GernBlansten

Scoutldr's idea is excellent. Informed voters know the party affiliation of their candidate. Uninformed voters shouldn't just vote R or D. In fact, they shouldn't even vote at all. I can't believe a random result be any worse than those elected just because of their party affiliation.

Bush talks the talk, but he doesn't walk the walk. I think its great that he mentioned it in the state of the onion. But I don't have any faith that he will actually do anything about it. He is far too close to big oil for anything meaningful to come out of this administration in regards to energy independance.

What Bush needs to do is champion a Manhattan Project or Apollo style effort for energy independence. Really push the envelope. Make it a national priority. Spend trillions in the next 10 years with the goal being relegating oil to a raw material for plastic production only. Turn petroleum into a marginal product like petroleum did to whale oil at the turn of the century.

I'm a paleo-conservative. One who believes in limited government, fiscal responsibility, a foreign policy based on defending our borders not building foreign governments. A party which encourages rugged individualism, self reliance and individual civil liberties is one I would gravitate too.

Unfortunately, neither Republicans nor Democrats have any of these qualities. Neo-cons (New Conservatives) now stand for an expanded government, fiscal irresponsibility, a foreign policy of open borders and building nations, a government that demands compliance, wants us to be in constant fear and take our civil liberties all in the name of national security.

So how do you correct the course of the Republican party, vote for the only party that can punish them for their lost ways. Vote Democratic and send a message that the neo-con movement is not conservative. At least not conservative in the sense of Ronald Reagan.

What can be done? Well, oil and gas is far too important of a commodity to allow greedy robber barons to manipulate the supply and price. It regulates our economy, it underminds our national security and foreign policy, it is a key unavoidable expense to every single American. The solution, nationalize the industry. Yup, we are talking real socialism here but that is the cost of our dependence on the black stuff. Take out the profit incentive, remove the greed and price manipulation. I for one would shed no tears for the stock holders and executives of Exxon et al. Even at our government's worst inefficiency, I doubt they would surpass the greed of this industry. OK, flame on conservatives. Tell us how free markets have helped you put a tiger in your tank.

JohnDangler,

What you propose is a clear violation of copyright laws. You can make "backup" copies of your own music and even make "dance" mixes of songs from different CDs. But the minute you give a copy to someone else whether for free or for fee, you violate the law. Like wise, if you give or sell the original CD to someone else (that's legal), you cannot play copies of the CD you made.

CaptnRon, you have changed my opinion on the way LDS units operate within the BSA. My impression was that LDS units wanted to be isolated from the rest of BSA. Other scouters I interact with share this same impression. I will now go to them and dispel those prejudices. Thank you.

If the band-aids were not mocking the purple heart, why was it that the RNC frantically retrieved all the band-aids after someone told them it was a slap in the face of veterans? Seems to me there is plenty of bad behaviour on both sides of the aisle to go around. I know my dad who was a veteran of Korea was insulted. Shameless slur on the greatest sacrifice an American can give to the country.

What your wife does would drive me up the wall. I get a certain pleasure exhausting the contents of a package and disposing of it. It is a sense of accomplishment, thrift and closure. If feel as though I got my monies worth and can move on. My mother recently moved in with us after my dad died. We emptied her cabinets of all her food and combined it with ours. Its been a tough few months for me seeing those two boxes of bisquick opened and going stale. But I get great pleasure when I finally put one of them boxes in the compactor.

Liberal vs. Conservative? I guess in the classical expression of the terms its conservative since you want to conserve the resources.

I guess it comes down to our own philosophies on raising children. My bias is to expose my children to as many things as possible, interact with people not like themselves, do things I have never had the opportunity to do. Of course this comes with some boundaries. However, I see some parents who do the exact opposite. My brother-in-law will not allow his children to attend public schools for reasons of liberal indoctrination. He also won't allow his children to interact with others outside his church. Since his church doesn't sponsor a BSA unit, his sons are not allowed to join BSA. Even if they did sponsor one, if they didn't restrict it to their own church members, he would not allow it. His children are very sheltered, very much under his thumb.

Our philosophies are different. I don't agree with his, but it is his right to have it.

OGE, you are right. I shouldn't paint all republicans with a broad brush just because a few of them mocked a solemn war decoration at their national convention. But the sight of them proudly waiving their purple heart band-aid on national TV really brought my blood to a boil. I mean, mocking an award given to our fighting men and women injured in battle especially in wartime was just over the top. I will try better to remind myself that not all republicans are insensitive, just some of the them are.

Well, there's no doubt gays are the third rail of BSA.

Rooster and Funscouter, my posts were intended to demonstrate that sexuality has no place in BSA. Follow the guidelines of youth protection and don't worry about whether someone might like guys in the biblical way. People get way too wrapped around the axle about this stuff.

Rooster as far as showering or dressing with homosexuals, chances are you already have if you were ever in the military, go to a gym or any other public dressing area.

Now to funscouters initial quest, how do co-ed units do it? Well, I suppose they would have codes of conduct that would not allow sexual contact. Hetero or Homo. You violate it, you are out. Adult or youth. Pretty much covers it doesn't it? In my teens, our co-ed church youth group would go on weekend campouts. We segregated males and females from sleeping in the same tents, but that didn't stop them from sneaking out into the woods to do what they wanted. They violated the code of conduct and if caught, where expelled from the group. I doubt having co-ed tenting would have made any difference. Same goes for adults. I would not want a married couple having sex on one of our campouts anymore than two men. Its inappropriate for the setting.

Fun,

Your comment brought back a memory of my first committee meeting with our troop. Our COR, an elderly gentleman who rarely shows up at meetings, popped in to introduce himself. He told us that he had full faith in our committee to run the unit as we saw fit but warned us that the CO would not tolerate any gays, adult or youth. Then he went on a diatribe about how we needed to weed out the young boys who showed gay tendencies and correct their ways. He said it was all about the way their fathers failed them and we could "fix" it. Finally our SM stopped him and reminded him that sex is not discussed with the scouts and counseling on anything like this is way out of our expertise or responsibility. He harrumphed and changed the topic and quietly shuffled off.

Rick, please don't construe my use of the term segregation with any malice. Its a term that perfectly defines my quandary. I could have used the term niggardly in the other thread about council finances but I doubt many would have appreciated its meaning. Perhaps segregation has too much baggage with it. Perhaps someone can suggest an alternative.

Don't get me wrong, I think that it is great that the LDS uses scouting for its youth program. But I think scouting is a great opportunity for our young men to appreciate and respect people from all races, colors and creeds. I think segregating your troop by your faith confounds that goal. Our nation is too divided right now, why further divide scouting?

Curious Funscouter,

When do you ask your scouts if they are gay? Or do you assume they are not since they are scouts.

Now comes the million dollar question....

Do you think religiously segregated troops are good for scouting? I am of the opinion that religious education and scouting are two separate things. Sure, there is some crossover, but the goals are separate. I send my kids to church to learn about God, I send my son to scouts to learn about scouting.

That is indeed a shameful display. Much like the shameful display at the Republican Convention of 2004 when band-aids with little purple hearts where passed out to the crowd. Really spit in the eye of every purple heart recipient.

The thread about LDS scouts getting killed more often mutated into a discussion on religious segregation of scouting units. I thought this should be a topic on its own merit. FScouter properly documented a CO's right to define leadership within the unit and how it delivers the BSA program. LDS units do this to the letter. My CO on the other hand are at the opposite spectrum of this, approving any leader regardless of their faith as long as they meet BSA requirements. Where does your unit fall into this spectrum? Are there Jewish only units? Baptist only? Christian only? I've got to believe that the vast majority of units, save the LDS ones, are just like mine, a melting pot of various religous backgrounds.

What recourse does the council have if a scout refuses to pay the $52 surcharge if he sends in the $10 for BSA membership? Can the council refuse/disenroll his membership or restrict access to council events or property?

Personally, if this was my council doing this, I would refuse the surcharge on principle alone.

Rick, I took the time to read the lds.org section on scouting. There is no doubt that LDS puts a lot of value in the scouting program. However, that site doesn't even reference any differences in how the program is delivered. One major difference I see is that only LDS members are allowed to lead an LDS unit. Our unit's CO is a Methodist church. Our scoutmaster is Catholic. Our CC is Presbyterian, a few of our ASMs are born again. To join our unit, you need only meet the BSA requirements. You do not need to be a member of the CO or even that faith. I for one do not agree that religous segregation of units is a good thing. In our district, because of the large number of LDS units, the last two weeks of summer camp are reserved for LDS units only. I just don't understand why they would require/demand/request exclusive use of the camp if the program is the same.

Dang OGE,

was going to submit, "all of these religions have never had their sacred rules removed from a US public building".

The problem with Judge Moore's display of the big 10 was its prominence in the foyer of the courthouse. It was not a simple plaque on the wall, it was the centerpiece and quite noticeable. It isn't hard for an avowed atheist to feel that Judge Moore would not rule objectively in his case. He demonstrated a clear bias towards religious people. All the atheist would have to do in his court was to proclaim his beliefs and if the judge ruled against him, he would have a strong case for appeal no matter the merits. Besides, of the 10 commandments, only 3 are part of our criminal code. 4 if you include adultery. The rest are religious rules and cannot be enforced or punished the courts. At least not yet. I don't have a problem with the depiction of Moses on the SCOTUS building because of what Merlyn has stated, its part of a long list of historical rules and doesn't specify any for the court to follow (blank tablets).

BadenP,

Regardless of the weak religious training you have received, the beauty of these forums allows you to give your uneducated two cents and we can all decide for ourselves.

Ok, guys, I'm joking. Sheeesh!

Good question, that is what I would like to know. The reference I made to blacks and the priesthood is one example of differences in LDS vs BSA polices. I know this is ancient history and the LDS Church changed their policy in the end but it does demostrate that there have been significant differences. Do you have a link describing the LDS modifications to the BSA program?

On July 18, 1974, the Salt Lake Tribune reported: "A 12-year-old boy scout has been denied a senior patrol leadership in his troop because he is black", Don L. Cope, black ombudsman for the state, said Wednesday. Mormon troop policy is that in order for a scout to become a patrol leader, he must be a deacon's quorum president in the LDS Church. Since the boy cannot hold the priesthood, he cannot become a patrol leader. Shortly before Boy Scout officials were to appear in Federal Court Friday morning on charges of discrimination, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued a policy change which will allow black youths to be senior patrol leaders, a position formerly reserved for white LDS youths in troops sponsored by the church. An LDS Church spokesman said Friday under the "guidelines set forth in the statement, a young man other than president of the deacons quorum could (now) become the senior patrol leader if he is better qualified". - (Salt Lake Tribune, August 3, 1974).

If there are no differences between an LDS program and a BSA program, why are we even discussing it? Why do Mormons need/want their own units? Why does BSA tolerate it?

I guess I construed the lack of visits to mean a lack of support. Your perception is not isolated to scouting either. People flock to mega-churches for the same reason. They like to associate extravagant beautiful complexes with success and legitimacy. Its easier to draw people into a shiny chapel on a hill than a renovated theatre in a warehouse district to worship. But one needs to review the purpose of the council. To promote and support local scouting units. I'm just not convinced that fancy office digs are necessary to fulfil that role. Especially when they live and die by the charity of others. Money would be better spent on billboards promoting scouting than any shiny building.