eisely

As of December 12, this provision has survived the House-Senate conference committee and is int the bill being reported out to both houses for final approval. Looks like it might make it into law, per the following Associated Press summary: _________________________ Education Bill at a Glance By The Associated Press, Details of education bill approved by House-Senate conference committee: -Authorizes $26.5 billion in 2002 for K-12 education - about $8 billion more than this year. The total is $4 billion more than President Bush (news - web sites) requested but nearly $6 billion less than Senate Democrats wanted. -Requires annual state tests in reading and math for every child in grades three through eight beginning in 2004-05 school year. Schools whose scores fail to improve two years in a row could receive more federal aid. If scores still fail to improve, low-income students can receive funding for tutoring or transportation to another public school. A school in which scores don't improve over six years could be restaffed. In schools already considered poor performers, parents could receive tutoring or transportation funds as early as this fall. -Requires schools to raise all students to reading and math proficiency in the next 12 years. Schools must also close gaps in scores between wealthy and poor students and white and minority students. -Allows churches or other religious groups to provide tutoring and after-school programs. -Requires states to ensure within four years that all teachers are qualified to teach in their subject area. States could require teachers to pass subject tests or major in their field in college. -Allows school districts to spend federal teacher-quality funds on training, hiring or higher salaries for teachers. -Provides aid to build new charter schools and help existing ones. -Requires schools to develop periodic ``report cards'' showing a school's standardized test scores compared to others locally and statewide. -Provides nearly $1 billion per year for the next five years to improve reading - three times as much as this year - with a goal of making sure every student can read by third grade. -Allows 50 states to use a small portion of their federal funds as they wish. A pilot program further frees seven states and 150 school districts from most restrictions on spending. -Targets Title I funds, slated for low-income students, to the poorest students. -Requires schools to test students with limited English skills to ensure they are proficient in English after three consecutive years of attending school in the United States. -Strips federal funding from any school district that discriminates against the Boy Scouts or similar groups that bar homosexuals. -Provides money to help schools form partnerships with colleges and universities to improve science and math instruction.

At a minimum these smokers should be field stripping their cigarette butts.

Does this den leader have something specific in mind to do with the funds? Was this discussed in committee, or at least with the parents of boys in the den, beforehand? I don't think there are any real hard and fast rules about these matters, and a little competition among dens in fund raising is a healthy thing. But this one sounds a bit over the top. Dens should not be amassing funds on their own without some kind of purpose in mind. If this purpose is understood and agreed to, the other dens may follow along to the betterment of the entire program. It is not a good idea to leave these amounts of cash in the hands of den leaders. The pack treasurer should deposit these funds in the pack bank account, and ear mark them in all reports as funds belonging to a particular den.

If your theory about Methane is correct, I suggest that we have a patriotic duty to recapture and recycle such. That also engenders a patriotic duty to create more methane.

Hi Mike, We're having too much fun arguing. You would ask us to give this up?

Of course it was tongue in cheek. I do note however that some midwestern state, I think Minnesota or Wisconsin, has hired its first Wiccan chaplain for its prison system. Somebody here in California was asleep at the switch on that one. We are supposed to be in the lead on these things. Rooster7, I don't really think that scouting is relativistic in all matters. All I was trying to point out is the tension that arises from neutrality on some matters coupled with a declaration of dedication to moral conduct. My sense is that Baden Powell, and the Americans who organized scouting in this country, all recognized that, aside from very particular practices, all religions tend to point in the same direction as far as basic conduct towards others is concerned, and that this should be encouraged. To answer some of OGE's original questions, past conduct (sins if you prefer) should not automatically preclude anyone from participating. I think we automatically grant a presumption of good intentions and a willingness to adhere to the standards and specific rules of scouting to all comers, until they prove otherwise. The level of trust does have its limits however, with respect to convicted felons, and "avowed homosexuals." But even in the case of convicted felons there may be positive examples. Supppose you as a scoutmaster were approached by a father who had spent some years in the big house, had found God through a program such as Charles Colson's program, and was bringing his son to join your troop. Suppose further that he had lived an exemplary life subsequent to his incarceration and asked to participate as a volunteer. Would you automatically turn this person down? I think few would answer this question affirmatively.

Oh no, another double poster. Oh no, another double poster. Hey Rooster7, give Jude Jude a hand.

Here in Babylon by the Bay, the animal activists recently changed the city's codes to relabel pet "owners" to pet "guardians" or something like that. A number of lawyers are still having heart burn over this out of fear that the word change impacts rights and responsibilities of human pet guardians towards the pets. Haven't heard much about this lately. 9 - 11 seems to have eclipsed a great deal. Of course we have the Taliban of Marin County to talk about now. Treason as an alternative life style choice ... but I digress.

Good for you Martha of Melbourne. Is that Melbourne, OZ?

Sounds like fun. Just hope that PETA doesn't find out what you're up to with the roosters.

REI is not cheap, but at least you likely get quality. Our local store grants 10% to scouting units and maintains a list of authorized buyers. This is in lieu of the normal 10% patronage dividend that members of the coop receive. You cannot get both the discount and the dividend.

Scouters are passionate if nothing else. I agree with Rooster7 that stirring the pot a bit is helpful. Although most people go directly from "morally straight" to the gay issue, it really is much deeper than that. According to my online dictionary the word moral is defined as "of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior," and morality is defined a "doctrine or system of moral conduct." The scouting movement, by incorporating the idea of morality into its oath, creates an ambivalence about morality that all would do well to recognize and accept. I would suggest that all scouters subscribe to at least the minimum precepts: 1. By inserting morality into the oath, we reserve the right to judge the conduct of ourselves and others under some system of beliefs. 2. Scouting is neutral as to individual religious practices and teaches tolerances among all religions. We will know that full tolerance has been achieved when there are religious awards for Wiccan. 3. In its neutrality, once one gets past the scout law, it is not unfair to say that scouting could be characterized as "morally relativistic" 4. It is very hard to maintain any sense moral conduct with youth today in light of everything they are exposed to. 5. While many scouters, including regular participants in this forum, are very intense in their religious beliefs, I would wager they are far more tolerant and soft spoken about their beliefs than the way they occasionally come across in this forum. There are very few real bigots in scouting. Everybody ought to take a deep breath and chill out a bit. Harking to another thread on a similar subject, I think it was Mike Long who suggested that a good place to start is with the belief system of the chartered organization. Since many, if not most, units are sponsored by some sort of religiously oriented group, that is not a bad place to start. Over two hundred years ago, philosophers such as Immanuel Kant tried to address the problem of moral conduct in the absence of religious belief. Since there is no great following of Kant today, one could argue that the effort failed. Scouting by its very organizational premise creates a tension between the general and the particular that we can only discuss and never settle to everybody's satisfaction.

I agree with OGE that the name "mafikeng" appears to come from Baden Powell's personal history. Unless I am mistaken, the correct spelling of the town that was besieged was "Mafeking." Baden Powell was the senior British officer commanding the forces defending this town during the Boer War. It was his successful defense that made him a hero in Britain.

Has anyone noticed how many times this thread has been read? I would not have thought that this would be such a hot issue, but I guess that it is.

I think it would be mean spirited, counter productive, and unfair to any youth applicant to deny membership to the youth because of behavior by his or her parents. Unless the parents involved make a big deal of their relationship, how is anyone to know? I haven't heard anyone in this forum, even the most vociferous opponents of homosexuality, suggest that BSA should have a sex police asking questions about adult volunteers' sexual practices. These things become an issue when they move out of the privacy of the bed room into the newspapers, and, in case you hadn't noticed, it isn't BSA that puts these things in the papers. These stories usually originate with the individuals themselves. I was not the first regular participant in this forum to make the comparison, but I look at homosexuality in this context in much the same way I look at alcoholism. A reformed alcoholic could in fact be a wonderful example for youth, but I don't want a practicing alcoholic anywhere close to scout leadership. Likewise, I wouldn't deny membership to a youth just because a parent may be an alcoholic. Having such a youth in scouting may be a path to recovery for such a parent.

I don't know of anybody who wears class A uniforms on the trail. I think there is good reason to wear class A enroute to and from outings, and I intend to start enforcing more of that. At a recent training event, a scouter whose views are quite sound observed that he thought that he and the boys received more respect from the public when they were traveling in uniform. It is too bad that BSA does not have good uniforming short of class A, but I doubt that they will ever get there and be competitive on price and quality. There are other ways to distinguish scouts from ordinary campers in the back country. One way is to carry a small american flag, make a small flag pole out something (low impact of course), and fly a flag at the camp site. Another way is have "scouts own" at appropriate times and places. I am not a particularly religious person, but we do scouts own on my outings. A little prayer can't hurt, and might help. But I digress... In the climate that has arisen since 9-11, I suspect such scouts would be truly admired and not mocked.

OGE, It is always good to hear from you. I suspect that most of us have gay and lesbian friends, relatives, or co workers who are out of the closet. I personally have not used the terms "filth" and "degradation" in this context. After I have finished the reading I am doing, I will put up a post on that. That will be some time yet because I have a number of priorities, including preparation for Sunday's hike. Peace.

True enough. That is one reason that I never deducted amounts I paid for outings I was going on, or fees paid for summer camp that I was attending. But if I do incur an expense for which there is no clear and obvious benefit for myself or my sons, I have claimed the deduction. If there is a grey area, I resolve the doubt in favor of myself. I still pay plenty of taxes.

dedicated dad, Thanx for the additional information. I had not seen that particular definition of homophobic before. Words matter, and the misuse of words matter.

Concerning the word homophobic, the first word cited in the definition cited by sctmom is "irrational." I think my attitudes are quite rational. I refuse to accept the debate on these grounds. Homosexuality is not a benign life style. There are many homosexuals who live perfectly happy peaceful lives, but the overall incidence of crime, disease, and child abuse perpetrated by homosexuals suggests that this is not just another benign lifestyle choice. Having said all that, homosexuals, like all other citizens, have the right to live in peace protected by the law in the same manner as any other citizen. Incidentally, as Rooster knows, I view homosexual orientation as a matter of choice, not inborn tendency. Everthing I have read so far refutes the rather poor science upon which the claim that homosexuals are born, not made, rests. Bottom line, I reject the word "irrational" as a predicate for the definition "homophobic" as applied to boy scouts.

On Tuesday evening, December 4, the City Council of San Diego voted to renew the scouts' lease. See the story below from the San Diego Union Tribune. The claim that enjoyment of the park was somehow reduced by the scouts' presence was refuted in part by the fact that the scouts make the facility available to non-scout groups, including organized homosexual groups. In the meantime the ACLU chugs on. __________________ City renews Boy Scout lease Opponents decry group's ban on gays, nonbelievers By Ray Huard UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER December 5, 2001 The Boy Scouts won an extension of their Balboa Park lease from the San Diego City Council yesterday, despite protests over the Scouts' policy of banning homosexuals and those who don't believe in God. Mayor Dick Murphy said he opposed the Boy Scouts' policy on homosexuals but did not see that as reason enough to deny the organization continued use of Balboa Park. "I support the Boy Scout lease because I am unwilling to punish 25,000 San Diego Boy Scouts by prohibiting them from using Balboa Park in order to send a protest to national Scout leaders in Texas," said Murphy, a former Scout. "That would be unfair to San Diego children and I will not do that." Words fly in debate over lease The Boy Scouts, headquartered in Dallas, have a national policy refusing to allow homosexuals or those who do not profess a belief in God to be Scouts or Scout leaders. The Desert Pacific Council, which includes Scouts from San Diego and Imperial Counties, has no formal position on the national policy. On a 6-3 vote, the council agreed to extend the Scouts' lease for 25 years, with a city option for 15 more years. The Scouts had sought a 50-year renewal, but Councilman Scott Peters recommended the shorter term, saying it was in keeping with recommendations from a citizens committee on government efficiency. Voting for the extension were Murphy, Peters, Byron Wear, George Stevens, Brian Maienschein and Jim Madaffer. Opposing it were Toni Atkins, Donna Frye and Ralph Inzunza Jr. "I sometimes forget that civil rights enjoyed by some people aren't enjoyed by all," said Atkins, a lesbian. Later, she added, "Liberty and justice for all doesn't mean me tonight." Frye said that by renewing the lease, the council was violating a city law and a council policy against discrimination. "If we do not agree with the law, we have the ability to change it, but we must not ignore it," Frye said. But city lawyers said municipal law and policy do not apply to Boy Scout membership policies but to the organization's use of city land. As long as the Scouts don't keep anyone from using the land they lease, they are within city law and policy, the lawyers said. And Boy Scouts representatives said they make their compound available to a variety of nonprofit groups, including groups for lesbians and gay men. Peters said he would ask the City Council at a later date to pass a resolution calling for the national Boy Scout organization to change its policy. Murphy said he could support a call for lifting the ban on homosexuals but was not so sure about calling for a change in the policy prohibiting nonbelievers from being Scouts or Scout leaders. The current 50-year lease on the 15.6 acres the Scouts have used for $1 a year was not due to expire until 2007, but the Scouts sought an early renewal to make it easier to raise money to improve the property. "You need to be able to tell your donors you're going to be around for a while," said Matt Peterson, a lawyer for the Boy Scouts. The new 25-year term will begin when the city manager and Scouts officials sign the deal. Under the lease, the Scouts must spend $1.7 million over the next seven years to upgrade Camp Balboa, the name they have given the land they use. The Scouts also will begin paying the city an annual administrative fee initially set at $2,500. A federal lawsuit is pending against the city by the American Civil Liberties Union, asking that the current lease with the Boy Scouts be canceled unless the Scouts eliminate their bans on gays and nonbelievers. Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, and others urged the council to postpone a vote to give the Scouts time to change their policy. By renewing the lease before the existing one expires, "You pre-empt what could be a very productive discussion the Scouts could have," said Kehoe, a former member of the City Council. Peterson, the Scouts' lawyer, said the new lease renewal includes provisions allowing for early termination should the ACLU win its challenge. More than 400 people attended the council hearing, which was moved from the City Administration Building to the adjacent Plaza Hall in anticipation of a large crowd. The hall has room for up to 800 people. Dozens spoke passionately for and against the lease renewal, their remarks at times punctuated by applause and cheers. "If you renew this lease, you send a message that all are not equal, all are not included, all are not welcome. And you will use taxpayers' money to do that," said Delores Jacob, interim director of the Lesbian & Gay Men's Community Center. Herb Johnson, a Scout leader, said the policy banning gays "is untimely and it needs to be changed." But, he said, it would be unfair to punish the San Diego region's Scouts for a national policy. "The truth of the matter is, you've got 25,000 kids at stake here. We can't penalize these 25,000 youngsters," Johnson said. John Beck urged lease opponents to be patient until the policy is changed. "In the meantime, let's work together with compassion and understanding and not create unproductive adversarial relationships," Beck said. Anna Matthews, a member of the city's Human Relations Commission, said: "All residents are entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of city facilities or facilities." She said the lease would deny that right to some. Several former Scouts and Scout leaders joined those objecting to the lease renewal. "This is no different than racism. It just has a different coat on it," said Scott McLaughlin, who identified himself as a former Eagle Scout. Peterson said anyone can use Camp Balboa when it is not being used by the Boy Scouts. He said about "one in five" people who use the camp are not Boy Scouts. Peterson said the Scouts have invited a variety of groups to use the camp, including the ACLU and the Lesbian & Gay Men's Community Center. But ACLU representative Dale Kelly Bankhead said that, as a practical matter, some people are excluded for the camp most of the time because of the Boy Scouts policy. "Most of the time, it is only for those boys who the Boy Scouts feel are worthy," Bankhead said. In a separate, unanimous vote, the council yesterday agreed to extend for 25 years the Girl Scouts' lease on 15 acres of Balboa Park land adjacent to the Boy Scout compound. That lease also has a 15-year city option. The Girl Scouts have leased the land for $1 a year since 1955. Their current lease doesn't expire until 2005. But, like the Boy Scouts, the Girl Scouts want to begin raising money to improve the property. Under the new lease, the Girl Scouts must spend $1.9 million over the first seven years of the new lease on improvements. There was no objection to the renewing that lease because Girl Scouts do not ban homosexuals or nonbelievers.

Balboa Park in San Diego is quite large. It is unusual for cities in this part of the US for its size and proximity to downtown. I don't know how big the park actually is. I didn't even know the scouts had a facility there until just recently. The park is the site of several museums and the, rightly, world famous San Diego Zoo. The idea that some peoples' enjoyment of the park is adversely impacted by leasing 16 acres to the scouts is another over reaching claim by those who would destroy scouting to satisfy their own personal agendas.

Glenn, All of the above are correct. You are supposed to be confused. I am currently an assistanct scoutmaster, regularly attend committee meetings, participate actively, and vote in those rare situations when a vote is called for. It may not be legal, but that is the way most units do business. Don't worry about it. I think that BSA draws the distinction between unit or "program" leaders and committee members, because BSA envisions the committee as a means for the chartered organization to oversee the unit. That is an appropriate and necessary function. As I commented earlier, who gets to vote should rarely be an issue. Raising the issue could cause hurt feelings. The idea of getting some outsider to speak to your committee about this is sound. sctmomm's point about there being a requirement to actually name committee members on the charter document is also well taken. Another reason for tigermom to ask to see the charter.

Correction/clarification You have to itemize deductions on your tax return in order to deduct charitable contributions. The idea of allowing "non-itemizers" to deduct at least some charitable contributions is merely a proposal, yet to be written into the tax code.

FScouter's and Chippewa29's points about looking at the Webelos program are well taken. The solution for this kid may be a better Webelos program rather than trying to jump ahead into boy scouts. If the dad feels that strongly about, challenge him to help make the program better.