Jump to content

GaHillBilly

Members
  • Content Count

    293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GaHillBilly

  1. Bob, you're baiting, but I'll rise to it anyhow! You wrote, "Which of thse practices do find impossible to be mindful of GaHillbilly?" First, LNT is not Leave Minimal Trace -- that would be LMT -- it's Leave NO Trace. In English, "no trace" is NOT the same as any of the following: - "little trace" - "minimal trace" - "minimized trace" - "reduced trace" - etc. Rather "leave no trace" is logically and linguistically IDENTICAL to "leave no indication whatsoever of your passing". LNT is EITHER (take your pick) a marketing slogan that every one 'knows' is not really t
  2. Hey All; Recently completed an OLS weekend. Too my surprise it was much more helpful than my prior encounters with Council training had been: not perfect, but surprisingly good. But, I ran into a couple of situations where we were told that XYZ was THE policy, and what we MUST follow, primarily in the wood tools and LNT sessions. I know that these requirements are not in the Scout Handbook, and careful searching has assured me that they are not in G2SS either. All the instructors were Wood Badgers, and I gather that these standards were ones they'd been taught there. Here a
  3. sheldonsmom wrote: "Yes, there is some disrespect but rarely to my son anymore. He proved his worth....the hard way. The skills the boys are drilled in here, first aid and emergency preparation escpecially, have been demonstrated. Our boys no longer ask why we need first aid training." That's great. And, I know that other troops exist where that's true. But, the problem is not only that our troop is not -- and has not -- been that way, but that apparently many, maybe even most, troops are NOT drilled in those skills. Many Scouts in many troops possess 'advancement check-offs', not skill
  4. Thanks, Eagle92. I'll try to pick those up on Ebay once I get back from camping this weekend. GaHillBilly
  5. I know this is off topic, but can someone tell me where I can find out more about the "urban Scouting of the 70's"? That is the era which produced many of the Scouters I'm dealing with here. I've already discovered that most of them understand Scouting to be what they experienced, and whatever that was, it's not what is found in the manuals or B-P or elsewhere. It would help me a lot if I could get a clear picture of what sort of Scouting they experienced. GaHillBilly
  6. What's ironic in all this debate about energy policy, is that both left and right agree on many things that should be done. Right wants less foreign oil use. Right wants to cripple or weaking Arab economies supporting terrorists. Left wants reduced carbon footprint from transportation Left wants reduced carbon footprint from energy production Answer #1: biofuels Hopefully, we'll get something more efficient than ethanol, but both sides like efficiency. Who doesn't like efficiency? UAW and US auto lobbyists, because US automakers have preferred inefficient vehicles.
  7. "We considered going to New Mexico, especially as some of our leaders have private property out that way, but in the end it was decided we would be setting a poor example for the youth (Scouts and our young women) by avoiding the law like that, at least until we've made an effort to comply and/or correct the situation." I would encourage you to reconsider -- not about camping, but about what constitutes a poor example of citizenship. The simple fact is, even good well-written laws tend to assume a simpler world then the one that actually exists. And, most laws aren't that good, much
  8. "In Maryland, state park regulations require 1 adult leader for every 10 youths for all activities except water related when 1 leader for every 5 youths is required." It's probably worth checking out . . . some regulations are promulgated that have no legal basis. Of course, the ranger can still arrest you, and it will take a lawyer and $$$ to prove that he did it without a basis. And unfortunately, the ridiculousness of a requirement is no evidence that it is not an actual law! Here locally, I've been told that in Georgia State Parks, I and the Scouts with me can be arrested for wal
  9. For those that asked . . . I haven't been in Scouts long enough to know the camps. From what I can find out, there's enough year-to-year variability to make it uncertain what you'll encounter in any give year or session. I HAVE encountered Scouts who've acquired MBs from both Sidney Dew and Skymont, but who have a total absence of the required skills. I no longer assume that an MB from either camp is any indication that a Scout actually possesses any of the skills required by the MB. However, I gather that the same problem exists with most Scout camps. GaHillBilly
  10. I couldn't help but note that knowing knots was sorta #1 on the list of useless skills . . . because the lack of knot knowledge has been a pet peeve of mine for years and years, long before I entered Scouting with my son 2 years ago. I learned a few odd-ball knots, working around farms as a boy. I mastered some more basic knots years ago, climbing and camping in high school -- bowline, prusik, sheet bend, clove hitch, water knot, Swiss seat -- and have used them ever since. When doing plumbing work, I can remember repeatedly having to re-tie pipes my partner couldn't tie to the truck rack
  11. "A bigger problem is one that I've commented on before. Boys really don't want to be Boy Scouts. Most are there because their parents push them, that's why parental involvement is so important." You may be right. My own son doesn't 'like' Scouts, but as homeschoolers, he prefers it to studying those things (merit badge topics) via hands on Scout methods, to book and junior lab techniques. He likes camping; he likes cooking; he likes hiking . . . he doesn't like all the slackers and whiners and goof-offs he's encountered. But, he's begin to buy in to the possibility of make the troop
  12. GW, I didn't say the program was the sole cause. But, when you compare a system in which patrol leader selection is made, or at least guided by the SM, toward the end of putting the best leader in place, and keeping him there, with a system in which you are STRONGLY encouraged to put someone new in place every six months . . . the program is going to have a big effect. Sure, you can find a way to do an end run around the mess. That's what I'm working on. But the program is definitely an obstacle, even if it's not the only one. GaHillBilly
  13. Hey Kudu; I need some advice . . . we don't have JASM problems yet, in part because another ASM and I have dug in our heels and argued every time it's come up that an Eagle who's afraid to camp without his mom along, who's afraid to swim or canoe, and who can't tie a square knot (and I mean this literally, not figuratively!) . . . MUST not be a JASM. The irony is, there are some early signs that he's beginning to 'get it', and realize that his approach to Scouting may not have been the best. But, that doesn't change the fact that he's an obstacle, rather than an asset. I hadn't
  14. If they need some more copies, my son (and some other Scouts in his troop) would be happy to donate his copies! His comment: "Dad, it's all just advertising for overpriced stuff!" GaHillBilly
  15. OGE, if you are referring to me, I'm not calling Merlyn any names he hasn't called himself. In Arthurian legend (ie, King Arthur), Merlin (ie, Merlyn) was the last of the great wizards. LeRoy is simply the Anglicization of le roi, which is French for "the king". So, calling M-LR "Great Wizard King" is simply calling him plainly what he called himself, slightly obscurely! Granted, "delusions of grandeur" was unnecessary, but by the time I thought better of it, my 'edit' window had expired. On the other hand, do you really thing it's very unfair to describe someone who would name himse
  16. The Lord Wizard King spoke thus, "Those aren't all the choices. Lewis' lord/liar/lunatic is a well-known false trilemma. It makes no allowances for simple things like inaccurate retellings of stories over decades by bronze-age sheepherders." Oh, Wizard-King, if you'd bother to read what I wrote, before you trotted out your supposed answer to an argument you'd seen before . . . you'd have noted that I HAD in fact dealt with that when I wrote, "To make Christ just "a good man", you only have to butcher the New Testament, especially the Gospels". If you toss all the bits in the Gospels you d
  17. "Re: The Biblical support for bigotry against Gays. Y'all were wrong when you used the Bible to support slavery. Y'all were wrong when you used the Bible to support "separate but equal." Y'all were wrong when you used the Bible to keep women from being equal citizens. Y'all are wrong now." The problem with your argument is that it simply and utterly ignores the facts. At various points in the Bible, slavery is tolerated, but it is never promoted as a good thing. And, the sort of kidnapping that was practiced to collect the slaves brought here was a capital crime. So, Christians who t
  18. "The idea that science would be the base for extermination of a minority is idiotic." Has been before, in Germany & Russia. Will be again, since it's a logical consequence of 'scientism'. BTW, Baden-Powell -- along with many enlightened Western Europeans of his day -- at least to some degree bought into the idea that, in order to maintain the forward progress of evolution, we need to manage who bred, and who did not. "Are you suggesting, GAHillBilly, that we should deny gay marriage because they are all just going go away eventually (perhaps soon) anyway?" No,
  19. "However, what I was referring to is the usual argument that homosexuality is not "natural" because it is rare among all animal species (but not as rare as used to be thought). To which I was pointing out that monogamy is actually more rare among all animal species." I doubt that your statement is correct. I know that there's been a lot of evidence of BISEXUAL behavior among mammals; I'm not aware of much, if any, evidence of primary HOMOSEXUALITY. Also, as you well know, behavior varies widely by species, but tends to be consistent within species. Serial male dominant polygam
  20. Dan Kroh wrote; "To make one of those unable to offend observations, every heterosexual I know had multiple sexual partners before marriage, and the vast majority of those were less than 2 years." Assuming you you mean sexual partners to the point of intercourse, I would certainly recognize that the majority of hetero's today are not virgins upon first marriage. However, your "every" says more about the company you keep, than what's true in general. Certainly, I can't claim the converse, that every hetero I know was a virgin upon marriage, but I could certainly introduce you to doze
  21. CalicoPenn wrote: 'Since it's now apparent that arguments like this aren't insulting anymore, as they're observational, I'm going to post it: "I have never met an intelligent Christian" While we're at it, I've never met a reasonable and non-prejudiced Southerner. I've never met a good looking heterosexual male. I've never met a person who drives a Honda Goldwing that wasn't a dweeb. I've never met a sports fan that is mentally or emotionally stable. I've never met an NRA member who wasn't compensating for size.' CalicoPenn, it's obvious that you don't 'g
  22. "If they're insulting to her then they're insulting." Packsaddle, you need to pay attention to what Lisabob actually said, which was that the "remarks" were "insulting", not that SHE was insulted! Your response would have been relevant if she'd said, "I was insulted by . . .", but that's not what she said. Instead, she deployed the nowadays standard leftist ploy of claiming that an argument is too "insulting" (or "red state" or "uneducated" or "right wing" or "fundamentalist" or even "ridiculous), thus relieving herself of the obligation to respond to G-W's claimed statement of fact.
  23. Lisabob wrote, "If you find it problematic that I think GW's comments were insulting - and frankly, probably intended to be insulting, given the fact that he frequently uses provocative and hyperbolic language rather than engaging in thoughtful discourse - too bad. I stand behind what I said." You may stand behind it, but that says more about you than GW. Granted, GW has often said provocative things . . . and I've been told by others, that he doesn't really mean it. I don't know that, since I don't really know him, or you. I only know what he wrote. And there's the problem:
  24. Lisabob, one of the problems with modern intellectual discourse is that certain ideas cannot be voiced because they are politically incorrect (aka "insulting"). This approach eliminates the need to address the facts, since any facts found to be "insulting" can simply be ignored. While I'm definitely not in GW's fan club, when he recounts his own personal observations of facts you may legitimately: + question whether his memory or observations were accurate. (Given some past statements by GW, a reasonable challenge.) + question whether his observations are representative, even if tr
  25. Ok, lemme see: NEGATIVES: + your son doesn't like it. + your son is not benefitting (or so I gather) + there's no real prospect that he will like it, or benefit, in the future. + you don't like it. + you're not helping anyone. + there's no real prospect of helping anyone. POSITIVE: + you've been doing this so long it will seem disloyal to quit. If all those things are true, it really sounds like the conclusion is obvious, even if it's emotionally difficult to accept! GaHillBilly PS: I've concluded that Scouting as an "activity", as it typically
×
×
  • Create New...