Beavah

Yah, I'm not sure that I've ever seen evidence that we created a barrier to non-Christians, other than perhaps the specifically religious CO's like LDS. In fact, around here, it's not unusual for Christian church-sponsored units to have Jews and Hindus and a small scatterin' of Muslims. For some reason, they like da Catholic units a lot of the time. Can't figure that out, since the Catholic units tend to have a Catholic feel to 'em. But I guess they're welcoming, or the "feel" is a good one. Maybe it's just the comfort that religious expression is valued in some way, rather than absent. I think you're playin' your problem parent wrong, Lisabob. A Scout is Reverent, and does his Duty to God, eh? I think yeh acknowledge her concern, and provide an opportunity for the lad and a few interested adults and troop-mates to do a Scouts Own or other religious service or experience on campouts. Yeh might be surprised what it adds to your program. Yeh might even find that it makes things more welcoming for your non-Christian (but believing) families. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

What I find abhorrent is the idea that the government should determine which things get to go in an art gallery and which ones do not. This is, after all, the same gov't that people routinely (and perhaps rightly) ridicule for bungling everything from trash collection to national defense policy. So, to bring it back 'round... The government didn't pay for the "God Rock" in the planetary walk. The government didn't even pay to host an exhibition. It simply allowed that expression. Seems like in one case it's bad to have the government refrain from paying for an exhibition of works that are designed to deliberately provoke large segments of the population by defaming their symbols. And in the second case, it's bad to have the government not pay but simply allow the display of a symbol or phrase it finds poetic, without defaming another group. What an odd standard, eh? Beavah

Common sense can be thrown around all we want, but for those that want to use that, please critique the above scenario right to the point. Do you think it would play out as I prescribed IF it went to court. Yes or No. Yah, courts are funny things, and there are many differences in law between states. So nobody who's competent or ethical is goin' to venture a formal legal opinion in an on-line forum, eh? All we can discuss in a more general, educative way are da principles of jurisprudence. That havin' been said, "no." There are a number of elements to establishin' negligence, and the scenario you describe doesn't really have any of 'em. Nor does it seem to have any damages. Just not a civil case to be had. Have fun on your trip. Fear no legal boogeymen. Beavah

As many of you know, the Kenyan Scouts Association has long been very strong, because of the nation's ties to Great Britain and because Lord and Lady Baden-Powell retired to Kenya. B-P's grave is in Nyeri. Kenya is also the Africa Region headquarters for WOSM, and we have a few BSA Direct Service units in Nairobi. The word from Kenya is that things are "very bad" and "deteriorating." Reports are very sketchy. They have about 10,000 scouts who are from da large slums in major cities and are effectively homeless; some of those areas are among the worst hit. As we debate da trivialities of "oppression" in the U.S., let us never forget that there are children and fellow Scouts facin' the reality of real oppression and fear around the world. My heart and my prayers go out to my brothers and sister scouts in Baden Powell's beloved Kenya. I hope yours join mine. Amani Iwe ulimwenguni May peace prevail in the world! Beavah

Hey, why did so many get their undies in a knot when Government funds were used to support an artistic depiction of cross (or was it a crucifix?) in a jar of urine made by a gay artist? It's just a symbol? Can't speak for anybody else. I got upset because it was lousy art. I figure if you're goin' to take my tax dollars to do art, I know a lot of really creative and talented artists who could use the help. But yeh gotta admit, since it was a crucifix, that the Catholics might be understandably a bit upset, eh? I reckon there's a difference between peeing on somebody else's symbol and just lettin' it sit on public property. I wouldn't be troubled at all by a Buddha on the lawn down at city hall. Especially if we had a large Buddhist population in the city, and they were payin' the taxes for city hall, eh? But I reckon I'd be a bit annoyed by somebody dumping urine on that Buddha. And I'm not even Buddhist. Beavah

Yah, thanks, Calico. That seems to be about what I was able to discern. I'm not really familiar with 4-H, though I've known a bunch of good folks involved with it. So it's about what I said, eh? Because da programs may be run by private entities, there's not necessarily an establishment clause issue as Merlyn suggests. Only an internal policy one, which can probably only be enforced by the agency choosin' not to grant a charter, rather than by private cause of action against the government. It's also hard to tell whether the various land grant colleges administerin' the program can set local policy to allow clubs to be an open forum, which would permit prayer, eh? That might be particularly of interest to the 30 Native American colleges, where da presence of common ethnicity may value such a cultural expression. Seems like I recall 4-H bein' involved with some pow-wows that included Native American (religious) ritual, but I'm gettin' old and addled. I'm havin' a hard time these days rememberin' the name of my first pet dinosaur. Beavah

I wish the system would discriminate against one of the epalmers, eh? I always figured they were like-minded twins. B

You would make a good reporter. Only use the part of the quotes that fits what you want. If you would have use the rest of that quote it would not have been as good would it have? ??? Yeh know, I think we could use a confused-looking smilley face! ??? Not sure what quote you're talkin' about dan. Eamonn? Or one of da scout handbook quotes? All three of 'em go on for quite a bit, eh? The Scout Handbook quotes go on for a couple paragraphs each. Eamonn, well, he just goes on . I picked what was short and seemed relevant. Yah, sure, relevant to the point I was tryin' to make. I figure most folks feel I go on too much as it is, without quotin' whole pages of text, eh? Beavah

Oops... back to da non-hijacked part. I suggest some fats to provide energy durin' the deep dark of the night, eh? How about a hearty soup with cheesy garlic bread? B

Yah, Calico, I've gotta agree with Gern and others, eh? Digestion takes hours and hours. The difference of one hour just ain't real. And digestion will naturally be slowed by sleep in any event. Folks who are cold should eat. And drink. If there's a real energy deficit (the person is already seriously hypothermic), they should start with simple sugars and work up, and be heavy on the fluids. Digestion does take a bit of energy to get goin'. But it yields more energy than it takes, eh? That's the whole point. Kids or adults just goin' to bed aren't hypothermic. They can afford the small initial expense in exchange for the energy gained throughout the night. I'd never want to see anyone encouragin' a winter camper not to eat, no matter what time of day it was. Just the opposite - they need to eat more than usual, and drink a lot more than usual. Not necessarily a huge feast, but constant grazin'. Besides, I suspect what you're feelin' is a fluids effect, not a digestion energy one. Digestion takes a lot of fluids, eh? Enough to turn all solid food into the equivalent of soup. If you're eatin' but not drinkin', that fluid comes from the blood & tissues, which reduces heat transfer to the extremities and makes yeh feel colder. As long as you drink enough, I think you'll find yeh can eat just fine without experiencing the effect you're talkin' about. And pee bottles should be stored outside of the sleepin' bag, eh? The pee ain't warm, it's at body temperature by definition. Very little added energy keepin' it around, but it takes energy to keep a bunch of liquid like that warm. Puttin' it next to your skin can feel warm temporarily (it's a bit warmer than the bag to start), but that opens up surface blood vessels which cool the core. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

don't hijack other discussions, and don't be unScoutlike. Seems like "Thread Closed" can be a hijack, eh? As to not bein' unScoutlike... A Scout is Brave... He has the courage to stand for what he thinks is right (Boy Scout Handbook p. 53) Seems like that includes bein' up front about "signing" moderation. Anyway, feedback is a gift. Because "there will be time when your judgment fails and you make mistakes. Now and then that happens to everyone" (Boy Scout Handbook, from A Scout is Trustworthy). Signed moderation just enables us to give feedback . B

Yah, I'm actually not sure about the legal status of 4-H, eh? There are elements of its program that are run out of the Cooperative Extension Service of the USDA. But then the National 4-H Council is a private entity, and they seem to be the major generator of educational resources (very similar to the BSA). The state-level programs are run through the land grant universities, which are both public and private, and at this level each land grant university seems to be the policy making body. Therefore, some 4-H programs seem to be clearly under private, not public, administration. And the clubs themselves seem to have both public and private sponsors. Funding as well seems to be a mix of private and public funding. In the present fiscal environment, my guess is that most to all of the funding at the club level is private. Anybody seen the 4-H Clarity Campaign materials that describe how the various programs and separately incorporated entities are divided in 4-H? It's a bit of a murky mess, eh? Anyway, I would humbly suggest that treating all of 4-H as though they're a governmental program subject to establishment clause restrictions is probably not accurate, eh? Beavah

Yah, acco40, if yeh go back to the parent thread from this one, I'd be curious to know what you think the signoff expectation was (#1, #2, or #3) on average for your son who made First Class in nine months. B

Yah, hey, nobody better be changin' my beautiful, sonorous northern midwest accent to make it more grammatical, eh? We toothy, furry critters got our pride I'm with Trev. "Secret moderation" is like "secret prisons". Even if what you're doin' is just fine, it sure looks wrong. Beavah

Beavah, I appreciate your comments, but you can't simply rely on common sense in the face of a guideline or requirement. Absent that, of course you do what is best, but if the definition of "seperate sleeping facilities" is a hard wall, for instance, and you use a plastic sheet, I don't care what YOUR common sense tells you, if someone makes an issue, YOU will lose. I am looking for by BSA legal position on the matter. If they don't have one, fine. They don't have one. They never have one (at least not for this sort of thing, eh? ). The BSA is not a government. Their guidebook is not a legal document. It's just a guidebook. There's nothing to "lose". Someone can complain to your CO, or to your council, and your CO might tell you "Hey, don't do that again", or your council might say "Hey, yeh might have tried this instead, that's what some folks do." Is that "losing"? If so, OK, but it doesn't seem like a big deal . I think if someone makes an issue of something, yeh do what any good leader would do. Listen to 'em, and consider their point of view, and make a change if it seems reasonable. You'd do that for someone anyways, right? Even if yeh were following the guidebook but they were uncomfortable? Sounds like you might be helped by a local perspective, though. Why don't yeh ask the Little Rock for the contact information for a couple of other packs and troops that have visited, and call their leaders to find out how they handled it? I'm sure both the Little Rock staff and your fellow local scout leaders will be happy to help. Or yeh can ask at your Round Table this month! Beavah

Spiney Norman must live on da other side of the International Date Line B

Yah, dfousek, I'd encourage you to "think different", eh? No matter what the book says, no matter whether you follow it to the letter or not, YOU ARE STILL RESPONSIBLE. Yeh can't get around it. If you are the leader in a youth program, you're the responsible party. You can follow every rule ever dreamed up, and if yeh didn't use common sense, it's still your fault. Put the female cubmaster in another room, and if some behavior bad thing happens that the other adults weren't quick to handle.... YOUR FAULT. Inadequate supervision, trained leader not present. Put a kid's mom in another room over her complaints, and if something bad happens to the kid that she could have prevented....YOUR FAULT. It's a Guidebook, eh? Written by well-intentioned people to help you, but they can't foresee every circumstance. That's what God gave each of us a brain for, to be Mentally Awake. So don't be afraid to take responsibility and make a decision. Just do your best, eh? Get your CC's signature on the tour permit, and go have a good time. Yeh don't need to turn this into a big legal-wording deal. If yeh can take responsibility for your son havin' a sleepover party at your house, you can take responsibility for sleepin' arrangements on the USS Little Rock with far fewer worries. We've got volunteer immunity and insurance . But yeh do have to take responsibility. Yeh can't delegate it to a book. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

For an alternate approach to tryin' to get get municipalities to evict programs working with kids, yeh can consider the church-school partnerships in Philadelphia. http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0928/p11s02-legn.html Rather than exclude folks of faith, they're welcomed into the schools. A difference between caring about kids and families and communities, and choosin' to be offended by expression of belief (as though one's fellow citizens were toxic and must be quarantined). This is an old article, and Vallas has since left Philly. School reform efforts usually have a lifetime of about 3 years before collapsin'. But I do note that their web site still lists an office for promotin' these partnerships. B

Yah, I've traveled widely, eh? Some with international Scouting, some for other reasons. Been to lots of places where the symbols weren't my own. Stars of David, Crescents, Buddhas, Christian faiths not my own, flags without stars and stripes. Can't say that I've found any to be intimidating or a threat. Been perfectly happy traveling there, talkin' with different folk. Would be fine living there. I currently live in an area where mine is not the majority denomination, in Scoutin' or otherwise. Doesn't bother me in the least. Takin' someone else's symbols as a threat is a personal choice, eh? Doesn't say much about them. Says a lot about you. Now the behavior of others is a different matter, eh? Folks can become too aggressive about things, or impinge on my space. If yeh spray paint your symbol on my church, that becomes an issue. If yeh try to block my parade or remove all mention of my belief from public life, that's an issue. These also say a lot about the person doin' them. Somewhere between "insecure" and "real jerk." We teach all this as part of "A Scout is Reverent", eh? Maybe we do need to open Scoutin' up to atheists and such, so that they can learn such important lessons of courtesy and citizenship that they don't seem to be gettin' elsewhere. Beavah

Yah, I think if we're honest with ourselves, there are always a few boys who just get under our skin, eh? I'm not talkin' about boys who aren't living the Scout Oath or Law, I'm talkin' about boys who other adult leaders enjoy and get along fine with, but they just get on our nerves (and often vice-versa!). In such cases, declinin' to be on a BOR is a kindness. While yeh no doubt would have done your best to be honest and objective, chances are the boy's level of comfort and his responses would have been changed a bit by your presence. Now, if the case is really that the boy is not living the Scout Oath and Law, and other leaders are seein' that too, then you might have been exactly the right person to sit on the board, because you'd be more likely to be blunt and honest, eh? And boys need that sometimes. So I think yeh at least need to give the CC a reason . Beavah

Yah, I've been noticing in the longwinded God Rock thread and some others that messages from some posters seem to just vanish sometimes. Not the usual "edited out" stuff which leaves da message behind, but just "poof". The actual message count in that thread just went backwards. Is there some server problem goin' on that we're getting message dropout? B

We decided that the lone female would be in separate quarters if she set up a tent within the building and slept in that. Yah, dat's a new one, eh? I'm always surprised by really odd rules permutations. Honestly, use ordinary common sense and good judgment, dfousek. The purpose for the "separate facilities rule" is to avoid an appearance of impropriety or any awkward or embarrassing moments. Sleepin' all together in a big room doesn't afford much chance for impropriety, eh? And as long as there's some sort of way to change clothes privately (perhaps in the restroom, perhaps just don't bother), I think you're just fine. Beavah

Yah, Merlyn, I tried, eh? Yeh now have a view from the other side. A chance to look at the world in all its diversity. An opportunity to see that folks get a bit upset with havin' their view excluded from public spaces. "You can teach about religion" and all that. As FireKat says, that experiment was tried in the old Soviet state, eh? What got taught "about" religion wasn't pretty, eh? Imagine if we said "you can teach about science, but you can't teach science." That distinction is just nasty, ain't it? Seems like yeh don't really want diversity. Yeh want to manipulate the system so that views you dislike are excluded from public places and public life. OK. I get that. That's where you are at. Reminds me of a lot of teenage scouts, so black and white. To the extent your approach affords no nuance nor room for polite civility, I think it only contributes to the voices of polarization. Your attempts to manipulate the system only encourage a response from the other pole to manipulate back. Judges can be replaced, laws altered, public entities defunded. Better a Christian nation than one where Christianity is excluded from public life, eh? I don't care for that approach. I believe in right and wrong, but don't much care for unnuanced thinkin'. I'm a more relaxed and easy-goin' sort that welcomes diversity of ideas and notions. So me, I vote against your extremism. I wish you'd give it up, but failin' that, I stand with those who gently oppose your views and your efforts to manipulate the instruments of governance for your own ends. Guess that's about all I can say, eh? May you find in the New Year opportunities for sacrificial service to people in the world who are truly oppressed. Or at least may yeh find good health, and a mind open to new understandings. God bless, Beavah

New York public schools used to have a "non-denominational" prayer recited each morning by schoolchildren, but that didn't make it constitutional (and it wasn't). What about a reflection, prayer, or short reading offered by a different child each morning, eh? You'd get more Christian than not, but each person's contribution would be welcome. No generic prayers. No outright elimination of prayers. Genuine diversity, welcomed and shared. Celebrate all holidays. Invite the imam and the priest and the rabbi and the anti-theist to come teach. Not generic. Not prohibited. Genuine diversity, welcomed and shared. They are "public" schools, after all, right? Not "government" schools. So they should reflect the character and makeup of the public, not the worries about government "establishment." Unless they really are government schools, and parks, and such. In which case, there should be choice, and funding should be provided to anybody serving a public purpose, not limited to a government monopoly. Government monopolies are dangerous. They can lead to exactly what you say - government officials choosing who has access or privileged access, based on legislation or ideology, rather than courtesy/decency. Like, say, Berkeley? Beavah

I'll say something, eh? Why? Seems like there's plenty of online Scoutin' forums and communications out there, eh? If yeh want to do somethin', you should choose a market. Maybe a forum for only youth? Or a forum for Scouting in your council or in your state? Members and posts aren't good goals. Being of service to others is a good goal. What will your forum provide that's new/different and of service to others? Beavah