OldGreyEagle

Ed, I bow to the superior intellect, you are again correct, scouting spirit is how a scout lives in everyday life. I dont know why I want to say outside of scouting, as we are never really outside of scouting there are just the odd times we arent at scouting events, but we are still always scouts

Gee Ed, we have something we agree on, haveing a requirement that a BOR be done only when the scout is in uniform is indeed adding a requirement and is wrong, but thats ok, the Dug Nevious school of scouting is so twisted beyond the BSA, its the least of the troops issues. Gern, I cant beleive no one has mentioned that a scoutmaster conference is not the time to do skills testing, skills testing is done when the scouts book got signed off because the scout showed he knew the stuff. To have to test again indicts your program and tells me someone doesnt have confidence in your sign off procedure. Its the scoutmaster's job to sign off scout spirit and as Ed has said, Scout spirit is the way the scout lives his life out side of scouting. The BOR is time to ask the scout about his acomplishment, how the program has helped the scout and where the program could improve. I would say we have a 95% success rate at BOR with 55 scouts in the troop

Kudu, I have come to respect your intense passion for the original scouting program. When the question was asked about who said "once a scout, always a scout" it reminded me about a recording I heard in B-P's voice where he attributes the quote to Lord Kitchener. By the time I found the link, someone else had identified the quote and provided the requested complete quote. While I listened to the recording, I noticed B-P mentioned that in the speech that a scout was first tested on his honor to carry out the scout promise which is first the work of God and King and secondly service to others. I havent transcribed the complete quote, but it does seem he values the work of God and King over service to others. The speech may be heard at : http://www.chsscout.net/rescenter/video/index.shtml#section4 The first speech, Address to Scouts Do you know the circumstances of the speech heard? It does seem he is placing God and King over service to others, but I may have the context wrong PS, I love listening to the speeches. It allows one to imagine what a person B-P was by hearing and watching him speak. You get a feeling for the man, his sense of humor and just how much he loved the program(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

Dan, sorry I missed the IVF answer, to be consistent I dont agree with IVF since it often results in the termination of fertilized eggs

(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

A tumor does not have the potential to develop into a human being, fetilized tissue does

So in Muslim Countries where women are allowed to walk the streets with faces visible, Homosexuality is accpeted? I beleive that life begins at conception. I don't base it on scripture but on this thought process. The sperm and the egg are single cells and without each other they have a short exisitence. The sperm will die and the egg aborbed in the uterine lining. But, once they unit, they start to change. That mass which was 2 cells starts to duplicate and then develop specialized cells. This mass of tissue has the potential of developing into a human being. Any artificially induced process that disrupts this process is termination of life. Many pregnacies are naturally terminated, the "Spontaneous Abortion", it happens. But in all the times I ever heard about a woman "miscarrying", the phrase "she lost the baby" is always heard, never, "oh well, a bunch of tissue that might have been a baby gave her a problem." Pro-Choice advocates say that a woman has a right to determine what happens to her body. That potential human, that mass of cells trying to develop into a person will someday become separate and apart from the woman, it is no longer her body, its his/her own. Women seeking to have an abortion talk about not wanting to have this baby, they say they dont want to raise the baby, they arent ready to care for another human. They never say, or I havent heard them say that I want to remove this mass of tissue before it becomes a human.

I am not disputing Gern, but does anyone know how Islamic Law views homosexuality?

Ok, I may have mis spoke, the taking of a human life is wrong and abortion isnt a Christian or any faith thing, its a respect for life thing The point about Scott Peterson is dead on, in a state that allows partial birth abortions the following can happen. lets say I am driving a car DUI and hit a pregnant woman and she loses the child, I can be held liable for manslaughter or some other crime. And I accept that. But, if that woman was on her way to have the baby aborted, the physician would face no charges. So the baby had civil rights when I hit the woman but none once the woman got to the clinic. The lawyers in the group will have to explain that to me. The baby of a 13 year old girl derserves to live, maybe not always with the mother, but still life deserves a chance. The exploits of suicide doctor Jack Kevorkian still linger in my mind. We protect life at the far end of the sprectrum, why not at the very beginning?

the killing of an innocent life is murder. Laws against Abortion are not based in faith, but in respect for human life

You know, A Venture Crew can go hunting

I think I hear you Beavah, but as you said, it is a different world and I am not sure what we as scouters can do about it. I would love to see the BSA allow ATV's, hang gliders, hot balloons, parasailing and parachuting and all other things (just about)prohibited in the guide to safe scouting, but what would that do to the insurance rates? Maybe its time to forget what the lawyers say and do what we/the boys want and the only BSA requirement is that the CO have insurance for that specific activity and then all is well and anything can be done.

Brent, the answer is obvious It's astounding;Time is fleeting;Madness takes its toll. (how many times can you visit this site a day before you are verifiable "manic"?) But listen closely... Not for very much longer. I've got to keep control. (then again, maybe as a moderator I need to let go, no be stricter, no be lenient...)I remember doing the time-warp Drinking those moments when The Blackness would hit me And the void would be calling... Let's do the time-warp again. It's just a jump to the left. And then a step to the right. With your hands on your hips. You bring your knees in tight. But it's the pelvic thrust That really drives you insane. Let's do the time-warp again. Let's do the time-warp again. It's so dreamy, oh fantasy free me.So you can't see me,(no, I wont sign my name) no, not at all. In another dimension, with voyeuristic intention, Well secluded, I see all. With a bit of a mind flip You're into the time slip. And nothing can ever be the same. You're spaced out on sensation. Like you're under sedation. Let's do the time-warp again. Happy week end

Ollie got aid and accepted it from the ACLU? C'mon, I need more details!

How is LFL crap?

I understand about growth, either you are gorwing or you are dieing, there is no safe "middle". But the question I have is why is the emphasis on new units AND members? If a District grows in scouts by 5%, why should a DE be taken to task if "only" 3 new units start and the goal was 5? More youth are being served by the program, why are moer units such a priority? If you have 5 troops of 10 scouts each, isnt a single troop of 50 scouts better? Or at least 2 of 25? In the 10 scout troops you have a SM and Asst Sm and then a whole committee, in the 50 member troop you would have the 10 leaders avaiable and the economies of scale. More youth to go on trips, to plan. Now we could get into what is the perfect troop size, but thats not my point here. Why not simply go by increases in youth members (period) OK, what am I missing? What is the argument for mixing units and youth membership?

Imagine my surprise when I was invited to "knock up" a friends sister while in London, Ok, so it meant to phone her...

Not sure how B-P's sexuality comes to light on a thread concerned with BSA and religion, but these threads are much like Forest Gump's feather, they float as they will. I was always impresed that B-P married a girl 32 years his junior and then had 3 children. I understand the confusion brought about by Kudu's posts, one reading them would have to assume that he would have no part of the BSA, but indeed he says he is a registered leader in the BSA. He is also exercising his right to freedom of expression and we are free to think what we want about his posts. I can't say I always enjoy his posts, but they are almost always intriging

Funny how things change, I remember when being gay meant full of joy,

I am sorta surprised our old buddy Evmori hasnt reminded us that a uniform isnt required to be a boy scout. While I agree that all scouts should have a uniform, and should look to ways to acquire one, I would rather have a boy be an un-uniformed scout than have him not be a scout. Perhaps just wearing a neckerchief could be done until a uniform could be procured.

Wasnt Lemuel Siddons made Scoutmaster Emeritus?

We took in 28 or so a few times (25-30)for a few years, back then it wasnt a case of should we have a new Scout Patrol, but rather should we have a new scout troop? Actualy between the ASM who headed the new scouts, and the troop guides and the committee member who did advancement just for the new scouts, it was like a troop in a troop, but the kids stayed (mostly) and it worked well. The key is adult support, without it we would have died.

In the Crew they refer to the group as "guys", male and female alike, they are all "guys" The adults try to use youths as much as we can, but at times "what do you guys want to do" slips out without nary a discouraging word from the young ladies who would take stern umbrage with the slightest perceived sexist remarks

As I have perused the forum since I joined this forum, I have seen a real dichotomy when it comes to how people spend money. When we have discussions on uniforms, I perceive the general consensus is the uniform costs to much, even if it was 100% unflawed 100% of the time. People economics are frequently mentioned. Then when we talk about equipment, tents, and the like I tend to think of posters advocating higher cost equipment and not gnerally the economic condition of the poster locale. When we talk about Summer Camp and related ills, it appears most posters are in favor uf upgrading the staff, facilities and program. All of which takes big bucks and no one mentions they are from economically depressed areas. We do mention seemingly exploding professional ranks and building projects and question if its necessary. So, when is money spent on Scouting a good investment and when is it not so good? Please note, I understand there are economically depresse areas, I do not mean to imply there arent, it does seem like we hear from the depressed areas when uniforms are discussed but not when discussions of trips to Philmont and other high adventures treks are involved

Before we "secularize" the BSA, I think we should examine what would be lost. Alcoholics Anonymous started with a program which is now almost universal in self help groups called the 12 step program. Belief in God, or a power higher than yourself is the foundation of the program. Now, I dont get out much, but is there a movement to get the AA to change its 12 step program?