sherminator505

Scouts without pocket knives? Interesting concept. How might a Scout cut rope when he needs to? Burn it with a magnifying glass, I guess. And I guess there wouldn't be any more carved neckerchief slides. Or Scouts earning their Totin' Chip. Or Scouts that would, oh I don't know, know how to use a knife properly? No thanks!

Perhaps by "coordinated" they mean District Committee AND Commissioners? One can only guess.

"The democrats can shove it." I read this on a public forum for Scouters.

In defense of vol_scouter, eisely brought up race as well... I wouldn't say that Democrats are blameless with regard to the current situation. Clinton in particular was just as eager as the Republicans were to take away the "rules of the road" that FDR set up to prevent just such a crash. Witness the result. I think that folks aren't upset with the Republicans for "causing this mess" per se. They are upset with them for denying the problem and trying their best to keep the veneer up from 2006 on to try to hang on to the White House. In hindsight, this was pretty cynical on their part

I haven't seen the new Scout Handbook. Have they started running ads in there again?

Train them. Then coach them. "I know there is the troop leadership training, but it does not seem to be enough for the scouts." I can't tell from your post whether or not you have already done TLT with your junior leaders. If so, please disregard the next paragraph. The canned training modules that are available aren't very complete or comprehensive, but they are a good framework. Try this. Set up a four hour session, maybe on a Saturday, and hold the training. Take the time beforehand to review the material and decide what needs to be emphasized, and if there are any holes that

OK, BadenP - I can see why you would be jaded.

So you're saying that leaving a floundering council in place would be preferable to a merger, then? I'm not saying that that's what is happening in this instance, but I am saying that a merger is not always a negative. However, I will concede that a merger done purely for cost-cutting reasons probably does more harm than good.

There could be a number of reasons for this. It could be a simple case of cost cutting, which may or may not directly benefit the boys. It could also be that one or both of the councils is underperforming and the determination has been made that one larger council would provide a "critical mass" to provide better service. The latter would definitely benefit the boys, as the quality of service and support from council would be improved.

"Well, Hal, if a BOR member makes his/her decision based on who the Scout says he is voting for then that person has missed the whole point of the question." I would submit that if the EBOR member makes his/her decision based on who the Scout says he is voting for then that person has missed the whole point of an EBOR. I also fail to see the logic that an EBOR member could somehow miss the point of a question that he himself asked.

Hope it stays warm! I don't see a problem with that format, as long as there aren't too many conflicts with other events.

Interesting discussion - but I am still reminded of the old axiom "Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear. I might believe it when I see it.

I did required/non-required...

About the more recent post - Did the District/Council put on this EBOR? If so, is there something going on in the background that we're not aware of? If not, then you have received a sign that the District/Council should be putting on the EBOR's in your neck of the woods.

About the original question - If I were to ask this question at a job interview, and I did not hire the applicant for whatever reason, I would expect to be sued! At the very least, this question represents an utter lack of care and foresight.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

From the previous thread, desertrat77 writes: "It speaks to a larger problem, namely, many parents aren't trying to raise young men...they are content to let their teenager act like he was still five ("Oh my little Johnny is such a good boy!"). So he progresses through his teenage years thinking that his every action is cute, proper, and consequence-free." This evoked some thought for me. It strikes me that there isn't a lot of emphasis on self-reliance in society today. The media sends the message to kids that it's cool to spend their parents money (you must be 18 or older to call.

I don't know. Maybe the thread got so long they had to move it into a large, empty building.

I design bridges.

I design bridges.

I design bridges.

I can see the problem with making this a "supplemental" training course. How about this - rather than looking at IOLS and AOLS, how about a two weekend OLS, with the option for an experienced Scouter (or one that has already taken IOLS) to test out of weekend #1?

I've said this in other threads and I'll repeat it here. What is needed, I think, is a sequel to Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills. As the name suggests, IOLS is just that. An introduction. As for Wood Badge, I took the course in 1993 and although there was an outdoor component, it wasn't the major focus. From what I hear and read of WB21C, outdoor skills are even less of a component today. So it appears that we have identified a void in BSA leader training that many of the posters would like to see filled. Maybe it is time to look at developing an Advanced Outdoor Leader Skills cours

I'm still waiting for a citation on that "Catholic propaganda." Fair's fair...

Ed, I'm certain we went to different confirmation classes. Or perhaps you have chosen to forget certain parts of the teaching because you left. They DO teach that the Catholic Church is the only true church, with the lineage to back up the claim, but they DO NOT teach that theirs is the only path to salvation, but the usual path to salvation. They concede that ultimate judgment to God. I just finished confirmation, and I remember pretty clearly what I was just taught, so PLEASE do not continue to mischaracterize my faith!

Sorry. I keep forgetting that you aren't Catholics, what with all the talking down and such. The complete discussion can be found in Alan Schreck's "The Essential Catholic Catechism," pages 105-107. Schreck's book is a fairly standard Confirmation/RCIA text. I'm sure that even if you read the entire discussion, you would be hard-pressed to conclude that the Catholic Church presumes, or professes to assume, exclusivity on salvation. It does present discipleship in the Church as "the ordinary way to obtain salvation" but DOES NOT claim exclusivity! I have cited my source quite clearly