BS-87

Have you approached your District Program Chair, DE, or District Chair about wanting to join that committee?

Base If you really think that the problem having too many professionals, you've never been a member of your District's Key-3. If you were you'd probably see that your District Executives are dying to get these kinds of programs in place, but is being met with our all too handy volunteer eye to realism. The problem is that your DE's are not program directors or event planners, they're salesmen, recruiters, motivators, and communicators. As I don't know your District I cannot say for sure, but if you stopped by the office one day and talked to your DE's and stress your concerns, they'd have your District Chair or Program Chair approach you about serving as a District Cub Camping Chair. This is for a few reasons, mainly to bring you into the fold you're fighting against or complaining about so you have a greater understanding, but also so you can use your passion for the subject to bring something awesome to the program in your District. That's probably a good challenge, go do it!

@ qwazse I understand where you're coming from with thinking that these issues won't hold back individuals from joining. That's the absolute truth. What is also true though is that there are organizations and communities that are holding us back from getting more face time with kids because of these issues. What an organization like the Boy Scouts requires is to be the dominant youth organization in the community, with nothing coming as close in terms of size and influence in that community. We cannot gain influence and therefore cannot gain numbers in communities that differ from us so grossly ideologically speaking. We want to go into communities and say, "Hey, we're the Boy Scouts and we are the most effective way to install quality leadership, morals, skills, and citizenship in your sons." We don't want to say, "Hey, we're the Boy Scouts and we don't like this and we don't like this and, etc... Want to join us in not liking stuff?"

BSA24 - Wow... Those are actually some great ideas for changes that reflect current styles kids may prefer. The Uniforms being brought down to the simple green and black is actually reflective of current styles and minimalism. What really blows me away though is the idea of a community-wide "Scouts Night". Many communities recognize Wednesday night is for Religion Classes or Catechism, and scouting families all know there's a "scout night" in that community, but it's not something other organizations or sports even bother to work around! If we can utilize our established name and brand image to tell people "Hey! Don't plan your games or events on Tuesday nights! That's Scouts Night and your boys should be there instead!" I don't know if that kind of community power has vanished since the 60's, and we may have lost some of that power once put in the negative spotlight for the stance against homosexuality and atheism...

What changes are you referencing? I do notice a lot of great ambitions that may or may not succeed, just not many changes...

John-in-KC is absolutely correct. Your DE should have already met with the CO. It sounds like your problems stem from a disconnect between your leadership and your CO's leadership. It may take your DE and Dist. Commish to do this unfortunately. But once everyone at the table has a better understanding of what that piece of paper they sign every year means, you'll hopefully see a positive change. The worst that can happen is your DE and Dist Commish will hear "We're not doing that." But if your CO uses the scouts by name in their fundraisers, they don't hate scouts and they don't hate your boys. That's positive, because that means they want to help, but either have a conflict with your leadership or just don't know how. Right now they may think the only way they can help is by offering a place to meet and a place to store your stuff...

This sounds eerily familiar... Call your DE.

I guess what this spin-off thread is showing is that there's such a powerful stigma around MJ now that everyone is starting to think they're an expert. When we come across something that's rarely talked about, there just aren't very strong opinions... Kind of makes you wonder if any of us truly actually understand anything we talk about in the Issues and Politics Board...

I heard it once (probably in a middle school health class) that ecstasy is like taking gray matter the size of ice cream scoops out of your brain... I agree with you though. If these preliminary studies are right, would ecstasy be good as a controlled medicine for kids with autism or people suffering from severely flattened affect as a negative symptom of a schizophreniform disorder?

When I read this article in my online browsing, I was forced to make a spin-off of the thread concerning Ecstasy being unacceptable on all counts. http://psychcentral.com/news/2010/12/17/drug-%E2%80%98ecstasy%E2%80%99-may-help-individuals-with-schizophrenia-autism/21876.html This appears to be a legitimate thing to consider before denouncing drugs altogether. If morphine and vicodin can be used (and abused) for pain. If marijuana can be used in treatment of depression, anxiety, glaucoma, anorexia, and chemo-relief. If we consider all things that could be useful but also abused, why couldn't we use ecstasy in the treatment of schizophrenia and autism?

@ Boyce Doesn't taking out more than you put into something like that where the money isn't invested but just taken from the new investors to give to the mature investors called a Ponzi scheme? and illegal?(This message has been edited by BS-87)

I honestly can't tell if that post is sarcastic... And yes I do feel bad for the folks that win great prizes they have to sell to pay for the taxes on them. I know I'd be furious if I just won a double showcase on the Price is Right and had to pay $40,000 in taxes, meaning I have to sell both the Boat I won and SUV I won that would've hauled it. Guess you'll just have to settle for the crappy kitchen set and trip to Peru that are left over... But in all seriousness, as JoeBob said, there needs to be a consideration for the Small Business owners in our country. A business that survives that first generational handoff and change of ownership should face the question of whether the new owners are competent, not whether or not they can pay 55% of a company's net assets out-of-pocket.

And that's when it all turned around. A last resort that sounded silly but worked.

Initially for the anorexic component, but something about metabolizing something or another made it uncomfortably psychoactive whereas the MJ only created dizziness at worst for unpleasant symptoms. We felt the decision pretty obvious.

While I agree that's unfortunate, it's identical to the complaints about alcohol. Whoever did that is a disturbed individual, and the act was not a manifestation of his "high". That's like someone saying their house was robbed by illegal immigrants, so we should deport all hispanics. I didn't want to take this argument personally, but it bothers me for a few reasons. Probably mainly being an individual that after only 9 months of this prescription, went from severe obsessive compulsive behaviors and clinical depression to a normal, healthy life and have gone more than a year without any treatment, especially that prescription. Did any other therapy or medication work? The plain and simple answer is no. There were some SSRI's that actually aggravated the condition and caused hospitalization. And being under the influence was the best form of therapy, as it taught coping strategies and how to reach a calm state of mind even without the drug. The mental disorders had sparked an eating disorder in which I went from 220 lbs to 140 lbs, and went from overweight to underweight and malnourished, further aggravating the condition. Within a month of starting MJ I was back up to 160 and eventually managed a healthy weight and diet at 170-180 lbs. I doubt you want to keep hearing more about what REAL benefits this drug can have when used as a treatment, but just know that you can't ignore case studies like this.

As I said before, I can believe that smoking MJ is not the best medicine. What I cannot be made to believe though is that smoking MJ is not medicinal in any way. Those who smoke it for its medicinal benefits will tell you about the long list of other medications or remedies that were either too invasive, intensive, or just did not work. For some of these people, I think there may even be a placebo effect associated with the "I'm getting away with something" psyche. Who are you to say that's wrong?

I know of units that will put limits on MBC's saying they probably don't have enough expertise to teach more than 4 different MB's well.

I'm nearly certain every boy in a POR had an adult adviser in my troop growing up. If you're the Scribe you work with the Treasurer, SPL with the SM, each PL had an ASM, QM with the ASM who kept the trailer at his house, etc... And this system really seemed to work for us, as it got a large number of adults involved in a positive way. A boy may say I want to do "this" but has no idea how to do it, and so they walk through it with their adviser. That is, unless the youth didn't keep in communication with his adviser, and in that case the advisers were more than happy to watch us fail, but come in afterwards to make sure we understand what we should have done. When you have adults that want to set the boys they work with up for success, it creates a great leadership and learning experience in a safe way.

Actually Beavah, I think vol_scouter was referring to the only medical reason to smoke MJ. As you don't have to keep the pill down as it's inhaled instead, with something like a vaporizer you're not even inhaling smoke. Tobacco is on it's way to being banned, but why? It's effects are known and there was a time it served as a huge cash crop and source of income both in production and taxes for our country. And I argue your point on alcohol, because moderate quantities is not what the problem populations consume. And I assume we're talking about problem populations like kids since you're not attacking the cancer patients and grandmas out there. And under heavy consumption alcohol can not only cause greater impairment than MJ, it can also be toxic even lethal! Also, you're vastly understating the potential medical benefits of MJ in medicine, as it could easily become the least expensive and least intensive form of treatment for many conditions.

Really doesn't bother me if someone self medicates with alcohol or ecstasy. Sounds a lot like the government trying to protect people from themselves. If I knew something would help me feel better when I'm sick, I'd at least like to make an informed decision myself as to whether it's worth whatever risks are associated with that remedy. What are the risks of utilizing MJ medicinally or recreationally anyway? Oh yeah... Reefer Madness... Rather be in climate change denial than 1950's irrational fears denial...

I can believe that considering smoking it is not the best form for the medicine. Smoking just about anything is an awful idea so far as respiratory health is concerned. But the THC has very serious medical uses that whatever article you took these quotes from is intentionally overlooking. For people with severe nausea from chemotherapy, it can ease their nausea and create appetite. For people suffering from a number of anxieties and depressions, the effects are incredible. Relaxation and euphoric sensation is widely accepted as treatment for these conditions. If you don't believe me, explain Xanex. The UM doctors would not ignore this, and so somewhere along the way your article did, and intentionally used the quote of saying smoking it is not medicine to try and discredit it as a medicine altogether.

I'm not saying the costs won't be in check, I'm saying we're not going to see much if any reduction in personal costs.

Something makes me seriously doubt making everyone buy health insurance will reduce premiums for us "schmucks" who are already dutifully paying. Increased customer volume means greater staffing needs and advertising needs (imagine the competition we're going to start seeing). And why would a company that gets a steady income from you at your own will decide "Hey, we really have nothing better to do with this money like employing people or pumping it into advertising: let's lower the rates."

Social Security and Medicare are probably unconstitutional

You're suiting the context of the situation to fit your needs and avoid being refuted. The word terrorist doesn't necessarily mean blowing up people or buildings. Some would say that the founding fathers of the US were terrorists. In the case of causing the establishment harm for ideological reasons, we call these people revolutionaries. Something tells me Assange takes pleasure out of thinking himself a revolutionary...