TAHAWK

If you support the Uniform Method, there should be A uniform - as in uniform, not endless options that do not look alike, The sales folks desire to meet customer preferences have trumped the methods folks. All the rationales are inapplicable with noticeably different "uniforms" that vary in cost, Venturing awards are being addressed. There is suppposed to be a rollout at the annual meeting, along with new training material to correspond to that and other changes. I wonder if BSA did parent focus groups on gay adult leaders.

The original Wood Badge, 1948-1971 From "Teaching a Skill," in "Making Training Sessions Interesting," Appendix, Wood Badge Instructor's Guide to Practical Training, Boy Scout Course, 1959 Printing. "You talk about the skill, and the learner listens. [L]et him ask questions. . . . [if] you write about the skill, and the learner reads it,. . .he has the advantage of a permanent record that he can review, But it lacks the force of personal presentation, and also the chance to clear up doubtful points by answering the learner's questions. You demonstrate the skill by doing it yourself. . . . He has proof that the skill can be done - and in the way you demonstrate it. This is more forceful than when you merely talk or write to him. You coach while the learner practices that he is learning. Coaching means correcting the learner. . . . Practice drives home the details until the skill becomes part of the learner; also he likes the action required iof him by practice. The learner teaches the skill to someone else. . . . They are sure they know a thing when they have shown someone else how to do it." Does this sound at all familiar these sixty-five yeasr later? I hope so. Also, you might find this article by George Crowl interesting:: http://www.crowl.org/george/EDGE-Effective_Teaching-MOL.doc

In usung Adnanced Search, the "From" date can only be in Jan-May, and the "To" date cannot be any month and year other than the "From date." So broken.

I the Javelin event, we always elect to "receive."

I hope we can distinguish between statements that we think are wrong and "lying." Let's say BSA decided to officially tolerate atheists as members - anyone who cannot honestly take the Oath or subscribe to the Law. Would these Scouts take a different Oath and recite a different Law? That seems problematic, at least to me, on several levels. According to my understanding, discrimination is largely lawful and ethical. Discrimination on the basis of prejudice is sometimes unlawful, sometimes unethical, and usually irrational. Prejudice against people of color is our national classic example of prejudice (In prejudice against the "different" we are hardly alone. ) Those who feel that some sort of spirituality is essential to Scouting can, and I suspect almost always do, discriminate against Atheists not because of prejudice - some overgeneralized assumption about what all Atheists believe -- but because of what Atheists actually say about what they actually believe - and do not believe.

1776 vs. 1789 And while prejudice against Catholics was certainly a factor, that's not all that aroused hostility to the Quebec Act: The province's [Quebec's] territory was expanded to take over part of the Indian Reserve, including much of what is now southern Ontario, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and parts of Minnesota.- much of which had been previously granted to the Colonies. It restored the use of the French civil law for private matters, except that in accordance with the English common law, it granted unlimited testamentary freedom. It maintained English common law for public administration, including criminal prosecution. It restored the Catholic Church's right to impose tithes The governor was to rule the province with no elected legislature. "The English colonists could not accept that London would grant territorial rights to their former enemies of New France against whom they had fought some 15 years earlier, not to mention would acknowledge the presence of "Canadian papists on British soil." The merchants of New York and Albany were incensed to see their westward expansion blocked and to forfeit the Great Lakes fur trade to Montréal, just as prior to the Conquest of 1760. The English colonists could not tolerate that the Québec Actappeared not only to set aside any plans to assimilate the French Canadians, but to legally assert the existence of a French civilization in America. They immediately denounced the "Anglo-Canadian collusion." A Boston lawyer wrote at the time: "Well now! We Americans, have we spent our blood and wealth in the service of Great Britain in the conquest of Canada, so that the British and the Canadians might now subjugate us?"

Didn't we have a problem once with only one religion being allowed to hold office? Had to be C of E? Revolution? Bill of Rights? Civil Rights? Where's the ACLU when we need them?

Just ideas: http://www.cascadedesigns.com/msr/water-treatment-and-hydration/basecamp-water-treatment-and-hydration/autoflow-gravity-filter/product Reviews of MSR http://www.campmor.com/msr-autoflow-gravity-filter.shtml

I think it should depend on the individual, not his religious beliefs - or lack thereof. Integrity. Intelligence. Knowledge of the law. Humanity Demeanor. Commitment to justice. Whether an Atheist, Methodist or Scouter should be irrelevant. In a given case, there may be grounds for recusal. Which is why I think California is all wet.

"Merlyn,"again nicely played. I strenuously agree - for the third time - that you can be an atheist and a Jew - or Jewish, But what do you say, guy? Should a Christian be allowed to be a judge? Should someone who follows Judaism - the theistic religion - be allowed to be a judge? Surely you have an opinion on that.

I work with a Crew and in the last 16 mos. we had Council put on a day (sic hours?) of training for adults with no venturing training once and a day-and-a-half training for leaders(venturers) once. Paid staff have zip to do with it. What are "they" doin' to you?

​LeCastor, Software won't seem to post reply to Pm on grounds of too few characters. Tomorrow I am having lunch with a guy who staffed Version 1 (all scoutcraft). He thinks we will find a syllabus and administrative guide up in his attic. He is sure there is a box marked "Course papers 1959, 1960, 1961." He staffed all those courses and was a Course Director eight times. He also has boxes of papers from other deceased Staffers that date back to that era. So I am very hopeful. He also staffed an experimental course in 1988 where Bill was the CD. It was an effort to get back to more Scoutcraft and was oversubscribed x 3. Nevertheless, national was not sold, so there were no other such courses. Help me remember by asking me in a week.

I tried to respond to a PM with: ​Tomorrow I am having lunch with a guy who staffed Version 1 (all scoutcraft). He thinks we will find a syllabus and administrative guide up in his attic. He is sure there is a box marked "Course papers 1959, 1960, 1961." He staffed all those courses and was a Course Director eight times. He also has boxes of papers from other deceased Staffers that date back to that era. So I am very hopeful. He also staffed an experimental course in 1988 where Bill was the CD. It was an effort to get back to more Scoutcraft and was oversubscribed x 3. Nevertheless, national was not sold, so there were no other such courses. Help me remember by asking me in a week. Yours from 91.44 meters." I was told to enter at least two characters. It would not post.

Have one adherent to the Jewish religion who is an atheist post here. I'd like to hear from him or her. I am not an arbiter of who is a Jew, but contending that a religious Jew is an atheist is wrong by definition. After attending a good many Bar Mitzvahs and Bat Mitzvahs, I am confident that Judaism includes a belief in God. I agreed there are non-religious Jews. I know a good many of them sa well. I worked with one for twenty-seven years. He sure identifies as "Jewish" or a "Jew" but is a practicing atheist. Sure there are atheistic religions. Buddhism comes to mind. None I mentioned are in that category. I was sloppy in using "religious" except to modify the name of a deistic religion, for which I apologize to anyone offended. Did you really not understand? So you can't find anyone citing the KKK in Dale. I feel better. The BSA did not compare itself to the KKK in Evan as the BSA was not a party to the case. The local Sea Scout ship was a party, and it did not compare itself to the KKK. It cited a case in which the KKK was a party for an asserted legal point that evidence of discrimination by a national organization is not relevant evidence of discrimination by a local chapter. That argument was rejected by the California courts for, I think, good and sufficient reasons. To be reassured, consult an atheist lawyer regarding the distinction. Evans should never have been brought. Scouts fighting for a subsidy from the City of Berkeley, California? Really?! As I never suggested that genocide was a goal, I cannot respond to your "Have you stopped beating your wife" allegations. If this suggests orthopedic insufficiencies to you, so be it. We disagree on many things. One more is no great difference. Nicely played, by the way, But back to the subject. Bar Scout members because they believe in God so bar Methodists as well? Your only one "t" away from that religion, "Merlyn LeRoy."

You cannot be a devotee of the Jewish religion and be an atheist. Many people who regard themselves as Jewish are, of course, not religious at all. I didn't list UU because I cannot figure out what their thing is. My point is there is no logic to excluding BSA on the grounds that it excludes atheists and including deistic religions, which also exclude atheists. As to BSA comparing itself to the KKK, I can't find that. My Googlefu has failed me. Help, please. (But you still enjoyed it, yes? That's OK. Conan explained what happiness is.) I defer to no man in my ability to be clumsy, but "genocide"? Have you not argued that religion is irrational? Do you not feel it needs to "go" in a rational world? Jumping to the assumption that it can only be defeated by killing adherents is a long reach - in our society, Not so much in some parts of the world.

Yes. "Invidious." Without rationale basis. Like all religion, in your view, which discriminates against the atheist by requiring belief for membership. Prejudice against the churched being mindful and against the unchurched being mindless/ without rational basis. And for you this is all about getting some against the BSA . The BSA and the KKK. Must have felt so good to type that. All those men in their sheets burning crosses and lynching and all those boys in their brown shirts reading the names of the war dead and rescuing TV journalists with broken ankles. Morale equivalents. Well, at least priests wear robes too. And the Sikhs all wear turbans. So easy to identify for the great cleansing of the irrational.

As to religious discrimination and by parity of reasoning, any judge should be prohibited from belonging to any organization that discriminates on the basis of religious belief or sexual orientation. Does any Catholic church accept atheists as members? Baptist? Lutheran? Presbyterian? Muslim? Hindu? Church of Christ? Zoroastrian? Methodist? Sun Cycle Deniers? Should we allow atheist or agnostic judges to preside in cases involving the religious? What might such a judge think of a witness who elects to be sworn, rather than testifying on affirmation? Might he unconsciously reveal his dismay over such a primitive ritual and thus cause the jury to discount the witness' testimony? (In fact, should we allow the religious or the atheist or agnostic to be jurors due to the possibility of discrimination? Who can we trust?) We have forty-eight women-only colleges. Can their graduates be judges in cases involving males or would it be acceptable if they first denounce the policy of their alma maters to discriminate against men? Can they hear cases of women who went to a gender-integrated college? What about judges who financially support discriminatory organizations? The UN has a number of nations who regard being gay or an apostate from Islam as a capital crime. Fairly discriminatory. Some sit on UN Human Rights panels. Do we bar contributors to, or supporters of, the UN from judgeships unless they insure that no benefit accrued to these discriminatory nations.? I trick-or--treated for UNICEF (which got us picket by the John Birch Society). Am I to be barred? And why stop with the judicial system? We have those prayers at every session. "In God We Trust." Sack the whole bunch? And elect? Interesting slope we start down - - - unless this is just "getting yours" against BSA.

Let's see. Mostly work with adults, not youth. Low salaries. Long hours. Metrics. Big turnover as most of those who can leave do leave. Other consequences?

I love combs "TENT: a portable shelter of skins, canvas, plastic, or the like, supported by one or more poles or a frame and often secured by ropes fastened to pegs in the ground. something that resembles a tent." So, for present purposes, a tarp is a "tent." I have a BSA tarp labeled "TARP TENT." https://www.google.com/search?q=tarp...w=1680&bih=949 At least we are all in the "neighborhood." "Journey to Excellence" [sic] specifically counts an indoor "lockin" to play electronic games as a "weekend campout."

War story. A couple of us older Scouts were asked to lay the council fire for an OA ceremony. We built a Tepee in a log cabin base and filled it with pine needles and pinecones. When it was started, an adult decided it was not roaring fast enough and elected to slosh some "fire water" on the already-vigourous fire The first aid problem that followed was very real. Not "realistic." Real. 0___0 It was a long time before that was forgotten. "The night when he threw gas on the fire."

Is watching a sports event "participation"? You expect clarity in language? We all just do the best we can. You can ask: http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/HealthandSafety/GotQuestions.aspx If you want an answer.

You're fine unless there is one Scout and one adult not his parent. In that case you would have the prohibited one-on-one contact.

Sure the Scouts need to consider what else is going on in the world. Nothing wrong with information or counseling from the SM. Very wrong to have the adults plan the schedule in the first instance. Very mom and dad. Very wrong. But a troop - or more importantly a patrol - is not a family. It's a representative democracy.

"Reasoning"?