sherminator505

Is this a patch awarded for completing the training, or is it a PoR patch?

I can't speak for Ed, but my point wasn't that atheism is a belief system. My point was that in speaking absolutes about what atheism does or doesn't "require," you appear to be speaking about a defined belief system. In other words, you have constructed a mythology for yourself as to what atheism is and are therefore treating it as a religion.

I think that this exchange speaks to the big general problem that we have as Scouters and the BSA has in general. Far too often we are so concerned with minutia to concentrate on the task at hand. I mean, here we are discussing whether young Ninja, writing through a proxy, should continue plowing through on his quest to become the youngest Eagle Scout in human history or whatever, and ALL OF A SUDDEN we are in a snit about how a Scouter chooses to capitalize "Webelos"?! I really think that if we spent more time on working with the boys and our fellow Scouters on the task at hand, and less time in Pharasseic rules discussions, we'd have more success as an organization.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

"They can believe in ghosts, reincarnation, magic, past lives, fate, kismet, lucky numbers, and Republicans, and that still doesn't make them "not atheists." " So, are you saying then that athiests can acknowledge a spiritual world alongside our own without acknowledging any responsibility beyond one's self?

"It's WEBELOS not WeBeLoS." I'm not sure how this speaks to her point.

"There is nothing in atheism qua atheism that requires that, since gods are not the exclusive source of meaning." Wow. Perhaps I'm reading too much into your comment, but you seem to be describing a defined belief system. Please, elaborate.

Merlyn's faith is admirable, if sadly misplaced. It really takes a lot of blind faith to be an athiest. To be an atheiest, you have to believe that every little thing that happens, merely happens. You have to be able to dismiss the development of human intellect as a natural anomaly. You have to believe that the placement of the Earth at the precise distance from the sun to support life to be random chance. You have to believe that the fact that ice floats (when other solids tend to sink in their molten form) is just a coincidence arising from chemistry. Fish survive through the winter because of this. You have to overlook what most of us consider to be miracles as random happenstance, no matter how fortuitous or otherwise improbable. You have to view the wonderful planet we live on as a random polyglot of rocks, gases, and organic material that simply came to be and somehow just works. Yes, it does indeed take an enormous amount of blind faith to be an athiest. Sorry, I'm not falling for that one, either.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

"First of all Polanski was not charged or convicted of rape, the charge was having sex with an underage child, the girl never accused him of rape." In our country, sex with a child who cannot legally give consent is rape.

"Just use the "contact" webpage to notify the webmaster or whoever at Irving. ...oh, right the National website doesn't have one of those "contact" webpages despite the numerous requests over the years by us, the users, to have that useful and common feature." I've noticed this too. I've also noticed that the BSA Innovation Engine is only open to paid employees. It's almost as if our (volunteers') input is "neither required nor desired."

"We've seen what happens when a President spends his political capital down to zero: His name was Gerald R Ford, and he had veto after veto over-ridden by the Congress." Bad example. Gerald Ford wasn't elected President. He didn't arrive as Vice President on an elected ticket. He was appointed by Nixon after Spiro Agnew resigned. The only political capital he had was a Senate confirmation in his pocket.

I think that many who are unhappy with Obama in the White House would have found something to say about him no matter what he did in this matter, just as it seems to be in most matters involving Obama. Had he not gone, many of these same folks would be second-guessing Mr. Obama's non-appearance right about now. Recall that at last year's Olympics, President Bush stayed for four days just to watch, even as the situation in Georgia (the country, not the state) was deteriorating. I don't recall that drawing nearly as much criticism at the time.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

It came in with the 1972 Handbook and disappeared along with skill awards in 1989. I had to earn it for First Class.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

In the words of Mark Twain, "(i)t ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand."

"I remember my TAP-OUT,, even to this day, and it'll be 40 years next spring. We were at campfire. All of a sudden, KA-WHUMPF!!! on my shoulder. I get picked up, seemingly bodily, by my belt and down we go to Allowat Sakima. This time, not one but three KA-WHUMPFS!!!, and off I get taken to the holding pen, told I'm on Silence, and we wait." It was still that way when I was tapped out in '86. Pity we have to water things down to keep the attorneys at bay.

"Once yeh put new programs in place, people will change their behavior to "play" the new programs." Egad! You mean they'll try to find a better way to get health care than clogging up the ER?

I would recommend The Grapes of Wrath (1940). It would have to be played in more than one sitting, as it is over 120 minutes.

"Sacred cows make the best hamburger!" Heavenly. Even better with green chile.

I can't see why people are rushing to defend Roman Polanski. As scoutldr correctly pointed out, he's an escaped convicted felon. Not only that, but the descriptions of what he was convicted of are very disturbing. I don't have a lot of sympathy for the guy.

Thanks for the visual, Gunny.

You might be better served by demonstrating it at the next PLC meeting (perhaps using the example of teaching a Scout skill a la the new advancement requirements) and let them go over it with their patrols. This will give them ownership and will make it more interesting to them. Jet! You beat me to it.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

No. Pi are round. Cornbread are squared.

"Satan is an imaginary thing that for some reason, we feel the need to have in our lives. Satan is the evil version of a childhood imaginary friend except that some of us cling to the idea as 'adults'." I'm not falling for that one.

First of all, to Adam S and Mr Irish, welcome to the campfire! I really don't see the requirements as being dated. You may wonder why you ever bothered to learn something until you find yourself in a situation where that skill comes in handy. It's happened to me a number of times. One requirement I'd like to see return: First Aid merit badge for First Class. It is good for safety reasons, and it introduces the Scout to the merit badge process if he hasn't already been properly introduced.

"Or another spin on it, what do you do with a scout who has a complete uniform but refuses to wear it?" This is one of my pet peeves. If there is a good reason why a Scout is not in uniform, that's one thing. But when I am faced with this scenario, I am not likely to be impressed.

There seems to be a lot of squishy talk about uniforms here. Owning a uniform has never been a requirement. That much is true. However, if the Scout DOES own a uniform, and it fits, then he should by all means wear it to EVERY board of review (including EBOR). It shows preparedness, Scout spirit, and respect for the process.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)