emailed my council to request a copy. We'll see what happens. As to the registered trademark of boy scouts, I'm not sure how you have a complaint. It is a national registered trademark name. You would get the same response should you try to start Nike boys or NFL players, or associate with any other trademarked name. I suspect it would not go very far. Just because you want to use it and you share the same heritage there is no conferred r

Bobanon You state "I also assumed there would be a portion of the members of this forum that will take the tact that I need to move on to some other endeavor. I understant their mindset fully, as I have lived my entire life in the bible belt. It has been my experience that those who scream loudest against non-xtians, and even liberal xtians, do not understand and know the history of their relgion, nor have they ever read the bible in entirity. I myself have read the bible through on two occasions and on both times came away with only uestions." Is it your intention to imply that indi

The best crossover bridge we ever did was one the boys lashed together during the ceremony. It consisted of 4 tripods connected by a crossbar for each pair then poles laid from crossbar to crossbar. The boy scout troop lashed one set of tripods while the webelos lashed the other set. This was done while I was talking about the scout law's 12 points (it so happens that there are 12 lashing on the tripods). Then as I talked about the 3 points of the oath, they placed the poles on the crossbars to make the bridge (3 sections of the bridge). They then walked across the bridge they built to transit

Source: Emory University Health Sciences Center Posted: January 31, 2006 Emory Study Lights Up The Political Brain When it comes to forming opinions and making judgments on hot political issues, partisans of both parties don't let facts get in the way of their decision-making, according to a new Emory University study. The research sheds light on why staunch Democrats and Republicans can hear the same information, but walk away with opposite conclusions. The investigators used functional neuroimaging (fMRI) to study a sample of committed Democrats and Republicans during the three m

You need to reread the article as it does not equate to what the Catholic church did. The article points out ignorant and inept camp and council staff not following BSA guidelines and probably state guidelines about reporting child abuse. To be a parallel with the Catholic church, the BSA would have to know about the pedophile and continue to have him direct camps and move him around to other camps when things got "hot". There is nothing in the article that the BSA covered anything up. The problem with paranoia is that there is nobody you can ever really trust.

Some quotes worth remembering. The thing I hate about an argument is that it always interrupts a discussion. G. K. Chesterton English author & mystery novelist (1874 - 1936) In a heated argument we are apt to lose sight of the truth. Publilius Syrus (~100 BC)

Something a bit on the lighter side. I have observed, over the years, a personality type that puzzles me. I am a fairly regimented kind of guy so I notice things that are out of my usual pattern. Why do some personality types always take from the larger or most full instead of using up the smaller? A case in point. Our office restroom has a double paper dispenser. The other guy in the office always uses paper from the largest roll instead of using up the smallest (I don't watch - we're the only two that use that restroom). My wife will open a full bag of sugar instead of using up the almo

BTW, thanks to all of you for taking the time to provide some input. I appreciate it.

I guess I will take the walk down the Woodbadge path. As has been indicated, one can learn new things in any training and it can only help the boys in the troop for the leaders to have more training. Anything that generates that much enthusiasm among graduates must have something good to offer. I guess my skeptical self wonders about the hard sell I usually get when I mention Woodbadge. Sometimes I feel like I just walked into a used car lot with an obvious wad of money. You definitely attract ardent attention from the sales staff.

I have been contemplating attending the local woodbadge training for some time, but I still haven't come up with a definitive reason why I need the training. I have met with and talked to many woodbadgers about the course and they all say it is great and I should go. I guess my hesitation comes from the following areas: Does it make a difference in the scouting program? I know many WB and non-WB leaders. They all seem to have great programs and are great leaders. They are all enthused and committed to the boys. If there is no self-evident difference, is there any difference? I have a

You have no argument from me Lisabob. Women do make just as good of leader as men. And mothers with sons do understand boys more than mothers with daughters. I also think fathers with daughters would make very good girl scout leaders and understand girls better. My argument is against girls as members of cub scouts or regular boy scout troops. Intentional or not, people do treat and view boys and girls differently and they interact differently. When they are in the same group biases will show and I believe they will show to the detriment of the boys.

I think I would have to weigh in with leaving the Boy Scouts as boys only. While I think it is great that they have interactions - maybe cooperative activities with local Girl Scout troops - the drawbacks are too great. If you have kept up with current research in emotional and educational development of kids you would note that boys and girls do not develop the same in either area. Educational research has shown that single sex classrooms in school improve learning and social interaction significantly for both sexes over coed classes. The learning and interaction of boys is simply too differe

I'm not sure spreading it out is the best thing. As an extreme example - one major paved road through the mountains has much less impact than 100 4-wheeler trails. Logically, if you move your impact to a new or recovering trail you are leaving more trace than if you had kept to the well worn trail. The well worn trail is already there and likely will be for decades. By moving you are adding another well worn trail. I'll assume your kill wildlife comment is meant as out of season, without a license, and as wasting game where you would be absolutely correct. I would hope you haven't run acr

You read way too much into things Gern. I was addressing your comment. You made a comment, and through implication, that if one was to pick up a baby bird that you have essentially killed that bird. I was providing information that called to question your conclusion. You have extended that beyond the text and intent, not I. Don't put words in someone elses mouth (or post I suppose). It is great that you are an ethical rock climber. I tried it myself for a brief period back in the 80's. And, it is great that you support LNT as do I - so we both do agree with LNT. I suppose our disagreement

Actually, handling the birds would have very little impact. It is common practice among bird biologists to take young out of the nest, weigh and measure them, place bands on their legs, and even place equipment near the nest - all without damaging the little birds or shortening their life span. So - you can't see it plus there is no lasting effect just like C&R fishing only it is C&R birding. The discussion that we have been having is not whether there is a benefit of C&R to the environment, but whether C&R is detrimental to the fish or fishery or environment or to scout e

Gern, Im sure I would have loved your Pulitzer effort. Most PETA type writing is quite entertaining, especially since they arent bound by any norms of factual reporting or science. Now for LNT. Since we are talking about scouts, lets look at the BSA Leave No Trace. Here is the BSA web address with LNT http://www.scouting.org/nav/enter.jsp?s=ba so everyone will know what it really says. Quote Leave No Trace helps reinforce that mission, and reminds us to respect the rights of other users of the outdoors as well as future generations. Also "What can we do to reduce our impact on the envi

To me leave no trace is leaving no obvious physical evidence that I was in the area (past tense). Just the fact that you are in an area is a trace. People can see or hear you and your camp. Once you leave, it should be very difficult for someone to detect that you were ever there. If you were to talk to the famous tracker Tom Brown I suspect he would tell you that it is impossible to really leave no trace. As for your absolutes of not molesting, hindering or annoying wildlife, I guess you do no outdoor activities with your troop or on your own. The mere presence of a human will alter or h

I'm not sure how C&R would violate LNT. How many fish have you personally seen in a wild area with hook marks? Don't tell me about someone you knew who once talked to somebody who saw it. How many have you seen in any wild stream or lake? If you have seen no evidence of it then it is LNT. Leave No Trace means you have left no visible evidence that another person would know you had been there. You are more likely to run across a cat hole, tent depression, or trackway than to see any fish at all much less a hook marked one. Your LNT argument is baseless. To further your point why don't

The ethical question concerning fishing can be addressed in different ways. First there is the belief that all living things have the same right to life. One may also look at the animal nature of humans, the holistic approach with the greatest benefit, and the basis for ethical reasoning. While some may call this Judeo-Christian or a western phylosophy, mainly the reasoning comes from an anthropocentric view of life and the world. Do all living things have the same right to life? Believing that you have the right to fish is an anthropocentric stance. It requires that the human believes he

So using animals for entertainment is bad (unless you are a bug - I suspect there are others who would rather draw the line at reptiles or maybe rats - that dang line just keeps moving depending on who's drawing it). You give a fine example of dog fighting at the extreme. What about rodeo? How about AKC dog shows? How about watching your hamster in an exercize wheel or fish in a tank? How far down your personal road would you require the rest of the world to go? You have a personal set of values that you stand by - and that is great. You have a personal aversion to fishing as is your righ