OldGreyEagle

sadistic equinenecrophiliacs thats the medical term for people who love beating a dead horse

See now, this is something again I have to comment on as a moderator and its for my own education. Beveah a few posts back comments that he can't beleive this thread is still going on, now, I can either take as a outright comment, that he can't beleive that forum members still want to make comments on this issue or I could take it as a subtle implication that the topic should be closed as there is nothing else to talk about. Well, since we all want to be be sure that everyone gets to say everything they want for as long as they want whenever possible, I am sure Beveah was just expressing suprise at the "legs" this topic still has. And besides, I am sure Beveah would never want to shut down any discussion unless it was illegal, fattening or immoral. Then Ed makes a claim that the only denouement possible is that we agree to disagree, but is that not always a possibility in any disagreement? Should it have to be announced? Is it better announced by a forum member rather than a Moderator? If I had posted, well this thread has lost its steam either just after Beavah's comment or in this position, agreeing with ED, and closed the thread, who would complain that the Moderators are controlling thought again? And Ed, Beveah, I am not picking on you guys, you just happen to be the authors of the posts when this thought hit me, it could have been anyone. I take it serving pie means the person thinks the topic is done, any any other posts serves only sadistic equinenecrophiliacs, but indeed who gets to make that call?(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

Why wouldnt the Scoutmaster be at the committee meetings?

I do have to say that if there were a fleet of school buses ready to move people out of town, they would not most likely have been left to get flood in. I am also willing to bet that if a shelter was set up for displaced people and advertised as the place to come, the municipality would have had essentials, such as water, available and not say hey its a Bring Your Own, Baby! And if the federal government would have come charging into New Orleans, prior to the request of the state's governor, there would have been those who would have accused president Bush of over stepping his boundaries and federalizing the state of Louisiana. There is plenty of blames to go around for every level, starting with people who stayed where they should not have, to the local governments who had no cohesive plan, to the state that floundered when the process calls for a request of Federal help to the Feds themselevs. FEMA should all that was wrong with is, but they didnt not equip the Super Dome with water and food before holding it out as a shelter. FEMA was not responsible for letting the school buses get flooded. FEMA did have the trailer and ice fiasco, so what did Katrina prove? That you can't rely on the government to bail you out of a problem, you have to do it on your own, at the local level. BTW, what were the ramifications of the 1993 flood? Upstream flooded town built higher and stronger levee's which concentrated the flow of water in a more narrow channel that then places communties farther downstream at risk. When those communities rebuild (!) bigger and stronger levee's will be built and people farther downstream will be at risk. Perhaps the people upstream should be held to blame. Then again, perhaps, and maybe, and well heck, maybe a comprehensive plan could be developed so that flood plains are set aside and areas developed to take advantage of the rise and fall of the river, heck the Eygptians did, surely we are at least as smart as they were. When you live either a few feet above or below the water level, things tend to get tight once in awhile

Interesting sidepoint here. MichaelOA asked for the thread to be closed at 10:17pm, Beavah made his post at 10:55pm and MicharlOA speficically thanked Beavah for his post. So, had the thread been closed when requested, Beavah's post could never have been made. Comments should be PMed to me, I will let the conversation continue, it's interesting and civil

In the summer of 1993 I think it was, the Mississippi overflowed its banks from Iowa to Illinois to Missouri and a few other parts. I was living in Alton, Illinois at the time. The town is up in the bluff so it was pretty much ok, the downtown area was right up to the river, and it was devastated. I was working at Alton Memorial Hospital at the time and we ran the place for a week without running water. We had plenty of water mind you, just in bucket, cans and the like. Each intersectoin had a water buffalo set up by the National Guard, you came and got water and went home. While the town was in the bluffs, the water plant was right next to the river. Was many weeks before we could drink the tap water again. Why am I telling you all this? Because the people then knew they lived in a flood plain, many many news stories followed people who swore they would never leave the river because their grand daddy lived there, their daddy lived there and they were going to live there and they will as long as the Feds give them money to rebuild. And rebuild they did, bigger and more expensive and only slightly higher than before so to those who got flooded out, good, you knew it would happen and you got what you deserve as did the people in New Orleans. Guess what? It will happen again, in New Orleans, when you build a city below the water level, its just a question of time, if you live in a flood plain its just a matter of time. I dont think its about race, its about stupidity and as Forrest Gumps mother would say, Stupid is as Stupid does.

either you beleive in a free market or you don't

So in our society today, we have a sort of "Knowledge Relativism" attitude. There are some professions that require the public to know that the purveyors are competent and others where its Caveat Emptor. The issue I have with Relativism is that once it is accepted in one aspect of society, it pervades others.

Confirming what was posted, you can be a MBC and just about any other position in scouting. BSA allows for a MBC to be available to all youth or to just one troop.

But states do administer medical license tests and don't you have to pass some test to practice law? So the government is telling lawyers what they must think and say and do, the same with physicians

hey now, pack, I resemble that remark "... They bring to the forums all of their personality quirks (sorry OGE, it had to be said ) and those are sometimes reflected in the way they censor the rest of us." Now what do you mean by that? The way I see it, you guys are all mighty quirky, I have the answers to all the ills of the world, the problem is no one has bothered to ask me as yet

All the states require a physician have a license to practice medicine (I love it, they practice medicine, because nobody has it down just yet). To obtain a license the applicant must pass a test. Presumably the "germ" theory is on the test in some manner, I have never seen the test but I am pretty sure a physician only trained in the art of healing by demonic exorcism and not "true" medicine wont pass. Therefore, the state is already telling us what our physicians must know. Should I not be allowed to heal others as I see fit? My track record will determine if I stay in the healing business.

"...but their diplomas won't help anyone get into college" Around some parts they are known as the Public School System ::shudder::

But say an organization, legally formed and with all appropriate licenses wants to start a "true history" tour. One that asserts that Ben Franklin was cheated out of a chance to be the first president by a wily and cunningly deceitful George Washington? That the flag that Betsy Ross sewed was a symbol, the stripes representing a prison, the stars representing women enslaved by the tyranny of a male dominated society that counted women as chattal. What about George Washington's refusal to continue public life? He went back to Mount Vernon when some would have made him King, he refused because Thomas Jefferson had some incriminating wood etchings. If this was the story an organization wanted to tell, should it be allowed to?

from the paper today http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/state/all-a5_tourguides.6488500jul03,0,1404041.story Three Philly tour guides sue over testing law They say it's a free speech issue in city of independence. By Patrick Walters | Of The Associated Press July 3, 2008 Citing their free speech rights, three tour guides filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging an ordinance that will require them to pass a history test and get a license before speaking to groups about the history of the Liberty Bell, Independence Hall and other landmarks. Mayor Michael Nutter signed the law in April amid concerns some guides were perpetuating gross inaccuracies, including the false claims that Benjamin Franklin had 69 illegitimate children and that three-time widow Betsy Ross killed her husbands. But the guides, backed by a public-interest law firm, argue the city has gone too far and want the law overruled. They say their constitutional rights are being violated in the very city where the Declaration of Independence was adopted 232 years ago. ''Mistakes happen everywhere,'' said Robert McNamara, attorney for the Institute of Justice, which filed the suit. ''But just because mistakes occasionally happen doesn't mean the government can license who can talk. People have the right to decide who they want to listen to.'' City officials say they are trying to protect the very history that brings millions of tourists to Philadelphia and generates billions of dollars in revenue every year. They don't want anyone leaving town believing that it is Ben Franklin atop City Hall (it's William Penn) or that homes were once taxed based on how wide they were. ''Tourism is a major part of our local economy,'' said Douglas Oliver, a spokesman for the mayor. ''It is reasonable to ensure that tourists are getting accurate information.'' The tests are to be required beginning in October. Washington, New Orleans and Charleston, S.C., have similar laws regulating tour guides. The suit is the first to challenge such tour guide regulations, McNamara said. Ann Boulais, one of the tour guide plaintiffs, said it is not a government's place to regulate what private people say on public streets. She said she would take a certification test at the behest of the tour guide's council, but not the city. ''My concern is, where does it end?'' said Boulais, 49, who has been giving tours for five years. ''Are you now going to license a stand-up comedian to see if he's funny?'' Oliver noted that the law applies to people who are getting paid to give tours, not to people such as volunteers or teachers or people giving tours on private property. But the tour guides say they can police themselves -- and want the city to stay out of it. Michael Tait, another guide represented in the suit, said he is always careful to tell his tours when something is folklore and when it is fact. He often addresses the tale that Betsy Ross sewed the first American flag, explaining that it is folklore and that there is no proof. Some guides do tell ''whoppers'' -- such as Franklin being the statue on top of City Hall. But Josh Silver, the third guide in the suit, says most are accurate, if not perfect. ''I simply qualify my comments and speak with honesty,'' Silver said. ''Certainly, I've made mistakes. I'm sure everybody has.'' So. should those who give historical tours have to pass a test on whether or not they know their history? And even if they do pass the test, what keeps them from telling historical innacuracies and since history is written by the winners, what do we use as criteria? Is there proof Ben fathered that many children and Betsy Ross seems to be one up on Lizzie Borden (who was acquitted you know) How does Free Speech mesh with historical tours?

Nessmuk, great ideas and I can tell its something you have put a lot of thought into and the unit you serve is lucky to have you as well as the District, Council, etc. And this is a great way to move along the discussion Thank You An aspect of training that is often overlooked is the educational level of the materials. Given the breadth of the volunteer base, this has to be an issue Given the following scale, where should the materials be placed? Post Graduate Baccalaureate Associates High School 8th grade 6th grade Other At what educational level should training be placed in the BSA?

Sorry if I was unclear Ed I guess the way I look at it, if all the answers to all things BSA were in one place and easy to find, then there would be no reason for this forum other than to discuss the woes and wonders of the units we serve ... the horror... the horror...(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

OK, it was me who deleted My Boyce's threadin the Uniform section. Interested people can PM me and I will explain why. I would post in the Uniform section but I can't seem to get a new topic to stick(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

The local school district requires 60 hours of community service to graduate http://www.beth.k12.pa.us/cs/ Boy Scout activities are among accepted hours. My son had his Eagle project planning time accepted as hours. That was most of his school hours right there. So, does that make his Eagle Project an activity of the Bethlehem Area School District because he got service hours for the project and multiple other scouts used the time they put in for service hours for graduation required service hours ? Bethlehem has a little activity here called Musikfest, I have tickets to see Jethro Tull this year, last year it was Deep Purple, Steppenwolf and the Moody Blue, (two diffierent concerts). BASD students who volunteer for Muskifest activities get credit for volunteer hours. Does that make Musikfest a BASD activity? http://www.musikfest.org/(This message has been edited by OldGreyeagle)

How can you not require the official pants? The uniform is the uniform, there is no unit option unless of course you are a venturing unit but that doesnt seem to be the situation here. Now, I am sure there will be those who will state that the BSA does not require a uniform and they would be correct. The best approach would be to present the pack with a fully and correctly uniformed youth and state this is the full uniform, this is what we would like to see and leave it at that. You are either in uniform or you are not, its not a transgresion if you arent, but its not honest to say you are either

I didnt say it was easy. The Troop I serve has a youth in it who is doing his Eagle Project. It will involve installing a playground for the Sunday school of his church. His Senior High Youth Group ( I think thats what they are called) will supply the help. No Scouts, other than the Eagle candidate will help, its a church/youth group thing. So, I can imagine if you told any of the youth helping, short of the Eagle candidate, that they were participating in a scouting activity, I can understand a few more than quizzical looks. We had another scout who wanted to run his church's Vacation bible School as his Eagle project. He enlisted a few of the troop youth to help. With questions about who would be leading whom, the project never got approved, the youth ran the Vacation Bible School and the youth enlisted helped as they said they would but it wasnt counted as an Eagle Project because it wasnt approved before it started and the youth admitted it was his fault it didnt get approved, but he promised the pastor he would do it and he did it. Quite well as I understand. It was a great project, it benefitted the community but it didnt count as an eagle project, it could have had the proper procedure been followed, but the scout fouled up and it didnt. I may have a new gimmick to make people think. I have turned many on their ear with the BSA does not prohibit sheath knives statement, this may be another. (Understand that if a Camp does not allow sheath knives, then they can't be used. Always wonder how they slice cake, cut meat, etc with a jack knife though)

I can follow BobWhite's position and understand what he is saying. The question I have is why does the statement that an Eagle Scout leadership project is not a scouting activity cause so much consternation? I accept BobWhite's premise, but I can't convince anyone on the Disitrct Advancement Committee, where I have been since 2001, that an Eagle Project is not a scouting activity. What would need to change to have scouters understand that an Eagle Scout Project is not a Scouting Activity?(This message has been edited by OldGreyeagle)

Merlyn, as discussed in another thread in an other section (I realize you usually stay in this section) just because a topic has been covered, new members to the site have as much a right to ask questions that others feel have been countlessly answered. I just consider it a cross we have to bear. And , as discussed in another thread, apparently there is much opposition to the even hint of censorship and Merlyn is here representing an alternative view. I guess we could bar him, but what would that prove?

Gee Rooster, I sure hope you meant typical and not atypical

What problem did you have and how did/would the BSA rules and regulations help/would have helped?