packsaddle

Cambridgeskip, I only just read it and it might have been an easy decision if there hadn't already been several responses (which would mean a cascading effect of editing, etc. which could just end up causing confusion - voice of experience here). I could invite you to read other statements that I've had to read in this I&P forum and you would understand that it isn't actually the most ignorant and offensive thing available...it's just the one that you read. I admit that I'm uncertain, short of just deleting things wholesale, how to keep a forum like this one 'moderate'. It seems to naturally spawn the sort of thing to which you've just reacted. And since I'm in a profession that values open exchange of ideas, no matter how ignorant and offensive, I try to err on the side of permissiveness. My personal approach to things like this forum and for that matter to those individuals who insist on standing in public place to spew this onto students and the public, is to let them stand and be the example of ignorance and offensiveness that they are. It isn't pleasant but in a sort of way, it IS instructive. So that's the approach I try to take here in the I&P forum. To the other moderators, please feel free to jump in on this.

Welcome to the forums! They can be fun and they can be informative. And once in a while they can be irritating, lol. A sense of humor helps...probably with the unit as well, lol. Like I just wrote, Welcome!

I'm sympathetic to Scoutldr's sensitivity to this topic. When I was a child, I suffered probably 3 or 4 blistering sunburns every summer all the way to my teen years. I suspect that it's just been a matter of luck now, at my age, that I don't have skin cancer already but I know I'm at risk. Back then sunscreen didn't really exist and my parents thought I just needed to get a tan (impossible with my complexion but they didn't know that). But that experience was literally burned into my memory and I make sure that when I'm in the tropics, or even outdoors here in the South, I and my students take careful precautions. That said, I can't force them to use good sense or to take my advice. But after that first burn, they usually 'come around' to my way of thinking...almost obsessively. Why anyone would voluntarily repeat that burn is beyond my comprehension.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the idea that anyone has to be 'trained' to protect themselves with sunscreen. It's as if there are still people who don't understand what sunburn is (or in an analogy, that cigarettes are not good for your health).

I'm wondering if this will lead to BSA acceptance of the UUA religious award. It sure ought to cause the UUA to rethink the wording of their religious award documents.

I apologize if I seemed to imply that Qwazse (I have trouble with the spelling too) was inviting anyone to leave. I just wanted to make it clear to everyone that they were still welcome. But I guess because I replied to Qwazse I can see how it had that appearance. That was not my intent at all.

Qwazse, I note that Oldscout448 and AZMike and others who are not happy about this change are still welcome within scouting and I hope they can find a way to reconcile themselves within scouting the same way that others have done for decades under the restrictive rules. They are free to remain or go, their choice, but the last thing I would do is to invite them to leave if they don't like it (as so many others have done to me). I would like them to stay. But if they do decide to go, I respect their views and their decision. I wish them well either way.

I'm wondering why Bloop didn't give us a more balanced view of the situation at the outset.

Be advised: I know this is an emotionally-charged subject. Try not to make this a 'personal' thing, however. The last two posts cross the line of decorum and I will let them stand as an example of what crosses the line. However, any future responses like those will find the circular file in short order.

Yeah, I know you're just pushing my button with this....so I just HAVE to respond.

Flavor Aid...sputtering...how many times do I have to say this...it's Flavor Aid!

I've seen them push buttons so very effectively. And nearly every adult, under the right (wrong?) circumstances can 'lose it' in one of those situations. It's one thing to snap at the kid in public. It's another to lose it so badly that they pay no attention to an attempt to intervene, worse to follow the kid to his tent. He completely took her power, that one did. So....now that some little time has passed, what is her demeanor and thoughts on this incident? How is it that she thinks she is under "attack"? Will she be at the committee meeting? Has anyone tried to discuss the incident with her? How about the parents of the boy, have they said anything? Does this mom understand that the incident cannot just 'go away' without some response? Or did she know what she was doing and had decided that this would be a great way to 'go out' in a 'blaze of glory' that no one would ever forget? Any chance there's some static on Facebook about this? You can bet the 'grapevine' is working full time.

They all know the score by now. Ask them at the beginning next time if any want sunscreen. And if they do, good. For the others, let them fry. You might want to video the event, here and there as a recruiting tool that you can put on Youtube. But make sure you record that beginning conversation about the sunscreen, "Who wants sunscreen, let me see a show of hands..OK now who doesn't want it, show of hands"...all on the record. That way you'll have the ability to play the conversation back to concerned parents. OR I take students to the tropics. I have red-haired, extremely vulnerable students sometimes and we are out in the sun for most of the day on many days. I merely ask them, "Do you want to end up looking like me?" That does the trick.

Agreed. But I fit your description of "highly trained professional teacher" and I can demand compliance with a snap of my fingers...and I get it. You didn't mention any other conditions. Edit: as for maturity, I think you are underestimating the maturity of scouts (at least the ones I interact with) and overestimating the maturity of college students (at least the ones I interact with).

Stosh, my classes are regularly at least 80 students or more. The one I'm teaching right now has more than 100. OTOH, I have absolute power in the classroom. That helps.

There are plenty of options to scouting, both 'boy' and 'girl'. The better competitor usually wins competitions.

Did I read that wrong? It sounded like the touching was by a scout not a scouter. But yes, should be covered by Youth Protection.

'The flag' was destined to come down sooner or later. I think realistic persons involved in the compromise that put it on the lawn in the first place understood that. But no one had any idea of how long it might take. Like I've pointed out before, the NAACP boycott and the business community have been a long-standing and potent force in favor of its removal. It was just bad business. The photo you mention may have been the stimulus the politicians needed to take the action they took. It was just good business. But lacking that photo, 'the flag' probably would have remained for a while, perhaps quite a while. For me, the best thing about all this is that we no longer can use a symbol to distract us from real problems that need to be addressed. Now that symbol has been removed as an issue. Good. And now the politicians have one less excuse not to address real problems.

JoeBob, I salute your new-found faith in newspapers as authoritative sources. I guess at that time they had not yet discovered hyperbole or deceit. Edit: Shovels, no less. I have to hand it to you. I'd never heard THAT one before.

They are THE definitive statements by the states that seceded...as to why they seceded. If you can find more authoritative sources than these please list them. Oops, almost missed this: "No one is saying slavery wasn't an issue..." You might want to take a gander at the next post.

Of course there's always Texas: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_texsec.asp and Georgia: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_geosec.asp These are not history books or someone's interpretation of what was written. These are what WERE written and they are remarkably consistent and clear about the central issue. Slavery.

Or might it be Mississippi's declaration in which that state included these words, "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world,†and then “Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of the commerce of the earth. . . . A blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization.†Jan. 9, 1861 Is this better?

OK, what is your better source than the actual "Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union" itself?

I confess. For a while I actually thought people were referring to the 'bad guys' in Deep Space Nine (the Cardassians), one of whom had the first name Kim.