fred8033

Cambridgeskip wrote: "In short, none of them could understand what the fuss was about. They were actually a bit surprised to learn that religion was any problem in terms of joining anything. They are used to people having different beliefs and are all quite able to discuss theirs without being nasty to each other. " That's what I'd expect. The push to remove reverent and God from scouting is not a scout based push. Scouts deal with these situations all the time. It's a political push. I find that interesting.

Nike has one view of the question. "Who has more right to control what's going on in that uterus? The woman? The fetus? The man? The State?" That's only one policy question. From my view, the question is worded as does one life have the right to end another life in the interest of their own freedom? The question is political and a matter of policy ... not a matter of science. We know when a unique human being is created. We know where the major transition from two separate people, two separate parts into a new single UNIQUE living entity occurs. We also know when the heart sta

We go to Target Minute Clinic or a CVS pharmacy for our physicals. Cheaper and gets done faster. For most 11-17 year olds, who attend public school ... yeah ... it's a waste of money and time. Once every three or four years is good. ... BUT ... I'd require yearly physicals for anyone outside of normal physical and mental health boundaries. Diabetic. Morbidly obese. Prescriptions. Voted democrat.

I've noticed that the cheap and intellectually lazy way to argue is to call someone else a bigot. I'm not perfect, but I try to avoid that threshold. Hard not to as though as you get upset with the opposition being unreasonable. IMHO, credibility is lost by the 1st person to accuse the other of being a bigot. Same as swearing, insulting or physical violence ... you lose.

You are facing a very stiff up-hill struggle. You might want to re-think what is best for the remaining boys in the unit. ----------- I've seen Kudu's presentation web page in the past. Great idea. The challenge is getting it in front of middle age youth. IMHO, if you have a chance of doing it anywhere, you have a chance doing it at churches or at your charter org. Our schools wouldn't let us do it at a school event. If flyers get lost / ignored, youth won't get to the presentation anyway. ----------- Ask your pastor if you can stage Kudu's presentation at the churc

Need to be slightly more specific. Troop and crews run programs differently. --- "Function as one unit" can mean different things. --- "Meet at the Same time and Place?" can mean different things. --- "unit" can mean different things... even though BSA has clear meaning being a pack, troop or crew Generally... IMHO... You can meet at the same time and place, BUT at minimum you'd need two different large rooms and a few other smaller rooms. One for the troop to run their program. One for the crew to run theirs. IMHO, you don't need to meet at the same time and

Qwazse is right Merlyn. You hypocritically hide behind the banner of tolerance and then shout that everyone needs to believe the same as you. Bigot? Really? Many of us cherish scouting because it does have a faith element to it. It's not thrown in your face and many barely notice it, but it is present and an important part of the program. I'm not much for big camporee events. But if you choose to attend faith components... There is something very special about sitting on the grass Sunday morning with the wind blowing thru the trees and being together with hundreds of others for

.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Outdoors: "I find that highly offensive." That's funny. .... Your point is ???? .... Scouting without a component of faith is just camping. You can have all the virtues you want, but without a component of faith, it's just not scouting. That's why Eagle rank accepts Chaplain Aide as a position of responsibility to fulfill requirements. ... I pray that BSA never goes the path of YMCA. I find it hard to walk into our local YMCA these days as the ones in our city have had the crosses removed and have been rebranded "The Y". Go on their web sites and you see a whit

scoutingagain is correct. All these controversial topics on this forum rarely come up in the units. The most controversial thing in units is usually how to work with the scouts, how to discipline, etc. In fact, most of us try to pull the controversial topics (both sides of the discussion) OUT of scouting.

trailwalker... just following track of posts. Just looked logical. My apologies. CalicoPenn... Get a grip.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

trailwalker = Merlyn LeRoy.... ZZZZZzzzz....(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Units don't work together today mainly because they are taught and structured to be separate units and the BSA documentation emphasizes the pack committee / program and the separate troop committee / program and yet another separate crew program. It's nearly impossible to "LONG TERM" on-your-own work-together because we send our leaders to training and roundtable. BSA teaches differently and structures the paperwork differently. Everytime our unit leaders get training, we'd have to de-program them and teach them our flavor of scouting. They are just as likely to become oppositional a

SeattlePioneer - What you describe is well meant, but fragile and doesn't go the extra mile. Your fighting against the Webelos program that tells dens to visit multiple troops and to shop around. One bad event and the Webelos den decides to go elsewhere. Then, your troop begins to fight for survival by recruiting Webelos from other packs or other sources ... and thus subverting any continuity that those packs and associated troops already have. Plus your fighting issolation between unit committees and two groups of adult volunteers that barely know each other. In a one-unit approach

Eagle dad wrote: "And I guess I understand the thinking of the Troop part of the program saving a struggling pack, but I really dont see how the same committee of the unsuccessful pack program could run a successful troop program. In other words, why would one half of the unit be successful while the other half isnt? Doesnt make sense to me. Wont bad leadership take down everybody? " It's not about unsuccessful or poor leadership (i.e. the wrong people). It's that scouting takes time to "get"; to understand. For me, it was about five years. As a Tiger parent, I did a bit, but mainly w

JMHawkins .... The one-unit approach is the federated model. It's not a consolidation at all as the youth ages have different needs. So you still have a pack, a webelos den, a troop and a crew. You'd still have a cubmaster, a scoutmaster, den leaders, patrol leaders, senior patrol leaders, crew advisor, crew captain(??), etc. The difference is infrastructure and how units working together and support each other. You have a central committee chair and then maybe sub-chairs for the pack, the troop, the crew, etc. Or... a central committee chair and then a chair for cub camping, a chai

I like the idea too. I'd be embarrassed asking people to spend money on an indoor meal on yet another night and especially knowing that the food menu will be locked down and more expensive then they can get on their own. Changing the May roundtable into an outdoor pot-luck cookout and short awards ceremony seems right. We're scouters and scouts is about being outside and having a little bit of fun. Seems only right to have an outside, do-it-yourself cookout as the awards ceremony.

This might be a tangent thread, but a neighboring district replaced their formal sit-down district dinner by converting their May roundtable to a pot-luck cookout with dutch ovens, camp fire stoves, etc. Everyone shares dishes. From what I heard, attendance increased to larger than a normal roundtable meeting. In comparison, the old formal district dinner pulled half the district committee and maybe two troop scoutmasters and one or two pack leaders. The only non-district committee attendees were usually the award winners. I'd like our district to consider the format change. Heck,

I agree that I think this idea has signficant merit. I see too many packs in trouble that would thrive with a bit more guidance. And my apologies to the UC corps, but I just don't see the unit commissioners cutting it. More is needed than just once or twice a year advice (if even that often). The key need is continuity. Everything else can be worked thru. I really really believe that Webelos troop shopping is a counter-productive model. Of course scouts should be able to jump ship at any time from Tiger to Eagle. But troop shopping promotes cities having one or two strong troops an

Eagle92 ... Those mixed results are because the units are run separately. If the troop and pack were more tightly linked, with the same leaders, same planning and same oversight, then it would be easier to help the units. The examples you give where the troop is healthy and the pack is in trouble, or vice versa, is because the units are separate. If it was one integrated unit, there would be an improved chance for the success of both.

Well written? I don't know. I often get confused by Kudu's quotes and descriptions. Sometimes he's referencing BSA scouting; othertimes UK scouting and still othertimes a scouting ideal that I'm not sure ever existed. Sometime's he's refering to Baden Powell, the person, and other times he's talking about the Baden-Powell Scout Association, which from what I can see was not founded by Baden Powell as it was created in 1970, many years after BP died. When I see it written as "B-P's Patrol System", that seems to reference the 1970's created B-P scout association and not Baden Powell,

DeanRx wrote: "would it mean you MUST have a troop for your pack?" ... Our pack has no parrallel troop. I'd hope we could change our charter to be chartered under the same organization that hosts a troop. They would just host multiple packs. DeanRx wrote: "I wouldn't want to be a CM forced into feeding boys into a failing troop" ... I'd bet that units that create successful troops would also have successful packs. And vice versa. ... PLUS, any scout at any time can change membership to another unit. I'd rather see the emphasis on changing to a unit that matches your needs and less

Yeah, I've read the label. Understand the differences. I'm just saying the green version is only a decorative replacement for the red version. If you want something functionally equivalent, you need to shop elsewhere. I absolutely hated the disco red color of the old jac shirt, but you could depend on it keeping you warm.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Ya know... I was going to write a post about the new green jac shirts. BUT ... I was not going to be as nice. Green Jack shirt PROS ---- Comfortable and less itch'y. ---- Looks nicer then the old one ---- Scout emblem is embroidered on. CONS ---- Less functional. ---- It lets the wind thru and does not keep you any where near as warm. I swear that I could use the old red jack shirt over my short sleeve scout shirt until it was about 5 degrees. I always had my procedure. Button cuffs. Close one or two buttons. Button to near top. Flip collar up. The co

JAY - You said "Requirements counted towards one Merit Badge may not be counted for another Merit Badge." Why? Is there somewhere it says that? I'd be okay if there is an official source. I'm just curious. I ask because we've had times where scouts work on multiple merit badges that have overlapping requirements, often first aid requirements. Summer camp often has any scout doing an aquadics badge show up at the same time to complete those basic requirements. Not once per badge they are taking. Plus how would two different merit badge counselors avoid being gamed by smart