LongHaul

Kahuna, You are correct I didn't phrase that correctly. I didn't mean to ask "What if I murdered you BEFORE I cut your line" the point was I cut your line and ended your life to save mine. That sounds like murder to me. As to the car accident senario society has made it legal for paramedics in that instance to decide who will die and who will live. The door has been opened, and that is what I have doubts about. If that accident happened in the 1960 south and I was black and you were white it would still be legal to let us both die trying to save you. Until we decide the issue of when life begins in the eyes of the law we will have someones civil rights being infringed upon, either the mothers or the fetus'. funscout, Would those be the same Ten Commandments that were put into the ARC of the Covenant and carried before armyies going into battle? The promise land was not empty when the Children of Isreal arrived. I agree with your reaction when you "saw" your child for the first time. You realized it was a person not an unidentified growing mass. I hope it was more due to your humanity and sence of motherhood than religion. That way there would be more hope for the Nation and the world as we are all human even though some make that hard to accept. LongHaul

BrentAllen While I agree that a persons military service, or lack there of, should not be used to justify or qualify actions I find your classification, for the lack of a better word, of what is or isn't a war hero interesting. You seem to favor the term be used to discribe a single act rather than a personal trait. As to Clelands not being wounded in battle or on the battlefield, I wasn't aware that there was anyplace in that country at that time that wasn't part of the battlefield. If Shughard's and Gordon's helicopter had exploded on landing back at base they wouldn't have died in battle but would still be heros because of a single act? LongHaul

Yes Ed but what happens when the card comes back with someone else signature. The boys know who some of the counselors are and do talk among themselves. My original question goes to quality control. The longer one stays in the program the more horror stories one hears or encounters. As a MBC for Personal Management I had a scout present a budget to me with all ZEROS. No income, No projected income, No spending, "My Mom won't let me handle money." I told him I could not counsel him at this time and offered to meet with his mother to explain the badge. He went to another counselor and received the badge. I talked to the DAC and was told that the counselor felt the requirements were followed and that all ZEROS accurately reflected the boys current "Personal Management parameters". As an SM Id have a hard time passing a card signed by that counselor for that merit badge along to my AC for recording. LongHaul

I am not being allowed to format this, a reoccuring problem of late, so I can't highlite sorry From the Avancement Committee guide book The Scout should be neat in appearance and his uniform should be as correct as possible, with the badges worn properly. It should be the desire of the board to encourage the Scout to talk so that the review can be a learning experience for the candidate and the members of the board. From the Supplemental Training Module put out by National on its web site. A board can expect a Scout to be neat in appearance and properly uniformed. With the rewording of the sentence has National just decided that a uniform is indeed necessary for a BOR? The first excerpt leaves room for interpretation while the second is clearly an indication that some form of uniform is expected. You know what I like about the National publications is that you almost know that they will contradict one another. Again I offer this as an example of authors and editors that dont have a first hand understanding about what they are writing. That is why we call them guide books.

OGE, I think you are answering my post not Kahuna's. I see from rereading my post that I didn't write what I was thinking I appologize. We as a society need to decide this question as a matter of law. The polar ends are life at conception and life at birth, currently the law is somewhere in the middle and hovering at "viable" with "mother's health" complicating things. It's easy to say life begins at conception and that's it, the hard part is what protection under the law do we give that life? What would be the penalty for fetuscide? Abortion would be premeditated from the mother's stand point and cold blooded from the doctor's. How do we legislate? How do we penalize? LongHaul

BrentAllen, Cleland volunteered for service volunteered for duty in Viet Nam when he could have stayed state side but is less in your mind because the grenade was dropped by a friendly. Are you saying that the men who gave their lives in the service of their country aboard the USS Oriskany and the USS Forestall fall lower on your scale than those who died aboard the USS Cole?

First funscout, please dont take offense at how I word some of this I am not as articulate as I am passionate. I mean you no offense nor do I wish to make light your beliefs. You say several things which are conflicting in my opinion. You say that your views on abortion changed, is that the case or did your views on when life began change? When you favored pro choice and that a woman who had been raped should not be forced to carry the child did you actually think of the child as a child at that point? Could it be that when you saw your own child in your womb you redefined that concept? You also say; When you see Christians with different values it is because some of us have gone against the values. That doesn't make them right for Christians, it just means that we have "strayed" from our beliefs. The bottom line is that a Christian is a person who has accepted Jesus Christ as his/her personal savior. We are supposed to follow the Ten Commandments, but we are human, and so, not all of us follow them like we should. This is where my concerns are, in the first sentence you describe the subject as Christians with different values. They are still Christians in your mind but their values arent Christian values, then what makes them Christians? a Christian is a person who has accepted Jesus Christ as his/her personal savior. So I can accept Jesus as my savior and not share your values those of a person who also has accepted Jesus as her savior. We dont know what Jesus values were on this because he never wrote anything down, all we have is hear say evidence written after the fact. There are a large number of writings not generally accepted as reflecting the teachings of Christ which claim to report his teachings and the determinations as to the validity of these writings was made hundreds of years after his ascension. I dont want this to go all bible quotes on what is the Word and what is not Im trying to say that the label Christian Values is flawed and that claiming injustice because group A is trying to impose Christian Values on group B is wrong in the context its being used in this thread. Judaism accepts the Ten Commandments how are they then Christian Values? They predate Christ by a considerable time. At what point each of us believes life begins is a personal conclusion or belief. We associate with those who share our belief . Because the Pope, the Archbishops, the Whatever controlling body of major religion believes something doesnt make it Christian or Muslim, or Bahai. Debate a principle or value on its merit not its association or exclusion by some religious group. Kahuna, Self Defense? If you and I were mountain climbing and ended up hanging off a cliff on a single line which would break under both our weights would killing you be considered self defense in a court of law? OGE, Depends on when life starts! Why should I be held to your beliefs? The issue is one of LAW. We as a society need to decide when life is considered to have begun for the purpose of protection under the law. Problem is with the good comes the bad. If its life at conception what degree of protection do we afford it? Mom smokes, mom drinks, Mom rides a motorcycle, Mom sky dives (early pregnancy), does Mom become a living incubator? With a single grain of sand the avalanche is begun.

Careful Ed! This is a very good thread right now on the subject of the original post, please don't bring what is and isn't taught at "Woodbadge for the 21st. Century" (the one word title just doesn't cut it anymore) because at the last course at a council near me this wasn't even mentioned.

As I read OGE's quote from the Advancement Committee guide I was ready to begin this reply but decided to read the other replies first, glad I did because Beavah beat me to my quote. Over the years I have come to believe that the National Publications are not written or edited by people with first hand experience in delivering program. There is too much contradiction and too much confusion created because the author doesn't seem to understand the material in a real world sense. IMO we must always keep the boys welfare foremost. Are we doing something because we have the power? because we have set a standard? because that's the way our leaders did it when we were scouts? We should be doing it because it's in the best interest of the boy.

Funscout, My irritation is with the "Christian Ethics" lable. I ask you and John in KC if you each felt your feelings at the time you "saw" your unborn child were determined by your religion? I think not. I know many Christians and their ethics differ considerably. To say "X" is a Christian ethic or "Y" is a Christian ethic is to say you know the mind of all Christians. "X" may be a Christian belief, "Y" may be a Christian teaching. If we just look at what has been done in the name of Christ since his assention we can see that attitudes and actions have spanned the spectrum from love to the Inquisition. Just what is "Christian Ethic"? I guess that one would be for Dan Kroh. I guess I'm getting just a bit over annoyed about this and just need to go back to ingnoring the religious threads.

Roundtable is suppposed to be a training aid/tool. I have seen it become a social event, a place to talk about whats happpening Scouting wise a calandar meeting once a month, a planning meeting for up comming events. Our roundtable is held on the same night as my unit meetings so I have to chose. Do I change my unit meeting night when roundtable night changes? No matter which night the district choses it is someones unit meeting night. Attendance at roundtable is a yardstick for measuring attendance at roundtable WHEN spoken of in terms of the individual. Attendance at roundtable can very well be a yardstick of unit involvement and quality when spoken of in terms of unit representation at roundtable. We have a "MAIL BOX" at opur roundtable with a spot for each unit to recieve info from anyone whattime to put something in their box. Having used the box to announce training opportunities I know that there are units that have not been represented at roundtable in many years. These units don't attend district events either. Should this be used to determine or is it even indicitive of the quality of MBCs registered with that unit?

The following are not necessarily the views or indicative of the practices of the poster and are presented for discussion purposes only; If the boy is expected to meet the requirements as stated no more no less can someone show me any place in the National publications where serve actively is defined or explained? If I have been given, or have accepted if you prefer, the position of Librarian and either no one has asked to use the library for 6 months of the existing policy/practice has been that scouts take and replace books unsupervised, how have I failed to execute my position? As a police officer my job would be to enforce the law, if no one breaks a law or even calls the police station for six months should I be asked to return my pay checks? When I was a scout the requirement read Serve to the satisfaction of your Scoutmaster in one or more. The wording has changed several times, for a while all the boy had to do was hold the position. Who decides what serve actively means, the Scoutmaster? Which is actually what the training materials suggest, the SM the person who decides what each of the requirements mean, or is it the BOR which is what the advancement procedures suggest. If it is the SM then how can a boy fail a BOR and if it is the BOR then shouldnt the BOR be allowed to satisfy itself that all other reqs have been met read restest. How can a BOR possibly determine if the req to Demonstrate tying the bowline knot was properly met? Most of what we say in this forum should be read as if it had IMO preceding it. This has been said before. LongHaul

Ah Yes EagleInKy BUT isn't also true that at some point during the day it's still "today" in that "somewhere" and still yesterday "somewhere else"? TERRY Please just re set the clock! Oh my head hurts. LongHaul

Dan, When the Patriot Act was passed and you gave up some of your rights just where did YOU go to Ok it's Passing? When it was revised and repassed again were you given the option of saying NO!? When the case to require Google to turn over data was drafted were you consulted? Were you even aware that the Patriot act was up for vote the first time around? Your question "If you give an inch you may give a mile?" ignores the reality that it is harder to stop something already started than to prevent it from starting in the first place.(This message has been edited by LongHaul)

What's the answer? We just have to get the message to the RNC and the elected pols that we've had enough. I think a lot of people are starting to do just that. Sooner or later, they will get the message. I cant help but think of my Troop when I read that sentence. Ive tried for a long time now to get the boys to take over leadership and ownership of their troop. The bottom line is they dont want the responsibility or the work involved. There is no way to force them to take the reins. My only options are continue as is or disband the unit. In politics what are my options? Vote for a slated candidate or dont vote. The system we use in my area does not allow for write ins. What would motivate a Politician to changes his/her ways? The threat of losing their office is the only one I can think of. In order to get a pol out of office we must elect someone else. Yes we have primaries and can chose between members of a given party but if we are aligned with a particular party we are already limited in our choices. The problem I see is the concept of parties to begin with. We have two parties The Haves and The Have Nots and that polarizes their approach to government. Say what you will the Republican party policies favor the very rich and the Democratic parties policies favor the VOTING poor often to the determent of the WORKING poor. The Democrats in Chicago just held a rally/parade, with Chicago Mayor Daley as a key speaker, to HONOR Illegal Immigrants. Our system of Government is the oldest continual government on the planet. When we look at why governments fall or are replaced we usually find that it was/is due to polarization. Haves and Have Nots. Those in favor and those out of favor with no one in the middle. When you eliminate the middle ground you end up with drastic actions from the polar ends, the Haves trying to keep it and the Have Nots trying to get it and ultimately Revolution from the Have Not pole. A third party reflecting the wishes of the Middle American. A party that would be more influenced by the validity of a proposal than how the media will spin it. A party that would concider a policy of take from the very rich and help the very poor achieve self sufficiency. Why does that sound like Socialism? LongHaul Rooster 7 All I can do is quote Martin Niemoeller. First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a communist; Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a socialist; Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a Jew; Then they came for me-- and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Why must my code of ethics, my moral standards, my sense of right and wrong be equated with which religion or an absence of religion my parents chose to follow while I was being raised? Dont I get to have a say here at all? If who I am and how I feel about certain issues is the result of the fact that my parents chose to raise me in the Roman Catholic faith and only that then I ask all of you WHY are we spending so much time as Scouters? Why spend so much time in these forums discussing this stuff? I feel the way I do because I was raised Christian, not because of anything Ive gotten out of Scouting, years of education, social interaction, 30 years of marriage, raising two sons, burying far to many loved ones. It all comes back to which religion, or lack there of, my parents chose? LongHaul

Eagledad, My list of "credentials" was included to point out that at different trainings one will get different explanations or interperetations for the same question. Am I to understand from your post that you think a Scoutmaster is mMaster only up to First Class and then the MBCs decide what "earn" means? The "Blue Card" I refer to is the National Publication #34124 an example of it can be found at http://www.meritbadge.com/files/bluecard.pdf. When you refer to "the advancement proceedures" please remember that National allowes Councils to impose "local interprtations" on many points. We can comment on what the book says, what our council requires, or what we think the rule should be interperated as saying. If the SM won't pass the signed card on to be recorded on an advancement form the boy does not get credit. Please find the National publication which has the simple procedure for MBs that you refer to and I'll explain how what you quote can be interperated "locally". In my council "Committee Member" on an Eagle Application means Advancement Chair and only the Advancement Chair per the Council Advancement Chair. National calls this "local interpretation" We have to send the applicants records portion of the "Blue Card" in with an advancement report along with the council record portion and then the applicants record portion is returned to the scoutmaster by the Council Advancement committee after it has been recorded in Scout Net. Again "Local interprettion". National rarely addresses issues like this directly because it causes more problems for them but more problems for trainers who end up trying to explain the what ifs. One thing we all seem to agree on is that the District/Council Advancement Committee/Chair has the final say. LongHaul

TryingHard, I appologize for not addressing your question before going on. Who makes the final decision? First the troop Committee has no say at all. Second the MBC decideds whether or not the requirements have been met in his/her opinion. Third the SM has the obligation to the troop( read youth ) to insure that the proscribed policies have been followed. The FINAL decision rests with the Council Advancement Committee. If the SM refuses to accept the signature of the "approved MBC" the Council Advancement Committee can over rule him and award the badge. LongHaul

BrentAllen, You and I have disagreed before and I hope that wont prompt you to say consider the source and dismiss what I say. You seem to repeatedly associate the current administration with America the USA and the like. Repeatedly it has been asked if you and those aligned with you would be equally supportive of administrations with different views. Was Clinton the USA as you seem to see GWB as being the USA. What Im trying to say is that its not the administration its the concept and the ideals. You agree with GWBs vision and I respect that, but to continually say that those who oppose the current views are anti American or any USA doesnt say much for your vision. American freedom means agreeing with me doesnt seem like a freedom one would want to die defending. You bring up the idea that German and Japanese soldiers wore uniforms so we knew who they were, but the current enemy is elusive we have no idea who they are. Reminds me of sorting villagers from VC in Viet Nam, as I remember it we got it wrong a few times. The huge difference now is that the villagers are American Citizens on American soil. They are the ones our Armed Forces are supposed to be protecting. Remember also that the NSA, CIA, FBI and BIG BROTHER et.al. do not wear uniforms either. We dont know who they are or where they are or what they are doing. They want to be held above the law and allowed scopes of action outside previously accepted limits under the pretext of defending the country. Whose country? Bushs, Clintons, yours, mine, jkhnys, thats why we have rules. Its what separates us from the rest of the world in that the ruling body cant do what the current administration is trying to do, erode civil liberties under the guise of protecting freedoms. We set rapists and child molesters and murderers free on technicalities because we are not willing to let rage and outrage cause us to lower our standards. Allowing our current enemy to cause us to suspend our civil liberties is admitting that our previous standards are no longer viable. Our way doesnt work anymore. We must become more like them in order to survive. LongHaul

In another thread as we say a fellow poster said "the Scoutmaster selects the counselor" and this poster felt that it would be up to the Scoutmasters descretion whether to accept a signed Blue Card from a different counselor. Yes it is the District/Council Advancement Committees responsibility to approve MBCs but as SM I have the resposibility of quality control within the troop I serve. There could be times, Summer Camp or Mass merit badge sessions where the specific MBC would not be known before hand but what about when it's just a scout and his buddy and you have selected a counselor form a "short" list. Would you accept a signed Blue card from a different counselor? Question 2; If you decide that you must accept the card becasue it is signed by "an approved" MBC would it influence you at the Scoutmaster's conference as to Scout Spirit when the boy had not followed your directions? LongHaul

First I am going to spin off a seperate thread in reference to Beavah's post.It will be in the Advancement section Let me play devils advocate here for a bit. I currently serve as Scoutmaster. Ive taken Scoutmaster training both pre and post 2001. Ive taken Woodbadge training pre 2001. Im a MBC and have taken MB training pre and post 2001. Which all means I have way to much information on policy to make this type of decision. As Scoutmaster it is my responsibility to see that the quality of the program and instruction meets my standard. I am Scoutmaster, that means I set quality control standards for the troop I serve. I decide what Demonstrate how to tie a bowline means. Demonstrate to me, to another scout, to the patrol, to the troop. Demonstrate as in tie the knot or demonstrate as in do a presentation. If you asked someone to come to one of your troop meetings to demonstrate CPR would simply doing the procedure on a training dummy without explanation be what you had in mind? The Blue merit badge application card has two places for the SM to sign. One for when he issues the card and one for when he accepts the completed card and forwards it to the Advancement Chair to be recorded. If the MB has the final word what is it the SM is signifying with his second signature? Remember the requirement for Star is to EARN 6 merit badges not obtain 6 merit badge application cards signed by an approved MBC. The Advancement procedures state that the requirements must be met, no additions no omissions, no alterations. If you as a SM know that this has not been done do you sign the blue card anyway? Example; At a Merit Badge Day hosted by the U.S. Navy at a local training base one of the merit badges offered was Law Enforcement. The counselor was a Navy Officer with extended Shore Patrol Command experience. The entire session was composed of his telling war stories about his carrier in Law Enforcement. The requirements for the merit badge were never mentioned let alone met, yet every card was signed as completed when they were returned to the respective scouts. Do the boys get the badge even though everyone except the counselor knows they have not earned it? The real problem for the SM here is the fact that the merit badge procedure has been ignored. The scout with a buddy is supposed to contact a MBC and arrange a meeting. The SM would not be present to know how the badge was counseled. Doing mass sessions is only recommended when special facilities or equipment is needed, this per the Advancement Committee Guide book. In the original post the MBC recently did a merit badge for our scouts. Having a MBC come to your troop to do the badge eliminates part of the procedure. Start the badge or complete the badge is another thing but present the badge entirely? My advice here would be for the SM or AC to know their MBCs and then dont micro manage and dont attend MB sessions if you have ethics problems in this area. LongHaul (This message has been edited by LongHaul)

I started a new thread about this topic but it disappeared! Maybe the moderators objected to how much fun this is going to be now that this post will appear BEFORE the posts of the PREVIOUS 24 hours.

Rooster 7, Long Haul whether you intended it to be interpreted this way or not, your quote is meant for people of prejudice and/or insensitivity, who turn a blind eye to injustices and atrocities which do not affect them directly. Ill give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant something else. If you meant for it to be interpreted properly likening me to the citizenry of NAZI Germany who supposedly were aware of atrocities but chose to ignore them - then I have a few choice words for you which I cannot post here. Use your imagination. Your interpretation of my Martin Niemoeller quote is very interesting. You immediately see it as an attack on you rather than an explanation of my position. You tell me how I meant the post. You go on to give the citizenry you do not wish to be likened to the benefit of the doubt and say supposedly were aware, interesting. You immediately seize on the alleged atrocities supposedly committed at the time of the quote rather than the quote itself. I do not compare you to the citizenry of Nazi Germany in the sense that you are turning a blind eye to KNOWN atrocities. As you say I have no example to quote which you would accept in making this a KNOWN threat. The quote was meant to point out that if we wait till it affects us personally it could be to late. Do unto others.. Defend their rights as you would want them to defend yours. The monitoring of Google searches, wire taps, suppressions of previously enjoyed freedoms i.e. appearing at a political rally wearing opposing slogans. are all indicators to me but apparently not you. If I had altered the quote to read; First they attacked my right to privacy but I did not cry out. Then they attacked my right to speak out but I did not cry out. Then they attacked my right to be considered innocent until proven guilty but I did not cry out. Then they attacked me and no one was allowed to cry out. Would that have made my point better? I think you attack me because you can't attack my argument which should be reason enough for you to beware. As has been asked already in different words; "What happens to you when the extreme LEFT gets to wield these powers?" Before you start typing I do not accuse you of being extreme Right only ask what happens when those at the extreme end of being opposed to your views gain power. When the atheist, draft dodger, long haired, hippy freak, pinko, commie, fag, junkie Independent Candidate gets elected because just enough people had lapses of judgment and cast a protest vote, do you really want him/her/it(?) with the powers to suspend your rights? LongHaul

We have done this at Klondike so the boys were sleeping during the warmer hours and active when it's coldest. One fun thing is the "Dry Cleaner Bag" balloons which look really cool at night. Remember to teather them with fishing line for control.

This thread brought back a question concerning SCOUT NET an how it counts dates. We now need specific dates for advancement, Jan 2006 doesn't cut it, it must be MM/DD/YY. How does this apply to the Jan 1 to July 1 equalls six months concept. What I heard when records were being transfered into the net was that six months equals 182 days. So Jan 1 to July 1 would actually be one day short. The date of the BOR would have to be July 2. Starting with Feb 1 results in Aug 3 as the first possible date. Now I have not seen this in print from National and I know we all have our positions of how we think it should be but does anyone know for a fact how SCOUT NET determines six months. LongHaul