skeptic

Especially with pull ups. Body type and muscle structure effect these things too. When I was sixteen I could do close to 20 parallel bar dips, 25+ pushups in a minute, and close to to 200 situps (not crunches) keeping my feet on the ground myself. I could do three pull ups. Did not matter if I went under or over hand either. The coach simply shrugged and said it was just my build. And I agree that ANY improvement should count, especially at that age.

Spoke with our Exec and assistant today, and they both are really concerned about the effect of the final decision. The CE said his calls are running at about 41% against it, and a lot of threats to leave if it happens. He said they are already looking at ways to redo the budget, as they fear they will lose considerable income. We are in a bit more conservative area of California, so his percentage does not really seem too off to me, though my own discussions have indicated most people would prefer the local option as long as it WAS a local unit choice. Our church has has already told us they will run with our decisions on leadership and so on. And the National Methodist have indicated support for local as well. We discussed the nightmares of people dropping out of jamboree at that late date, as well as loss of executive board members. Apparently there has been some that indicated they would resign should the change occur. As noted earlier, I really just do not get why this is such a problem with so many, other than we now live in a very egotistical cultural climate. Will just focus on the troop and hope for the best.

Merlyn, while I am fairly certain you will disagree, the reality is that if Dale had not happened, the groups noted above would have found other excuses, because their goal has nothing to do with the benefit of the group, and all to do with their agenda. And, while you will claim they have no agenda, it is fairly clear to most of us that they do. Have a nice day.

While it really does not surprise me too much, I am saddened by those that simply refuse to allow the expediant decision of Local Option as the logical and workable compromise. What those now demanding total capitulation are doing is attempting to change not just BSA, but any Charter Organizations that would continue to not support the Agenda due to their organization's tenets. And that then puts the LGBT group into the same position it has challenged BSA on in the first place. It would no longer mean a child could not join BSA period, but rather they would have to find a group whose sponsor met their personal criteria. I guess the idea of compromise is now joining the simple premise of common sense. Someone recently stated that the LGBT groups would "never" stop until they destroyed the BSA, and I scoffed, thinking they could actually be reasonable people. And maybe most of them actually are, but the ones pushing things are not it appears.

If mom will not allow the needed paperwork, then it is on her. There is no way around it; there has to be some kine of records. She has no recourse if she continues to refuse the registration and update. Sounds to me like she is simply looking for another publicity event. And of course, there will be people to support her, even though it is entirely ridiculous. The council/troop should get her refusals in writing as protection IMO.

Add a "page" change to the bottom of the list, or move it down there. Have to scroll back to the top to move forward when you reach the bottom of a multi page thread. Thanks.

While I am also a bit annoyed at the delay, I have to say I do not have a huge problem with it, as long as the final decision IS made in May with the voices of the entire voting membership at the National Meeting, and not by a small sub committee. EVERY council has representatives that vote at these meetings. The big issue now is for the local councils to make every effort they can to get the feelings of their ACTUAL members. The local executive boards should make this a priority, and IMO should also do individual community soundings OUTSIDE the local members. Each council could then go with a pretty good idea as to where THEIR council stands, even though it is impossible to please EVERYBODY. At least, if the effort is made locally prior to the vote, then we will have come as close as possible to a reasonably accurate response. Even with all the hoopla going on in the media, it is amazing how many local scouters are still completely oblivious to the whole thing; and very few of the scouts seem to have any idea, even now. Of course I am not making a troop boy survey, and only responding to those parents that bring it up. That is the way it was, and still will be in our unit. Deal with issues when they become distractions and really are problems.

All that info should be in the charter package. But the executive officer is a NON REGISTERED position, and also unpaid. So, the answer is no. They also are the ones that need to sign the agreement. Most EO's are far too busy to do what the COR is supposed to do. Reality is that COR's often are nothing more than names on the charter.

Executive officer is the person who is the head of the sponsor, such as the minister and so on. Only position you can hold with another is COR and one other such as CM. Otherwise, you could theoretically have a unit with only one or two people holding all the positions which is not a good idea and kind of misleading.

It appears if you go to "last 24 hours", then click on the main title, you then can filter that specific thread for various periods. Put a week in, and you will get all the entries back a week. Have not tried anything else, but am hoping can occasionally enter photos if I care to. Thanks Terry for the ongoing project. I just got dropped from Scouts-L due to some kind of computer problem, and I am not going to fool with getting back on. If their system drops me due to glitches in it, then so be it.

Just looking for some material to help SPL on first aid. Found it elsewhere, and today the site seems fine. So, whatever the issue was, it is gone. Thanks.

Have been trying to log into the wonderful meritbadge site, but it is not available, nor has been all day. Anyone know what gives? Just maintenance I hope, as it is one of the most useful sites on the net for Scouts and Scouters I think.

Yep, if your screen shows the active working symbol, then just try and not force it. If the post is really important the way you wrote it, copy and save short term, open a new window or even different browser and go about your business. Come back and check later; if for some reason it did not post at all, try again with the saved copy, or just rewrite and hope it goes.

It will pretty much be a non issue with the scouts,as few of them even read a paper or listen to news. Unless an adult makes a scene, it will simply be another yawning response, if anything, though older boys may actually put forward an opinion at some point. If you have run your unit with the subject pretty much taboo, then you should be able to just go on as you have. As far as the few worrying about law suits, that is likely a really minor concern since it will no longer be a decision outside of the specific CO's purview, and there will be alternative units somewhere in most cases. Like everything, a bit of adjustment. But, just like women as scoutmasters, it will very soon just be part of the fabric of the specific unit.

It will pretty much be a non issue with the scouts,as few of them even read a paper or listen to news. Unless an adult makes a scene, it will simply be another yawning response, if anything, though older boys may actually put forward an opinion at some point. If you have run your unit with the subject pretty much taboo, then you should be able to just go on as you have. As far as the few worrying about law suits, that is likely a really minor concern since it will no longer be a decision outside of the specific CO's purview, and there will be alternative units somewhere in most cases. Like everything, a bit of adjustment. But, just like women as scoutmasters, it will very soon just be part of the fabric of the specific unit.

Merlyn; whether or not YOU think so, Political Correctness is a real problem in today's society. And Dale was "outed" in his own council by someone who saw the piece about the Alliance and his participation. At this point, hopefully this particular part of the debate will pretty much fade into the background until someone wanting to get attention or push a new agenda roils the waters again. Just my own opinion; so bluster all you want.

Calico and others; When I said it was "local option" prior to Dale, I meant the decision, because it went to SCOTUS, led to the hopefully abandoned policy currently still there. There were a number of locally divisive cases across the country starting back in the 70's, and Dale was simply the final push it seems to me. The Gay proponents seem to have determined to push it through their legal groups and get it into national media. When whomever "outed" James Dale did it and it became a flash point, National made the poor decision, as noted by Terry, to somehow take the CO out of the equation on this issue. We all know that on occasion we may have had to deal with local intra-troop distractions in relation to this subject; but the units simply did what was best for them and moved on for the most part. There is a good chance that should the PC crowd simply left it alone back then that the issue would have already resolved itself, just as other political and public changes did before. That is the perception I have come to based on my own reading and study of the subject. As had been pointed out, we have always had Gays in the program; it was generally just not an issue, as nobody felt the need to make it one for the most part. And just like an abusive alcoholic, wiped out druggie, or an in your face womanizer, the occasional Gay that felt the need to disrupt the unit was simply removed.

Really should be little impact, other than the few hyper sensitive individuals that somehow cannot even be around someone "different" without having an adverse response. Since sexual orientation has never been part of the program, it will not be now, unless someone chooses to try and make it so. Then they will likely be gone; at least in our unit they would be.

Basically, isn't it simply a return to how was before the media and Gay agenda pushers forced National into the wrong headed public decision? It was always the local choice until Dale or shortly before, and it seldom caused any problems because everyone accepted that private lives are just that, private, and that if you make your personal life a distraction to the unit, you will be asked to leave. On the other hand,God or some form of greater presence is still a cornerstone of the movement. But, since there is such a wide interpretation of spiritual beliefs and faiths, it rarely should be an issue, especially since few boys have arrived at their absolute position in that regard. But, if one is at the point of being certain they believe in nothing, they simply need to understand that they then no longer meet the standards. Certainly, adults who already have made the determination they are atheist simply need to accept they do not meet the qualifications.

"Maryland pack forced to withdraw popular non-discrimnation policy now votes on leaving the BSA" Merlyn; please try posting accurate title. They obviously did not vote to leave BSA. Your title suggests that they did. I realize you would prefer they had; but they did not, so you are not being accurate. Thank you.

Maybe it is really still just because of who does the appointing. Hold up important posts, and then blame the President for not dealing with things in that arena as well as he might do with a qualified adviser.

So 540; there are around 400 public schools, according to a quick search, around Oklahoma City. If you put one guard in each school and pay them say $15,000 a year, that is six million dollars. Not sure you could hire "qualified" people for that, but say you could. So, you really think people would approve additional taxes for such a thing; especially since the price tag would likely be higher in reality, and you would accomplish little with only one in each school. It also does not take into account the costs for likely having to reorient school layouts and, as Beavah notes, liability insurance. All the stuff you noted in taxes and so on were things people likely "would" vote for, as they have real measurable results. I think the real issue is what truly makes sense and is also affordable. It is like here in So Cal; we have no earthquake coverage for the condo association in which I live because the benefits do not meet costs. Rates are too high and deductible too much and structured to benefit the insurance company. So, we simply hope if one does happen, it will not knock us down, while individuals can get personal coverage through the state that will help with very basic losses only, but is there. But, it is also fairly obvious that some simply are not particularly rational about these kinds of things.

Come on now Schiff; don't inject common sense into the discussion. We all know that "lead shot" occurs naturally in the soil, right?

The actual gore was not allowed to be seen, and it was usually pretty obvious who were the bad guys and what happened to them when they were bad. Even many of the bad guys were still polite to women, and kids were still expected to be respectful to adults, or they were punished and parents were still held accountable for their kids' actions. Of course, you left out the other things playing as well then, such as Ozzie and Harriet, Andy Griffin, Leave it to Beaver, Hazel, Dennis the Menace; all of them had some type of moral to the story. How many of these are now seen on modern TV. Parents are either not there, are idiots, are held up as models when they represent what was once considered to be anomalous in society, or allow the kids to get away with anything because they do not want to hurt the child's fragile ego. Husbands are often portrayed in similar manner. People that show what was once considered common courtesy and positive responses to others' troubles are now made fun of as being foolish or worse, and sometimes even called "a boy scout". As an aside on the cowboys and Indians; the NRA needed to take them in and give them training, as most of them could not hit the broad side of the barn unless they were having a draw down in the street. Of course shooting a revolver or trying to aim a rifle while on a running horse, often twisting backwards as well, was not the best way of being a successful shooter. Of course, the horses seldom stumbled either, even thought supposedly running at full gallop over rough terrain. Of course, we also all knew that Indians always said "How" when greeting you, and generally they always either sneaked up on you in ambush, or ran in large groups in circles without fear of being shot by the beleaguered white men. Maybe the ridiculous simplicity of the plots, and the awful acting lent itself to not being taken seriously.

The big questions are his reasons for hating them. Probably was not a good idea to do two major activities the same summer either, as burnout will occur, especially after the fact, which may affect the experience when reviewed later. If you are averse to heat and humidity, you will not like either location a good amount of the time. If you do not really like to hike, you might not enjoy Jambo, and certainly are not ready for Philmont. If you are the much discussed "gimme Scout", you will not enjoy having to possibly fend for yourself on occasion; you have to work with the team in both activities. If you did not put any effort into earning your spot in these activities you will likely have little appreciation of the opportunities.