Gunny2862

That is correct! A great question for BSA But I think the important question in this thread is did Avery get enough input to make any decisions? Avery?

Definitions are useful. It would be nice if they all aligned. But the more of those silly University classes I take the more definitions I find for what I thought before were common words in common use, in any field. Now that you have given us yours, your own definitions of atheism and agnosticism seems to convolute any possible understanding without going to extremes to clarify exactly what combination of the convolution one is talking about. True, more and more Americans are claiming not to be "sure" about "which" god but the majority of them are still theistic. Agnosticism for me will retain the common meaning - in the hinterlands between atheism and theism but generally examining theism for an answer. Once one settles on eliminating Theism as a possibility I would choose to classify that person as a Atheist. An Agnostic-Atheist(Atheist) would tell me they were unsure about what "worldview" to choose but that all choice must be outside of theism(for them) and I am unable to detect why one would need to make this distinction in most discussions - surely atheist suffices in this case. An Agnostic-Theist (Agnostic)is still looking for god. At least in the way I'm going to talk about it. If we really need to pick nits please give me the advance warning and I'll try to play. Although I do tend to prefer dynamite to scalpels, but I'll try if it must be done.(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

Merlyn, in this topic where you have clearly displayed your expertise and posted links to the relevant citations in the past, I am sure you are correct. However, as we have seen all across these forums, the practices of Scouting in communities tends to occasionally veer from the vision of the Corporate/ Legal offices. Anyone who has never had a "crisis" of faith has simply never examined the beliefs their parents(or social group) exposed them to. I would contend that at the moment of time that that examination takes place that most who do examine their faith are momentarily agnostic. Should they then dis-enroll themselves from Scouting and re-enroll themselves immediately, even if it only takes a second? As an element of character, ones religious beliefs are always open to examination by each person. That decision to believe or not believe in any thing is a deeply personal choice and while one is forming their ideas I would also say they should be allowed to pursue Scouting. Now as to whether or not they get to go on to pass their Eagle BOR, well, now we are inserting Corporate back into the deal but, in theory, atheists are very different than agnostics and I would say that Scouting is an ideal place for agnostics to examine those parts of their life with the peers who are also dealing with these issues (vocally or not) as they grow (hopefully) in the other areas that Scouting is trying to grow them in. As to atheists - well, I may have different views than Corporate - Scouting might be good for them too. Exposure to competing ideas occasionally changes minds or at least makes one think. I am not for close-mindedness in most things. However, like yourself I am sure there are things you have come to believe - I doubt you rope yourself to your house until you have arrived at your car, trusting that gravity will not let you down for example.

First, wow, good answers in the majority! Second, Avery, you sound like an agnostic - one who doesn't know - to me. Usually this implies that you are a searcher - and open to the idea of a deity or a god or even just a higher power. The BSA as an organization usually leaves this as an open place for you to search and seek out the answers you are/should be looking for. If that, as I understand BSA's stance, is the case then you are definitely someone who should stay in Scouts as you seek those answers. If you just want to leave and want a little controversy to hide behind as you run away then you clearly aren't applying the Scout law to your life. You aren't even being Trustworthy to yourself - just say what you really think. You aren't being Loyal to yourself - by having to make up or create a smokescreen for your actions. You aren't being Helpful to your Troop by placing them in the crossfire of the controversy you would create by using these excuses as your reason for leaving. You can see the rest, I'm sure, you seem very articulate and thoughtful. You've gotten good advice from the others, a couple of additional things as you search for "truth". Be aware that any one who has a belief will be colored by that belief and you need to understand that they may not be intentionally trying to color or shade their belief in a more positive light to mislead you but that it is a natural outcropping of their belief. Be open to looking at the big questions across each established faith you examine. What answers do they give as to: Why are you here? What is your purpose? Why do YOU exist? How did you get here? Is there an afterlife? Is it important? Personally, I think Jesus is the real deal - some of his followers I can do without (including myself at times ) but you can't really expect flawed humans to fully live up to the example set by a deity, even one expressing himself as a human while retaining his deity. I'm a little bit of a Grace addict - I seem to NEED it every day. Good luck as you search - but if you are just searching for controversy to cover your escape from Scouting - drop it, get real for your own sake and just say what you really think.

We just had some Scouts obtain some garrison caps from trading blankets at a trading post event. They wanted to wear them so bad they traded for an extra one to "influence" the Scoutmaster into letting them wear them... The Scoutmaster wasn't influenced and really thought it was a PLC decision but, the PLC were the ones who traded for the hats. Machiavellian Scouts at times. And anything that increases the amount, frequency and correctness of uniform wear is encouraged in this part of the woods. At this point if the hat were wrong I'd still let it go if it increased wearing the rest of the uniform. By the way, the new SPL held a uniform class at the TLT! Progress!

Trevorum, I might understand the dropped communication issues if we were talking the relatively low bandwidth connections and poor video and audio of your typical webcam and computer setup. But with the videoconferencing (videoteleconferencing: VTC) codecs used by most universities/ colleges today I find that most poor comunication is the result of, well, poor communication skills of the participants rather than limitations of the systems. So just like in real life poor skills may be exhibited, but a breakdown in VTC communications shouldn't as quickly be blamed on the VTC systems as in the past.

I don't know John's answer, but if you'd ever had my sister-in-laws cooking you'd understand the phrase. Teleconferencing (with video) over Skype would work but given not paying for gas you might consider looking at local universities and asking their fees for renting a videoconferencing room. A much higher quality connection, video and sound if it's in the budget.

All, espescially(sp?) Gonzo, Sorry for the grumps, you also can't tell who's having a hard week on ( or sometimes off of) the 'net . Coleman sells those fold-a-beds I mentioned at Wally-Mart for about $40.00. For a pure comfort at a longterm or cabin camp I'm not sure how you'd beat that setup without bringing your SelectComfort bed. But , can't imagine dragging it for a weekend.

Every Troop is worth saving. Are you the person who can do it? If your Institutional Head(IH) and Chartered Organizational Representative(COR) are onboard with the new Scoutmaster(SM) and are aware of how she is changing the program, you may get no traction here. If they understand Boy Scouting and aren't aware, and are willing to buck this current SM, then you may find yourself with a Troop and no Committee and no Assistant Scoutmasters(ASM's). If situation 1, then I would start shopping Troops with my son. But, as John-in-KC wisely suggested - feedback or an exit interview with the COR is an excellent choice. As is not poisoning your new Troop with bad stories of the old one. If situation 2, then you must ask yourself if YOU are ready to take this on. And are your Scouts able to do enough functions that you can do it with their help. I am not familiar with the term IBSLT, mostly the I part. Does this mean you are "Trained" or have just completed Scoutmaster Specific training? If you choose to take this project on I fully endorse getting Trained and asking your COR to ensure that any remaining or incoming Committee members get trained - their classes are much easier(and fewer) than yours and gives them a little insight in to what Boy Scouting is supposed to be. Good luck! Let us know how it goes...

Gonzo, Well that was rude. Just impugn the motives and abilities of your fellow Scouters. FYI My presumption was that the question related to summer camp. Note that in my reply I say "but if Summer camp isn't car camping I don't know what is." In the interest of disclosure. I have only used a cot on a weekend campout once. My back was out and I probably shouldn't have gone at all. Otherwise I'm using a pad that's been on 3 continents and at many islands, and always arrives as part of my basic load, by foot, from wherever the trailhead may be. Grump, grump, grump. Smart-tuckus comment declined but thought really loud. (This message has been edited by Gunny2862)(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

From my (very limited) experience I would guess that it was unusual. But, I'm glad you contacted council and found a fix! Great Work! Now find out if you have concrete pads or wooden pallets provided by the camp to put those Council tents on. If so, you might want a cheap carpet square for the floor (nice but not necessary) If not you might want to see if a local business will loan you pallets to put your gear on in case it rains, these are typically open or dirt floor tents.

Admittedly I'm totin' some 8-9 pack abs, but it is the diameter of the quadriceps and the zipper seam that is the difference maker for me. The current Switchbacks are actually a little loose in the seat and I've got PLENTY of belt left, BUT... The current Switchbacks become constrictive at the quads when I get a little muscle pump on the quads going from a strenuous stretch on a hike or if I'm bouldering with those things on. I just hope the relaxed fit addresses THAT fit.

Well, the first question is do you have tents available? If so, problem solved. Our camp does provide the old canvas "1920's Expedition Style" Boy Scout tents. I have at times seriously considered going to the trailer and putting MY tent up inside of the camp tent - but bad example for the Scouts, sigh. So, I ensure I have my mosquito net and an emergency heavy rain tarp and call it good. They may be doing you a favor by not giving you what THEY do have available.

I'm using a thrift store purchased military surplus cot that is very similar to the Byer Tri-Lite. If you don't particularly care about height off of the floor (six - eight inches), mine is great and it was $1.50. (I bought four.) It is a little heavy but if Summer camp isn't car camping I don't know what is. The military version I have also doesn't fold it is a takedown version with four STEEL side bars that assemble for each side frame and five W shaped supports that insert from underneath into the side bars - so no bar is immediately under the material to adjust your body around. It also gives more headroom under a mosquito net, if you use the standard mil-surplus mosquito net kit. I do like to still use my camp pad - Therm-a-rest 3/4 Backpacker (from the early/mid eighties) on the cot - if you're car camping anyway make the most of it! Most of my "experienced"(ten or more years older than me) Scouters are using something that looks like something you might use as a guest bed with a four inch mattress, aluminum frame, folds in half and has foot long legs on each corner of each half frame - if they can get it wherever we go without carrying it, it is their "camp" bed of choice. I have no idea where to get these though. The main things are, will it support your weight, will it creak every time you move, can you position the legs if your tent is on a pallet instead of a pad?

In a perfect world with well trained, age and rank diverse, committed Scouts(but WHO trained them) I suppose you could get by with Adults in the positions of: IH, COR, CC, and SM. And then the Scouts could be doing all of the rest of the committee jobs. Here one would then have to have one of the aforementioned adults at least as a signer on the banking account. It wouldn't be any more possible to drop responsibilities than with some of the adults, but I would be leery of it until I saw(and knew) the Scouts in question. If I tried it I would probably think of each Scout doing the job would have the outgoing Scout mentoring him in all phases of it, in a continuous cycle. So that there would always be the outgoing and incoming position holder working together, so one would actually have a double tenure in each position one undertook.

I have a one side scrubby/one side net "Washcloth" I put soap scraps in and keep it in a plastic baggy for times when we have showers available -i.e. Scout Camp. It's not LNT enough for backpacking (for me) but it's great at established sites with facilities. And at 97cents at Wally Mart it's an affordable way to keep those scraps at home from going to waste. You would just be starting out with an almost full "Washcloth". If your pack doesn't get out enough to places where they would need (or take) showers they could donate to the associated Troop(if any).(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

I have a CDL with air brake endorsement and have formerly driven Silver Eagles and the big square "city bus" varieties as well as "Blue Birds" - (similar to a School bus but in military, espc. Air Force usage) and would use a bus on some trips if we had one - BUT most of the places we go locally you can't get a bus back into - much less out of. Cost are higher than you probably have anticipated and if you aren't a "moneyed" group may quickly be prohibitive. I would NOT want to pull a trailer behind a 44 pax bus - but that's me. I think the Diesel Suburban (4WD preferred)(I'd prefer a Turbo/waste-gated arrangement) route is the way to go if you pull a trailer. A high capacity van, if additional trailer capable vehicle/s are going, would be a plus - but the CDL card does come into play. It may work now, but will you always have someone who has or is willing to get(and keep) a CDL AND go on every trip? I also wouldn't prefer to pull a 5-6000 lb trailer behind an 16/18 pax Van. For us right now; a 16/18 pax van and a 8 pax Suburban would be a great mix. I'd drive the Van and hope a Trailering knowledgeable parent was along for the trip OR I'd pull the trailer with the Suburban and enough parents would have to volunteer to make up the rest of the lift. Or for some of our Service slash community events we would only need the Van OR the Suburban.

Here's my perspective. I just had my first outing, ever, with more than three adults - we had five on this one. It was awesome! In the past I have wondered if the other adult was, in fact, going to show up or if the outing was going to cancel - this is especially nerve-wracking when they show up late. On this one I had parents calling me to ensure they KNEW what time to be there. In the past with either two or three adults I always wondered what to do if someone got hurt. Leave one adult with the injured Scout - going to the hospital or home? Leave one adult with the group while the other takes the injured out? If two adults and one of the adults went down but you needed two cars to transport the group, then what?(Realizing that it would be preferred to have to adults in each vehicle) Four adults is the minimum for practicality if you can "lift" all of your Scouts in two vehicles, in my view. I think it's a little weird to have more adults than Scouts but, if they didn't get in the boys way - so the boys could do their Scouting - then I wouldn't have an issue if the parents wanted to have multiple patrols of their own. I think that would be a hugely better problem than the Baby Sitter of America parents who drop and run and still gripe about the costs we ask them to cover (which from what I've read in other threads is very low). In practice, I would like to see in a Troop(including troop sourced Venturing crew): IH COR CC Equipment Chair(QM) Treasurer Advancement Chair Camping/Travel Chair Scoutmaster(SM) One Asst. SM/ Venturing Advisor per Patrol/ Venturing crew. with parents or an older Scout to take on additional duties such as Popcorn Kernel. Of the above, only the first three, the SM and Treasurer are mandatory in this area because you need an adult to work with the bank and a joint account, and I prefer to have an adult working the Advancement chair - possibly supervising a Scout but not just turning that over to the Scouts especially not on a six month turnover basis. The CC could double hat on this if he was a "fit" for the job and cared to do so. So for me this is the minimum in a perfect world. As long as the adults realize they are camping near but aren't interfering with the Scouts and the Scouts avoid them then I don't see a reason for a maximum number of adults other than land use issues. If you have Scouts who are capable they should be able to do everything else.

scoutmomma and GW, I haven't run into the problem of mismatched Swithchback legs either. Our guys stuff them in those little cargo pockets when they take them off. Also I may be wrong but I didn't think you could put two left legs on the shorts, in this area they are labeled L and R on each legs zipper tag and the zipper is directional. We'd have to put one leg on inside out to do that.

I don't know about that Merlyn, Many religious adherents would claim that their religion is working for everyone - but that those who aren't adherents of their religion (or at least of "a" religion)were simply ending up on the wrong end of the spectrum of outcomes by not participating. Thus many religions do "work" for everyone, they just might not provide the desired outcome by non-adherents for non-adherents. I like an open mind too, my faith doesn't require that I not evaluate evidence - where it exists. An old Christian comedy ensemble I recall as Isaac Air Freight had a bit I still enjoy, just wish I could get the recording or remember more of it: paraphrased... "(Military Cadence) Left, Right, Left, Right, (Jody Cadence) I know what I believe and believe what I know, 'Cause the Sergeant here done told me so, thinking for yourself only jumbles your mind, but, I'd rather be a branch from the true vine, (dramatically) Oh yeeaah." The whole thing was a bit about simply buying into religion without thinking about what you were being sold - and whether you had to simply groupthink religion or not. Point being that you don't. But try getting past a peer review board if your ideas aren't within scientific orthodoxy even if your methodology is flawless. Talk about groupthink... peer review would be great if ideas were truly examined but they are in reality put to the orthodox examination of the field wherein the theory lies. The inertia may eventually be overcome by the superior idea but, wow. So one puts faith where they will, in a worldview categorized as a Religion or Science or other Humanistic thought. For those who place their faith in religion they may be wrong - but they don't think so and neither do those who place their faith in science. The outcome will be proven after we are gone - either way. I know that I know the answer but many others can claim the same, when I can be convinced away - I am open to the argument - but just don't (most likely like you)belive that will happen.

I also concur, no one wins, this will be settled by the last post (the one who is there last writes the history). However, scoutingagain said "I don't believe it's the scientists going into Churches asking to be allowed to present their point of view as an alternative valid faith or religion." True, but science is in the schools(where it does in fact have a place) but it does not the right to sell itself as fact while displacing other worldviews as myth. When it is used in it's proper context is does provide ways to, as Merlyn stated: "1) find the best answer (or answers) that explains current observations; 2) make predictions, which hopefully are accurate (if not, that's a strike against it as "best answer") 3) refine the current crop of best answers to get answers that are more accurate and/or more complete." However this tool doesn't usually provide the kind of answers a worldview usually calls for... and in the worldview market can often be said to be the wrong tool just as faith is the wrong tool for Scientific inquiry.

And this uniform is I suppose going to be LESS militaristic in appearance with the green and tan motif? Not that I really have any problem with that, but I am covering my ears in anticipation of the howls of those who do...

Barry, you may be right. That may be a stumbling block for me. I can only recognize it and work on it. On the other hand it is also the character and included responsibility factor I am looking for, not simply # of Eagles produced whether they "just met the requirements" or were recognized "as Eagles". And I'd much rather have the latter. Eagle is only a metric for those who develop that far - and a parental pressure on the program. As to the JASM in question, I have an ASM who only shows up when work doesn't interfere with him also - same rules apply - glad to see you here! I just wish either of them would show up more often and more regularly. And we are actively trying to place your other numbered steps into production rather than just talking about them.(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

Sitting by the side of the lake, fishing, studiously ignoring "NOT!" the swamping exercises with the canoes. The Super New Equipment Scout trying to light the log (no tinder) with his new "swedish fire steel" or other like implement.

I'd have to check with our current Goat Science expert but I think I remember her saying that you can learn a lot about the health of a herd by doing some goat entrails reading. Doesn't really help me understand why I'm here, how I came to be here and whether or not my life has a purpose other than my own personal fulfillment,(the basic but no only questions involved in creating ones worldview), but it is scientific. I could be wrong but even though forensic science can tell us after the fact how something happened, it cannot always tell us why something happened. Often it takes testimonial evidence to find out why - and testimonial evidence is not really within the realm of Scientific endeavor. So if religion works for some folks in answering the questions they're asking why does the Scientific crowd have such a backlash against them unless it is to win them over to their worldview/religion? And then deny that they are adherents to a religion?