LongHaul

Packsaddle & Hunt, The site you provided is also from the NCI. The site I provided from the NCI has conflicting data depending on the page. The projection for 2006 is at the top of the page but scroll down and you will find a graph U.S. death rates for common cancers 1975-2003 which shows the death rate of PC to be above BC. I only want to point out the conflicting data from a body (the NCI) which should be able to provide accurate numbers. The NCI also indicates that the death rate from BC has dropped steadily since 1990. The Annual Percentage of Change (APC) from 1990- 95 was 1.75 and from 1998-2003 the APC was 1.61 why would it all of a sudden jump for the 2006 projection to be so far ahead of the PC projection when the two were about the same in 2003? I question the view that more women contract BC then men PC. 1 in 8 women will contract BC in her life time but 1 in 6 men will contract PC. As a rule of thumb it is not wise to compare data from two different studies because parameters are never the same. Saying that the American Cancer Society also uses the projection that 40,410 people will die of BC in 2006 but the break down is that 1,110 will be under 40 and 20,940 will be over 65. http://www.cancer.org/docroot/stt/stt_0.asp Is the notion that BC kills the young really valid? Of the 40,410 projected deaths 39,300 will be over 40. When we look at death prevention we are faced with a different picture. According to the ACI 214,640 people will contract BC in 2006 and 234,460 will contract PC. However 41,431 will die of BC but only 27,350 will die from PC. BC is more fatal than PC but Ovarian Cancer kills 75.86% of the women who contract it! Its what killed my mother and why I took an interest in the numbers game we play with cancer research and fund raising. LongHaul

I've had a problem with the current form of Fund Raising from the moment it was begun. In the 60's & 70's we solicited contributions from the general public. As a scout I went door to door in a District wide campaign. Today door to door and almost all general public solicitation is contrary to National Policy. National feels that those being asked for money should receive something of value in return. UNLESS of course you are a.) a Parent of a Scout or b.) a registered volunteer, then your free game and often at more than one level. Soliciting from those already contributing to the support of UNIT, Chartering Organization, and District is far more ethical than soliciting from the general public? I've volunteered to do FOS presentations to help stall program cuts and the sale of our camps. The programs were cut and the camps sold anyway. With over 17 million in the bank our FOS goals have still been increased yearly. But I'd hate for the rest of the country to look to Chicago Area Council as a bench mark. LongHaul

OGE, Take a look at this table based on death certificates world wide. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus05.pdf#027 packsaddle, No argument that breast cancer strikes earlier. Onset of BC is 25 and rises with age where as onset of PC is 50 and also rises with age but at a far greater rate. According to the National Cancer Institute, they expect 215,000 new cases of BC with a 40,000 death rate and 209,000 new cases of PC with a 42,000 death rate. Problem is on another page at their web site they state It was projected that in 2006, there would be 564,830 cancer deaths overall, including 162,460 deaths from lung cancer; 55,170 from cancers of the colon/rectum; 40,970 from female breast cancer; and 27,350 from prostate cancer. Statistics are wonderful because they are so elastic. I make NO case for increased PC funding at the expense of BC funding. I dont think PC is being ignored because of BC getting the primary focus. I think PC is ignored because it kills older men. At age 75 150 per 100,000 females will die of breast cancer where as at 75 250 per 100,000 males will die of prostate cancer. At 85 the numbers for women are 275 per 100,000 and for men they jump to 800 per 100,000. So yes BC kills earlier but I think the concept that it kills more often is no longer valid. If you go to http://progressreport.cancer.gov/doc_detail.asp?pid=1&did=2005&chid=26&coid=229&mid=#estimate and scroll down you will find a graph which shows the death rates of the four cancers from 1975 to 2004 and has PC slightly above BC on the death toll. Where as PC is at about the 27,000 figure they give at the top of the page BC is no where near the 40,000 range. LongHaul (This message has been edited by LongHaul)

Packsaddle, No, in rereading my statement I can see how I should have worded it differently. What I was trying to say was that I can not in good conscience vote for Senator Obama based on the Senators political platform. That platform in my opinion is based on his being part Black. What I meant to say was that after listening to Senator Obama speak, both before and after his election to the US Senate I find that his political platform is focused on the plight and subsequent need of African-Americans to the point that he is not interested in the job of representing the entire population of the State of Illinois. I never heard him state a position of the plight of the homeless as a group, but have heard him refer to under privileged Blacks forced to live on the streets of Chicago. Ive never heard him speak about the plight of the working poor, those not on welfare or assistance that have no health care and little disposable income, but I have heard him speak on improving the lives of those on welfare and assistance in Chicagos inner city. I could and will vote for Senator Clinton depending on who she runs against. The fact that she is a woman would not prevent me from voting for her because the fact that she is a woman does not seem to be the focus of her political agenda. She, IMO, would not be running for the purpose of being the first female president, Senator Obama and his supporters, and again this is how I see it, want Senator Obama to be the first Black president. OGE, Ever wonder why we hear so much about breast cancer but almost nothing about prostate cancer? Percentage wise more men contract prostate cancer than women contact breast cancer. Male chauvinist societal values I guess. As for Senator Clintons effect on Health care it was all but nullified by partisan concerns about her husband and her gender. Her ideas seldom got the discussion time they deserved. Hunt, Im not running for President of the United States. When a boy comes to me and wants to join our troop I do not see a race, color or religion I see a boy. I do not run a program focused on race, color or religion. I dont advocate programs which target select portions of the troop without providing equal programs for the others. (i.e. High Adventure, Aquatic, Hiking) All boys dont aspire to go to Philmont so when we do, we try to provide an equally appealing alternative to the other members of our troop. Senator Obama talks a different talk here in Chicago when his audience is primarily Black. His national coverage does not have the duration that his appearances here in Chicago had. You may see him as multi ethnic but he sees himself as Black and that is what motivates his thoughts and actions. His being Black is not the issue I have with him its his statements which lead me to believe that his primary concerns will be racially motivated. If a white candidate said these things there would be outrage but when a Black, Latino, Asian candidate targets specific groups to aid its perfectly all right. If favoritism in politics is wrong then its wrong for every one or its not wrong for anyone. Too many people dont want to stop discrimination they want to change who is being discriminated against to suit their need. As I said before about Chicagos mayor Washington he actually came out and said Now its time for us to get ours. He wanted Blacks to get the perks Whites had had for so long. We now have city rules which dictate the percentage of Black, minority, Woman Owned contractors which must be used for city contracts. Best quality and best value missed the boat. Its business as usual with a different privileged group. LongHaul

Hunt, Being from Illinois Ive heard Mr. Obama speak. Ive heard Jesse Jackson speak, as far back as 1968, and Bobby Rush and everyone of them is concerned with the plight of AFRICAN-AMERICANS. If President Bush was to announce he was stating a commission to help under privileged WHITE AMERICANS there would be a riot. Is America ready for a Black President based on the color of his skin? Or is the question rather is America ready for a president whos number 1 priority and concern is African-Americans. We (Chicago) had Richard Daley for a Mayor for many years, very white and very patronage oriented. We had Mayor Harold Washington, very Black and very concerned with Blacks getting theirs. Neither is a proper way to administer a government. When government officials are concerned with what color skin the constituent benefiting from a program has then that is racism. Because some Blacks are repressed or deprived of their civil rights does not justify an elected official to priorities his/her agendas according to race UNLESS the constituents who elected that official are of one race. (Or primarily of one race) The President of the United States must represent all Americans regardless of race. When Barack Obama can look at me and not see a White man I will be able consider him as Presidential material. Shortly after taking office President Clinton announced that he was going to appoint his wife Hillary to head a committee/commission to look into the issue of Health Care in America. There was an outcry because she was a.) his wife and b.) a woman. Did anyone think she would come up with a plan that focused on females? If Senator Clinton were to be elected President does anyone think that she would seek to pass legislation which was designed to benefit females? Does anyone think that Senator Clinton sees me as a White Male in the same sense that Senator Obama sees me as a White male? Im not ready to vote for a Black man to be president, not because of the color of his skin but because of his political platform. I thought that was what I was supposed to use to base my decision. LongHaul

Hunt, Granted, part of the reason whites on average have more advantages than blacks on average is economic, but that isn't all of it. Please explain to me where being white and/or male gives me an advantage that isnt economically driven. I could answer your questions but you really would not like my answers because they dont fit your profile. Yes, you are guilty of profiling. You are supporting the notion that basing a decision on the fact that a person is White and Male is justified. As human beings we, for the most part cant help making value judgments for this kind, we can learn not to act on them. Your position seems to indicate that you have accepted the premises that being born a white male imparts on one an original sin for which some reparation is due non white males. We, white males, must take certain things into consideration when dealing with others and this is justified. We, white males, must understand that we are viewed in a certain light and this is justified. Guilt by association..but only for white males. LongHaul

Beavah, First I am not a lawyer so anyone with superior knowledge please chime in. I was in agreement with you, in that the volunteers should have called National's bluff. However the way it was explained to me is that National was not bluffing. They would like nothing more than to dissolve CAC and divide the area up and incorporate the parts into the surrounding councils. The assets would revert to National and because there would be no CAC there would not be an injured volunteer base to retain assets. It's like a troop trying to file suit against the CO because the CO wants to dispose of equipment. In this case the assets were obtained legally and without a Charter from National all CAC assets revert back to the parent corporation. National would not be starting over and would have plenty of money, about 34 million dollars, to pay for the restructuring. Sad part is that the general public and media in particular just do not care. We have had a difficult time getting coverage of our fight. Boy Scouts are not a favored son any longer in a lot of urban areas. LongHaul

Ok lets go there. I am a White Male. I am not a college graduate. My wife and I combined do not earn over 50,000 a year. I do not have a white collar job. Just how do I have an advantage over non white non males? In the 70s to get non skilled jobs for good pay you had to be Black and better yet female, I didnt qualify. My wife worked for our school district which had to lay off white non tenured personnel to hire Black personnel to comply with State and Federal guidelines. Then Reagan came along and everyone was out of work so it didnt matter. In the upper positions there is discrimination and always has been, not my doing, but at the lower end? Not all White Males have an advantage, and forgetting this is no less bias and offensive than making sweeping and all inclusive declarations about any group. LongHaul

Hunt, Now I am offended! Just because, being a White, American (Please note the absence of a hyphen), Male, I am a member of a group which; has at one time or another exploited, subjugated, or suppressed every other race and ethnic group on this planet. Been largely responsible for directly or indirectly polluting every part of this planet including the Polar Regions and highest mountains, does not mean that we, as a group, are insensitive to being singled out for ridicule. In particular when said ridicule comes from a non member. LongHaul

Why is it only the other person's feelings that matter? Just because I object to my scouts using the "N" word when speaking to one another why should the PLC be bound by my feelings. If the PLC sees nothing wrong with using the "N" word, which is prevalent in the music a number of them listen to, why should my feeling take president over theirs? I can get away with Use what ever language you want outside Scouting but when your in that uniform and in the presence of your fellow scouts you will conduct your mouth according to my rules because I earned the respect of my boys and their parents. The question in this thread is whether it is right to impose my feelings on them? The initial joke was sexist, are sexist jokes wrong in and of themselves or dependent on the audience, and the teller. If the General in the original joke had been presented as a female would it still have been wrong? We have heard it said just get over it and move on in reference to both sides, those offended and those defending the right to tell off color jokes. Which shall it be? LongHaul

NOW STOP!!! Underwear, the changing or wearing of or not is at the sole discretion of the wearer, or not wearer as the case may be. I've used the "You can wear the same underwear all week!" as a selling point to many First Year Scouts to the absolute horror of thier mothers! "We'll hose them off and put them in clean clothes before we return them." comming from my advancement chair usually follows the gasps from the adult audience. Seeing one of my boys with his tee shirt inside out I pointed the fact out to him and was told, "The other side is dirty" LongHaul

Beavah, The annual meeting is set for January 27, 2007. National has already said that no matter what the outcome of the vote, our current SE (the guy who started the whole "we don't belong in the real estate business" "sell the assets and bank the cash") Jim Stone, will remain our SE until the Owasippe sale is final. This is the result of talks centering around buying out the SE's current contract and replacing him with someone not predisposed to selling all our camps. National has made it pretty clear they want the money in the bank. At a recent fund raiser brochures were passed out to the attendees showing traditional scouts doing all the things traditional scouts do and having fun. The fund raiser itself and all the proceeds went to the LFL program, kind reminds me of "bait & switch" not to use the term fraud. LongHaul

This reminds me of an incident which took place at a BSA Training course I attended. In setting up for a presentation the American Flag and other BSA flags were put out, the American Flag was placed to its own left instead of to its own right. After the first presentation was complete the presenters, 2 males and 2 females were leaving the stage. They separated into two groups, the 2 males and the 2 females. A trainee who had noticed the error was approaching the stage to inform the presenters of the error. The 2 males were going away from the trainee and the 2 females were approaching him. He approached the two females and said, Pardon me Ladies, but did either of you place the flags on stage during set up? One of the females replied, Why do you ask? To which the trainee said Because they are improperly positioned and I wanted to be sure you knew before you continue. At which point the female angrily informed the trainee that it was improper to refer to women as Ladies because the term was demeaning and meant to cast females as lesser individuals than males. The husband of one of the females approached the trainee minutes latter explaining that that he, the husband, expected an apology be made to his wife. The female in charge of the training as a whole came up and expressed dismay that the trainee would display such unscout like behavior. The training continued with the flags improperly positioned. Recently there was an incident in which a comic used the N word in responding to some hecklers. I have Blacks in my troop and have heard the term used between Black scouts. Along with making it clear that such references will not be tolerated in the Troop I made it a point to talk to the boys about how they saw the word, what it meant to them as people and in combination with their personal ethnic/racial position. I have other races and ethnicities as well as Black and White. Many people do not see the N word as being bad, unacceptable, or just plain wrong all by itself. It depends on WHO says it more than the context or manner in which it was said. Had this comic been Black there would have been no media attention. I view this as racism and not on the part of the comic. The man should not have used the term in the first place but the resulting outrage is purely an example of racism (IMO) none the less. LongHaul

Packsaddle, Ok two questions up front. First; "The Board of Review is an opportunity to review of the Scout's attitudes, accomplishments and his acceptance of Scouting's ideals." Doesnt this indicate that the BOR is expected to be more than the part you chose to put in bold type? Second; If the boy says or does something during the review that provides direct evidence to the board that he is not qualified for advancement, Other than being a Scout who Mumbled one word answers accompanied with shrugs and blank looks, very little reflection, inability to provide specific examples of scout spirit, how he puts the scout law into action, difficulty articulating or apparently grasping how he is a role model (as a scout in a visible and important POR in the troop) to other scouts, etc.. This scout appears to view advancement as just a bunch of hoops to jump through with little or no meaning to them." Just what would he have to do? You mention being out of uniform, for a bold type guy on this issue where is being in uniform a requirement, officially that is? From the first question I asked, this scouts attitude was bad, his accomplishments were in question (i.e. merit badges actually earned ) and his acceptance of Scouting ideals non existent difficulty articulating or apparently grasping how he is a role model (as a scout in a visible and important POR in the troop) to other scouts, Advancing this scouts says to me that the ideals and aims the program is supposed to be about are not important. What is important is getting credit, no matter how you do it, its a matter of getting credit and once again this scout has accomplished THAT goal. LongHaul

emb021, The course to which I referr may quite well have not been a National course. Just as Okpik is not a National Course but is done "locally" each course different and each specific to the area it's done in. The common thread in Okpik courses is Cold Weather Camping. The common thread with the course I referr to was advanced outdoor skills training. Ours was called Powderhorn and the symble was a black powder powderhorn. I did not take the course so I don't have any materials I can send you about it but I certainly do remember it. Remember Donna and Larry Cunningham developed the "current" course which uses that name not the name. If National decides to script an official Okpik course tommorrow it would not negate the fact that Okpik has been a course for years. LongHaul

FScouter, This troop didn't "come up" with this idea, they have just been around long enough to have not stopped doing it when New Brunswick (Today's Irving) stopped. You say you think it is counter to the method, I thought it worked just fine when it was the method when I was a scout. LongHaul

Lisabob, IMO the boy should not have been advanced. Attitude being one reason. Lack of understanding of his role in the dynamics of the troop being a reason. Lack of understanding as to how his attitude projects the wrong image to those he is there to lead, see Setting the Example ( do they do that in NYLT ?) Packsaddle, In looking over the post in which Lisabob first brought up the issue of boys getting blue cards signed as complete for merit badges they didnt actually earn I see that you didnt participate. Ill let Lisabob enlighten you and others about this as it goes to Scout Spirit in my book. You said that if the boy has done the requirements he should get the award or rank. One of the requirements for every rank is to complete your board of review. If it is your opinion that in order to complete a board of review the only requirements should be the completion of, or more specifically haven gotten credit from a person designated by the SM as having such authority for the completion of, the other requirements for that rank or award; then I ask you what is the purpose or need for a board of review? We have been down this road before in these forums but it always comes back up. Why do we need a boy to sit in front of us if all we are doing is checking to see that all the boxes have been checked off? We cant possibly think we can determine a Scouts character or degree of or lack of Scout Spirit in 20 minutes. The BOR is supposed to be made up of adults not involved with the day to day administration of the troop program. Thats why SMs and ASMs are excluded. If a CM is at all the meetings and outings what differentiates them from the SM or ASM, what code is used on the charter? Your supposed to be reviewed by adults you dont normally come into contact with during your Scouting experience. Is there any reason, provided all the boxes were appropriately checked, that you would deny advancement? LongHaul

Emb021, Powderhorn is definitely not what it has always been. Look at the National info on Powderhorn and youll see it focuses on the Venturing Program. Powdeerhorn was around long before the Venturing Program was instituted. Yes a SM can put SOME of these skills to use in the BS program but back in the late 60s and early 70s the Powderhorn course was for SM/ASM to learn and hone outdoor skills. FScouter and Lisabob both touch on the difference between a course which is designed to teach and a course which is designed to provide methods to help one teach. I have this discussion constantly when trying to enlist presenters for Leader Training. Everyone thinks they can provide a demonstration presentation approach whatever, on fire building. The question is are you teaching me how to build a fire or teaching me how to teach an 11 year old how to build a fire? The approaches are different. The explanations of what you are doing , why, how are different. Powderhorn was a course designed to teach and hone skills. You had to be a seasoned Scouter to qualify for the course. Today I think you still need SE approval, its not a beginner course but its still a course to show you how to present Silver and Ranger Award programs to Venturing Crews not develop your personal skills. LongHaul

Red berets never stopped being part of the uniform? Why aren't they included in the uniform guide or sold by the National Supply? I know older Scouter who still use the 50s/60s style over seas cap so they can cover for flag presentation and pledge. These are no longer sold either the baseball type cap is the latest head gear. I'm with Beavah on this one, I've got real issues to attend to and the wearing of green shirts not having been stopped back in the 80's is not that big a deal. LongHaul

Exactly who is telling you this? We use a tenderfoot type image on almost all our event patches. The Council just ran an event and the patches were produced by a firm I know paid absolutely no royalties to anyone. That particular patch had the Cub Scout, BoyScout, Venture, Venturing, and Commisioners Logos on it! Again I ask who it telling you this, unless it's the SE run the patches as you intended and correct it next time. BSA will not missthe money but the boys will surely miss the patches. LongHaul

So if a charter is issued to any not for profit organization whatever they chose to do or condone as a part of their youth program becomes Scouting by way of the charter being issued? If they want to open up their pack and troop to female youth its Scouting. You said none of the BSA materials are designed for girls. Just what part of Cub Scouts or Boy Scouts is gender specific? What activity is unsuitable for a young female? We are not talking about what National would do if they were made aware if a CO admitted female youth but just your view of what is Scouting . I am by no means trying to take a counter point to anything youve posted on this subject I only seek your views. I dont believe we must adhere to National as though they were gods. LongHaul

New Thread Started See....Wild Uniform Adaptations

Yes emb021, I know exactly where the "tradition" in this troop came from. It is not their tenure which they feel extends them the right but the fact that once it's part of the official uniform it's part of the official uniform. Some Troop still use the red berets, you find pictures of them popping up in Boy's Life. Why not the old Leadership Corps green shirts? My question was in reference to discussions being had about the authority to tweak the program. Here is a tweak based on past practice. When does tweak cross the line and become alter? Who decides? To Tweak or Not to Tweak there is the question. LongHaul

Well if we look back some years we find that in the 60's you had to have two years as an active leader to be eligible for WB. The idea was that you gained the experience by doing then used WB to refine your skills. Anyone else remember CornerStone? It was a training program for SMs and ASMs which consisted of 9 sessions usually over several months. Anyone remember when Powder Horn was an advanced outdoor training beyond WB and intended for those who wanted to provide a more High Adventure program. The new WB is marketed to those who are brand new to the program and not necessarily at the Boy Scout level. IOLS was not intended to teach you outdoor skills it was intended to teach you how to teach 11 year olds the basics skills up to First Class. First Class should take 1 year to complete so you get the experience and applied knowledge of the skills. You cant teach it in a weekend not even to adults. I agree BSA needs a Nationally standardized advanced outdoor skills course. It would be to hone the skills you have acquired over several years of active involvement not teach them to you. LongHaul

SueM, Sounds like someone in your Adult Committee is trying to get technical. Explain to them that "technically" there is no order in which the rank requirements have to be done, this includes the BOR. If a boy, 1 day after making Star, requests a BOR for Life technically he should not be refused the BOR. It is recommended that scouts who are not going for rank advancement be asked to present themselves for a BOR to assess their experience in and opinions of the program. Many of us fall into to the "thats how we do it" groove and loose track of why we do it that way. LongHaul