sherminator505

Injustice is indefensible. Keep in mind that segregation was the law of the land in this country for many years, and it was not blind, unquestioning obedience that changed this.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

Red berets died for the same reason that the green folding cap did. They simply fell out of style, as have a number of uniform options that seemed like good ideas in their own time. Time will tell if the Centennial shirts catch on or fall by the wayside, but I just have the feeling that the latter will happen. Or perhaps it's just wishful thinking...

I've noticed that those who cannot defend the indefensible are usually the first to try to stop the discussion. Is that what is happening here?

As an Eagle Scout, I remember how nerve-racking the EBOR was and I understand you're kinda freaked out. So I'll give you the following advice: Merit badge sash - wear it! Not only does it look sharp, but it also provides a point of reference when they start asking about merit badges. Make sure all of your merit badges are on it. Philmont belt and hanging patch - both are acceptable. Pins - ditch 'em. If you're not sure if they're supposed to be there, they shouldn't. Your current service star, on the other hand, is a nice touch, and you should wear that. New uniform shirt -

Interesting discussion! I've observed that the biggest critics of Wood Badge are those who haven't done it. I have also observed that Wood Badge isn't for everyone, and the majority of Scouters that do attend are those who plan to stick around a while (i.e. long after the kids discover sports, cars and dating). Sure, there are those who go on in Scouting for many years but avoid Wood Badge because they question its value, but those who have done it generally consider it a valuable experience.

Here's to the hope that the old uniform will return and that the Centennial uniform will fade into Scouting history as an idea that was given a fair shot.

Personally, I wonder why we got rid of the red shoulder loops and troop numerals. There really wasn't anything wrong with that aestetic.

As it stands now, there are not too many courses that are required for a Scouter to be trained and (thankfully) many of these are now online. That means if you're here, you can get there. As for the BSA's emphasis on continuing training for Scouters, I agree. I am returning to Scouting after a five-year hiatus, and I find myself feeling more than a little flat-footed and probably need a few refreshers. Also, keep in mind that many of the training courses that the BSA requires for certain activities are there in part to keep the group insurance rates lower, which in turn affects registrat

I find a number of these arguments interesting. I find it interesting that some like to talk about a gay agenda, when the only agenda they seem to have is equality. I'm sure a lot of white people spoke similarly about the black agenda a century ago. At that time, after significant argument I'm sure, the BSA moved forward as an integrated organization. That proved to be the right thing to do, and represents the best of Scouting's tradition. I find it interesting that the "immorality" of homosexuals is cited as a reason for exclusion, but a similar standard is not imposed for remarried

I haven't been to the Trainer's EDGE course yet and I'm not even sure when it will be offered in my council. I have, however, reviewed the syllabus and have a couple of observations: First, it seems like a very useful course for trainers in general. As a provider of training for my group at work, I feel that this course could be used to train trainers in a non-Scouting environment with surprisingly little tweaking. Second, and not so glowing, the syllabus as currently posted is more than a little bit drafty. Beyond the formatting and the apparent mismatch between the Table of Content