BadenP

Well the group is coed all the way through, there are no uniforms, more emphasis on sports and fun activities, hmmm isn't this what we on this forum have been debating all these years that the BSA had to do to increase our numbers? I agree with other posters that this group seems more fluff than substance, unfortunately that what seems to attract more of todays youth, less structure and more fun. One plus for the parents is that they don't have to hear complaints from their daughters that the boy scouts is more fun than the girl scouts. We will see if this pans out but it smacks too much of the coed Campfire program, time will tell. By the way to the poster who asked about the term scout being trademarked, the word scout or scouts alone can not be trademarked and can be used freely.

John We all understand the costs of running a scout camp, it ain't cheap. So using your logic we should close down all scout camps and allow the councils to be more fiscally sound, and while we are at it lets close down all the High Adventure Camps cuz they are way to expensive to run and maintain, and with the lawsuits against scouts starting fires or doing other damage in our parks so lets just cut out the outdoor segment of scouting all together. What kind of scouting program does that leave? The truth of the matter is that most scout camps are not run by adequately trained personnel, one week at National Camp School does NOT make you a qualified camp manager. Most councils do a piss poor job in planning out capital and allocating resources to maintain and develop their camps properly. Why, because many scout camps are allowed to stand idle and rot most of the year, and then its a last minute surge to get it ready for the summer, cutting corners to get it in a barely operable state. Councils really aren't the best ones to be managing camps in the first place, it should be done by experts with a lot of experience. We all watched as the SE at my former council let our camp, for over 75 years, fall apart because he was advised to sell it to get out of debt, by the council VP of Finance, to developers instead of updating the facility. These guys advised all of us volunteers that they would be buying another camp, a bigger and better one, it never happened. Three years later the council was gone, absorbed into another. So I guess the question becomes who should really own and run a scout camp?

This issue was discussed on another thread a couple of months ago in great detail. I am pretty sure this is a mandate coming down from National as part of the new reorganization plan of Mazzuca. With the ever increasing numbers of lawsuits filed against the BSA for neglience and safety issues, like the troop that started that fire in a National park, those killed by lightning at the Jambo as well as other events, etc. I think National feels these types of occurences will significantly decrease, as will the lawsuits, if all volunteers are properly and fully trained. Look for new standards in the exsisting training policies and curriculum as well.

Look at the Republicans flip flop on the party's morals stand with this embarassing event. If the woman can't even get her own children to accept her values how can she expect the country to follow her lead. The Republican party is teetering at best and Palin will cost McCain the election in a big way. Maybe Sarah should have been teaching her promiscious daughter about birth control instead, at least there would not be an innocent child involved. Can you say hypocrite? Lets see how the geritol crowd at the convention try to shove this issue under the table. Thank you Ms. Palin for giving this election to Obama, lol.

Well here is the latest comment on Palin that appeared in a well known talk show. "With the selection of Sarah Palin as the Republican VP candidate McCain has all but guaranteed his losing the race to be President." There you go all you red neck conservatives chew on that, lol. Oh by the way this comment was made by a prominent McCain supporter, can you guess who? Let's all say it together now, President Obama.

Thank you Calico for your excellent legal summation. Scout and talen you two should move to Richmond, VA I think you both would feel quite at home among your own kind of thinkers. It has been over 140 years ago and you two still think the way you do, tsk, tsk, tsk. As far as slavery I was talking about what was going on in our country that we had control over, not debating slavery over time in the rest of the world. You know Scout if this was the 1860's you would be branded a traitor and shot for your comments, lucky for you most of us are much more enlightened than yourself.

Scout I take it you are a dyed in the wool southern boy. You are incorrect about European involvement, the British and French wanted to see America split for more reasons than just cotton, if you want to deny it go right ahead but you are historically WRONG. As far as Lincoln leaving the south alone, what about that southern abomnination of slavery that institution sir was a crime against all humanity and had no place in the land of the free. How many slaves were killed or maimed in order to make their southern masters rich Scout? Your sense of history and injustice is not only innaccurate it presents a very disturbing mindset to hold in todays world. When I was in Richmond, VA and visited the Museum of the Confederacy I was amazed when the curator told our tour group that the south really did not lose the Civil War. A history professor in the group quickly corrected him, relating the details of how the south's infrastructure agricultural, societal, and industrial were totally destroyed by the war, to which the curator replied, "I suppose it all depends on how you look at it sir." So you see Scout you can deny any and all the historical evidence you like but it still does not change the truth of what actually happened.

You know it is easy to look back at something that happened over 140 years ago and criticize, the fact is Gold Winger you were not there and really have little credibility in critizing Lincoln because you read one book written by another naysayer as yourself. The fact is that the southern states seceding was a violation of Constitutional law. If you took the time to read other more credible books about that time period you would understand that. The motivation given to the south by the British who wanted to see a war break out so they could have access to cheap cotton for their massive textile industry, and get another foothold in America if the south won the war, help run the Union blockade, and cause general chaos in our country. These promises that Davis was to find out were never to materialize. You see GW the Civil War was not a domestic war but one of international involvement, Lincoln was dealing with other countries who had a vested interst in the south winning and undermining the USA. In addition all these promises of aid to Jefferson Davis by these powers, assurances by them that the south would win the war spurred them into a war they were not ready to fight and could not win. Lincoln I think as do most historians did the best job he could given the circumstances of the time and the potential threats to America's stability. So before you go on another witchhunt checkout the facts from more than one slanted side. Your critique of Lincoln is unwarranted, innaccurate, and outright UnAmerican.

For the first time in a long time I agree with F-Scouter 100% not only is she abandoning her baby but that baby has special medical needs. Gold Winger per usual your remarks were not only callous and thoughtless but were an insult to women, and showed once again your lack of understanding the situation at hand.

Gee Gold didn't know you were a psychologist too, lol. The only one with issues here is you my friend adding your barrage of nonsensical posts, acting like an expert about everything including scouting. Maybe you should check your own motives with your craving for constant attention in this forum by posting on every thread multiple times. At least Bob can quote references to support his ideas, you sir do not have a clue what you are talking about most of the time. So say what you want but IMHO you are a complete waste of my time. By the way the example I gave was to show how the knot thing can get carried to the extreme, most scouters do not act like that, most are humble caring individuals who love scouting. How many knots do you have Gold, or are you even a true scouter?

GW you got it wrong dude, I am not talking about scouters with three or four knots I am talking about people who overdo. There is a guy at my RT who wears 16-20 knots on every one of his uniforms, half of them are youth knots, religious award both youth and adult. He never got eagle as he tells it but he wears the knot, he wears knots he bought on ebay that are not even official BSA. He is always in your face about the right way to do things, yet his troop is down to 6 boys who are mostly inactive. However he gives all a good laugh and no one takes him seriously. This guy wears so many other patches that you can't even see the front of his shirt, but he loves to tell tall tales how he saved his troop from a bad SM, was asked by council to help with a crisis etc, etc. Now he is not a typical scouter but rather the extreme end of the scale. The other scouters who like to wear a lot of fruit salad I noticed have scaled back to a more realistic look for fear of being compared to the crackpot.

GW, most of the good scouters are fully trained or their units would flounder, many of them choose not to wear the knots they have earned for a variety of reasons, they are modest about their accomplishments, don't want to make it a competition with other scouters or even with the boys and their earning ranks, etc. If they do wear them they do so with some class by not overdoing it., and not lording them over others. The question comes down to one thing, are you in it for the boys or for your own glorification. Some scouters use their knots to justify calling themselves EXPERTS in the scouting program, right Bob. Ok "Shields Up!"

The real measure of a scouter is how well their unit is running, the quality program they are giving, and how their kids respond to their example, in other words they are in it for the kids and not themselves, they want to see their kids succeed not how much fruit salad they can fit on their uniform. A person who wears an overabundance of knots on their uniforms are just begging for attention, look at me, where are all your knots. Most of these type of scouters love to tell other scouters what they are doing wrong, act like uniform police, and are constantly looking for new ways to be recognized by the BSA because most of them have very unsatisfying jobs and lives.

No Rooster what definitely is a oxymoron is "an intelligent group of conservatives." So lets elect a senile old man to be president who thinks our economy is in great shape and can't even remember how many houses he owns and it really says a lot about the rationality of his supporters. It is time to put the elephant out of its misery, I hope you can read between the lines Rooster.

Just for the record Bob I have 25 years as a volunteer leader including WL, CM, ASM, SM, Advisor, CC, COR, UC, Council Commisioner,and as you constantly bring up 5 years as a DE and Sr. DE is that enuf experience for you bucko? So I do have some background in scouting on which I can rely.

I have never claimed to be a scouting expert either Bob, I just don't criticize others if a method someone is using is working for their unit because it didn't come out of a scout resource as long as it is line with the BSA program. If the laws of the land are subject to constant review and reinterpretation by the courts what makes you think that the same policies should not apply to BSA resources. A scout unit is a living entity not a stagnant automoton. My last post was not an attack Bob just a request that you try to understand what Beavah was saying, that the resources are there to help guide our programs but sometimes even they don't have all the answers. That's why this forum exsists so scouters can exchange ideas about situations they have encountered and is not in any book.

Scout First of all ethnocentrism is a commonly used word in anthropology and sociology it is not meant as an insult, rather it is a way certain people perceive and interpret the world around them. Secondly, I was raised a Roman Catholic most of my life and left it during my graduate studies in theology where I learned just how many doctrines of the Catholic Church were just not true, twisted truths, and had no basis in scripture. I chose to leave the Catholic faith and to those who are loyal to it, fine by me, just don't try to pull that nonsense of it being the only true church created by Christ and leading to eternal salvation, because that is nothing more than a false teaching and outright lie, and any other Christian would have to agree. If you want to brand me anti Catholic fine but a religious bigot is just not true, before you accuse understand the meaning of your insult Scout.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

OGE Sorry but you are incorrect 1)the Roman Catholic Church is not directly decended from Jesus because Jesus did not establish a Church with clergy, Jesus nevered referred to Peter as POPE, 2) The Roman Catholic Church is a breakaway denomination from the Eastern catholic (universal) Church, around 1054 when the patriarch of Rome decided he was best suited to lead and formed the Roman Catholic Church with all the trappings and hierarchy you see today.3) There is no direct decendancy of the papal line from Peter because Peter never referred to himself or by anyone else with that title, and in Church history with the Avignon and Pisa popes ruling simultaneously with the corrupt Roman pope any possibility of a direct line was lost. You like all catholics, myself included, were brainwashed with this poppycock created by the Catholic Church to maintain control through fear of their followers. If you read the unbiased historical accounts you would see for yourself instead of blindly following false doctrines, I suggest the book The History of Christianity for a start.

Packsaddle you are so right so here is my take. As young adults we tend to be more liberal seeing an infinite array of possibilities and change for the future, then as we get to our 40's to 50's we start to feel the world is passing us by and changing too fast, so we try to hold on to pieces of our past in which we feel a sense of belonging and safety, becoming much more conservative in our views whether you are Democrat or Republican. Obama scares many older Americans because he wants to make drastic changes in our government and these older people want to hold on to the way things are. McCain gives older Americans more a sense of security and holding on to the past as does Lieberman which IMHO was one of the main reasons Gore lost against Bush . I think the McCain/ Lieberman alliance shows these ideologies go much deeper than any political party affiliations.

Hey Bob since you like to quote scripture I think this one's perfect for you. "Stop judging others and you will not be judged. For others will treat you as you treat them."- MT 7:1,2. Kinda says it all doesn't it Bob. Instead of attacking Beavah listen to what he is trying to say to you, there are some real pearls of wisdom. If you want to be respected treat others with that same respect. Guidelines or rules and even laws can be interpreted in different ways, we need first to find our commonalities and then work through the differences.

Scout what you preach is also called ethnocentrism, comparing all other cultures to your own and assuming yours is the superior one. It is the same mentality that drove many European and American cultures feeling perfectly justified in wiping out the indigenous peoples of N. & S. America, Africa, Asia, Oceania, etc. All your theory does is justify bigotry, racial superiority, and religious intolerance and none of that can ever be justified . Not to mention it is just plain "UnChristian". When the Catholic Church states that all other Christian denominations are deficent, and their ordinations and sacraments are invalid, and that the Catholic church is the only true religion leading to eternal salvation, all of that is nothing more than religious bigotry, and is just not true morally,theologically, or ethically. Oh in the Nicene Creed Scout the word catholic was in lower case and it meant universal, not a particular denomination.

Scout, your sources are very clear, you have to count the 1 billion Roman Catholics for your statement to be true, so the 2 billion you quote is not accurate and the current Roman Catholic Pope has declared that all other Christian denominations are defective, the ordinations of their clergy and the sacraments given are invalid. His comments are considered dogma by the Catholic Church going all the way back to the Reformation. To top that most evangelicals and pentecostals do not count Catholics as Christians. So you see you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Sorry packsaddle but your numbers are faulty worldwide Christianity comes in a distant fourth after Buddism, Hinduism, and Muslim It is also faulty to say America is based on the Judeo Christian ethic because the only Judaism is what the christian church accepted and adopted from the Old Testament in the Christian Bible, the 10 Commandments for example which Judaism later expanded into 365 rules so you see there is truly only a Northern European Christian tradition in the founding of our nation, the Jews had very little to do with it. Keep your historical references accurate.

McCain will probably pick someone older than he is so he can be the youthful candidate, but seriously can we afford to elect a man who can't even remember how many houses he owns and states that "he will have his staff get back to them." Is that the kind of man you want as president? He has played his POW card too many times, yes I respect his military record but that was over 40 years ago America needs a forward modern thinker for the new world of the 21st century.

I am going to have a good laugh when all you staunch Republican conservatives are crying the blues when McCain picks his close buddy Joe Lieberman as his VP. All the so called experts are saying he is McCains first choice, what a convention that will be, lol.