tortdog

Alright. I'm convinced on the burning of waste. Let me ask, though. Do you think it's safe to bury human waste on a barrier island? I'm worried about shifting sand (though you could dig down a ways at the top of the island I suppose). Also, any other councils allow charcoal fluid? We always assumed it was off limits.

>Charcoal lighter is not classified as liquid fuel You know, that makes sense becaues the GSS specifically mentions the proper storage of charcoal fuel. Why would the GSS address the storage of it if it was not permitted at all? It's like addressing how to safely store fireworks, when fireworks are prohibited outright.

Kind of two parts. The GSS states that we cannot use liquid fuel to start fires. No brainer. But what about MatchLight? It's charcoal with liquid fuel applied in the factory. Is that okay? If that's okay, can you make your own at home, bag up the charcoal and use that at a BSA activity? Leave No Trace states that you can burn human waste as an alternative to catholes. What if you used some liquid fuel and mixed it with the waste (like the Army does), in essence making "MatchLight" and then burn the resulting product? If you can't do the last one (or two), then what about st

The interpretation you use occurred in 1947 (150 years after the founders wrote the amendment), and it was a 5-4 decision (meaning 4 justices disagreed with it). Fact is, the interpretation of the 1st Amendment that YOU rely on is divisive, controversial and been held for only about 50 years of the 200 year history of the union. I agrue my interpretation is correct because it is the one espoused by the founding fathers. Let me ask you this. If the founding fathers believed the position espoused in 1946, then why did they permit government funds to be given to churches and comme

>These topics aren't outdoor skills and they don't have merit badges, but they are what boys are interested in. Sounds to me like yall might be interested in Varsity or Crew, where it was created around specialized programs. I did not know that the troops were geared for this. I am not sure the troop should start concentrating on activities that do not help in advancement.

Hunt. Reasonable people can disagree. Sure, if a public entity sponsors a racist organization, I concur that that entity is violating our constitutional prohibition against racial discrimination. However, there is no constitutional provision that prevents a public entity from supporting religion IN GENERAL. There is a prohibition from Congress (and I'll expand that to the states) from ESTABLISHING a religion. When a school sponsors a Cub Scout unit (and solely in connection with the religion argument you make), it allows ANY person who promises to do his duty to a supreme being, how

Ya know...I must need YP again. I honestly would not give it a second thought to be in a public restroom with a scout. The restroom is open to the public. Anyone can go in. I'm in and out of there as fast as I can (never really liked public restrooms though obviously it's a necessity). Would Scout leaders also not enter a public restroom when there is a Scout inside?

>then also the wives might start getting the credit for the support they give the husbands with the boys. In my experience, the moms get most of the credit.

If the ACLU were committed to civil rights, it would consider fighting for the 2nd Amendment (which right to bear arms some of the founding fathers considered the most important right). The ACLU would also attack the religous groups that have leases from San Diego (but it does not). It's about money; Cash on the barrelhead; Money talks. It's about pleasing its consituents: a bunch of people who are upset that the Supreme Court didn't write in a right to prevent groups from freely associating and refusing entry to gays. >"Boy Scouts of America is a religious organization, associati

I suppose I speak only from my experience. As a Scout, there were plenty of things to do at camp other than D&D. I always brought home 4-5 merit badges (and worked my butt off for them). When I wasn't working on the merit badges (including after the classes for environmental sciense, sailing, rifle and archery as examples), I was doing SOMETHING outside. I worked on crafts from the Scout Shop. We played outdoor games. We expored. We built pioneering projects, but I did NOT spend the time playing games I could easily be doing at home. The Scout camp experience was totally different fr

>Scouts is NOT about advancement, thats a side thing. It is about FUN. If a Scout is not having fun AND advancing, then the leaders are doing something wrong. And in my view, if a Scout come back from camp with 1 or 2 merit badges, someone screwed up.

>BSA already has co-ed activities in the Venture program. I haven't heard of any problems there. There was a reported case on the radio here in Houston within the last year about inappropriate sexual relations at a Venturing activity between male/female Venturers. I'll see if I can find a cite on the net. I like the idea of a program for girls run by the BSA (but I don't see why the GSA would do just as well). I do, however, have some pause on whether the program as currently constituted would work as well. A specific example: In our church the young men use the BSA as the

Trevorum. Once the teen birth rate starts to drop and the pant lines rise up about the butt I will consider that teens and sex are not an issue to worry about. Regarding the Venturing crews, I know an LDS young lady who is a Crew president in a non-LDS Crew. I'm glad that the BSA offers the program for the YM/YW. I see value in it. However, I'm not sure if she sleeps overnight with the crew (or if they even do overnighters). Personally, as a parent, my children will not be doing any co-ed overnighters unless I am absolutely 100% certain that the events are highly and adequately super

So desiring to keep young men/women separate in overnighters is akin to the Taliban??? I thought it was just good judgment. In my experience, trusting that the adult supervision will absoultely protect kids from hanky-panky is hopeful, but not realistic. Kids outwit adults all the time (I did). Further, I don't think we can rely on "good" kids to not engage in hanky-panky. If we make something available to get into trouble with, even good kids make mistakes. My preference? Don't make it available while they are young. I mean, we do have statutes based on the premise that people under

Merlyn. >Where has the BSA stated, in court, that it is not a religious organization? I've already shown you where the COURT that you use for your authority points out that the BSA argues it is NOT a religious organization. >You've only shown where the BSA has said it is "nonsectarian", but that's not the same, as the description of the BSA as both nonsectarian and religious has shown. Oh...you must not have read the entire court order. >And if you'll read the judge's decision, you'll see that the BSA lease was struck down because the city didn't have any sor