Vicki

"But when the wimmen folk say "that's just what men do" or oggle the studly guy from the cover of the romance novels. That's okay. " No it isn't. Hope that's short, sweet, and declarative enough for you. Vicki

fun is found in funny finagles, offense? none found. hopefully, none given. obviously obfuscatory humor (sigh again-not the first time my humor too dry) thick skin grown over a number of years of corporate warfare. Benefit of the doubt critical. Sanctuary. Vicki(This message has been edited by Vicki)

"Maybe it's a chick thing" Simple sigh, stuck in stolid, silly, sexism... Vicki

I'm with scottteng - sounds like classic malware to me. I, too, run quite a bit of software to protect from such things. Vicki

I agree with all the posters who have provided well-thought-out reasons why a parent should not counsel their son on a merit badge. I also agree that if there is someone with a specialized skill in the troop, there is no reason on earth why he or she should not be able to counsel their son in this merit badge. That said (venting on:

Just saw this thread - I'm w/you on this one, GW. Although I do note that the authors of the study provided this caveat, "a little dehydration and a little over-hydration are not a problem, it's the extremes one has to avoid." Not to mention that an 85 pound scout drinking eight eight ounce glasses of water is silly. But it just seems to me to be common sense that non-caffeinated liquid/water would help with toxin excretion since movement through kidneys = toxin excretion. But I'm not a medical professional, nor have I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express recently. I think our troop leadership will still want to see water bottles whose liquid content goes down regularly - and when a scout comes to me at summer camp with a headache, I'm still going to ask him how much liquid he's had to drink...oops, would that be common sense rearing its head again? Vicki(This message has been edited by Vicki)

Darn, too late to edit! When I look back at what I typed, "There are Jews who would even have a problem with the question asked this way because they name God Yahweh." - The whole point in Judaism is that they don't express the full name of God so I should have said that differently. Sloppy semantics on my part. Thanks, TAHAWK. No reason for me to reply to Ed on this one. Vicki

Ed wrote, "Asking a Scout if he believes in God (god for some) is not asking a Scout to define God or interpret God's rules. " But Ed, this is an almost uniquely Judeo/Christian way to ask it. A Muslim names God as Allah, a Hindu believes in a pantheon that expresses the creator's attributes, a Buddhist doesn't believe in God (per se), etc. There are Jews who would even have a problem with the question asked this way because they name God Yahweh. So the phrasing of the question this way presupposes a belief set, requiring a response that starts off defensively since the person must then explain, if they are not Christian, what their beliefs are. Much better to ask about how the scout defines reverent, especially since that's the word the 12th point uses. Keeps it all consistent. Vicki

I'll second WAKWIB's comments. My followon thought is the wonderful addition to my own context that this board provides. The two troops in two different districts that I've served have, for the troops, excellent EBOR prep - none of our Eagle candidates would be surprised to be asked the questions posed here in whatever form. At the district level, same comment - if the prospective Eagle attends the Life to Eagle seminar (I have) then, again, no surprises. That this is a surprise to some expanded my context a bit. Thanks. Vicki

Voltaire quotes!! I LOVE this place! Now I get to say what I wanted to say to the poster in the other, more serious,thread who commented on Torquemada and the Inquisition - "NO ONE expects the Spanish Inquisition!! Fetch the comfy chair!!" Vicki

Bear! and soon to be a good ol' staffer too (our course just passed the half-way point on enrollment). Vicki (somethin's caught in my teeth)

Two things I treasure - the box with a bear sitting on top (not one of those cutesie things, a real representation of a black bear) that is just big enough to keep my woggle and beads in. The other one is a paperweight with the bear emblem with the beads-on-thong kind of wrapped around it done in pewter. It's not the one I just looked at on scoutstuff.org that says Wood Badge, but I'm pretty sure my beloved ordered it from the local Scout shop. Of course, I now have a couple of other bears from my out-West travels. Vicki everything else, really, is just food(This message has been edited by Vicki)

Somebody like that would probably have standards. Pfah. Vicki

Didn't say I didn't like ya, Pack. Vicki

"As I often say to my wife and occasionally to a moderator, "Whatever you say, Dear." " Arrh, I get SO tired of sexist claptrap - keelhaul 'im and get it over with! OGE, thanks for the invite! Oh, Tink... Vicki

Or cue Bob the Serious, who positively, absolutely REFUSES to sink to the occasion. I won't grow up, I won't grow up, I don't want to wear a tie, I don't want to wear a tie, or a serious expression, or a serious expression, in the middle of July! Cuz growing up is awfuller, than all the awful things that ever were! I won't grow up, I won't grow up, not me, not I, no way! In fact, I propose the above as the subversive Scouter oath! V(This message has been edited by Vicki)

Why sure, Macy - once we've beaten something to death, let the silliness commence! Walk this way, Master... Vicki

Winter nights we sang in tune Played inside the months of moon Never think of never Let this spell last forever Summer lover passed to fall Tried to realize it all Mama says she's worried Growing up in a hurry, yeah oops - definitely NOT music man:

Bob, a couple of things I think we could discuss (and they have been discussed, ad nauseum, elsewhere on the board, I bring them up here just to keep us honest), were we of a mind to do so - 1) that the LDS is treated "the same as any other Christian faith." As has been noted in various places on the board, they aren't - treated the same, that is. Because of the numbers of scouts involved with the LDS and because they have incorporated it as an integral part of their religious practice, if one looks at the way they run their version of scouting, it isn't the same. That's just the way it is and I'm not out to get into a protracted debate, just saying there is more than adequate room for disagreement between reasonable parties on that point. 2) that LDS is Christian. THAT one I'm certainly not going to get into a protracted debate about, but if you do your research, it's fairly obvious their faith doesn't view Christ the same way Christians do. I'm OK with that in terms of tolerance, just pointing it out. Suffice to say that, again, there is more than adequate room for disagreement between reasonable parties. Vicki

Agreed, sa - although I realize I didn't say so explicitly, those sorts of questions are discussion points, not "gotchas"! Vicki

SSScout, please feel free - while I expressed it in my own words, the theological concept behind it isn't new. Besides, putting together a meaningful Scout's Own isn't easy! Use whatever resources you can find. Thanks for the kind words, Vicki

"He answered Reverent bacause it was the only one that did not have to do with interactions with others." OK, this is the one that stopped me in my tracks. To put it into Boy Scout terms, from the Footsteps of the Founder - "Religion very briefly stated means: firstly, recongising who and what is God; secondly, making the best of the life that He has given one and doing what He wants of us. This is mainly doing something for other people." Reverence is expressed through service to and with others in the religions with which I'm familiar, which would be Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The vertical nature of the relationship with the deity is expressed in the horizontal nature of the relationship with one's fellow human beings. IMO, this is where that particular EBOR should have gone. Vicki

I can confirm what Dan said - and no, Venturing is not even mentioned. Vicki (NYLT staff)

Interesting. I didn't really see anybody out for blood. Decent discussion, different points of view, sympathy for kahits and nephew. Some devil's advocate stuff happening along with fact sharing. All, by definition, based on one side of the story. Nice if we had both sides of the story, but I don't see how that's going to happen. Shoot, nobody's even called anybody any names! Hmmm, perception is such an interesting thing. Vicki (edited for typo)(This message has been edited by Vicki)

I may be belaboring a point here, or I missed something in a subsequent e-mail, but here goes...a Philmont crew is minimum seven, maximum twelve. Two registered over-21 types per crew. http://www.scouting.org/highadventure/philmont/hikers/crew.aspx So, kahits, bottom line, if you're saying 26 people signed up and four of those were adults, then, no, none of the adults can step down, they have to go. If more than four adults are going, or there is only one crew, or 24 people or less signed up, then asking scouts to step down would present a problem for me. That becomes a logistics/administrative issue which, as adults, we're "paid" to figure out. Vicki