Trevorum

I think it is more the "connections age". For example, last night I recieved our family's cell phone statement. My three teen agers had racked up more than 2500 minutes in a single month! #1 son had more than 90 calls on a single Saturday! I think when I was 16, I might have made one phone call per week (and way back then, we had to hold the tin can real close to our ear!). But that's not necessarily bad. Technology has made it easier to communicate with people, to exchange ideas, to build relationships. Just like we're doing here. (Still, I'm glad our family has a group plan with roll-over minutes!)

Much of what Rooster says is correct. There are many "ways of knowing" in this world. Science is just one of these ways. Science is unique in that, if rigorously applied, it will yield replicable conclusions between different seekers. Science is also self-correcting in that it tends to continuously refine the limits of what is known to be true. Religious faith is a perfectly valid way of knowing the universe. In most day-to-day circumstances, and for most persons, it will fare just fine as an explanatory framework. However religion is not science and religious based explanations should not be presented as science education.

ahhh - this is more like it! (let me tell you Ed, those several weeks when you and I kept agreeing with each other were pretty erie!) "So because ID is a religious based scientific theory it can't be included in public schools?" ID is NOT a scientific theory. It is a religious theory. It shouldn't be taught in a science course because it isn't science. It could be presented in a sociology course, in a history course, in a comparative religion course, even in a course on philosophy. Just not science. Now as to why it's "fair" for public schools to do this, I'll let Merlyn or NJCubScouter, or one of the legal eagles address that point.

A joyous solstice greeting to all Scouts and Scouters! May the new year bring health and happiness to you and your loved ones.

There are indeed several alternative scientific theories that attempt to explain how evolution proceeds. And these are taught in science courses. However, none of them invokes supernatural beings or events. "Intelligent Design" is a religion based theory; it is not scientific and has no place in science education.

I would never work in a place like that. The second-hand cigarette smoke can kill you.

Though weary of this common mis-statement, I will soldier on ... Evolution is not a theory. The evolution of biological systems over geologic spans of time is a demonstrated fact. Evolution happens. What is a theory is the mechanism by which evolution proceeds; natural selection is currently the best explanation. Hence, the "theory of evolution by means of natural selection". It's the natural selection part that is the theory, not the evolution part.

I asked this question of my son (a true expert on the subject) just two weeks ago. He said PS2 hands down, unless there is a specific Xbox game you just gotta play.

A tie??? ugh. I own a tie and I actually have to wear it 2 or 3 times a year. That's enough for me. In uniform, I wear the troop neckerchief, just like everyone else.

I hope I'm not out of line if I correct a slight mis-statement by hotdesk. Scouting is actually non-sectarian (any religion is accepted) as opposed to non-denominational (any Christian denomination).

You should tell the folks on Patch-L; they're all insane patch collectors. (um ... I mean we are ...)

I'm confused. Why would anyone have to "fight" for the right to fly the flag? Is this on your own property? and someone is telling you not to fly the flag? I'm confused.

scottahicks said, "I indend to become a scoutmaster again and have his troop wear the berets". Assuming, of course, that's what the scouts want, and it's voted by the PLC. You wouldn't make a fiat like that when the boys are running the troop!

I believe that respect is not earned; it can only be lost. Sometimes it can be re-earned. Every person is worthy of respect even if you don't know them. I respect every person unless they have actively given me a reason not to.

Please don't let this spoil your festive spirit. Some people look for reasons to be offended, and perhaps that family is an example. A "holiday" party is for everyone. I could see them feeling excluded if you had announced a Kwanzaa party, or a Channukah party or a Solstice party, but there is no call for anyone to get bent out of shape because you were inclusive. I hope the party is joyous, whatever people want to call it Merry Christmas!

I know that many of my friends believe that Yshua was divine. Everyone is welcome to their religious beliefs. But they needn't put words in the mouths of others. Lewis sets up a false premise from the start; I do not accept the dichotomy that Yshua was either a god or insane. It's like saying that Abraham Lincoln was either King of England or an escaped felon - take your pick.

I can't understand why anyone would be offended by someone wishing them a "Merry Christmas". Unless, of course, the greeting was gratuitously intended to offend. I suppose that happens. In our society, Christmas is a secular holiday as well as a religious one. I see nothing wrong with that. It's a fine holiday for everyone, with plenty of solid pagan roots (as Kudu points out). My family celebrates the season of good will as a joyous cultural tradition. My wishing someone a "Merry Christmas" means neither that I am Christian nor that I assume they are. If someone responds back to me with "Happy Chanukah", or "Happy Yule", or a "Merry Solstice", I am gladdened. By the way, the 2005 winter solstice will occur at 10:35 am PST on December 21.

I can't understand why anyone would be offended by someone wishing them a "Merry Christmas". Unless, of course, the greeting was gratuitously intended to offend. I suppose that happens. In our society, Christmas is a secular holiday as well as a religious one. I see nothing wrong with that. It's a fine holiday for everyone, with plenty of solid pagan roots (as Kudu points out). My family celebrates the season of good will as a joyous cultural tradition. My wishing someone a "Merry Christmas" means neither that I am Christian nor that I assume they are. If someone responds back to me with "Happy Chanukah", or "Happy Yule", or a "Merry Solstice", I am gladdened. By the way, the 2005 winter solstice will occur at 10:35 am PST on December 21.

Semper, Haven't you ever learned - you can pick your nose and you can pick your friends, but you can't pick your friend's nose!

I mentioned the climbing idea to the SPL last meeting and he was all over it. He's going to bring it up at the January PLC and try to get a night scheduled at the rock gym This SPL also told me that in preparation for our February shooting campout (at a BSA camp with BSA certified instructors), he is inviting a Special Ops guy to come to a meeting and present firearm safety - with an AK47 (unloaded of course). The troop really "ooohed" at that!

There is a commercial rock gym in our area. It's pretty cool with a variety of climbing walls and is very safe. They charge $8.50 for an hour of climbing, including harness. There is also a video arcade and laser tag in the complex. Would it be appropriate to have the troop meet at the rock gym for an evening activity instead of a regular meeting? (assuming of course the PLC so votes...) Most of the families in our troop could easily absorb this small cost, but I wouldn't want to put anyone's parents on the spot. Does anyone see any other concerns? Thanks!

scoutldr, Your LNT instructor may have been mistaken or may have been misunderstood. LNT is not a set of inflexible one-size-fits-all rules. Rather it is an ethic. There are some situations where human waste is not biodegradable (tundra, alpine) or is unusually polluting in a contrained ecosystem (caves, river canyons). In these limited situations, a 'poop tube' is recommended. However. for most backcountry camping and hiking, cat holes are perfectly fine. Trench latrines are not recommended except for long-term camping in disturbed areas.

Re: the ethics of lying, I am reminded of a thread we had some months ago on the source of ethics. Some posters were of the opinion that all ethics were based on religion. Others, including myself disagreed. This is a case in point. The scientific method insists upon accurate reporting of observations; lying is unethical. In science, lying is ALWAYS WRONG. This ethical rule would have to exist even in the complete absence of religion. But that's beside the main point. Hunt has given us a thought experiment in which lying, although wrong, would be justified as the lesser of two evils. LongHaul has astutely pointed out that attempting to redefine some lies as "right" is a dangerously slippery slope. In my view, to knowingly tell a lie we must consciously choose to violate a basic rule so as to achieve some greater good. The conscious evaluation of that balance point is essential.

OA stuff can be pretty pricey. I constantly see OA patches offered in the $100-500 range, and occasionally higher. Sometimes MUCH higher. It's a classic case of supply and demand. Many OA items were issued in severely restricted quantities and no more are being made (notwithstanding unscrupulous counterfeiters). However, demand constantly goes up as new generations of Scouts are inducted and discover patch collecting. Other categories of memorabilia can also command surprising prices, especially very early BSA stuff and Baden Powell stuff. There are some passionate collectors out there with, apparently, huge disposable incomes... Not in those rarified collecting circles, I'm happy with a $5 patch traded on a handshake. Still, my wife does not understand patch collecting at all. She tells her friends, "There's a fine line between hobby and mental illness."

Yes, please tell us more. Is it a pilot program? In which council are you located?