Posted 27 May 2009 - 12:08 PM
scoutldr, the discussion was not about encouraging Scouts to ignore the rules. I think it is telling that you referred to them as "Scouts" when in fact by 18 they are supposedly now Scouters and not Scouts, which makes me question if at some level you do not consider them to be adults. Anyway, if I expressed the opinion that the speed limit on a particular road is too slow it doesn't follow that I am encouraging people not to observe the posted speed limit. It's a free country. People can have whatever opinions they want, right or wrong.
I pointed out the medical fact of 18 year olds not being fully grown because somebody else said that it is only recent society that has said an 18 year old is not an adult. I pointed out the medical fact, and I pointed out the fact that B-P created the Rovering program for this age group and referred to them as "older boys". I thought B-P's opinion might carry a little more weight than mine, but maybe not with the BSA. Regardless of that, I don't see how anybody could say that medical facts could be irrelevant to a discussion of how we should define who is an adult and who is not. You are free to ignore the medical facts if you choose, but that doesn't mean they are irrelevant to the discussion.
The BSA rule is what we have to follow, but that doesn't mean that it is written in stone and will never change. Presumably people with decision-making powers sometimes monitor these forums and might be influenced by the opinions expressed here.
Personally, I don't think allowing an 18-21 year old to wear an eagle patch would in anyway change his status as a registered adult leader for a boy scout troop. 18-21 year olds are also allowed to vote in OA elections and for OA are considered youth. So, there is already this gray area.
However, I also stated my opinion that if they are registered as an adult leader they should probably follow whatever rules the other adults follow. If the BSA wants to make an exception though, that's fine with me too.