Jump to content

NJCubScouter

Moderators
  • Content Count

    7405
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    70

Everything posted by NJCubScouter

  1. FatOldGuy asks me: NJCubScouter, since BSA requires an adult woman along on any excursion involving girls, do you think that all trips with boys should require a heterosexual man? I'll ignore the premise about what leaders must be along on a trip when girls are present, as I don't think it has anything to do with the question. As to whether I think all trips with boys should require a heterosexual man... well, actually there is no such requirement now, nor is there any guarantee that it always occurs. (I would venture a guess that it almost always does.) The BSA policy expels open
  2. I'm always amazed that anyone thinks that it is possible to prove that God, god, gods or any deity exist, OR do not exist. There's no proof either way. It's a matter of "faith," right? We all believe what we choose. I also don't understand why it's such a big deal. As I believe it was Benjamin Franklin (a Deist who disclaimed any belief in the divinity of Christ), who said (something like), we will all find out in our own time what is correct and what is not -- though not until we've passed on. And, I notice that people keeping asking Merlyn to explain things. I don't see why that i
  3. This does not necessarily sound like a "problem." I personally think it MAY become a problem if dad and/or don't decide after a few campouts that the best place for the son is in a tent with another boy(s). When I think back on my Scouting experience, I was in tents with other boys from the beginning. I seem to recall a few times in a tent with my father but no consistent pattern. I also seem to recall that after the age of 15 or 16 I generally stayed in a small tent by myself except at summer camp. I would be curious as to whether this father and son went on Cub Scout campouts. My s
  4. Red Feather says: Each of us keeps our own peace. I think that is a really good concept. It would be a better world if people could respect the right of others to keep their own peace.
  5. Packsaddle: I'm listening. I thought your post was excellent. I agreed with RedFeather's also. (Of course I am sure this does not come as a big shock.)
  6. If you were to look down the list of old threads in the "Open Discussion" topic, and maybe also in this topic, you would find a number of threads in which people have discussed situations in which other Scouters have allegedly (note that word) acted unreasonably, unfairly, vindictively, nepotistically (I may have made that word up) unsafely, perhaps corruptly (though I do not recall reading of actual "bribes"), and in all sorts of other undesirable and sometimes prohibited ways. The initial question or scenario is often followed by a series of responses in which some other forum members try t
  7. This was never a problem with my pack while I was assistant cubmaster, as we realized the position we would be putting everybody in if the paperwork was delayed. Everybody = The boy who is not a registered member of Scouting when he and his parents think he is; the parents who (as dsteele points out) are paying for a service; the leaders who, as we realized, would be putting ourselves in a difficult position (perhaps personal liability) if a boy were injured at a meeting or den trip or whatever and it turned out that the boy was officially unregistered because his form was sitting in the cubm
  8. I think something has gotten a bit lost in translation here. Neither my pack nor anyone in it chose the site. This was a council event, each district having the camp to itself for one weekend. I made that clear in the other thread, from which a portion of my post was extracted. I am sure sctmom did not mean to do it, but from my words as they appear in this thread it WOULD appear as if this was a pack event. It was not. As for why the council chose to have the event in this camp... well, it's the council's camp. The council has two full-fledged camps (not counting a high adventure b
  9. It's really not relevant who said what about the resolution -- and that includes the reporter who wrote the newspaper article and the headline-writer who stuck the word "condemn" in there. What is relevant is what the resolution said, that's why I asked about the actual text. Thanks to Merlyn for providing it. Aside from a few little factual issues that are arguably mis-stated, obviously I agree with the sentiment of the California resolution as far as sexual orientation is concerned. I wish the BSA would do as they suggest. As far as atheism, I don't think there is anything wrong in
  10. I'd be curious to see the actual resolution, which I could not find on the Internet and is not linked-to in this article. The headline says "condemns" and the first paragraph of the story says "criticizes" but later when it makes a quick reference to what the resolution actually says, it sounds a lot "milder" than that. It never actually quotes any language that sounds like a condemnation or even criticism. The only reference is that it asks the BSA to change it policy -- something that several BSA councils have already done. However, I am sure everybody will just focus on the "conde
  11. bsat4jb, my favorite is the Marxist-rhetoric-spouting feudal peasant. "'Elp! I'm bein' oppressed!"
  12. MaineScouter, you are welcome in New Jersey any time. You said you are a "YPT administrator." What does that position do? Do you schedule YP sessions? Do you supervise the trainers? Collect the fees and paperwork afterward? Or other things? And, are you "a" YPT administrator, or "THE" YPT administrator for the whole district? Depending on the answers, is it possible that the best place for you is as a member of the District Training Committee? I do not know, however, if being a member of a district-level (or council-level) committee like that is a "registered" position in an
  13. OGE, how does "Deism" come into the discussion. I thought you were discussing atheism, which is the belief that there is no deity. Deism involves belief in a "creator" but one who is not necessarily currently "active in the affairs of man." (To put it one way.) Or maybe I misunderstood what you meant.
  14. Hey, no offense meant there, sctmom. What I was mainly referring to there were a few instances where the person who really was not having a great time was the younger sister. These were girls 4, 5, 6 years old. It seems to me that there was one very young boy there at one time, maybe 2 or 3 years old. It was my opinion that the situation really was not very suitable for them, but I never said anything. Evidently their parents agreed, because the young children did not come back the next time, and invariably it seemed to be Mom who chose to stay home with the little sister. In each c
  15. Wallace, try to ask something more difficult next time so we can disagree.
  16. I did not know that OGE, but according to this: http://www.usscouts.org/usscouts/eagle/eaglejudges.html yes he is. It also lists Rehnquist, Scalia and Kennedy as having been Scouts but not Eagle Scouts. Sort of interesting then that these latter three were among the five-member majority that upheld the BSA's policy in the Dale case while Breyer, the Eagle Scout, was one of the four dissenters.
  17. TwoCubDad, you are absolutely right about Clinton, the whole time he was president I kept hearing from the "right" about how "liberal" he was and wondered where all the liberalism in his policies was hiding. In addition to what you mentioned, don't forget the whole NAFTA/GATT/free trade thing. That was a conservative, business-oriented policy that Clinton not only supported, but twisted arms in Congress in order to get a majority vote. Al Gore went on TV to debate Ross Perot (gosh that seems like another century; oops, I guess it was.) In contrast, when he was trying to advocate a "libera
  18. I have said a number of times that this whole thing is really about religion (and religious politics) and as times goes on I see more and more confirmation that I am correct. Rooster and Ed Mori and others, in various threads, do not deny this? How could they? In light of the fact that old social consensus against homosexuality is slowly fading away, and at present is maybe half-here and half-gone, all that is left is religion as a basis for the BSA's policy. Now, if it were all religions that would be one thing, but it isn't. One group of religions and denominations still sticks to the o
  19. OGE, sometime I could expound on the theory of "political realignment" that I learned about in college, which is really what you are talking about. There have been several elections (or series of elections) in our history that are considered by political scientists to be "realignments." One was 1932 in which FDR put together what came to be known as the Roosevelt Coalition -- which included Roman Catholics (resulting in part from the fact that the Democrats had nominated the first Roman Catholic for president, Al Smith, 4 years earlier.) Also included were many blacks, who previously had be
  20. I've also noticed, over the years, that the close relatives of persons who have committed serious crimes often have a different perspective than the rest of society on the actions of their mother, father, child or whoever. Mom may be a murderer, but she's still mom. (In this case technically a felony-murderer, she didn't pull the trigger nor did the government prove she knew her fellow robbers intended to shoot anyone, but she was still convicted of murder because she knowingly participated in the robbery in which the officers and guard were killed. I remember all this very vividly, I was a
  21. Oh, man, I can't believe I did that again. My first line should say, I do NOT agree. NOT. I have not had a personality transplant. One of these days I will get around to writing to the good folk who moderate this forum and try to get some help in figuring why everybody else can edit their posts except me. I noticed it the first time I tried to edit after the 3 or 4 month "break" that I took from this forum in the spring/early summer.
  22. ItsTrailDay says: I want to put aside for a moment how some religions do not approve of the gay lifestyle. I think the biggest problem with it is the stereotypical promiscuity. This immoral behavior is what I do not want BSA to condone by allowing openly gay (avowed) leaders. I do agree that "stereotypical promiscuity" justifies the policy. As you say, it is "stereotypical." I don't think policy should be based on stereotypes. It should be based on individuals and their individual merits or demerits, not on what "group" they are a member of -- unless it is a "group" whose members
  23. So, the self-absorbed comments of one college student translates into "Narcissism of the Left?" The entire "Left"? And who is this "Left," anyway? It's tough keeping track these days.
  24. MaineScouter, although you say you checked with your UC, I just want to second Bob's suggestion that you check with the District Executive or other professional in your council office assigned to your district. (My district usually seems to have a District Director but in practice it is the same.) A UC does not necessarily know any more than you (or I) about what position would be appropriate for you at the council level, and how to get there, because that is really not part of the UC's job. (No offense to present or former UC's. There are UC's that WOULD know, but I guess it's like asking
  25. I didn't necessarily mean to start a debate on gays in the military. I suppose it is fairly obvious that I agree with TwoCubDad's opinion and OGE's (apparent) opinion. I think it is really much more analagous to the racial integration of the military than it is to gender equality in the military (and by the way officially women are still excluded from "combat" by law, but the definition of "combat" has been modified so they really are in combat, as became clear in Op. Iraqi Freedom and in some earlier operations like the one where we got Noriega in Panama.) Rooster, it is very nice fo
×
×
  • Create New...