packsaddle

To reply to the original question: Aside from a lot of noise regarding loss of funding, the only fallout I have seen was during my stint as cubmaster. We lost several families one evening, not as a result of the policy, but rather as a result of allowing a DE to fulminate about the issue at our Blue & Gold. I was shocked and, evidently, others were too. That was the last time a DE was invited to speak.

Yep, I bit on the subject too. Here's a related diversion: The newt is an interesting amphibian. The adult lives in the water and it lays its eggs in the water. They eat invertebrates, fish eggs, tadpoles, small crayfish, etc. The eggs hatch and the larvae eat tiny invertebrates, etc. until the summer when they leave the water and change to a stage called the 'eft'. This is the typical salamander that you often find in moist leaf litter or under logs. The eft does not have gills and it lives on land for 1-7 years eating insects, snails, etc. The skin of most (perhaps all) of these is poisonous. They are often red or reddish-brown in color. At maturity the color becomes more subdued and they re-enter the water to complete the life cycle. It is common in some lakes (Oregon for example) to see large numbers of these adults swimming to the surface and diving back to depth with no fear of predation by fish or birds. This is because their skin, too, is quite poisonous. Why, you may ask, am I telling you this? The derivation of 'eft' comes from the word 'effete' which is in turn derived from latin 'effetus' (also the source of 'fetus'). 'Effete' is first defined in terms of fertility (rather lack thereof) and then related to weakness or decadence. It was this term that Spiro Agnew, for example, used to criticize student protest movements, "A spirit of national masochism prevails, encouraged by an impudent core of effete snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals." Spiro had such a way with words...and corruption. Anyway, 'efts' are infertile and 'fetus' also has an element of lack of viability associated with it. 'Effete', being also related to 'effeminate' and synonymous with it, is not used often. 'Effeminate' has further taken on a pejorative character and today is usually applied to male humans. Again with attached connotations of weakness and lack of viability (lack of virility). But I thought that the term's meanings, spanning the range of contemporary social interactions to amphibian life stages, was interesting and I wanted to share it with you here.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

BW, I like that idea. Some of the boys I know need less 'encouragement' than others but it's good to let them know that the leader is interested and knowledgeable of their status. Knowing the boy is necessary but your suggestion is a way to know, at a glance, his advancement status as well.

LongHaul, Has your council seen the letter that you cite? It seems to definitively answer the question. And they seem to be in non-compliance.

Saltheart, my thoughts exactly. Ford was one of the good guys. Not much of a golfer, though.

Wingnut, I appreciate your acknowledgement of the timeless nature of basketry. But just for fun, let's see if we can put together just what was happening for computers back in 1993. As I remember, for my day job I still had a DOS machine, I think, with a 10MB hard drive (a somewhat intelligent typewriter). The newest machines we had were using Windows 3.1 or Norton Commander. We used dot matrix printers for drafts and a daisy wheel (remember those?) for letters. Microsoft bloatware was just emerging. I think we still had a working Apple IIe somewhere and I knew people who scoffed at using a 'mouse' but did it anyway - reluctantly. But...in the classroom, we had 40 Macs in a lab networked with server-based drives and software, shared laser printers, and each interfaced with lab instrumentation and running programs that didn't require manuals. Man, have things changed!

In many states schools are off-limits for firearms even with carry permits. Similar for bars, government buildings, and churches. But there is quite a bit of variation and anyone with a carry permit had better know the laws for the state they are in.

I understand the frustration of seeing rules change and worse, seeing them applied unequally. I carried a pocketknife to school every day back in the 'old days'. Lots of students did. On more than one occasion I saw them pulled, on one occasion one was stuck into my back and I had to deal with it. The no-weapons rules for school today are much better than the way it was then. Today where enforcement involves judgement, we must fight poor judgement. Where punishment is mandatory, we must apply it equally. None of these approaches are perfect and I sympathize with efforts to make improvements. I still carry my pocketknife (not the same one) but I honor (as I do with my CWP) those places in which such are prohibited. I trust that I will pay the price if I don't.

Hops, you didn't give us much to work with there. Edited part: Thanks, the edit helped.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Three days suspension? Accidental? I'd say he got off lightly. Taking a weapon to school is serious. The penalties depend on the state and local school regs but around here it could mean expulsion, depending on history of offenses. No sympathy here. He just got a cheap civics lesson in the 'obedient' point of the law.

As I write in the old-fashioned manner, I note that Terry presently only has 44 posts. Wow. Thanks for letting the rest of us be ratchet-jaws (fingers).(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I think you are correct about that but in that case, the university is not forcing the change. Rather the acrediting agency is forcing the change. In cases of this that I have heard of (very few) there is usually a grace period associated with the change. The circumstance you mention should be very rare. There is one other, though, that may occur more often. If lack of funding forces a degree program to close, that can happen quickly and could force unexpected changes for numerous students. But my point was that it seems like the MB counselor should have the latitude to stick to the requirements that were in effect when the scout started the MB. Seems only fair.

Yep, what's that quote from Einstein, "It's a no-brainer"?

Hey, has anyone seen (heard from) Rooster7? I sort of expected to hear from him in these topics.

Favorites, my K-bar pocketknife and my Vasque Whitney backpacking boots, both a little over 30 years old now. I hope to be buried with them...after at least another 30 years or so. NOT: rap music, skunks, mouse droppings in my oatmeal, oops you were interested in the gear, weren't you! OK, those stoves with disposable butane cans are anathema to my sense of backpacking ethics. And they're not worth much as stoves either.

I think it would be great. In my experience (and I include myself in this pejorative view) women are almost always smarter and better organized than men. But we can beat them arm wrestling, well, most of them.

mk9750, the suspense was terrible...I hoped it would last.

I have never heard of anything like that. Every badge form that I have ever seen signed by a MB counselor as complete has been accepted by all other parties, including the council. How would they even know about this? We don't submit the blue forms, only the advancement sheet. Edited part: At the university, after a freshman enters a degree program there are often curriculum changes before his degree is completed. Every program that I have been involved with has carefully applied the degree requirements that were in effect on entry to that student until the student graduates. It is considered a binding contract and it seems a fair policy as well.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

OK, I'm often slow on the uptake so let me give it a try here: Scenario 1) KA6BSA loads up his van with neighborhood boys (who coincidentally are members of the troop) and takes them on a birthday celebration to, say, lasertag. Then he alone may be responsible if there is an injury and he and his insurance company (if he has insurance) may have to cover the damages. Scenario 2) KA6BSA loads up his van with neighborhood boys who are members of the troop and takes them to, say, lasertag. He ignores G2SS, doesn't have a copy of it with him, fails to file a tour permit, and tells the parents that it is not an official troop outing. Why would liability and insurance coverage be different between the two scenarios? If BSA covered anything at all in the second scenario it seems that KA6BSA would still be better off. What am I missing?

OK, the results: Tomato juice - We didn't have enough so we added in some t-sauce (diluted) and one bottle of ketchup to the t-juice we had on hand. It did seem to help except that when the dog was around it made me hungry for Italian food. On one spot of fur we also tried vinegar and lemon juice. Man, a Caesar's salad would be great right now. Anyway, there was still some residual odor so we tried a peroxide and baking soda concoction that Big Dog sent. That seemed to work very well but I advise anyone repeating the experience to avoid following the vinegar with the baking soda. It wasn't all that bad but the dog seemed alarmed at all the fizzing noise. And the cats, also alarmed, just hissed at the dog.

The mental image is almost as bad as America's growing crack problem. Can you get them in paisley?

I feel the need to respond to some recent statements. Science is not a faith and does not depend on faith, nor should any faith depend on science. That said, it doesn't mean that scientists do not have beliefs. I do understand that some persons may confuse 'working assumptions' with 'faith'. The distinction is that faith does not and cannot be a part of experimental or rational study. Working assumptions, on the other hand, are often used, sometimes in the form of hypotheses, as tools in just such studies. I state these things because to link atheism with science is erroneous. Atheism may well be a belief system that denies the existence of a deity. And atheism (and atheists) are free to employ science and rational thought to support their beliefs. However, to make atheism somehow dependent on science gives qualities to science that do not exist - and also may understate or misrepresent the philosophical basis for atheism. Science cannot address matters of faith. Period. Therefore it is at worst (or best) neutral to those matters, being unable to address questions of deity either positively or negatively. Therefore I remind everyone that for the sake of science, if for no other reason, we should recognize that it is separate from matters of faith, even atheistic ones.

Man, you're right about that! Tele-evangelists, Falwell, Robertson...skunk fumes galore!

Here's an idea. Forget the local fundraisers and go for the brass ring, the holy grail (so-to-speak). Since BSA has laid claim to being a religious organization, why not jump on the tele-evangelist bandwagon. Pat Robertson would probably jump at the chance to incorporate BSA as probably would Jerry Falwell. They'd probably want a cut of the action though. Or to paraphrase Country Joe and the Fish, "...there's plenty of good money to be made, by supplying the faithful with the tools of the trade..."

Acco40, don't forget the classic Jimi Hendrix version of the anthem.