CalicoPenn

Well if you're not responsible to make sure your son does his summer homework, who is?

Scouts are no better - someone always mentions Bong State Park when we pass the sign on the highway headed north to Milwaukee, Wisconsin and beyond in a Beavis and Butthead manner. We still haven't quite gotten up the courage to stay there. To the subject at hand, there are a lot of colleges, museums, nature centers, botanical gardens, arboreteums and the like that offer merit badge programs to Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts (and programs for Cub Scouts too). Some will be excellent, most will be good and some will be poor. Before taking part in one of those programs, you should do at least a little homework. Read the requirements and contact the group to ask questions like "How do you handle pre-requisites (if any), how do you handle requirements that might take more than a day to do. You might even ask who designed the program - was it someone with a history with the Boy Scouts? It's a shame the person that coordinates them for the CT Historical Society was rude but was this person also the instructor? You're going to run into these kinds of situations but a good thing to keep in mind is that District and Council volunteers can run some pretty awful merit badge colleges too, and so can some summer camps, so if it was really that bad, you might want to try to talk to them about how it can be improved.

It's a direct quote from an article in the Boston Globe which was exploring how much influence canon law had in civil courts. If he wasn't quoted correctly, that is something for the Boston Globe to answer for.

They don't have to shut up and leave and I never suggested that they should - My suggestion is that if they truly have the courage of their convictions, then stop telling us that you're going to leave and act on your convictions. Threatening to leave and then staying around while continuing to say you're going to leave sure doesn't make it seem that you're all that upset about the issue. When openly gay youth were finally accepted into the program, the folks that left for Trail Life didn't spend weeks threatening to leave - they just left, and National knows why they left (or at least in theory knows since Trail Life apparently welcomes gay youth too). The Bishop of Bismarck didn't spend days and weeks threatening to stop chartering units, he just issued an edict that the entities controlled by his diocese had to stop chartering BSA units, and National knows full well why. Bad Wolf, you weren't hanging out on this forum when members of this forum were telling people who opposed the old policy to "shut up and leave if you don't like it" quite regularly. The difference is that those opponents weren't threatening to take their ball and go home. Now, we're seeing not only major sponsors claiming that they just might leave (and I think we all know that what they're trying to do is blackmail the Executive Committee into changing their mind) but we're seeing folks saying things like 'when my son finishes his Eagle Scout, we're out of Scouting for good' and 'when Webelos is finished for the year, we're leaving the Boy Scouts'. Really? So you're really hacked off about the issue but you'll ignore it until your son earns Eagle Scout from an organization that you no longer like or respect? Why should anyone take someone who expresses that seriously?

I wish these folks would stop threatening to leave and just leave already if that's what they want - they would have had to been blind not to notice the handwriting on the wall two years ago so it shouldn't have been that big of a surprise

I checked with a buddy of mine from England and he believes this is a Stesco brand mass market brass pocket compass sold in the UK back in the 1960's but made outside the UK, either in Japan or Germany. It would have been sold with other inexpensive camping supplies in stores that did not specialize in quality outdoor gear, places like K-mart or Sears (not that they had K-marts but that would be the familiar reference to us). The stamp on the face of the compass looks to be the word Foreign which would indicate it was not manufactured in the UK but was manufactured in another country, and again, most likely Germany or Japan. Products did have to be marked in some way if they were not made in the UK and in the 1960's, the experience of WWII was still a real sore point so to prevent protests, companies like Stesco would mark them Foreign rather than Made in Germany or Made in Japan. According to him, Stesco got it's start selling camping stoves, particularly coil stoves, and the stoves, sold in tins, are somewhat collectible. (I did some digging to and found that Stesco must have partnered with a US company called Seabury & Co. out of Los Angeles to patent in the US, manufacture and sell the Stesco stores in the US - Stesco stoves came in black and white printed tins in Great Britain and yellow and red printed tins in the US). Stesco then expanded to other camping gear like compasses, cooking kits, etc. of the kind of quality that you would find in the Camp-mor catalogue - good stuff fine for the occasional weekend car camper, and just a step or step and a half below Coleman.

Ok - I can see that argument but it could also be said that since canon law elevates civil courts above eccliastical courts and since civil courts do not hear canon law cases, only secular law cases, it does, in a way, elevate civil law above canon law.

I have read very little of canon law, I doubt most of us have so I relied on a statement from Charles Wilson, executive director of the St. Joseph Foundation which is the American Catholic Church's scholarly think tank on canon law who said that, and these are his words: "According to canon law itself, the jurisdiction of civil courts is paramount - it's not just that the Church defers to civil law, it adopts civil law as its own." So according to the Catholic Church's own canon law think tank, not only does the church put civil law ahead of canon law, it also adopts civil law within canon law and on top of that is elevates civil courts to the highest jurisdiction.

I'll bite - and my answer is No - that person is NOT God. I will grant that the person MIGHT be a superior being, but there is a vast difference between being a superior being and being a supreme being. Humans like to think of ourselves a superior to cows (and fine, we are - let's not go down that rabbit hole) but we don't require cows to worship us and if humans believe in a supreme being, then they can't also declare themselves to be supreme in relationship to to cows since there is still at least one level above us. Note, I also say that person might be a superior being - if such a person did program that simulation oh so long ago and never evolved technologically or intellectually from that point, then it could be argued that humankind has caught us since there are plenty of humans that have programmed simulated universes of our own (World of Warcraft anyone?). There is also the "Who created the Creator" conundrum - if some superior being created us as a simulation, from whence did that superior being come from - is it not possible that this being is itself a simulation of a being superior to him or her in which case our creator would not be a supreme being because, like humans with cows, there is still at least one level above.

So that means that Trail Life was founded because they were upset that the BSA was not going to continue to make youths lie about who they are? That Trail Life will accept gay youth as long as they stay in the closet and keep lying to people? Hmmm - that sounds even worse than changing their minds.

I'd be really curious to know just how strong a claim the BSA would have on unit funds and equipment since the fundraising is done under the CO's EIN number and not the BSA's.

(trying to do his best Horschack) Oooh, Oooh, I know, I know Mr. Kotter: It's because the people who started the BSA were men whose religious traditions came from the Abrahamic traditions and they used the concept that was most familiar (and the most dominant for the time) to them. It's also yet another one of those contradictions in the Boy Scouts that we all love so much since they also welcome folks in to the fold that don't call their god or gods by the proper noun God (which is just the proper name form of the Abrahamic god (not capitalized on purpose).

Snap!

Why do the words "Be careful what you wish for" come to mind

I think the point is being missed. Everything I've read about Trail Life and it's founding points specifically to the Boy Scouts of America accepting gay youth - Trail Life was founded after the Boy Scouts of America agreed to start accepting gay youth (or started talking about doing so) as a very specific reaction to the Boy Scouts of America's new policy. Trail Life was founded as an alternative for folks who did not like the BSA's new policy towards gay youth - that's why it seems odd to me that not much more than 2 years later, Trail Life now accepts gay youth, gay leaders and athiests too??? Are we sure the interpretation of Trail Life's FAQs and policies supports the statement that they accept gay youth and leaders and athiest youth?

In what way is it moral relativism?

Websters defines the word God thusly: 1) The supreme or ultimate reality as: a) the being perfect in power, wisdom and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe b) the incorporeal divine principle ruling over all as eternal spirit : infinite mind (Christian Science) 2) a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically: one controlling a particular aspect or part of realty 3) a person or thing of supreme value 4) a powerful ruler Since a rock can be considered both and object and a thing, it can meet at least two of the definitions of the word God. Now I understand if folks want to express that it's not what is meant but my sense of the word and concept of reverent in the Scout Law not only allows but requires us to respect someone's beliefs that an object like a rock is God, even if that's not our understanding of the word. If I ever had a Scout come to me and say he worships a rock he carries around in his pocket as God, and not just as a representation of God but as a God itself, then I will respect his beliefs. If he's sincere in this belief, I won't be the one to mock him. If he's playing it for a goof, I won't give him the satisfaction of falling victim to his prank (and will have a nice little conversation with him about the meaning of reverent).

New Picture??

Until the BSA issues a policy statement requiring units to specifically ask about the faith of the Scouts, it's hard to know if you're violating the charter if you don't ask and they don't declare. I know there are Scouts that make it a point to go to the Catholic services at camporees and Scouts that make it a point to go to the non-demoninational (read as Protestant) services at camporees but we also have Scouts that do neither - have no idea if it's because they don't believe in God, don't normally go to church, are neither Catholic or Protestant, or just don't feel like going.

As I've said before, we don't ask anyone about their faith, or lack thereof - and when we discuss the Scout Oath and Scout Law in these matters, we make clear that it is up to the Boys to determine what God is to them, what their duty to God is, what is meant by doing THEIR best and what how they maintain reverence. As one of our Scoutmasters once said - we don't care if you believe God is real, if God is a rock, if God is a concept, if God doesn't exist, as long as you respect the beliefs of others on the matter. If we ask you to tell us how you have done your duty to God, we're not asking you to define God, we're asking how you do your duty to your belief.

There are no legal grounds for canon law to trump secular law in the case of child abuse and in fact, it's a violation of canon law not to adhere to the superiority of secular law in such cases, which he would have known as he was making his arguments.

I'm confused - Trail Life accepts gay youth? Wasn't Trail Life founded as a reaction to the BSA admitting gay youth? Barely 2 years old and they're alreadt compromising their message?

Not bragging, just stating the position of our CO - and in exactly the way the Pastor expressed it. The message is pretty unambiguous, and if we do end up discriminating against someone, then shame on us.

I suppose the Bishop of Bismark was reacting biblically when he tried to obstruct an investigation in to charges of sexual abuse of two girls by a priest while he was a monsignor at the Rockford, Illinois diocese. If he wants to make it the policy of the Bismark diocese (which pretty much covers the entire western half of North Dakota) that no part of the diocese can sponsor Scout units, then that's his prerogative, but a man that insists that canonical law supersedes state law in child sexual abuse investigations should be very careful about judging other people and organizations on morality issues.

Yeah, maybe he'll be the person who files a lawsuit - one is going to be filed eventually and none of us are going to know just how the religious exemptions portion of the policy is going to hold up until it is challenged in court. It's a bit ironic though that folks who scoff at the BSA's risk managers for all those silly rules because of risk folks fear of lawsuits seem to be so fearful that someone will file suit over this.