vol_scouter

Merlyn, Once again the left avoids the issue because they cannot argue it. First, I do not believe that blacks are more likely than any other group to commit theft. It is truly amazing that even the left could possibly equate theft to sexual molestation of a child. You are vile to equate the two. Clearly, you do not realize how such actions permanently scar people and make long term relationships difficult, they suffer from depression, alcoholism, and suicide. Such a statement is incredibly callous and wrong.

GaHillBilly, You beat me to the punch on those articles! The argument for AGW seems to more political with decreasing evidence.

Hilo, Before calling physicians with a quarter of a century experience names, please get your facts correct. Pedophiles have sex with prepubertal children and it is usually heterosexual. Amorous relationships between an adult and a post-pubertal child is a homosexual relationship. Please re-read the scout law and check your behavior. I have posted this information several times. Pack, I am sorry that you cannot be friends with alcoholics especially when they have a genetic propensity for that behavior and similarly for couples where one of the partners has a propensity for nymphomania. Clearly, I am able to be friends to a much wider group of people than you. I have stated many times that I believe long term homosexuals likely have a genetic propensity. As usual, the left resorts to ad hominem attacks rather argue the salient point: Would allowing homosexuals in scouting increase in a statistically significant manner, the number of sexual l molestations? I find it hard to imagine how the incidence would decrease. If the answer is a significant increase in the incidence would you still argue for inclusion?

Packsaddle, They come to me for advice and tell me of very personal issues, so yes I am their friends. What you imply is that you cannot be friends with an alcoholic or an adulterer (I assume that you do not agree with those activities).

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year's to all.

Oak Tree, I do not believe that the voters of any state have approved homosexual marriage. I tried searching on the net but did not find any case that the voters approved it. Did I miss one?

Gern, From prior comments and leaving out Christians, one wonders if you are anti-Christian? You have implied dislike especially evangelical Christians and their values. Once again, people who believe that homosexuality is sinful may not wish to associate with homosexuals. That is not fear. They may not wish to associate with alcoholics either. I do not agree with that view and I have homosexual friends and colleagues. I am always concerned about issues of abuse of our youth and I am personally torn on this issue. There are many cases of reported sexual abuse in councils all across the country that never reach the press. Those cases are too many. The question that no one can definitively answer is whether a change in policy would change that number (whatever it is - only national knows) either up or down. If the answer is no change or a decrease (I cannot logically see how it could decrease the number of cases but I will include it as a possibility). If the answer is that there would be a statistically significant increase in the number of sexual molestations based upon a policy change to allow homosexuals, then I believe that everyone on this list would want to protect our children rather than make a policy change that affects less than 2% of the adult population (as I have quoted from the CDC before on these lists). So the real question is what is the effect on the number of cases of sexual abuse if the policy of the BSA were to be changed. I can only believe that it would increase but I do not know if the increase would be significant. The only way to know is to do the experiment. Whether it is worth the risk is clearly a matter of opinion.

Gern, It is interesting that you did not say: If a unit wanted to ban Christians, a local option would allow it. They would however be known in their district as the anti-Christian troop. Also, it is not correct to call people who believe, as most religious denominations do, that homosexuality is wrong homophobic. They are not afraid of homosexuals.

NJScouter, By your logic, there should be absolutely no issue with a heterosexual male and a homosexual female tenting together. Similarly, there is absolutely no issue with a heterosexual female and a homosexual male tenting together. I do not think that most would find that tenting arrangement acceptable. Therefore, one should not allow a heterosexual male and a homosexual male to tent together and a homosexual female and a heterosexual female tenting together. So only single person tents should ever be allowed. Also, if these local options are enacted, there will be troops that allow only Jews, only Christians, only whites, only blacks, only hispanics, et cetera. I believe that the BSA is acting in a prudent and responsible manner in order to deliver a program that proclaims to be morally straight which according to most (though not all) religious denominations would preclude accepting homosexual behavior.

HiLo, That has been discussed here before. The thread's originator asked not to discuss whether homosexuals should be admitted on philosophical grounds but rather to answer the question of what would the likely effect of admitting homosexuals. The posters have amazingly stuck to the original thread rather well - not a common occurrence.

I can conceive of at least two reasons churches would withdraw. First and most important, many churches will read the bible and conclude that homosexuality is sinful and will see the acceptance by the BSA as condoning sin. Thus, those churches will feel that there is no alternative but to withdraw. A second reason would be the potential for a lawsuit saying something to the effect that the BSA allows homosexuals so every unit should. Whether the lawsuit would be successful or not, the cost is a deterrent. In my area, many volunteers would quit over the issue and Friends of Scouting would be decimated from comments made to me. Part of the reasons to change the policy is to increase the numbers of youth. The only comparison that we have is churches. The only statistics that I have seen on churches that have moved to be more 'inclusive' by accepting homosexual behavior have suffered significant losses in membership. I doubt that parental fear over homosexual abuse on outings will not be a greater factor in the number of scouts than feeling like the organization i more 'inclusive'. Those parental fears may be misplaced but the same parents have misplaced fears about many things that we do in scouting. So I think that the BSA would suffer major losses in members, both scout and scouter, and would suffer losses in funding that I do not believe would be made up in other gains.

I am a United Methodist and due to the church structure, there is a very low likelihood of any change in the church's stance on homosexuality. Changes in the church dogma have to be approved by a majority of the clergy and a majority of the laity. The clergy has been introducing the topic for years and despite the clergy's efforts of stacking the delegations, the laity consistently soundly defeats the issue. The United Methodist Men are responsible for much of the lay work in the church and the organization is at this time not likely to change its stance. The Methodist church is along with the LDS and RC a large supporter of scouting and would likely officially withdraw if a change in homosexual standards were to be instituted.

There are few LDS and Catholic troops in my council but the Methodist, Presbyterian, and Baptist churches would pull out overnight, the FOS would be decimated, and the council would fold. Most of the Board would resign.

There are few LDS and Catholic troops in my council but the Methodist, Presbyterian, and Baptist churches would pull out overnight, the FOS would be decimated, and the council would fold. Most of the Board would resign.

BadenP, Your observations are what several of us have been trying to make others understand. Wrecking economies over any consensus of scientific opinion is risky at best and foolish at worst. Consensus refers to what most believe and may have little to do with scientific truth. Those who wish to wreck western economies based on AGW are being foolish especially in light of evidence pointing to a hoax. To make reasonable adjustments in fossil fuels use is beneficial for many reasons and should be encouraged.

HICO_Eagle, I absolutely agree. The cooler fall that the northern clime is experiencing does not imply anything. I just find a certain amount of humor in the climate talks having a snowstorm and Obama returning to DC to one of the worst snowstorms in decades. Certainly a bad winter does not negate AGW. However, one of the predictions of the models was that the hurricanes in the Caribbean this past year would be larger and more numerous than in prior years while in fact it was just the opposite. The AGW model does not predict a downturn in temperatures as is currently being seen. So those are 2 failures of the model which does not negate the model but it does demonstrate that the model is incomplete or incorrect.

At Philmont a crew of 8-12 uses a single large pot. There is a single dish and everyone uses a large cup to eat and drink. Only a spoon is needed. Unless there is no water available, water bottles only and get the water for the pot from a local source (pond, stream, etc.) and purify (pump is often best though iodine works well when instructions are carefully followed). Coleman backpacking stoves and MSR stoves work well. A lightweight tarp makes a good dining fly. Check on the internet for Coop Wright's Philmont Advisor's Guide for good ideas (costs ~$10 and goes to a troop).

A recent New England Journal of Medicine paper demonstrated that smokers are better off to continue smoking than to gain weight. Obesity is a serious health problem that increases the likelihood of many diseases. How can Scouting portray itself to be high adventure when the scouters are obese? Finally, as a physician, scouter, and on the healthlodge staff during two summers, the problem of leaving it to the local MD is that the physician is not likely to understand the rigors to be faced. Too often the mental image that the physician has is of a comedic summer camp that they have seen on television. They do not understand how rigorous scouting can be. The scouter wants to get the approval and is therefore not likely to expound on the strenuous nature of some of the program. The physician is busy and will likely not read a thorough description of possible program. Thus, for too many scouters the physician blessing is not from an adequately informed and knowledgeable physician. Altitude issues are not covered in much detail unless the physician's residency (training) is in a mountainous area. So they may not even know about the increased risks. So having the local physician (or worse a non-physician provider) make the decision is also not a good solution. I do not fit the weight guidelines and so this affects me as well but it is the right thing to do. We should not be talking to our scouts about fitness when we are obese.

After Brent's post, here from www.drudgereport.com: Minnesota braces for 'snowiest Christmas in 30 years'... Winter freeze kills 79 in Poland... Plummeting temps, snowfall causing chaos from Moscow to Milan...

Pack, I use believe in because at this time AGW is more a belief than scientific fact. The error bars on the data are sometimes larger than the effect being postulated. So those that say AGW is settled are believers. If they were truly scientists, they would say that their model predicts increasing temperatures as the CO2 level rises AND that their model has many limitations. They do not readily admit that all models have flaws and are especially bad for making long range projections. Instead, the AGW proponents are saying that their models are reality and that certain actions should be taken or otherwise there will be serious problems in the next several decades. So weather models which are not accurate for more than a few days are now accurate for decades? To make such statements is to be a believer because there does not exist enough hard evidence for a good scientist to make such claims. String theory likely explains our universe. To date, there are no experiments that have been conceived that directly test string theory. I am a scientist when I say that there is a good theoretical foundation for string theory to be correct. If I say that string theory explains our universe, I am a believer instead.

Merlyn, Please take the time to read the article, the sodomy was performed with a broomstick. To say that all sexual abuse forced and about power is forget about coercive relationships. Oftentimes, an adult having sex with a youth is coercive in nature and it has everything to do with sexual gratification. This is sexual abuse. The youth will have permanent scars which are often expressed in adult life as difficulty developing and maintaining relationships. This is true whether the abuse is same sex or heterosexual in nature. From my reading of news articles on the web and personal experiences with local council issues, coercive relationships are far more common than power issue assaults.

Beevah, I am surprised that you consider people who do not believe in AGW to be 'hacksters'. There are legitimate climate scientists from Ivy league schools and other major American universities as well as major foreign universities that do not believe in AGW. PCA is one of many techniques to analyze multivariate problems though not necessarily the best in nonlinear systems (the climate is extremely nonlinear). There are all of the elements of a major hoax at this time. If the left allows an investigation, the question of a hoax may be answered. AGW is at best a belief and at worst a fraud. That does not mean that the country would not be best served to move toward energy independence - something that republican and democrat presidents have long promised but done little to accomplish. A reasonable program to decrease greenhouse gases makes sense if it does not wreck economies.

GaHillBilly, Merlyn invariably shows himself to be willing to show his lack of understanding and to attack others who have clearly demonstrated him to wrong. He has done so again. He does not counter valid arguments but picks a small point to attempt to insult. Since he is clearly not knowledgeable about the importance initial conditions for nonlinear simultaneous partial differentials equations or other topics of importance to the debate - he should be ignored. I always regret responding to his poor arguments and tell myself to ignore him. He will keep saying nonsense until everyone else gets tired of his posts and stops posting allowing the thread to die.

Merlyn, You obviously have absolutely no understanding of the politics of research in our world. There is absolutely no need to demonstrate that thousands are participatory in a hoax. CRU provides most of the information used by the IPCC to declare AGW. Since the results and motivations of members of the CRU are in question, then AGW can clearly be a hoax. Since you are not able or willing to understand how science works - not the way that we all wish that it works - you will never admit the obvious possibility of an AGW hoax. I would only be insulted if the person was a knowledgeable scientist which you have shown yourself not to be.

Merlyn, Once again you demonstrate your lack of scientific training. Piltdown man was a hoax but not ALL organizations were participating. Most were mislead. They assumed that the scientists were being honest because that is what science is built upon. If the people who have controlled most of the global warming debate have mislead the rest of the field, then AGW is a hoax. There is some reason to believe that this is the case. Unlike some others on this group, I am not certain that AGW has been proven to be a hoax but there is certainly enough evidence to bring it under scrutiny. By the way, your characterization of my word usage as 'oxymoronic' instead of addressing the issues confirms my assertions.