Proud Eagle

OGE, I think is arguing against something that none of the rest of us are arguing for. I think he is saying that if someone attends for 6 months, does the job required by the POR for the lenght of time, he can no longer be required to attend in order to advance. I think we would all agree that once someone completes those 4 or 6 month requirements, they can't become incomplete simply because he missed the last 3 meetings after completing the requirement. On the other hand I would think we could say that someone hasn't shown up in 2 months, hasn't returned phone calls, and didn't reply to the letter we sent, so we are dropping him from the troop roster. Though even if a hypothetical Star Scout completed the 6 month requirements, then dropped out, he could still return and use the previously completed requirements to advance. If my assumptions about this are incorrect please set me straight.

I think everyone here would agree that you can't add anything to the current rank requirements and still be within the BSA program. I would, however, argue that it is OK to create some sort of guideline for interpreting the requirements when they are vague or unclear in some way. If, hypothetically speaking, a requirement said that someone must be active in their unit for 6 months since achieving the previous rank, it would be reasonable to set out what that actually means. In this way you make it clear to the Scout what is expected of them. Otherwise all they can do is guess as to what will be considered being active. Now we all know that chartered organizations can set requirements for being a member of a unit they own above and beyond the requirements of the BSA. (As long as this does not directly conflict with the policies of the BSA.) So could a chartered organization then delegate the authority to set additional membership policies to the SM, unit committee, COR, PLC, or other unit level authority? I don't really know the answer to that question. My guess would be that they could. Further, isn't being a member of Scouting considered to be a priveldge rather than a right? I always had the notion that members were invited to be a part of a unit. I personally am not in favor of saying you must attend X number of meetings and work X hours at the fundraiser and sell X amount of popcorn to be a member of the unit. On the other hand I would support the idea that good meeting attendence could be used as a criteria for some reward such as a special trip, or the troop paying for merit badge college costs. I would also support the idea of requiring fundraiser participation (or other financial support) to the level possible if someone expects to recieve the benefits of those fundraisers. It would be totally unreasonable for a Scout that does not contribute to the planning or preparation for a trip, and skipped out on the fudraiser to pay for it, for no reason other than they would rather play games at home, to expect to walk in and be given the same benefits as those who made the trip possible. All of this being said I am rather worried about unflexable rules with no room for special circumstances that require someone to do one thing or forbid them from doing another. Reasonable accomodation should be made to the needs of others, but you shouldn't force everyone to break their backs while bending over backwards to include someone that isn't willing to make the effort needed to do what is expected of them.

I would like to make a quite possibly incorrect prediction. Howard Dean will be nominated do to his being most in tune with the true liberals. Those are the individuals most likely to vote in a Democratic primary, it seems. Those same liberals will form a very dedicated core of supporters in the general election. Most of the other Democrats will also support Dean. However, Dean's positions will decrease his chances of gaining widespread support from the moderates, centrists, and undecided crouds. That and an improving economy and continued (though pricey) progress on the military front will favor George W. Bush. Though any number of factors could upset this. Major scandal or other disruption within the aminstration, Dean shifting to a centrist position, military setbacks, more terrorism, economic trouble, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, and many other factors could all throw off the current trends for the nomination of Dean and the election of Bush.

Yikes, this is a tricky and troubling situation. I may have missed it at the start, but I don't think I noticed anything that spelled out what the young couple and their parents have decided to do about the pregnancy. Are they keeping the child? Is it being placed up for addoption? Or (and this is quite literally stomach turning to even sugest) have they chose to kill the child? The answer to that question makes a very significant difference in this. Without knowing the arrangements that are being made I certainly can't offer much in the way of specifics. OK. That being said, I will offer what thoughts I do have. 1. CO- Seek the guidance of the CO. I would consult both the COR and IH. Even if they don't have an opinion about keeping him as a member (and they might), they can still offer advice on this matter. They can provide guidance for how to handle this with the boy, his family, the committee, other boys, and other parents. All of these things should be done in accordance with the wished of the CO. 2. You may wish to consider seeking guidance from the larger Scouting community. However this should be limited to people you trust and who you think will actually be able to offer useful advice. 3. This is certainly a matter that the committee must know about to some degree. If the boy is staying they will need to be informed and consulted to a greater degree. Keep their wishes in mind. 4. Consult with the parents of the boy. Determine what their wishes are. Work out what role, if any, Scouting will play in the future life of their son. This would be a great time to recommend any services you know of, or make offers for quiet individual support for the family. Once some sort of general agreement that is within the wishes of the CO, the scope of the BSA program, and seems likely to be approved by the unit committee is reached by with the parents you should procede. 5. The parents of the other Scouts must be informed to the degree appropriate to the specific situtation. They may have objections to the corse of action chosen. Their concerns should be taken into account. They will also be the final determiner of how the situation is handled with their son. Some may choose to leave, others may wish to handle it as a parent-son lesson, and others may prefer the Troop address the issue openly as a unit. This may require some modification of the plan. 6. There should be a Scoutmaster Conference with the boy involved. Both the Oath and Law and how is actions that caused this pregnancy, and how he is reacting to it should be discussed. Discussion of how to handle the subject with other members of the Troop should be included. Any guidance to be offered about other support available would be appropriate. Creating a plan for the Scouts future involvement (if any) should be carefully crafted. 7. The issue must then be addressed with the other Scouts. The way to do this will likely be after these other steps are completed. Though it may be necessary to address the issue in a more aggressive way. (i.e. If all of the Scouts are talking about what happened to Johnny at one of the meetings before the outlined process is complete it would be necessary to address the issue immediately in some way. Perhaps having the Scouts contemplate what the Scout Oath and Law says about premarital sex, and how to handle a difficult situation, would be appropriate.) OK. All that being said here are some things that should be remembered throughout the process. 1. By becoming a father this Scout is no longer a boy in the true since. By choosing to engage in such an adult act he has opened himself to adult consequences. 2. You must consider how to best balance the needs of the many against the needs of the few. 3. You must respect the privacy of the mother, father, and their families to the greatest extent possible. 4. The Scouts will find out if they don't know already. Even if the family moves to Alaska and pretends it never happened the other Scouts will know. Don't pretend that they don't know. 5. Consider the possibility that the Troop is not what this boy needs. He may need other things more than the Troop. The best thing you could do might be to lead him to groups and services that will better serve him than the Scouting program can. (Was BSA meant to develope teenage fathers? No Are there service for that purpose? Yes) 6. Allow for the posibilty that even if the troop has something to offer this boy, that his new responsibilities, and the Oath and Law, may require he spend his time and energy in other pursuits. He may be better off working to support the child, or taking more classes, or actually spending time with the child instead of the Troop. Scouting may not be the answer to this problem. Now, a few last points. If I overheard some of the Scouts in my troop bragging about sexual conquests or some such thing I would be deeply saddaned. I know it is possible that some of them are sexually active. I also know some of them may choose to talk about it to other Scouts if they are. I would say I would have to seriously consider taking some sort of action in that case. It is this very sort of bragging that leads to someone thinking it is ok to do something that turns them into a 15 year old father. I don't think I could ignore that. I would certainly feel compelled to discuss it with the Scouts proclamining to be sexually active. I would probably also address it with the others in the context of the Oath and Law. It could even require a similar response to that required in the case of the 15 year old father. After all, the same act is involved. The case of the bragging teen has the added problem of promoting the behavior. I must say I hope I never have to deal with this issue. However it seem likely that eventually at least dealing with the sexually active Scout, or the bragging Scout, will be an issue.

I would be interested to hear how that goes. If you could post your observations and conclusions in a new thread later on that would be quite nice. Thanks.

OK. Let me attempt to explain and clarify what I said. (and request some clarification of the correction DSteele made) When I looked up the information I referred to the uniform inspection sheet found on the supply division website. #34284 "Male Leader Uniform Inspection Sheet" Boy Scouts of America 2000 "A Scouter should wear the color shoulder loop of the position in which he is functioning." The newest version of the uniform and insignia guide may differ from this, and if it does it would most likely superscede this. However, this is the best (and handiest) source I have available. On the OA issue you seem to almost contradict yourself. If, for example, a Lodge Chief, is supposed to wear the loops for his primary registration that would seem to be either red or blaze loops. The reasoning being that an Arrowman's first responsibility (as an Arrowman) is to his troop. Also, I for one don't think the average Lodge Chief is (though they perhaps should be; -side issue- can a youth be registered in a council position?) actually registered in a Council position, even when they do serve on the Executive Board. Also, I am not entirely certain that Area and Section really equate quite right. Areas, to the best of my knowledge, contain one or more sections. As an example, I believe I am in the Southern Region, Area 6. Area 6 is then divided into two Sections, 6 South and 6 North. DSteele may have been trying to simplify this for everyone, or perhaps I am mistaken. Oh, as to another unauthorized set of shoulder loops- Someone has created red shoulder loops with the old MGM Indian head OA logo embroidered on them. I was very annoyed to see a fellow member of the SR6N Council of Chiefs wearing them. I could understand the Lodge Chief position patch since that was once official and can still be authorized by an SE, as I understand it, but the unofficial loops on someone representing a Lodge of "Scouting's National Honor Society" bothered me a bit. Happily I now have nothing at all to do with Section matters. Oh and the Section Chief shoulder loop comment is based on personal observations. Our immediate past Section Chief was given a set of gold loops by the Section Advisor to wear at the national OA meeting. (national planning conference? I don't remember the actual name) On the other hand all four section chiefs I have seen wore red loops during section functions. Maybe that is just something peculiar about our section, after all, Clay Capp did come out of our section...

My advice on pads is as follows: When you have the weight and room to spare use a full size self-inflating foam pad like a ThermARest. Buy one that is long enough and wide enough for you. It is worth it. For Philmont I bought a RidgeRest that was narrower and slightly shorter than the thermarest I usually use. (Still able to fit on it, but just barely.) However it saved quite a bit of room and made breaking camp faster and easier. I also purchased a small conversion kit that I can put the RidgeRest into and make it into a stadium style chair. The pad and chair kit weighed less than the inflatable pad by itself. Also, if you want your self inflating pad to continue to self inflate you should store it inflated. Under a bed is a good place for this. This prevents the foam from being compacted over time. This really does work. Others in my troop had to blow up their pads after a while, but I just role mine out and open the valve.

While I agree that poor meeting attendence could quite easily be a sign of a problem with the meetings or some other part of the program, that may not be the only answer. It is also possible that the Scout has little desire to participate in the Scouting program or does not wish to embrace the values of Scouting. Any of those, or even other things, are all possible. Now unless I am mistaken the CO can set additional requirements for membership in a unit they sponsor. (I am uncertain if the CO could choose to delegate this authority to the unit or not.) If this is a properly established requirement for membership in the unit it should be either upheld in a reasonable way or changed, not ignored when convienient for some people. It would be reasonable to question who made the rule and under what authority they did so. Applying a rule to some people, but not others for no good reason is fundamentally unfair. Now I happen to agree that the unit shouldn't be setting up arbitrary rules just to have its own little program seperate from the rest of BSA. I also agree that it is usually better to offer the carot rather than the stick to encourage some behaviour. The unit certainly shouldh't be adding anything to requirements set forth in the program that they are not specifically empowered to do. This case does bring up some interesting side issues that I think are pertanent and are being missed. (I could be wrong. I also lack sufficient information to relate these points to this case in anything other than a hypothetical way.) I would suggest that a key point that needs to be considered is the finance issue. Is the unit paying part of the costs of this merit badge college (or transportation to it, or any other related expense)? If so that changes the question quite a bit. Also, if the troop has any sort of system for rewarding good attendence that could come into play. In my troop the committee sometimes chooses to use troop funds to pay part of the expense for each Scout. Sometimes this is done regardless of funraiser participation, sometimes it is only done for those who chose to participate in a fundraiser. Even in cases where no per person supplement is made the unit often pays all adult leader related costs, as well as maintanence and other fixed costs related to vehicles and equipment. I don't really want to turn this into a discussion on finance, but it is somewhat relavant to the topic since fundraiser participation was mentioned.

Yes, it is quite clear that you are trying to make a point. However, your point is not related to the argument that I am making. You seem to me to be suggesting that BSA has a problem with people avowing their sexuality. That is true in the absolute sense. However, I don't think BSA would kick someone out for being an avowed faithful spouse or some such thing. Besides, your statements/questions make no argument against my statement that "avowed" has a relatively well excepted defintion. Even if it did not the priority must first be on defining "homosexual". "Avowed" simply tells you what kind of "homosexaul" is banned. Note the policy does not prohibit "avowing" anything. Oh, and I do agree with NJ. There is no good time to discuss sex or sexuality in Scouting. (particularly not between youth and adults) Though it is possible for such a topic to come up without it requiring anyone be removed. I really don't see how you could have gottent the idea that there was some appropriate place or time to "avow" anything related to sex within the Scouting context.

This is going to be a somewhat long story inspired by a Troop dinner held a week ago. It is heavy with troop history and is quite long. It probably needs some serious revision before it is fit for human consumption. If you are the sort that can't get enough of even the most poorly told Scouting stories, read on. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Troop 280 was founded in March 1977. We had a Silver Anniversary Dinner last Saturday. It was an event well worth the two hour one way drive. Troop 280 was founded in March 1977 after a Methodist minister approached the local district about starting a troop at his church. He had a vision of Scouting being a part of his church's youth program. It was also a chance for the church to do something to benefit others outside the church. In the end a 26 year old Eagle Scout was asked to lead the troop. He had been a troop leader before, but never a Scoutmaster. Now he was being asked to build a program from the ground up. The troop and church hosted an open house and 13 families showed up. The sons of those 13 families would become the first Scouts of Troop 280. The troops first year there was no trip to summer camp. The new Scoutmaster was worried that it might not go too well since the troop had never been on any camping trip before. However, they outdoor program soon got under way. The council camporee was the first outing. Another nearby troop loaned Troop 280 enough extra equipment to make it through the weekend. That was the beggining of a tradition of strong outdoor programs that still endures today. The troop was lucky enough to have success with early fundraisers such as barbecue sales and what not. This, and a parent that was a manager at Kmart, allowed Troop 280 to begin aquiring its own equipment. At the same time that these first funraisers were showing a success the young Scoutmaster and the parents made the commitment that no boy should ever have to stay home because they couldn't afford an outing. Since that time the Troop has had other fundraisers. There have been more barbeques, candy sales, popcorn sales, car washes, and the greatest success - Christmas tree sales. Those fundraisers have paid for the tents of the troop, dining flies, patrol boxes, and other equipment. It has ensured that transportation was available to the Scouts by allowing the purchase of an old school bus (old yeller by some accounts) and more recently a 15 passenger van (old blue to some). The gear has found its way to events in the various trailers the troop has borrowed or purchased over the years. Though funraising has always been a key to the troops financial success, it was not always enough. In the early years leaders and parents had to personally sign for fundraising materials to guarantee payment. Other times fundraisers fell short of expenses and generous parents made up for the short falls. None of these parents did this to recieve recognition (and I feel certain several of the specific examples given at the dinner had never been made public until then), but rather instead to ensure that their boys, and those of other families then, and in the future, could recieve the benefits of Scouting. All through the years, even in the leanest of years, no one ever had to stay home because they couldn't afford it. The troop did not forever remain under the guidance of that same Scoutmaster. He eventually took on district and council jobs, and started a family. Only when there was simply too much for one man to do did he step down. Even then he did not stop serving Scouting. He remained an assistant in the troop and was Woodbadge director for several years. During this time two others stepped forward and carried on where the first Scoutmaster had left off. Though the original Scoutmaster did return to his post after several years. (I have to think it would have been like Kirk returning to the Enterprise. It was where he always belonged.) He remained at his post until family obligations forced him to again step down in 1999. As history would show that was not only the end of his tenure as SM, but also the end of an era in troop history. The trip to Colorado that summer proved to be the turning point. After that the SM and CC stepped down, and the last of the old guard of ASMs and CMs faded away. Gone from active duty in the troop were any who remembered that first generation of Troop 280 Scouts. Shortly after this trip to Colorado the Scouts that had been in the troop prior to my joining began to depart as well. It wasn't long before I was the SPL of a troop without a SM, or any of the more experienced Scouts to guide it. Fortunately at least one hanger on from the past stepped in to fill the void just enough to hold everything together until a new SM could be found. That new SM happened to be an Eagle Scout and English teacher who had joined Troop 280 as an ASM a week after I joined it as a Scout. (which produces the odd affect of me often being the longest tenured member of the troop at many functions) The new SM has since set the troop back on solid footing. He has helped ensure that a few dedicated parents took on the job of running the committee. He has also been an indespensible source of leadership and encouragement to youth and adult alike during a somewhat rocky transition. (though he had what now seems to be the good sense to let most of the bumps smooth themselves out, rather than following the advice of others that suggested he take command and fix it himself) Now, back to the previously mentioned outdoor program. That has included so many camporees that the event ribons can't fit on the troop flag pole. Then there are the awards ribons from competitions, the consistent quality unit awards, and all sorts of sundry ribons. These require about a four foot horizontal pole just to display. The troop has been to summer camp, or some other major summer time camping experience, every summer since 1978. Most years the troop went to summer camp and spent another week on the road or trail as part of a major troop planned outing. That in addition to generally having an outing per month. The troop has been to Colorado (Rocky Mountains), Wyoming (Grand Tetons), Florida, Canada (Niagra Falls), D.C., Jambo (as visitors), Baltimore, Gettysburg, Manassas (sp), Wisconsin (Dells), and these are just a part of the troop planned summer trips. The troop has likewise been to many different summer camps. Though the pinnacle of Troop 280's outdoor program has always been, and will likely remain, the periodic Philmont treks. The troop usually sends at least one crew every four years. Sometimes it has sent multiple crews. Sometimes it has waited longer, or been more frequently. In 2001 I went as Crew Leader and one of my advisors was on his 3rd trek with the troop (the other two as youth). Now you may notice I didn't say anything yet about advancement. Well that sort of goes along the same lines as everthing else. The troop has produced 27 Eagles. It usually has one of the highest advancement rates in the Council. (though not necessarilly the fastest) Of my original patrol, two made Eagle, the others dropped over the years. Of the original 13, 4 made Eagle. (OK. I know this is long, but it will only be a few more paragraphs.) Near the close of the dinner a remark was made that made me think. The COR (who likely saved the troop while we were without an SM) asked that we keep two of the former members of the troop in our prayers. Those two are brothers, and are two of the four boys from that family that were entrusted to the troop over the years. One is no more than two years older than I, so I got to know him in the troop. He married a girl in my AP Chemistry class and they have a kid now. Though he isn't with his family, he is in Afganistan. (He had previously been in Bosnia where he got a sitation for subdoing a local that ran a checkpoint using nothing but a flashlight. The local was carrying a concealed, loaded 9mm.) Both are now serving on active duty in the Army due to the continuing war on terror. I couldn't help but think of the gold stars mentioned on this board. I certainly hope we never have need of one. The affect of seeing so many old faces, and at least 6 brand new ones to the troop, all in one place was quite profound. It made me feel old and young all at once. I realised that not only was I a part of the greater tradition of Scouting, but also the great tradition of one of thousands of Troops. The idea that there can be thousands of others units with leaders and parents just as dedicated as ours was inspiring. The idea that people share in such a rich experience of Scouting throughout the nation, and world, as what I have was somewhat refreshing. Scout on everyone. I hope all of you have had as fantastic of a Scouting experience as I have. Sure it has had its down moments,* but I wouldn't trade it for all the tea in China, as they say. *(that includes being tied to a lawn chair, being partially suspended from a tree by my ankle, nearly being killed on a sailboat by a barge, and enough unpleasant or nearly fatal experiences to make me think there must be an entire legion of angels dedicated just to guarding over Scouts)(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

Thanks. Very good read.

My two personal favorites were: The construction of a pair of bridges as part part of a handicap accessible and pet walking trail near the camping area in the local State Park. The project also involved the clearing of about a half mile of the trail as well. (Other parts of the trail already existed.) The other was a playground improvement at the local Catholic school. A trench was dug around all of the playground equipment. Railroad ties were placed into the trenches (only partially below ground). The enclosures created by the railroad ties were then filled with wood chips/mulch. This did two things. It made the playground safer because the wood chips softened falls. It also doubled the amount of use the playground could get. The woodchips prevented water from pooling below some of the equipment and creating massive amounts of mud. In all that project involved something like 140 full lenght rail road ties and at least 3 (may have been 5, don't remember for certain) large dumptruck loads of mulch. (The project did contain one unusual aspect. Some of the work was performed by inmates of the local jail. Apperently it was neither required of the inmates nor paid, so it was technically volunteer service. The inmates apperently were glad for a chance to get outside and do strenuous manual labor instead of sitting around the jail doing nothing.) (This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

I am not really very concerned with the term "avowed" at the moment. I think the definition of that is clear enough. Besides, "avowed" is merely describing the far more critical "homosexual". The term avowed is not something that would really seem to be a point of great contention. However, the term "homosexual" is. A large part of the debate over weather or not homosexuals should be allowed in the BSA or weather or not homosexuality is immoral, is possibly due to a disagreement over what "homosexual" means. One person might say that someone who has some sort of predisposition to be attracted to men, but manages to avoid ever acting on that attraction, and lives a normal life, perhaps even having a happy marriage and raising a family, is still a homosexual because of some sort of unidentified predisposition. Others would say that the definition is entirely actions based. They would argue that a person could be attracted to those of the same sex and repulsed by those of the opposite and not be homosexual unless they acted on those feelings. Also, the cause of homosexuality is clearly a point of contention that, while not necessarily part of the defintion, very well could be in some people's minds. Someone might say that homosexuality is the purely determined by some thus far unknown homosexuality gene. A second person might say homosexuality is caused by the way a person is raised and is hard coded into their brain by age 5. A third person might say that homosexuality is purely a personal choice always under the control of the individual. Yet a fourth person may say that there are examples of homosexuality caused by all three. The fifth and final person in this example may think it doens't matter what causes homosexuals to be homosexuals and so he doesn't care. It is critically important that "homosexuality" and/or "homosexual" be defined in order to have a solid basis in language for this debate. Right now (no pun intended by this) everyone is arguing over the price of fruit but no one has defined if it is apples or oranges that we are arguing over. Some people assume it is apples, some oranges, other tangerines or bananas. Until we arrive at some undeniably true definition of "homosexual" it would be a good idea for those debating the issue to provide a basic definition of the term as they see and understand it. This doens't have to be in every post, but it should be in at least every couple of threads to remind people of what their term is.

I would suggest making it as much like an Eagle COH as possible. There has already been a funeral, no need to have a second one. It should be a celebration and remembrance of the Scout's accomplishments in life, what he stood for, and what he believed in. I would agree that you should consult with the family to determine what they want. However, they may prefer to leave the details to the unit. Without knowing the individual I can't really get into details. Eagle Court's always have to be tailored to the tastes and history of the Eagle and his family. I hope all goes well with this endevour. I can't imagine losing one of our Scouts (even the ones I couldn't get to stop throwing sand at each other).

I have to agree with potluck. That is the way our troop does things like this. Either that or do a cookout. (You could in fact go halfway, with all side dished and deserts being potluck and cookout the meat immediately prior to the event.) For Eagle Courts of Honor we do the actual COH in the chuch chapel and then have a celebratory dinner afterwards in the church's fellowship hall. The Eagle's family provides meat, plates, cups, napkins, and other things like that. Each Scout's family is asked to bring a side dish or something like that. In that way no one person has the burdon of preparing or paying for all the food. It also provides a wide variety of foods. Further, the more people that come, the more food that is brought, so that works out nicely. Also, by having each family commit to bringing a dish ahead of time that will ensure that they won't just decide to stay home at the last minute. In the case of a troop wide Court of Honor you would probably want to either sub out all of the items, or pay for meats and paper products from the troop budget. It would also be appropriate to invite some distinguished visitors to such an occasion. Those could include representatives of the district, former SMs, former CCs, the IH, and other individuals that you wish to show off the troop to and say thank you to.

I know a thing or two about not making quality (insert leve/type of Scouting organization). In my case it is Quality Lodge. Though I was in the good position of having publicly written it off as a goal before the year even started. That doesn't help the fact that we didn't make it and I know we could have if we had done some things differently. Oh, I am sure someone will wonder why I wrote off quality lodge. Before I took office I had spent too much time listening to other officers/advisors talking about what had to be done to make quality lodge like it was the holy grail or some such thing. I decided we needed to focus on what we wanted to accomplish, not on some set of criteria from nationals. In the end I realised we would have been better off paying more attention to those criteria, because they are pretty good measures of the quality of the program. I guess I was far too optimistic. I thought if we took "make Quality Lodge" off the list of goals for the year we would still be able to do it if we focused on the program areas that we felt needed improvement. I think if I had it to do over again I wouldn't have used the traditional "make Quality Lodge" goal that everyone before me seemed to. Instead, I would have paid close attention to the criteria while setting goals and choosing the areas to focus on for the year. Guidelines for awards are not autimatically some evil, artificial, program detracting set of criteria. Just remember that the focus is on delivering quality program, based on the situation and needs in your case. Though the quality X criteria are often a good guide for figuring out what it takes to deliver that quality program.

That does not define the term homosexual. It does say that the person must have in some way declared themselves to be such. However, a definition is still needed both for the purpose of debate and for clarifying the policy. Let me explain the policy implications If SM X says around the campfire, "I find men attractive." That would be avowing an attraction for men. The policy is unclear as to weather or not being attracted to men is enough to constitute being homosexual. The policy could intend that only those who are engaging in homosexual activity be banned. In which case the SM would have to say something like, "I was out on a date with my boy friend last night and..." Further, it is absolutely impossible to have a meaningful debate over an issue when the issue is not defined. So, at the very least it is necessary for the various debaters to make certain that they clearly define homosexual as they are using it in their arguments. It is not safe to assume that everyone is using the same definition from the same edition of the same dictionary when so much depends on one word.

It would be appropriate to wear Scout shirt, Scout shorts or pants, Scouting belt of choice, Scout socks, shoes or boots, neckwear of choice (if any), and headgear of choice (if any, and if appropriate for the location). Now depending on local custom it might be better to wear a chapter or lodge T-shirt to the chapter meeting. Also, many chapters and lodges have some sort of identifying totem they use, such as a special necklace for beads, and it would be appropriate to wear that to such a meeting. My experience has been that people at OA functions usually are some of the better uniformed Scouts. {*} So there is really nothing that would be innapropriate, other than wearing the merit badge sash with the OA sash. Oh, and it would probably be overkill to wear actual medals. All of that being said, it is far more important that you show up to the meeting wearing something, than not show up. OA, like so much of Scouting, is boy run. Without the boys, it doesn't run. OK, the former Lodge Chief is surrendering the floor. *(Also, there is often a dispraportionately high number of uniform police in some areas, though around here OA members are more likely to take amusing liberties [souther drawl interpreter strips and the like] with the uniform than try to police it.)(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

That is rather intersting conclusion to reach about the future of the program. I can't say that it won't happen, but I don't see any proof that it will happen either.

We don't have a troop rule that says we must use the Eurekas for every camp out no matter the situation. Instead those are the tents the troop owns and are therefore what are used on most outings. As Bob White says most troops don't have the money for mutlitple types of tents. I suppose we could use our fundraisers to buy new tents and stick the boys with all the cost the troop currently covers, but that doesn't seem like a good idea at all. Now when we went to Philmont for example, some people purchased backpacking tents (and at least one person already had one). Those individuals used those tents for Philmont and for several outings before Philmont. Those that did not have their own tents (or a tent partner that did) used the Philtents provided at Philmont. We do not expect our Scouts to purchase their own tents. We do expect them to have certain basic equipment, but not tents. If someone has a tent they will be allowed to use it when appropriate. (Such as when there are not enough troop tents, or their tent is better suited to the conditions.) Most of our youth that have tents choose to use troop tents when given the option because troop tents are often larger, dryer, and sturdier than their tents. Truth be told I don't know of any outing ever even suggested by our troop that our troop tents would not have been able to handle. Certainly they are not always the perfect tent for the job, but they always seem to get the job done. Oh, and we do teach about the trade offs of using different types of tents. Unfortunately with tent technology always changing and insufficient numbers of different types of tents/shelters available we can only teach the basics rather than letting every Scout learn from first hand experience. Personally I would really like to get some nice big wall tents (either the BSA version, some civilian sort, or maybe GP mediums, or best would be the new modular military tents) that would be able to hold a patrol size group in comfort for such things as summer camp. Unfortunately that would eat up too much of the troop budget on something that isn't necessary.

Blood Drives could be an Eagle Scout project. However, I only know of one Eagle that got approval for a blood drive, and carried out the project to the satisfaction of the BOR. After he completed his project the troop decided it was a good service project and decided the troop would do it annually, but not allow it as an Eagle project. Now, if you really want to try this project you need to discuss the possibilities with each of the folling persons, perhaps twice: your SM to see what he thinks someone from council/district to get their input someone from Red Cross to find out what it actually would take on your part to do this then talk to SM and district advancement persons again to find out if doing what the Red Cross indicated would qualify as a good project Now if you were to do a blood drive there are quite a few things you could do. Working out an appropriate date for the drive. Scheduling the facility. Schedule training for other volunteers to work the drive. (conducted by Red Cross) Plan for the promotion of the drive and finding blood donors. You will need to be able to have a minimum number (often 30) of guaranteed donors before the drive. You will want to sign up as many donors as possible before the drive. You will also want to promote the drive to the community to try to get more walk ons. This could consist of having notice placed in the newspaper, church bullitens, on the radio. Also posting flyers and posters in businesses, schools and churches would help. Use members of the troop to aid the Red Cross in setting up the drive. Here there is a ton of stuff that has to be unloaded and set up for blood drives. Use volunteers you recruit to man the check in table (this is not the medical screening, more of a greater role). Use volunteers you recruit to assist in the donation area. Here the Red Cross uses donors for things like placing the bandages on the donors, taking the blood from the donation to the collection area, guiding donors to the rest area after donating. Use volunteers to man the hospitality area. Get all food and drinks for the event donated if possible. Assist the Red Cross in packing up and loading their equipment at the end of the drive. Clean up the facility. Blood drives usually last several hours and we usually do ours from about 9am-2pm on a Saturday. Providing lunch for all workers would be necessary. You would also need to handle scheduling the volunteers you provide to ensure enough are available at all times before, during, and after the drive. Now, all that being said, I don't think a blood drive is the best project to do. You run into serious questions about the benefit to the community (does the blood stay there or go 4 towns down the road?), lasting impact (you are helping collect a parishable and expendable commodity), and the level of leadership you would show. The Red Cross would essentially provide you with all the information you need for planning and most of the materials involved. I would suggest consulting with your SM, CC, pastor, district advancement rep, school officials, parks and recreation officials, naturalists or coservation officers, and the heads of community organizations involved in service work. These are the people that will likely be able to provide suggestions about what is needed in the community. Often these groups have things on their "wish list" but don't have the manpower or money to do the project. When it came time for me to find a project I consulted with my SM. He provided some general suggestions about who to contact. I then talked to the naturalist at the nearist State Park, and several others. However, none of those I initially conacted had anything that seemed to fit. Then my SM heard from a friend of a friend that a certain community group that does projects in many of our local parks had some things it wanted done. I contacted the head of this organization and she indicated that they did have several projects they wished to complete but lacked the recources for. I scheduled a meeting and discussed the options and came up with a set of goals that I wished to accomplish. I then planned my project based on that. It required many phone calls and several meetings with various people and even some interfacing with the local goverment since it involved park land to put the project together. In the end it required about 120 man hours from other volunteers representing two Scout troops and one high school service club to actaully carry out the project, and about 20 hours from me to handle all planning and preparation. (I am doing the numbers from memory, I don't have my project report at hand.) It then required quite a bit of time to complete the report on the project. (My troop is very big on documenting the project. The project notebook filled a 3" three ring binder with information, charts, tables, photos, the written report, and copies of just about every piece of paper in any way associated with the project placed in plastic page protectors. This is the standard format that has been used for at least a decade in my troop. Each succesive Eagle always adds to the norm and improves it in some way. By looking at past examples I was able to see quite clearly the improvements allowed by the change from typewriters to computers.) Anywase, I wish you luck in selecting a project. Don't be afraid to think outside the box. Just because most people seem to end up building something doesn't mean you have to.

OK. Cooking makes sense. Do you cook by troops at your camp or does the dining hall use them to start charcoal and what not?

Sorry, I suppose I was a bit harsh in my response. I just sometimes get a bit cranky I suppose. I am all in favor of good dialouge, it is just that I have my doubts about the possibility of it on this subject. Though I am willing to give it a try. Oh, and welcome to the forum.

Not to get into this too far but... I think BSA has banned promiscuous individuals. Since most people would say that type of conduct is contrary to the Scout Oath and Law, then it would be rather hard to live up to those standards while engaging in that patern of activity. Also, has BSA ever definied what exactly the term "homosexual" means in regards to the policy? I don't think I have ever seen a clear BSA defintion of the term. That would seem to be a key weekness in the policy. Some people define homosexuality as a choice, a lifestyle, or based on some other readily controlable criteria. Others define homosexuality as being a predetermined characteristic, or mearly as being in some way attracted to those of the same sex. Precise defintions are needed to clarify both the policy, and the positions taken in the debate about the policy.

OK. I think everyone that was going to reply has done so. Now let me explain the point I was hoping everyone would get. When you think of that 13th point you may think you have the perfect answer. However, when you try to explain why you will normally notice something. The point you are making is covered in the current 12 points, or wouldn't help even if it isn't. My point was "thoughtfull". The idea was that people would take the time to think through their actions and consider what they are doing. The obvious problem was that if you are considering the Scout Oath and Law you are already being thoughtful. I think most other examples will suffer from similar problems. It is still a good excersise. I think of the responses posted hear I like humble and honorable best. However, if you think about it, those areas are covered as well.