Bob White

The question NJ, is what makes your arbitrary decision (based on your opinion, observations and experience) correct, but the BSA's arbitrary decision based on their opinions, observations and decisions incorrect. You have the right to believe in your sphere of influence that your opinion is superior, but that also gives the BSA the right to determine in there sphere of influence that their opinion is superior. Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

The bigger question is not "would you tell a scout that he is doing it wrong?" but, will you teach him how to do it right? Bob White

"Because they make $$$ when the boys lose them and think they have to have them with 1,005,592 Boy Scouts/Varsity Scouts (per national web page)they make $703,914.40 at 7 cents a card." I think it's safe to say that everything costs money. To say that the BSA "makes" 7 cents per card is short sighted to say the least. The BSA may collect $.07 per card but that does mean they make .07 per card. You must take into consideration the cost of manufacturing, shipping and handling of the item that must be paid out. I would not be surprised to discover that this is a nearly break-even item. Another problem in the math presented is that it only accounts for one card per scout, which we know is not accurate. A final point...The scout master does not certify that the scout has completed the badge. The Merit Badge Counselor certifies the advancement. A scout leader must sign that the the MB card has been recieved by the troop and that portion is the boy's reciept. Bob White (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Your opinion is not shared by the patrol method Ed. Look at it this way. The first day a boy goes to baseball practice he plays a position. He may not do it well but he gets to see the game as a whole and how the position fits in the team. As he develops he might play several positions. Each is unique and each has it's own rersponsibilities and placement within the team. The more he plays the better he gets. But more significant is, the better the coach the better the players progress. Check out the scouting handbooks for more on this topic. Bob White (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Sure why not? Everbody has to start learning a job sometime, and new scouts need to know how a patrol functions. That is why the program calls for a Troop Guide for each New Scout Patrol and an Assistant Scoutmaster to hel the first year. It all comes down to a trained Scoutmaster who knows the program and how to develop leadership skills. A scout with less experience or a bigger job, gets more support and training than a scout with more experience or a less vital role. You will find an itroduction to leadership conference guide for each position in the Troop Leadership Conference manual. That is a great tool to start with. Then the Scoutmaster and the leadership staff continue to develop each person according to their needs and the needs of the office. Bob White

Ed asks, "Do you mean in a Troop of 50 Scouts there should be 50 postitions of responsibility?" Absolutely Ed, that has been a part of the patrol method since Baden-Powell's first handbook. It's quite simple. For example a troop of fifty could look like this; 1. SPL 2,3. (2)ASPLs 4,5. (2)JASMs 6,7. (2)Instructors That leaves 41 scouts in say 6 patrols 8-13 (6)Patrol Leaders 14-19 (6)Assistant Patrol Leaders 20-25 (6)Patrol Quartermasters 26-31 (6)Patrol Scribes 32-37 (6)Patrol Grubmasters Also within the patrols would be 38(1)Troop Musician 39(1)Troop Librarian 40,41(2)Troop Quartermasters 42(1)Troop Scribe 43(1)Troop Historian 44(1)Chaplains Aide 45(1)OA Representative 46(1)Troop Guide Leaving 4 positions that could be filled according to patrol needs such as Patrol Historian, Patrol musician, Patrol librarian, etc. Any role that can be done on a troop level can be done in a patrol and vice versa. So giving each scout a specific responsibility is not only easy but has been an intregal part of scouting methods, manuals and training since the beginning of the program. Bob White

Where is this list of obligations that you refer to NJ, or did you just arbitrarily determine based on your personal preferences that allowing avowed homosexuals membership should be one of them?(This message has been edited by Bob White)

I want to echo what CubsRgr8 said, it was right on the money. Committeechair when you wrote that "the troop is finally big enough to worry about someone not having a position" you are overlooking the fact that no matter what size the troop each person should have a position. That is one of the elements of the patrol method of scouting. Irregardless of troop size, by using the patrol method every scout should have a position of responsibility. Bob White

Reagan was recovering from an assasination attempt in 1981 and was undergoing intestinal sugery during the 1985 Jamboree. In 81 I believe he sent Bush,his VP, and in 85 Nancy appeared in his place. Pres.Clinton simply refused and offered only a low ranking member of the dept of Ag as a replacement. Instead the BSA invited Distinguished Eagle Scout William Gates, Director of the CIA. Throughout his administrative term both Clintons made negative remarks in regards to the scouting program. Following the Monica Lewinsky embarrassment the BSA recieved thousands of requests from Eagle Scouts to have re-issued Eagle Certificates without President Clinton's signature on them. The question was asked "who snubbed who first". When did the BSA snub the President? When did they snub the Democratic Party? This has been a very one way street. Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

The presentation of the Wood Badge paraphenalia is the priviledge and responsibility of the Course Director. So sit back and enjoy the moment. Bob White

Shortly after Clinton took office in 1993, he failed to show up at the National Jamboree, located only 70 miles from the White House. The press at the time blamed the snub on Clinton's effort to please the homosexual lobby -- a major source of campaign donations. The next jamboree was held in 1997, and this time Clinton attended. "We are grateful. Please recognize that he did come. That's significant," said Shields. Shields did not know if press reports in 1993 stating that Clinton was the first U.S. president to turn down an invitation to speak at the National Jamboree were accurate.

And that's what's great about America. The right to disagree about the government. NJ we disagree about what is important to the different parties. Ed you and I just disagree...about everything. NJ my experience through the lives of two police officers in my family have shown that Democratic politicians on a local basis cut law enforcement budgets when republican's seldom if ever do. That democratic judges care less about the wrong done the defendant and more about leniency toward the convicted. But that is my experience. Yours might be different but I cannot base my opinion on your experiences. The Democrats as a party have shown remarkable distaste for the need for a military. It seems they don't mind having one as long as no one gets hurt and we don't break anything of somebody elses:). I don't think we should be the bully but I am very comfortable with being the kid on the playground that all the bullies are afraid of. The democratic party is afraid that in order to protect the society we have developed will take money that thier constituency should get for not working. Again My opinion and I'm welcome to it. Mr. Clinton as the head of the democratic party made his dislike for the Boy Scouts public on more than one occasion, even to the point of refusing to speak at the BSA National Jamboree. The only President ever to do so. As an extra snub he offered to send an under-secretary of agriculture in his place. That added to the appalling behavior of the Democratic representatives at the national convention and the attacks on the BSA in large Democratic controled cities, easily leads one to evaluate that the party does not support the BSA program. I am not saying that individuals who vote democratic do not support the BSA just that the party does not. If we were to take a scientific survey of the scouters who want to open the BSA membership to anyone, do you forcast that the political affiliations would be primarily Democrats or Republicans? The Democratic party strikes me as "values determined by the majority rule" And I find that dangerous and lacking in a moral foundation. Interestingly enough until the early 1980s I was a Democrat. Then I realized that all the horrible things the democrats said the republicans would do never happened. But the things the republicans warned about Demorats did. The democrats want to help the poor and helpless, so did I then and I still do. I want to help them be productive, prosperous and healthy. The Democratic party has shown me they want the poor to stay poor but "kept" by the money they extract from those who work. They want the homeless registered to vote but not living in their neighboe hoods. When did the democratic party ever build a home for a homeless person. I know numerous builders, contractors and suppliers who make habitat for humanity possible through their donations of money, material and manpower and guess what? Everyone of them is a Republican. I see the democratic party as one that wants to take my money and give to those they see as needing it. I see tha republican party as one that wants me to take my own money and use it to help those I choose to help. I know many scouters and I know the party choice of only a few. But all the scouters I know are concerned for the environment, feel it is important to help those in need, and all the other nice things that the democrats have claimed as their own. I can't believe I am the only Republican in the group. For the most part I am sure we all want many of the same things. I just dislike the way the Democratic party wants to achieve it. Regardless of the cliche you want to assign my opinion they are still my opinion and I am as welcome to them as you are to yours. Bob White

Another option for the boys is that the "temporary" patches (those displayed temporarily on the right hand shirt pocket. Can be sewn onto the outside of the merit badge sash on the back. Bob White

WOW, Sometimes I think the computer scrambles the letters in my typing when I hit the submit button. OK FOG here is my dilemma. When you say at the end of your post "do the ends justify the means?" It sounds as if you don't think so. I am trying hard not to put my own interpretation in, so I am trying to get a straight answer from you. Do you think the ends justify the means? You resonded but you did not answer. You asked "Can a moral end ever justify an immoral means of reaching that end?" That does not answer the question it simply poses a new on. So if we could please take one step at a time. Do you believe that the ends justify the means? If you believe the the answer is "no" then do you think it is no sometimes or all the times? (This message has been edited by Bob White)

I saw the new Field Book being edited in August. It is due to the printers by years end and should be released in early January. Keep in mind in will take a few weeks to get distributed nationally. BW

Forget trying to find out what he was convicted of it is unimportant if you as the Commitee Chair did not sign his application then it is inavalid. The BSA can determine his eligibility to hold membership but he still requires two unit signatures to register. Specifically he needs yours, and either the Charter Organization Representative or the Institutional Head. If you never signed then call the coucil office and tell them that the application is invalid. If you presigned your applications, bad idea. But it is never too late. The COR or IH can revoke unit membership at will, or you can wait until the annual rechartering and remove him from the roster then. Either way the council has no authority to interfere. Just for the record the whole thing sounds odd. I have never met a council registrar that accepted an adult aplication without the required signatures, council and nation take revocation of membership seriously and rarely reverse a decision. Bob White

No i am not trying to put words in your mouth, I am trying to ubnderstand the point you were trying to make. So I aked you a quaestion . Am I understanding you correctly? I have yet to get a straight answer. You are not being very clear. Bob White

It sounds like quite a challenge. Good Luck and have fun! Bob W.

With all due respect NJ, That paragraph you refer to violated the rules that OGE set when he introduced the string. I have already apologized for sending it and I will not continue a discussion along it's lines since it should not have been there to begin with. I sent a replacement post that was in keeping with OGE's request, and if you would like to question that post I will be happy to respond. Bob White

Let's back up a little. In your post http://www.scouter.com/forums/postings.asp?action=ReplyForm&threadID=41104&forumID=15#id_41191 you seem to suggest that the ends do not justify the means. When I asked if that is all the time or just this time you responded, "Can a moral end ever justify an immoral means of reaching that end?" I do not know where you stand yet. When you say ever, I ask does murder qualify to you as a justifiable means. In other words can a moral end ever be achieved by murder? You original post suggests you do not believe that a moral end can come from breaking laws. Is that a fair understanding of what you meant. So if that is the case, ould you agree that murder is breaking a law and so it is not a justifiable means to an end. Would you agree with that?(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Earlier I asked "So Fog are you saying that the end doesn't justify the means? Or just not in this situation?" Fog answered "Can a moral end ever justify an immoral means of reaching that end?" I guess it depends FOG. Do you consider murder an immoral means? (This message has been edited by Bob White)

OOPS never mind(This message has been edited by Bob White)

TwoCub where are you getting these ideas. Show me one trace of evidence that I have "hooked up with CJ. If yoiu read my post I even said that just because he agreed with something I said doesNOT mean I agree with him and CJ was good enough to apologize for for a statement that appeared we were in agreement. Where did I say anything about liberals? NOWHERE. I have never made a distinction that all democrats are liberal, I do not believe that to be true and so I NEVER made a comment in this discussion about liberals I do not mind you disagreeing with me but these false statements from you need to end. Bob White

Hi ps2lady, The Adults can wear a single temporary patch on the right hand shirt pocket, or on a non uniform jacket. The scout uniform is a controlled trademark element of the BSA. There is a manual called the Insignia Guide which explains all the uniform regulations and the placement and use of the advancement and recognition devices of the BSA. In order to be worn on the uniform a temporary badge must incorporate a few specific design elements. You will find all this info in the manual. Thanks for asking, and for wanting to wear a correct scouting uniform. Bopb White

Hi ps2lady, The Adults can wear a single temporary patch on the right hand shirt pocket, or on a non uniform jacket. The scout uniform is a controlled trademark element of the BSA. There is a manual called the Insignia Guide which explains all the uniform regulations and the placement and use of the advancement and recognition devices of the BSA. In order to be worn on the uniform a temporary badge must incorporate a few specific design elements. You will find all this info in the manual. Thanks for asking, and for wanting to wear a correct scouting uniform. Bopb White