packsaddle

Sheldonsmom, we met at Iowa Lakeside Lab. When I took my daughter there and showed her the lake, we both burst into laughter. There were so many boats and floats and rafts out there it wasn't possible to safely do anything but just slowly float here and there. The whole lake was practically a giant floating party. My wife and I were both graduate students. We'd be up at 6am, work until about 11pm and then adjourn to the nearest bar (Miller's Bay Store) until about 2am. For the whole summer. One of our faculty wasn't looking very well near the end but he was really old, 35 or so. Maybe youth isn't wasted on the young after all. Great memories though.

Sheldonsmom, just curious. What part of Iowa? I met my wife in a previous geologic era at Lake Okoboji. I have nothing but fond memories of Iowa. A few years ago on an all-summer campout with my daughter, I took her by the lake and was surprised to see ALL the wind turbines! What a great addition to a climax forest of corn!

Gern, thanks but shouldn't you consult with the dogs first? They might think I smell bad.

Me too, Lisabob. I took my furlough in a lump a few weeks ago and I think I'm good for the fall semester (mostly because my courses are popular, go figure). One is a requirement for the curriculum in several departments and I'm the only one of my 'kind' here. I may survive nicely. That said, I've decided to seek a better position in the private sector. I have greatly enjoyed academia but (scoutldr, you need to pay attention because I also used to work for DOD) there is NOTHING in the Federal Government that comes close to the level of incompetent management that I observe at the state level. It is of a lack of quality and bloated quantity of stupidity that must be by intentional, unintelligent design. So I'm going to give the private sector another go if I can locate a good position. Like scoutldr, my 401K is essentially doodoo and I was also in the new version of the federal retirement system (no real pension). One child still in college - tuition at $40K per year. I used to joke that I'll work until I die. I say it with conviction now. But at least I'm still ticking away. My complaints are small and insignificant compared to many others and I know it. So outside of this thread, I don't complain.

We had some really bad experiences that led to the appointment by the SM of an unofficial Eagle advisor (me). Now the troop has me to keep track of the latest forms and arcane requirements by the council and district. Now things are running smoothly and the SM is a happy guy again. We just had three EBORs in the last two weeks. No problems. When they make Life, I give them copies of the appropriate forms and show them the requirements. I make myself available if they have questions. And then they are on their own unless they need help or advice. When they ask I respond. They know the score. Some wait until the last minute and others get right to it. But they do it on their own (of course parents are free to push if they want). And I attend the EBOR as a silent observer.

I have found the best prices at: http://www.memphisnet.net/category/s/3" and http://www.nylonnet.com/merchandise/?top_cat=96&cat_nav=120&sub_cat=287&cat=287 In the past I've purchased tens of thousands of dollars of rope and nets from these vendors and they are great to do business with.

TheScout wrote: "I care for little about the "rights" of anothers property. It is all in the way you look at it. I am quite sure you wouldn't have given a damn about the rights of the slaveholders. I will support the right of an American slaveholder over an African slave anyday." Is everyone comfortable with this? Ed? Beavah? Mr. Boyce? Eagledad? Beelzebub?

"Black slaves were not citizens and I would accord a free baby rights a slave did not have." Like I said, consistent.

"I think it is disingenuous to call such a position hypocrisy." That's your opinion. But just in case you thought it was about YOU, while you're savoring the fungal taste of your own hoof, I'll make it a little clearer. Ever since you wrote that you think states should be able to enslave their citizens, I have not considered you to be a champion of personal liberty. In that, at least, you are consistent.

Ed's point emphasizes a troubling problem with our inability to assign a 'line' in development at which time the central government takes over the woman's life. The concept of 'viability' that currently is the basis for some statutes is not well-defined because viability varies on a case-by-case basis - and as technology improves, viability moves to earlier and earlier times in development. For the time-being, viability is imperfect but it is what some of us have. If a state did categorize abortion as murder then TheScout would be correct. Not only should the woman be prosecuted along with the doctor (the same as an accomplice in an armed robbery in which people are killed) everyone else who even knew about it should be charged with something, perhaps accessory before the fact or conspiracy to commit. I'm sure these details would come easily. And since some popular types of birth control also terminate pregnancies, using a definition in which the beginning of life occurs at fertilization, those should be outlawed and practitioners prosecuted as well. Never happen. Laws that actually addressed these thing would be thrown out, result in a legal and medical morass, or never be written in the first place. Every still-birth, every miscarriage would have to be investigated as a possible homicide. 'The Pill' would be viewed as more dangerous than crystal meth...prosecutions and punishments pursued accordingly, especially for out-of-state visitors to family members or on vacation. All consistent with 'life at conception' and 'abortion is murder'. While I hope we never change our government to a theocracy run by the Catholic Church, I do recognize that the church is consistent in its opposition not only to abortion but also to nearly every means of birth control. I also note with irony that some posters here who claim support for personal freedom at the same time support forceful intervention by a central government in these most personal decisions. I see hypocrisy. I take some satisfaction in the prospect that if the Catholic Church is as ineffective an influence in the lives of Italians, for the time-being at least, it will probably be as ineffective in this country. Better to take the approach that OGE proposed. Still imperfect, but at least an improvement.

Liz, I am completely sympathetic. Any adult ought to be able to go without tobacco for the duration of a scouting event. BSA should have a total prohibition of it. You know, if the Mormon Church wanted to exert a positive influence on this topic......

Beavah, those are some things I do agree with - particularly, taken together, your final statements, "Folks think that government drives society. Bah, humbug. Government reflects society. As for da rest, you and I both agree that there were hardly any "best minds" at all in da administration of the last 8 years, pro-life or otherwise."

In reference to a child who threw up, "it's OK for them to destroy that mass of cells?" Beavah, I don't think that is OK. However, I think it does happen, too frequently. Mothers on their own children, fathers on their families, and then there are the regular old murders. The state doesn't prevent it. The state can only punish and punishment evidently doesn't prevent it. Prior to the Supreme Court ruling even those states that had bans in place had abortions taking place. They were just killing some of the women as well. The states that allowed abortions were doing a good cross-border business. Like it or not, those women were making a choice, no matter the risks. And coercion by you, the church, or the state could not prevent it. "I reckon that yeh can't find any rational, testable way of determinin' when any human should be defended." As long as the woman is in custody of that embryo, she is the ultimate source of defence for it. That is the unavoidable reality. My approach is to allow her to take that responsibility. If you think that isn't rational then please articulate what you think the rational approach IS. You provide a defensible time at which the state takes over. You provide a defensible set of standards for the state to follow as it provides the protection. You provide a defensible way to enforce it. And then you provide a defensible punishment for those women who defy the state. The best minds in the pro-life movement had six years in control of every branch of the government. They really blew it. All they needed to do was to log into Scouter.com and ask for Beavah. So where were you? Your movement was floundering. Why didn't you step up with your solutions? Why not? Your movement failed. Where were you when they needed you? Think of what you could have prevented...and didn't. OGE had a reasonable approach. It still allows choice but minimizes the frequency of the choice. Promoting governmental intrusion is little more than an admission that pro-life arguments are too weak to be convincing. A better option for those who support the pro-life policies would be to construct a more effective argument. And then convince people to make the best choice. Good luck.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

SR540Beaver, you know, if someone had explained to me so many years ago, that I was supposed to spit I might have become hooked on it as well. But my reaction was sufficiently extreme that tobacco was just not in the cards for me. This from a boy born and raised in NC over 50 years ago. As for cigars, I'm afraid that's one more thing I just don't 'get'. I think anyone can live without tobacco for the duration of a scout outing or else they just shouldn't be there at all.

TheScout, yes you can. You will also risk punishment by the state. However, if he happens to be a lost Japanese student who is trying to find a Halloween party in Georgia, you'll get away with it. If you can make a credible claim that you felt threatened by him, in some states you'll get away with it. I think that NY is not one of them so you'll need to cover your tracks. OGE, suicide is not against the law in all states. Besides, what is the punishment for suicide? Duh! As far as who makes the decisions, are you ready to take on that responsibility for everyone else? No matter what the circumstances? Are you ready to confront the incredible number of complicating factors for these decisions...on behalf of all other people? Do you think this is an easy, simple task? If not, what makes you think that goverment can do this better than you can? If you DO think you're ready to make the decisions for everyone else, what makes you better at it than those for whom you are making the decisions? Are the answers to these questions coming to you quickly and easily? I hope not.

OGE, the problem with your question is with the word, "worthy". If I phrase it, 'At what point should this mass of cells come under state protection?' then I can answer more easily although the answer seems glib. It should come under state protection whenever the people decide they want the state to protect it. Right now, in most states, the people have decided. And sometimes they change their minds. Inserting the concept of 'worth' adds an element of judgement that demands further detail. For those who hold that there are moral absolutes, the fact that the 'people' of a state can change their minds on this issue - is troubling. As for me, I am troubled by the whole concept of 'worthiness' when applied to human life. It makes me think in terms that would be contrary to Godwin's rule. If the question is phrased a bit differently: to ask, for example, when the 'soul' enters the embryo? I have no idea. No one else does either, in any objective or demonstrable manner. Anyone who would like to assign a 'point' where this happens would have to contend with many equally valid alternative 'points' that might be in conflict with their beliefs. Not to mention the fact that many see the concept of a 'soul' in terms of mysticism and magic - fun to play with but not real. As a practical matter, you must understand by now that no matter what the situation or decision on the abortion issue, some portion of the 'people' are not going to agree with it. The current status of, state-by-state, the people allowing or limiting access to abortion is workable. I don't agree with it but I accept it, especially with the unlikely prospect of even greater limits placed by government on personal freedom. So my answer is that I would not pick the 'point' at which the mass of cells is worthy of state protection. The state should butt out. I would leave the decision to the woman - and her physician if that is her choice. Again, except to alter the cost and convenience, it's an unavoidable reality anyway.

OGE, I have advocated that for a long time. Lisabob, just curious...isn't that called....'marriage'?

Yes, remind them of the G2SS if they've forgotten, or get them trained if not trained. There's not much more that you can do unless you want to start a big fuss at the level of the committee or CO. The boys are usually pretty savvy about these things. If a parent comments about it, you might pass that buck (and a copy of G2SS) right on to the other leaders.

ASM915, not exacly PC but I thought it expresses a great sense of humor, the rottweiler thing! Enough about hats, already. Yeah, I almost wrote about that other source of organ donations but I thought the topic of 'outsourcing' would be off-topic. Not to mention that it really makes those of us who ride on two wheels just a bit nervous...we do need, after all, to be politically correct and protect the tender sensibilties of all those bikers. You won't catch ME making cracks about THEIR hats! Have a nice day.

Ideally the boys decide which MBs they want to pursue. Then they speak to the SM and a decision is made as to which counselor. At that time you would be contacted by the boy with his request. OK, that's not the way it often works in practice. IMHO it is best NOT to do the MBs in groups, although such seems common practice. But if you do it with a single boy, you do need to have another person present (parent preferably). They don't have to be involved but I've had them sit in because they were interested (Oceanography, for example). You and the boy can arrange to do this in whatever venue works best. It's possible that your newness to the scene, combined with some historical inertia will make things go slowly. That's OK. Just make yourself available and let them decide.

Beavah, am I missing something? Here's what you wrote: "Since Nagasaki there have been no atomic weapons used in anger." That's where I got the word from. But it was just a question? Yes or no? "Nitpick da wording when yeh can't address the argument." Coming from someone with a legal background?...c'mon.....do I really need to say it? "New technology is a magical genie, that once released in society can never be checked." I'm not sure what you mean by 'checked' but if you meant 'eliminated', I agree. Its application might be suppressed but the technology will remain, just like that really embarrassing cell-phone photo that someone took of Paris Hilton. We may not be applying those weapons but they still exist and plenty are ready to continue the incinerations and poisonings. And the way they work would survive even if they were totally destroyed. In the case of medical procedures associated with abortion, that technology is diffuse (known by many in many places) and simple. It always will exist somewhere and availability will always simply be a matter of money. Technology isn't just hardware. It includes the knowledge of how to do things.

That was a great joke, I got it too. You know, I'm in a quandry. I would like to get those deductions...but there are few things I dislike more than filing tax returns. what to choose....

Beavah, I guess I missed that other 'hat' comment. I apologize. As for the other question, I answered it I thought. I repeat, "Beavah, life began several billion years ago and hasn't stopped yet." I think I can demonstrate in a number of different ways that unfertlized human eggs that are capable of being fertilized, are alive. I can test this, for example, by measuring the metabolic rate, or watching the internal cytoplasmic motion, or perhaps by using vital stains that are specific for certain living processes. Those are just a few. The claim that "life begins at conception" is demonstrably false. As for your comment about protection, I thought I had been clear on this many times by now. I think the decision should be left to those who bear the responsiblity. The woman should be free to make that choice, with her doctor's assistance if that's what she wants. The trimester system that is employed now seems to be workable for doctors and their patients. Or am I wrong? Edited part: Oops, Sorry Ed abuot teh mispelign. Reproductive rights don't need to be regulated by anyone but the individuals engaged in the commerce and who bear the responsiblity, certainly not by a government.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Did we incinerate alive all those Japanese civilians, men, women, and children, out of anger? Did we do that? Edited part: "The law would rather see the embryos destroyed as unwanted property, experimented on as lab animals, or harvested for body parts/stem cells than actually adopted and allowed to become someone's children." H'mmmm, I didn't hear that from the law. Did the law say that to you? Where? When? I was under the impression that the law did not 'prohibit' those things but that, collectively, WE choose to do it. Or am I wrong?(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

"Yes, you can deduct expenses due to scouting activities, within reason. You can deduct the cost of uniforms that are not suitable for wear for other purposes. You cannot deduct the cost of meals that you, yourself consume." Huh? I thought that only donations to a qualified whatever-the-number charity could be deducted. When did all this happen? How about mileage? What does "within reason" mean, anyway?