Scoutfish

My .02 for what it's worth. I used to be on a FD with a water rescue sqaud. Part of the requirement was that you had to be able to swim. No brainer right? But we always had on life jackets and helmets which also had flotation. We weren't going to need to swim were we? We'd just float. Except that one time an averahe ordinary everyday wave flipped our AVON ( semi ridgid inflatable hull boat) over in 8 foot of water and one of our crew members jacket was yanked off. Still not sure why it happened. The wave wasn't specail or diferent than any other. But sometimes stuff just happens even when you are prepared. Another requirement was to be a certified Emergency Medical Technition. Realistically, we just grabbed victims and ran back to shore, with little time or chance for medical attenton, but sometimes, your emergencies are not on a sinking boat or drowning person. Don't believe me, ask a lady who gave birth in the intracoastal waterway on a pontoon boat. Now, I have lived near the coast all my life, I was taught to swim by my father by being pushed off a dock at the Coast Guard sta. Althoug I wouldn't recomend it, I will tell you I learned to swim in around 20 seconds or so. Been doing it ever since. I have jumoped off dock and boats to grab a small child that was just too close and without enough supervison by their parents. Knowing how to swim extended their life. But swimming isn't just for pools and lakes. Where I live, I can cross up to 35 creeks in a single day that are at least 12 foot across and 8 feet or deeper. Never know when you might get run off the road into a creek. Now, I don't personally switch from back stroke to breast stroke or doggie paddel while swimming, but I swim none the less. And somehow, I cannot float on my back. My legs just sink down. Yeah, I'm a freak of sorts I suppose. LOL! But I can survival float and I can stay above water while conscious. I can tread water for quite a while too. I can hike. I can hike in the summer, the winter, uphill down hill. I can hike in the rain too. But I can't hike underwater!(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

I'm confused. The first article says: So he is already an Eagle. No? But the second article says: So I have a few questions. Is he or is he not an Eagle? Was this really his Eagle project or just misunderstanding by the article writer? Did he make Eagle ( as he is refered to) before even finishing his Eagle project? Now,I'm not a BOY scouter. I'm just a CUB scouter. I do not know every single rule for Scouting...but this doesn't seem like a community project to me. Granted, a statue may be asthetically pleasing to look at in the park, but serves no purpose than any other statue....recognition. Recognizing what scouts do or COULD possibly do is not comunity service. I could talk all day long about what others DID or what I COULD do for charity, but at the end of the day, it's just talk.Noth98ing more or less. In my own opinion, while a cool glimps of showing that a scout can do amazing things when determined..It also looks like training for a future DE who might be all about selling popcorn and raising money for a council - more than anything else.

Great point Lisa! I train all new guys at my company. I found out that sometimes, somethings are easier learned if I just let the guys screw up. Sometimes we learn better from our mistakes than somebody just telling us.

Brent, that's actually a great idea! You are setting te terms for holding, maintaining, and getting credit for aPOR, and without ignoring any given definition ( and argument) of active. Sounds like you have a job description for a POR.

Wow! Talk about arrogant: Read again! Every reference he made was a direct QUESTION to you about your position.... NOT a statement!!! But since you brought it up - YOU , o0f all people, ASSUMJED that I did not understand you only because I didn't agree with your non specific and consequently - incorrect as you stated only 3 examples as to what you called "everybody" - answer. See, we can all carry the same attitude you do, but all that does is have us argue about miniscule details that have no pertinance to the subject matter! Seems like when you are done being snide, rude and attacking others on a personal level...you actualy have nothing to argue concerning the subject matter except your emotions. Luckily, that too is also protected under the US Constitution under freedom of speach. Now, most people don't understand that right as they should.....but that's another arguement for another day!(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

You missed my point. I understood you. As for a point, you didn't have one. You might have almost sorta thought you had one, but you didn't. As my answer..I was just dishing out your kind of responce: Ultra specific to the microscopic detail - you said everybody, yet did not give any worthy or remotely corect answer, Now, as for an athiest's opinion of a chaplin or any other religious figure...ell big surprise at that outcome. No more surprising than what a Chevy fan thinks of Toyota in NASCAR! Now, If it was the persuasion of my religion to go to confession, and as a military person, there was no chaplin, pracher, father, rabbi or whoever...then I woud be denied my religious freedoms due to the nature of my employment b y the US government. And we both know that the US Constitution just frowns on that! You are kidding right? A religios figurehead for people who just don't believe? I completely understand why n oibody is moving forward on such a complete wste of money!

Well, the government is not paying for me to have a chaplin. They have yet to send one to my house or let me just drive on any bases to recieve that chaplins services. So I am not part of everyone. I can pretty much assume you are not military or you would understand the need for, even if you didn't use those services. Either way, the government isn't providing you one either. Nor for my neighbors or anybody else on my block for that matter. Now, my dad was in theUnited States Coast Guard for 22 years 3 months. I had 5 uncles who served in the USCG, USMC, USA and USN. 4 cousins who served and are still serving in te USA, USMC, USCG , and USAR. I have one brother in law who served in the Army. Not a single one of them ever complained about being forced to pray, go see a chaplin, or be forced to confess sins, take part in Mass or communion. Not a single one of them even had to be actively religious. So, it seems the government provided a service to only those who FREELY CHOSE to participate in said activity. And the government chose to offere it for logistical reasons: It's hard to go to church or see a chaplin or preacher if you are going to battle in less than 5 minutes - and you happen to be on the other side of the world fighting for freedom that ALLOWS people to choose to not be religious or PRACTICE religion without OTHERS INTERFERING as the US CONSTITUTION GARANTEES! And if the government denied that service..It would be preventing United States citizens from practicing their religious freedoms as garanteed under the US Constitutuion!!!!! So your answer is no good, not valid, incorrect! JUST FLAT OUT WRONG! I'm still waiting!(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

By that,. I mean, I signed my son up because of the scouting stuff. I registered as a member because of the scouting stuff. I do not have intentions of pushing my personal views or blocking others personal views. The only personal views I imagine I will ever hear of or be concerened with will be wether to set up a tent in this spot or over there in that spot, and what to cook for dinner.

I personally don't care if a leader is gay. Why? My pack doesn't teach heterosexual scouting. We don't teach gay scouting. Matter of fact, we leave sex out of our program completely! We don't teach democratic scouting. We don't teach republican scouting. We don't teach vegan scouting . We don't teach carnivorus scouting. We just teach scouting just as it is presented in our scout books and (as far as we know) by BSA's policies and guidelines. So If a gay person was to teach just plain old scouting.. I wouldn't have an issue with it. I could be wrong..but is there a gay lean or slant on scouting? But then, what about the guy who is in the closet. Suppose he has been a CM for 9 years and everybody thinks he does a fantastic stand up job. Has one of the highest retention and crossover rates. His pack has the most family and community involvement. His pack always sells the most popcorn and participates in the most community service projects. If he suddenly comes out of the closet...does all his great accomplishmenst dissapear because we now know he's gay? Now, if he wanted to make the program or den/pack meetings about being gay...I'd definantly have an issue. But I'd also have an issue if we started making our den/pack meetings about heterosexual activity or any sexual activity at all! So, if scout meetings are about scouting..I don't care if they are gay, straight, Wiccan, Vegan, from Venus or works as a street mime! I am not predjudiced, racist, or bigoted. But this is BSA's program. It was what it was when I signed up. If I don't like it, I can leave. Nobody is making or forcing me to be active or my son either. I personally don't agree with that particular policy, but that policy wouldn't make a difference as far as my son is concerned either.

- Merlyn_LeRoy Who is everyone? Can you cite specific examples? Is the government requiring soldiers to listen to the chaplins? I hardly think so! Is the government suggesting that all soldiers need religion? Not at all! Is the government providing a means to those who might find themselves unable to go to a religious service while under the employ of the United States Department of Defense? Isn't the government actually making sure that the government is not denying any religious servises, acccess to or participation by those employed and serving in the armed forces? And not everyone finds themselves under employment in the US military , now do they? Looks like to me, that by not wanting the government to hire chaplins, preachers and such, you are actually not wanting normal, every day US citizens to enjoy the Costitutional rights (that they fight to protect by the way) of their right to practice their own religion! To say that government cannot hire a chaplin - which they do for the soldier who wanted it/asked for it - that is to say that it's okay to prevent people from their constitutional rights in the name of Athiests! - Merlyn_LeRoy

And the Lord gives us patience and understanding when as my 9 year old son can get out of the shower, put on his class A uniform, and somehow, get covered with dirt before he ever steps foot outside!

The best I can tell: Pants #3 are UNISEX and have an internal belt built in(and beltloops for external belt).And are centenial. Pants # 1 are men/youth male pants and include the belt and BSA buckle. Earlier this fall, I went and bought myself a leader shirt. The scout store had one shirt advertised for $9.00 and the others were $ 28.00 ( I think). WEll, the more expensive shirt was centenial and the $9 was the old design. AS far as i can tell, the only difference was that the US Flag was already on the shirt and it had a tech pocket on the right sleeve. Naturally, they did not have the old shirt in my size! LOL! The cheaper pants listd are not centenial. Could be that National is just trying to get rid of them with a cheaper price. The physical difference MAY just be a pocket flap, a pocket inside a pocket or maybe pocket drain holes have brass ferrules around them. Something like that! Oh, I'd get the cheaper pants. They are still official, and are still regulation too. Save some $$ and still be correct. Besides, when you wear those out, and have to buy a new pair, you won't have the choice by then. Well, I guess that pretty much settles everything doesn't it? LOL!(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

Convenience! Sometimes you need to look something up or reference something, and you aren't at your computer, you might be at the den meeting, pack meeting or even camping. I bought one of those SCoputer messenger bags on sale at scoutsource . It carries two 3 ring binder (leader book and Cub scout activities), carries my coppy of the Bear Cub handbook, A collapsable file folder/atache thing with various documents and forms in it, and also any fliers or printouts I might pass out at meetings. My computer is awesome when I'm at home in front of it, but catch me anywhere else with a question.. it isn't doing me any good!

Convenience! Sometimes you need to look something up or reference something, and you aren't at your computer, you might be at the den meeting, pack meeting or even camping. I bought one of those SCoputer messenger bags on sale at scoutsource . It carries two 3 ring binder (leader book and Cub scout activities), carries my coppy of the Bear Cub handbook, A collapsable file folder/atache thing with various documents and forms in it, and also any fliers or printouts I might pass out at meetings. My computer is awesome when I'mat home in front of it, but catch me anywhere else with a question.. it isn't doing me any good!

AMERICAN ATHIESTS INC. Murray v. Curlett (1963) Challenged Bible reading and prayer recitation in Maryland public schools. Murray v. United States (1964) To force the Federal Communications Commission to extend the Fairness Doctrine so that Atheists could have equal time with religion on radio and television. Murray v. Nixon (1970) Challenged weekly religious services in the White House. O'Hair v. Paine (1971) Challenged NASA's religious use of the space program to require astronauts to read the Bible during a space flight. O'Hair v. Cooke (1977) Challenged the opening prayer at city council meetings in Austin, Texas. O'Hair v. Blumenthal (1978) Challenged the inclusion of the phrase "In God We Trust" on U.S. currency. O'Hair v. Hill (1978) To have removed from the Texas constitution a provision requiring a belief in god of persons holding offices of public trust. O'Hair v. Andrus (1979) Challenged the use of National Park facilities for the pope to hold a Roman Catholic mass on the Mall in Washington, D.C.. O'Hair v. Clements (1980) This case tried to remove the nativity scene displayed in the rotunda of the capitol building in Austin, Texas. Steel Crosses on Utah Highways (2005) [1] Society of Separationists vs. Pleasant Grove (2004) American Atheists vs. Starke, Florida.(2005)[2] American Atheists, Inc., and Steve Walker vs. City of Detroit, City of Detroit Downtown Development Authority, and Detroit Economic Growth Corporation. Clyde Baxley, Grace Brown, Edward Byford, Bill Jager, Al Sundquist, James Woolever, Arlen Acharias, and Dorothy Anne Zappa Vs. State of Alaska. American Atheists Inc., Mark W. Butler v. The City of Jacksonville, Florida (2006) (Sued for the city's tax-funded "Faith Day")[39] Chester Smalkowski, Nadia Smalkowski, American Atheists v. Hardesty Public School District, The County Of Texas County, Oklahoma, The Town Of Hardesty, Oklahoma. (Filed August 2006)[3] American Atheists Inc., Lon Bevill, v. City Of Stark, Florida. (2007) [4] American Atheists Inc., Edwin Kagin, v. Kentucky Office of Homeland Security (2009) [5] From Wikipedia Now, some of thoise lawsuits were actually good, Requiring prayer or bible study in school is not good at all. You might not be of that religion. But most of the lawsuits prevent anybody from willining ly saying a persona prayer too. And that's just wrong. Personally, i don't care because I do not have to have people hear me pray in order for my prayers to be real. I can pray just as good inside my head.

Oak, I spent 14 - 15 years on a VFD. Honestly, I don't know where they found the time to do it!

One last thing: WE will just have to agree to disagree! Let me say one thing about myself. I may not agree with you on certain subjects, But that does not mean I look upon any of you in a bad light. It doesn't make me think any less of any of you. To me, it's no different than you having red as a favorite color and I having blue. We are all different and have different views. Diversity is what makes the world great! While I may not agree with your views, I completely defend and support your right to have them and discuss them. Even if they are wrong! LOL! I am a NASCAR fan, I am used to being your best friend, totally rooting for/supportimng a different driver than you,and still being your best friend. I can argue without hard feelings. Just hope nobody looks down on me in other subjects or walks of life just because I might not agree on one.

Well, yeah,I know it was an example. But? Alot of colonies were around. Alot of people had all kinds of ideas about alot of things. But that doesn't matter because they didn't write the Constitution! There were also colonies that were founded as colonies of England and also only followed the Church of England as the only recognozed religion. And that doesn't matter either because they didn't write the Coinstitution. Put it like this: Lets say that I worship oranges for whatever stupid reason. You worship apples. We both have ideas about the way our lives should be run. One day, the steak worshipers fight and win everybody their freedom. Then the steak worshiper write up a new governement and all it's principle policies. Neither you or I can say it was our own ideas that the new government was founded on. We may have shared SOME ideas, but some isn't the same as Steak basing their laws on OUR views. Same with Mass. Sure, they had their views, but so did alot of groups. The consitution wasn't based on any one groups ideas. If it was, it would have specifically said that there would be a seperation of church and state. Instead of saying that the government couldn't establish ( read: create) it's own religion or deny one. And another thing: it is still not the governmemt that is being predjudiced,. It would be the Co or the BSA. Every year, there is a music festival at the Marine Corps Base that is about 5 miles from my house. Budwieser sponsors it big time. At the end of every radio ad and tv ad, and at the bottom of every flyer, there is a disclaimer that staes: (not qiouted by the way) Just because the governmemt is allowing the beer company to sponsor the event, it doesn't mean the government or Marine Corps, Dept of the Navy, Defense Dept, etc.. and eventually governmemt endorses it! Basically, I will say ( using your logic) that if you are a member of BSA, then you fully support, endorse and sponsor discrimibation and predjudice! How can I say that? Because you joined BSA, you pay dues to and are active in BSA....which is predjudiced. Meanwhile the government isn't DIRECTLY involved with BSA. The government is only supporting a group that just happens to want to start a unit. The group does, not the government. I might hate Chinese cuisine. But If I give my son an allowance, and he spends it on chinese food...Does that mean I support Chinese food or culture? No! It just means that my son, who I support( and lives in my house, follows my rules/laws, etc...), happens to support/like/ use Chinese food. The Chinese and I are seperated. Yet, you guys ( a general term, not sexual okay?)* are DIRECTLY involved with, dues paying members of and highly active participants of a group that you readily admit is predjudiced and biased ...yet you have a problem with the group that isn't directly ( and realistically as you very well know) involved? You know what the real problem is? You might just be scared that the government will come in and say: "You know what? The predjudiced attitude ends now or you lose your charter!" Let's recap": BSA is predjudiced. The religious CO's are predjudiced. You belong to the BSA and a CO. The government isn't predjudiced. And you have a problem with the government? * I use the terms guys, and man pretty loosely. I do not mean male or female when I say this!

Let me ask you this: My pack has several fundraisers each year. We do this to collect money to support our program. Should we register as a charity since we solicit funds and spend them on community individuals? Popcorn sales and recharter pays for professional scouts. These same professional scouts try to increase the number of scouts in order to bring in more money. Doesn't that make it a for profit group? BSA has it's own rules, regulations, uniforms, training and advancements. Has it's own ceremonies and ritualls and practices. Doesn't that pretty much sound like any cult? I gave money to my school to help with the playground equipment. My son's school has a fall festival which helps the school raise money. The school also recieves money from a yearly community fish fry. Doesn't that make the school a charity or community organazation? Merlyn: You get any tax deductions this year or last year? You accept any stimulus money from either Clinton, Bush, or Obama? You might be government! > Every time you buy something from any retailer, it is under the auspices of federal and state laws. The way you buld your house is too. Every time you drive a car, it is under auspices of state laws. As well as your bank accounts, credit cards, telephone and cell phone ( and not excluding internet use) fishing, boating , camping, and even watching tv. Matter of fact, being born and dying are covered too! Government funding is everywhere. Government regulation is too. It might be city, county, state or federal, but it's there. And we spend all day every day working real hard to be able to take this green government paper and coins home in our wallets. Yep... everything I buy, build, every time I talk on the phone, write on this website, drive a car or go fishing..is is under the oversight and regulation of the state or federal government. I guess that makes everybody and everything government! I would say except breathing air, but government controls and has laws about that too!(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

> "These folks WERE founders of the American colonies and yet," Yeah, colonies,. Not the united states. They were not the people who drafted the Constitution, nor the Declaration of Independans . There were alot of groups. Ther were alot of colonies. Different ideas, different countries sent different explorers. Different reasons too. Some colonies were also founded by those loyal to England. Some were founded by very religious and some were athiest. Some were just a motley crue of different folks with all different kinds of ideas. But they didn't write The Constitution. Now as far as the other staement I made: > The governemnt is not actually chartering anything. The school is. Just because the school gets government funding does not automatically make it an entirely government entity. Because using that reasoning, the fact that the government is of the people ( meaning us) then we are government too, which means we can't have anything to do with scouting,.lest somebody say that government is teaching scoutng. But then again, since the government gets all of it's money from you and I, in essence, they are spending my money on supporting a group that just happens to want to charter a scout unit. Hmmmmmm..a group of people, who we put in office, gave some of my money to another group that helps the community. That "another" group, decides on it's own, that it would like to sponsor a group of kids in doing something besides sitting on their butts and playing video games. That "another" group wants to mentor kids in an activity that just happens to be the exact same activity my son participates in. Umm, that's not government,. Thats a group of people who decided to volunteer their time to mentor kids. It's just like saying that since you give your son an allowance, and he spends that allowance on beer one weekend, that you support underage drinking! You didn't tell your son to buy it. You most certainly didn't give permission, and I'm pretty certain you weren't even aware of the plans... but since the money came from you...you bought the beer! Sounds different that way right? The government wouldn't be sponsoring the pack/troop. The school would. Axctually, the group of volunteers would, but I guess you couldn't just give Tom,Dick, and Harry a charter could you? Nope! You'd have to put some sort of civic group or what not type seal and name on it! And as I understand it, you have issues that BSA is predjudiced, but not enough to quit scouting....only enough to keep another type of group from sponsoring a unit. Which incidentally, would teach based on BSA ideals, not government ideals.

Gern, LOL! My last post wasn;t directed to you, even thouigh it appears that way. It was just a basic statement to everybody and not just one individual.

Okay, let me ask this: Who has an issue with a VFD sponsoring a scout unit? Or a school for that matter? Is it anybody in here? Or rather, I should ask: What person using this site that is either a scout, a scout leader ( or other scouting position such as leader, committee,etc....)has an issue with it? What is the problem? I mean, the way I see it, the whole point and purpose is about scouting. Not who sponsors it, what color building they have, how many windows there are or if they are on the east or west side of town. As a parent of a scout, as a scout leader, and as a person who wishes the world wasn't going to hell in a hand basket... I'd love to see more scout packs and troops in as many places as they can effectively serve. The point of scouting is the mentoring of the boys, not who might foot the bill for the rent or electric service. I agreed to let my son join scouting becauuse of what scouting offers, not because of the CO. My son's pack teaches from the scout books and adds generic good morals..not any specific religions or political ideas. Not that I have any issue with the CO's ideas, but I joined scouting with my son, not the specific CO unit. So, I guess to me, it looks like one clique of a social club knocking on another clique because of who they are, not what they do. Looking at another group who is trying to do the same thing, but knocking them because they are not you. But while looking at them, forgetting the real purpose: The boys. And in my opinion, that's a way bigger problem than who might sponsor a pack/troop! So please explain to me ( a new ADL and new to scouting) why the fact that the detail that a group gets a few tax dollars should be more important than the fact that they are trying to teach and mentor youth in scouting....just like we are? I mean, being that this is a scouting site for scouts about scout stuff by and for people who support and endorse scouting...... it looks like to me that we should be happy that any group would also like to sponsor some scouts! We should be welcoming the idea, not blasting away at it with minor technicalities!

NJ, 99.99% of my post was about the specific topic of "seperation of state" as most people MISUNDESTAND it. But as you say.. if the government IS the people, they why cant the people still sponsor a scout unit? If the government IS the people,then you and I ARE government...in which case, we have to drop out of scouting! When my son turns 18, he is a legally responcible voting citizen, there fore will be government too. Oh! Maybe that's why you have to get Eagle before 18 right? Because once you are 18, you become government?

I spent plenty of time on a VFD/ Rescue/ water rescue, went from a Jr member all the way up to Asst Chief. The government NEVER owned me! PERIOD! I did not work for the government! PERIOD! I did not take orders from or recieve pay from the government! We recieved tax dollars on the county level from people of the community we served. We recieved money through donations. We used that money to buy equipment such as trucks, laddders, SCBA's axes, radios etc..which incidentally was to protect the entire community including churches! We even used to drive a fire truck in the local churches vacation bible school parades! Uh oh! Did we just etablish a religion by government? But we raised our own money to build our building. Not 1 single cent was from taxes. We raised the money for the land by having chicken dinners, BBQ dinners, pancake breakfasts. and such. Not a single pennny came from the government or through tax dollars. Our department followed certain state laws and guidlines in order to operate, but we were a registered and chartered Incorporation. As a group of people, we used to have scouts come and look at our stuff, give tours, etc. We were not a government entity in any way, shape or form. We did use trucks that were HALF paid for with tax dollars. But those trucks never thought about teaching scouts. Matter of fact, I don't think those trucks thought about anything at all. Now, in all my years as a Volunteer fire fighter, I never reallly had time to think about sponsoring scout pack. But since I wasn't a government piece of propertiy, I don't see any reason why I couldn't. Afteral, my department was made up of the same people who owned or worked at the local hardware store, the school, post office, lumber yard.... Not government owned people! Now, as for the definition of government tax funded...did any of you get any stimulus money? Cash for clunkers? Earned income credit? 401K allowance on your tax form? Ever deduct donations to churches from your taxes? Ever get a small buisness loan? Ever get welfare, medicaid, or such? How about that...(what is is now?) ... $10 for jury duty? Look out! You might be considered a government entity! (This message has been edited by scoutfish)

Wear what you want. Me? I'd wear the uniform for several reasons: I am a scoutleader . I am active just like my son. All the leadership should dress the part. See, you are being the dad, but when did you ever stop being the dad? At patrols? During Jamborees? During campouts or regular meetings? Uh-uh! You were stilla dad the whoile time. So when you it beside your wife in that uniform...you are still a dad! But again, do what you think feels right!