Gonzo1

Merlyn, You said: "I also don't see what "bending over backwards" is being done of behalf of atheists -- do you have any actual examples?" How about all of the schools that can't charter BSA units. That's about 9,000 examples. I'm sure if you had a groupd of atheists who want to use a school gym or meeting room, you could probably get it. How about towns and cities being sued over Christmas trees, the media calling them Holiday Trees so atheists (and other religious minorities) don't get upset. Do you if all of us on this forum lived in Tehran, we would be allowed to have this discussion. If we all believed as we do, SSScout is a Friend, I'm Methodist, others are Catholic, etc, do you think Ahmadinajad (sounds like I'm in a jihad) would allow for Christian displays or Jewish displays so as to not offend the minority? You gotta be nuts. Be glad you live in a country where you're free to choose and believe (or not believe) as you wish! There are countries where christian are murdered for being Christians. The function of government does not include having to deal with silly lawsuits brought by the ACLU either, but our taxpayer dollars have to deal with that too. How can you possibly be hurt by a nativity scene display at Christmas time (the time of year occurring on or about 4 days after the winter solstice) when the rest of the year there's nothing there. Could we say that we honor your nothingness by not having anything there the rest of the year? We the people have the right to peacably assemble. That includes YOU. It will probably be a matter of time before atheism is recognized as a religion. Go ask your local school if your group can meet at the school and let us know what they said. My hope is that because we can't meet there NOW, you can't meet there either. I wish we could meet there. Merlyn, the difference between a school "owning and operating" a BSA unit is that the school principal isn't the scoutmaster or cubmaster, but rather allows the unit to meet there and approves of unit leadership.

It's not the public school that discriinates against atheists. Could atheists have a group meeting in a school, probably so, maybe now, more than ever. You're civils rights are there for you. But, why is it that the majority must bend over backward for 3% or the populations so you won't be offended? I'm OK with a city spending a few buck for a cross, menora, star of David, etc. Remember, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, you think it's OK our civil rights to "peacably assemble" should be trampled too. The minority loses, you didn't get physically hurt, you just lose. Your rights remain intact. So do mine, except when someone in the minority might get offended.

berets? How do you find them?

Merlyn, You said: ... removing public school charters wasn't an attempt to "force" the BSA to do anything; it was to force public schools to disassociate themselves from a program that required those schools to practice religious discrimination. Well, here's the First Ammendment: Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. All of the separation of church and state people make this false claim, it also says "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" BUT, we can't have the "free excercise thereof" can we? There is no "separation of church and state". I heard on Paul Harvey yesterday that 91 % of the US says they are Christian, only 3% said they are atheist. So, please don't waste my time over a small percentage of the 3% trying to get into BSA. 3 percent? C'mon, move onto something else. Freedom of religion doesn't guarantee you or anybody freedom from it. Don't like seeing a cross, look away. Want scouting? check out www.spiralscouts.org

Many of you are older than I, some are not. some of you study history, I study the human body and radiology. If General Westmoreland were still alive, he would tell you we won, He was the on the ground commander for much of the Viet Nam War. OK, so people get plucked off roof tops, it doesn't look pretty. The media can paint any picture it wants, the media can be wrong adn the American public will see wahat the media want you to know. Here's another of example of the media "tinkring" with fact. Recent polling data show Mitt Romney low in the polls, BUT, he has raised more money than other republican candidates, how can this be? If he' doing so poorly, why so much cash? Maybe he's not really doing so poorly. Dug, when military commanders were in charge, things went well. When politicians got involved, (you know, we can't upset the chinese or the soviets) things went down hill. Viet Nam really isn't germaine to this discussion anyway. Pack, I'll still do the report. OGE, it's the images, the pictures that the Amercian public see and remember. Recall the presidential campaign with the little girl and the picture of the mushroom cloud? Just a commercial ruined it for one guy. Was that McGovern? How about Dukakis in the tank? Early in this war, things with the media were good. But as usually is the case, anything good for America, bad for liberals, anything bad for Bush, good for liberals. Anything good for America or Bush, bad for liberals. Consequently, the media rarely, if ever, show anything good coming out of Iraq.

SSScout, #2 made me laugh. Regarding guarding places of interest. Many places were guarded, but not all. Oil fields were guarded so terrorists (or Saddam) wouldn't blow them up like Saddam did in 1991. In some cases, Saddam deliberately poured oil into the Persian Gulf from off shore wells. Actually, WMD have been found, got about 2 days newsplay and then it was dropped. (Mustard gas cannisters and mass graves of people executed) The war isn't about WMD, that's only part of it. Pack, I can't wait to go camping with you. Afterward, I'd like to organize a scouter.com campout, maybe Rainy Mountain or somewhere in the national forest? Dug, Viet Nam was a greater success than the media allowed to be reported. A quick search shows: " Big Story is sui generis, a book as remarkable as the event it describes. The book punctured not only the myth of Tet, but the myth of the news coverage surrounding it, revealing exactly how the national media acted as a catalyst for the loss of a war." taken from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/12/the_legacy_of_tet.html I firmly believe the media lies to us everyday. I know the government lies to us. They should at times.

Kilo Charlie, Wow, You said: "Seems like a false dichotomy. I think there's a couple more possibilities: (assuming that, in using the word "with", you actually meant "support") 1. You don't support "us", i.e., Bush and his military strategies and priorities, and you do support the terrorists (the terrorists themselves, and those who aid them) 2. You do support "us", and you do not support the terrorists (a good chunk of the American people, probably including yourself) 3. You do support "us", and you do support the terrorists (probably not possible, save for a few wacky conspiracy theories) 4. You do not support "us", and you do not support the terrorists (another good sized portion of the American population, who do not support terrorism, but feel that Bush is not addressing the problem in an effective way) If we dice this up anymore, we'll be back to wht the definition of "is" is and "I did not have s#xual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky". Go back, listen to what Bush said about what is now known as the Bush Doctrine when he made his speech to the Nation.

These three related: Let's look at philosophy Some say drop DRP Others say no Without Him can't grow 'Cause with Him, the best scouts we'll be With Merlyn or LisaBobbie We'll discuss merits of DRP 'Round campfire we'll chat 'Bout this thing or that Hopefully, friends we can still be I look up to my friend Packsaddle A teacher, not herder of cattle We usually agree But not always you see Down a river we someday can paddle

Professor Packsaddle, Assignment received, but will take some time. I'm going to guess you're a few years older than I, so my research would be like you doing a similar report on WWII, no real first recollection, just reaserch. BTW, I'm 45. I usually see the glass half full as I'm usually optomistic. And while I agree we don't always agree, I enjoy these chats and others and look forward to a visit 'round a campfire, dinner, maybe a canoe trip, etc. I agree that the people in her district elected her. My question is what in the world is the House Speaker doing over there in the first place. The Speaker belongs in the Capitol and in her district, not the Green Zone and Syria. LH, Interesting. I think it could be extended to both. I think the President, in his original context, suggested that "you" were to mean potential allied nations and "us" to mean the United States of America. As in other countries are with the USA or support and maybe sponsor terrorists, leaving not much wiggle room. I know already, Switzerland is always neutral, Vatican City always wants peace, Lichtenstein doesn't have an army, yada yada yada. LH, another thing is is the old "draw down" of the 1990's. It's one thing IMO to scale down a military, but another to cut it to the bone. Maybe if the military weren't cut down so badly, we would have more troops and equipment to use.

OGE, I grew up about 3 miles from National College, but I attended Logan College of Chiropractic in St. Louis. I earned a BS degree from the University of the State of New York. It's ironic that Logan College comes up in this thread. Logan was built from a former monastery (sp) and the library was located in what used to be the chapel. Hmm, monks praying for whatever they pray about and chiropractic students praying for a C or better. OGE, send me a PM, I'll explain more. G

You earn them, wear them. Personal taste will dictate how many rows to wear. I've seen some guys with 7 or 8 rows, IMO, it looks little silly, legal, but silly.

Packsaddle, Ah, fundamentalist. That's accurate. I also know that BSA DRP is stricly flexible and ambiguous. I'm aware and OK with people of others religions come to BSA. Also, if someone's God is a rock, I guess that's OK too, odd, but OK. If you need a guest speaker or sub for your class, please let me know, I'm free Tuesday afternoons. I can put a world real (non-classroom) spin on things with a chiropractic angle.

As he was tired and spent

LongHaul, It seem to me that democrats are makingpolitical hay out of the war and THEIR anti-war stance. When I was a general's aide, the insde scoop was that this war on terror would last 7-15 years at the least. It would take place in many countries and allies may change along the way. I thik the media was with "us" (America) until we captured Saddam and Bush declared "mission accomplished" on the carrier. Not the best move in my opinion. It seems that the "mainstream media" turned on us at that moment. I agree that safety is paramount for the troop. I abhor your use of the term "retreat". We may as well throw up our hands and wave a white flag. Would you agree that one measure of success might be thenumber of personnel captured on the battlefield? To date, we have taken thousands prisoner. THOUSANDS! Our enemy has 2 US soldiers. That's right, 2. I agree that congress has no business dictating to military comanders how to do the job. Let the people who have the knowledge make the decisions. How would Lovie Smith like it if we critisized his coaching in the Super Bowl, we're not football coaches. Here's an example of how biased the media is. During the time when democrats were in the minority, news reporters would ask Harry Reed and nancy Pelosi what they thought of a particular subject/topic. Now that republicans are the minority, reporters STILL go to Reed and Pelosi. Doesn't seem fair (unbiased), does it? Packsaddle, I believe we won in Viet Nam, but the "scoreboard" shows it differently. I wrote a paper on Kennedy's "best and brightest" and proved how they were neither best nor bright. Wars must be fought on the battlefield, not the floor of the house or senate. For what it's worth, Pelosi should get her rear end back to Washington and out of the middle east. I wonder how many trips Dennis Hastert took overseas? I don't think he did, but I could be wrong. I've heard on talk radio lately (yes, I'm one of THEM) who referred to Walter Cronkite as being somehwat responsible for ending the Viet Nam war with a single broadcast, not sure what is meant here. Remember, you're either with us, or, you're with the terrorists. Gonzo

We still disagree. It's sunny and 75 in Georgia, enjoy the snow. Packsaddle (and Merlyn and Lisa), as long as teachers administer tests, there will be prayer in schools. (wink)

KC9DD1, Now it seems you want to bring "tolerance" into play. Wel,, tolerance is a virtue, not a point in the Scout Law. I encourage being nice to all. About judges, I don't agree that all judges are correct and right. I don't believe that rapists, murderers, drug dealers, child molesters etc should be allowed to walk free. I don't agree that Roe vs Wade should be the law of the land. I think the Supreme Court erred in its ruling. The court should have considered ah, never mind. Those rules and requirements are a good thing BECAUSE they are the rules and requirements. BSA has them and we collectively want to be in BSA. You know, the exclude know in advance too. There is Campfire, Spiral Scouting, I'm sure there are others. Indeed, many people base their beliefs andvalues in something other than faith. Let's try this: Fill in the blank: On my honor, I will do my best, to do my duty to ___ and my country Hmm, what goes in the blank? So, if we kick God out of BSA by dropping the DRP, then we will have to change the Oath, the Law, heck, we might not even be prepared or do good turns. I most strongly believe that by lowering the standard, we would break the BSA. Like me and LisaBob, you and I will probably agree to disagree. I don't usually advocate gambling, but i enjoy it from time tom time. Ever play blackjack? Well, if the rule is to not go over 21, do you expect to be paid as a winner with 22? The rule is too not go over 21. Evmori? Packsaddle? Beavah? Eamonn? OGE? Other wise and knowledgable scouters, help me explain this please.

Well now, I think the rules have been in place since 1910? Give or take. BSA is strictly non-sectarian. If someone doesn't want to recite the oath, that's there business. But the person must agree to live by the Oath (promise) and law. I don't know what religious minorities think about the DRP, the USA is about 95% Christian, 4% Jewish and about 1% the rest - give or take. Now, I'm sure one of our colleagues will find actual census data, but that's pretty clos. Lisa, again, I disagree. If a person can't do duty to God, it would be watering down the BSA. At a commissioner college training about 5 or 6 years ago, I heard the speaker 9for the life of me, I can't remember his name) who commented on these "constitutional issues" and he said that if BSA was forced to cave in, the BSA would shut down. Lisa, I usually agree with most of what you say here, not everything. I'm sure we could help more, expose more to scouting, have a positive influence on many more people. Loog at the Tall club example I gave. The tall people could have many more people to influence if they would only cave in and let short people in. The only problem is, the tll people want other tall people as members. I couldn't care less what religions our members are, so long as they believe in God and meet other requirements for joining. So, here we are at an impasse. Perhaps you can try to pursuade national to change and I'll pursuade them to stay the course. We'll agree to disagree. See you at a campfire.

I've heard it said that a priest could REFUSE to give comunin just because someone believes in this or that, like say, abortion. I doubt seriously a priest would marry a Jew and Catholic, but I could be wrong. I agree that comparing the two is not quite apples and apples. My point is that both have rules. I think the DRP rule is OK. There are other rules BSA has that I don't agree with, but I'll support them. In your example, you don't believe its' an issue. Well, we're sitting around a campfire and i ask, "so, where do you go to church?" or "hey, what's the matter with you? you didn't say the Pledge of Allegiance, your arm broke? can't place your hand on your heart?" And yes, I'd probably have that tone too. So, now it's an issue. Now what? The atheist can't answer. Is it right (always) that some guy in a black robes (or 9 of them) say something is the law of the land and that's it? That what the "Left" is saying with Roe vs Wade or about any other left leaning decision. The BSA and DRP isn't something that's really been that controversial. If you believe in God and meet other requirement, you can join. Now, I believe citing those snipets is exactly the point. The applicant knows in advance what the rule and requirements are BEFORE joining. So, I think it's positive to exclude. How important is it that a scout attribute a duty to God? I think it's at the very foundation of scouting. There are plenty of other groups out there. Try Campfire, they used to be Campfire Girls, but now they admit boys too.

LongHaul, I guess we have something in common. I didn't care for the President either. Don't agree with his politics, his leadership of the military or management. I think he should be in jail too. Oh, wait a minute, I'm talking about Clinton, I think Clinton should have been convicted by the Senate and imprisoned. Now, remember, every military today is a volunteer. NONE OF US KNOW ALL OF THE DETAILS. WE ARE NOT THERE. I retired from the Army Reserve in June, 2006. From 2001 to 2004 I served as an aide to a brigadier general, I guarantee you, the general public has no clue of what's really going on in Iraq because the general public isn't attending briefings, meetings, receiving intelligence reports, talking to on-the-ground commanders, and it should be that way. How would you like it if President Bush said publicly what we're gonna do? Hey terroists, we're going to attack your building on Monday morning. C'mon, not gonna happen. I hope you don't forget LongHaul, we were attacked. Not just on September 11, 2000, but at the Marine barracks in Lebanon, at a US barracks complex in Riyyad (sp), Saudi Arabi, in 1993 at the WTC, USS Cole, overseas embassies in several countries. It's far better to fight the enemy over there than over here. The American public is not ready for car bombings at your local mall. But, surrender, let the terrorists wait us out and they'll bring the fight back over here. For the record, I don't agree with everything President Bush does or says, I think there could be a different approach in Iraq today, but they didn't ask Captain Gonzo for my opinion. Regardless of what Katie Couric tells you on TV, we're winning. We have some difficult times too. Did Amy Carter serve in the military? No How about Chelsea Clinton? Uh, no. Secret Service protection is required, not optional for the president's family, even his siblings have some protection. Secret Service was beefed up for many people and provided for others not normally "entitled" to it due to their office. It's not their job to make sure the twins are sober, just safe. If you listen carefully to President Bush, he says that the troops will come home when the job is done. Not some artificial deadline. Take a look at history: WW II ended in 1945, but, we still have troops in Germany and Italy, the Korean War ended in 1953. What's up with that? Can't they take care of themselves by now?

KC9DD1, Welcome. Rules are rules. OK, you declare yourself here to be Catholic. If I'm a Methodist can I just go to church one Sunday and take communion? If not, why not? Can a muslim enter your church? If not, why not? Can a Jewish person marry one of your members in your church?, that is, the actual building? See where this is going? Your church has rules, BSA has rules. The harm is that they don't qualify for membership. Can an atheist truly be trustworthy, loyal, ....... AND REVERENT? Can he do Duty to God? Uh, I don't think so. The adult application for membership states in part that the BSA "maintains that no member can grow into the best possible citizen without recognizing an obligation to God" and is "absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training". Oh yeah, it also says that "Only persons willing to subscribe to these precepts from the Declaration of Religious Principles and to the bylaws of the Boy Scouts of America shall be entitiled to certificates of leadership"

evmori, That's my point, he can't. He won't say the Pledge of Allegiance, Scout Oath or Law. He certainly won't say grace. Maybe Spiral Scouts may be in order, check spiralscouts.org

Kudu, I just checked the Camping MB requirements. I didn't know heretofore that rapelling and a foat trip could count toward Camping MB, see requirement 9b. It would be nice if things were a bit tougher.

Merlyn, I Wasn't aware of it, can't comment on it either. But, a brief bit of research thanks to google revealed: In August of 1998, it all came to an end. At that point, National split Exploring in two. The various career oriented Exploring Posts, as well as the Career Awareness Exploring, would be moved over to the BSA's Learning for Life subsidiary, after which they would be refereed to as the Learning for Life/Explorers. By doing so, Explorers would no longer be members of the BSA, no longer needing to adhere to BSA membership standards. The rest of Exploring: the arts/hobbies, sports, youth group, outdoors, etc., plus the Sea Explorers (now renamed Sea Scouts), would form the new Venturing Division. This was pretty much a name change, as the Venturing program was almost identical to the pre-1998 Exploring program in most ways. So, since it was moved to learning for Life and "not a part of BSA", then I guess it's OK, as Venturing came along and is BSA. Lisa, I agree with your first two paragraphs in your last post. But, as the WHY? BSA has in it's literature that BSA believes that people become the best citizen by their faith. Not quoting chapter and verse here though. Now, I agree that we may disagree on this and perhaps many things in BSA. I think we agree that we will support the BSA programs, we may not always agree with it. As a retired member of the armed forces, I took an oath to "support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic". I may not always agree with our laws or the citizenry, but, I would defend to the death your rights and beliefs. For example, I'm opposed to abortion but for the death penalty. There are many other examples, but these two illustrate that while many disagree with abortion or the death penalty, they remain the "law of the land". This is not to mean that either or both are leagal where you (or any other poster) live. Just an example. So, IMO, dropping the DRP would indeed have a devastating impact on BSA. Try doing your duty to God or be reverent without God. Maybe we should then have optional oaths or laws. I suggest keeping it the way it is. Besides, BSA doesn't go witch hunting. The only time I'm aware that there has been a problem is when someone (the atheist or agnostic) brings it up.

AHHHHhhhh, Thanks OGE, I forgot to mention THAT point. Citizenship is encouraged, but no credit for service hours.

It may be a minefield, but I don't see any loophole either. The application, (a useful tool) says "Citizen activities are encouraged, but partisan political activities are prohibited". It may be wise to steer clear, but if some scouts wanted to put up signs, pass out flyers etc, as long there is no reprisal for not doing so, I don't see a problem. I have considered running for office in the past (considered, but never did) and would never think of asking scouts for their time.