TAHAWK

Thank you for being willing to contribute to a discussion of this issue. The fifth requirement for the Eagle Scout Service project, is indeed properly read as having to do with the Eagle Scout Service Project, not the Duty to God requirement, And that language is only one basis for the conclusion that purporting to require confirmation for Eagle is an addition to the requirements for rank, all such additions being prohibited by B.S.A. (but not by the federal government) As to the Duty to God requirement, we know how the candidate for advancement meets that requirement, and the requirement and the meeting of it are totally apart from the Eagle Scout Service project. "Tell how you have done your Duty to God...." B.S.A. has explained hoe this requirement is to be administered: "It’s important to know what that means — and what it doesn’t. The new requirements do ask Scouts to reflect on their own belief. They don’t ask the Scout leader to have a two-way conversation about religion, to proselytize or to evaluate whether the Scout’s duty to God meets the Scout leader’s personal standard. Look at the verb in the requirement: “Tell how you have done your duty to God.†Not demonstrate, discuss, show or prove. This is a monologue by the Scout. Not a dialogue between a Scout and his leader. The requirement is complete once the Scout has told how he has done his duty to God. With young Scouts, this could be a very brief statement. As Scouts get older and their beliefs mature, this “telling†will evolve. The troop leader is there to listen, not to evaluate a Scout’s expression against any standard. In many troops, the Scout leader and one or more of his Scouts will have different religious beliefs, and that’s perfectly fine. In fact, it’s healthy. ... There is no requirement that a Scout identify a religious faith as part of his duty to God—although, if the Scout does have a religious faith, it is likely to be part of the self-reflection and expression. It is important to note that Scouting is nonsectarian and promotes no specific religion. In fact, a boy need not belong to any official religious institution—he could practice his beliefs privately at home. However, while membership in an organized religion is not necessary or implied, a Scout does have to ascribe to the declaration of religious principles, and express belief in a higher power. This condition of membership is acknowledged by the parent or guardian’s signature on the BSA Youth Application." B.S.A., Scouting Magazine.org, June 14, 2016. Having told the Scoutmaster how he has done his duty to God, the candidate has completed his Duty to God requirement. ... The troop leader does not evaluate whether a Scout’s expression of how he shows duty to God is sufficient by any standard. In signing off the requirement, the leader simply acknowledges that the Scout has told how he has done his duty to God. The leader should make no judgment and the Scout should not be held to a standard of belief or activity in order to be signed off on the requirement. There will often be differences of belief among troop members and troop leadership—but the troop leader’s beliefs do not establish a standard for the Scout. The policy of the Boy Scouts of America is that “the home and the organization or group with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life.†The troop leader is to respect those differences, with no attempt to impose his or her personal beliefs on the Scout." And I do see how a religious leader might want more, although his CO has promised to abide by the rules.

OK. The provisions that BSA says are mandatory are merely suggestive. ""[O]ur job is to act as da BSA intends us to act," means do whatever we believe is better, regardless of what B.S.A. says. After all, B.S.A. rules are surely less important the the U.S.C. So what about Ad Altare Dei plus Pius XII for Eagle if 15 or older? And why not require Hiking, Swimming, and Life Saving for Eagle? They were a good idea until the wretched New Scouting Program appeared in 1972. Why not require them in your troop? Real Scouting! I mean, we do want 110% Eagles, right? And why in the name of North American mammals should we stop at Eagle? Why not added requirements for all the ranks? Why deprive First Class candidates of the benefits of added requirements? And if the Scouts in your unit have to do more than the Scouts in all the other units, why it's good for them to do more. Anyone who disagrees should be thrown out of Scouting.

A moderator when a question is asked? Of course no one needs to provide identifying information. Oh noble Castor, you see things in such stark terms - the aberration in David's unit or the highway. How about "our job is to act as da BSA intends us to act, eh? " David's unit could do what B.S.A. seems to require. As for reading, one can but try. However, I don't see the point for those, like you, who routinely dismiss B.S.A.'s pronouncements as merely suggestions subordinate to your insights into how things ought to be, however correct in a cosmic sense I might think you are on occasion. "This publication clearly identifies mandated procedures with words such as “must†and “shall.†Where such language is used, no council, committee, district, unit, or individual has the authority to deviate from the procedures covered, without the written permission of the National Advancement Committee." B.S.A, Guide to Advancement at p. 2. "No council, district, unit, or individual has the authority to produce or require additional forms, or to add or change requirements, or to make any additions, deletions, or changes in the text, outlines, links, graphics, or other layout or informational elements of the workbook. It is permissible, however, to print, copy, or send individual pages or forms within the workbook as long as they are not changed in the process." Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook 512-927 9.0.2.7 “Proposal Must Be Approved … Before You Start†The Five Tests of an Acceptable Eagle Scout Service Project. The proposal is an overview, but also the beginnings of planning. It shows the unit leader and any representatives of a unit committee, council, or district, that the following tests can be met. 1. The project provides sufficient opportunity to meet the requirement. 2. The project appears to be feasible. 3. Safety issues will be addressed. 4. Action steps for further detailed planning are included. 5. The young man is on the right track with a reasonable chance for a positive experience B.S.A., Guide to Advancement 9.0.2.7 This language seems to me to preclude adding a requirement that the Eagle candidate complete any religious requirement before commencing his Eagle Service Project. In fact, as far as I read, the inquiry into whether the candidate is meeting his religious or spiritual obligations is by the Eagle Board of Review. So teach me. Point out the enabling language for this sixth test for an acceptable Eagle Service Project. Please.

Interestingly enough, B.S.A. does not say that. Instead they have written rules that they require a CO to formally promise, in writing, to follow. B.S.A. may or may not enforce those rules - do something about those who do not keep their promise, but your giving a pass to a CO that, for example, requires Scout to finish confirmation as a requirement for Eagle, changes neither the rules nor the promise to follow them. "Rules? Pshaw!" Great lesson for 'da youth. Council? Unit number?

And, if you had read the catelog in the last seven years, you would have had the opportunity to learn that in 2009 the Sage Green jac-shirt was replaced by the red shirt. http://www.scoutstuff.org/bsa/apparel/mens/jackets/washable-wool-jac-shirt.html#.V2CvkbsrLq4 "Let your words be soft and sweet, the better should you have to eat them."

Let's test your thesis. Give us the council and unit number.

Let's test your thesis. Give us the council and unit number.

So the departures from B.S.A. rules that suit "we" are OK, but the rank of Hedgehog is not? What about the SM who required all Eagle candidates to be demonstrating leadership when applying for the rank? Shouldn't Eagle stand for leadership? We say it does. So that should be OK if the "we" go along, yes? And what's wrong with retesting at BoR? Shouldn't a rank indicate skills actually known vs, known months ago and forgotten?

Ah ha. My.scoiting.org Menu My Dashboard My Training Click on tiny printer image are far right opposite "My Training" Obviously flunked Human Factors Engineering.

Adults are to train the leaders in their jobs and act as resources (suggestions/ideas/information). But if the adults are either untrained, refuse to train the Scouts, or refuse to let the Scouts lead, you don;lt get Boy Scouting.

No. No. No. No. Purple.

Very revealing example.

NG! No waist belt.

By some. Just as the Guide to Advancement is laughed out of the room by some - on various grounds. In part, these phenomena may be attributable to the very human tendency to have greater confidence in one's own judgments than those of strangers who reach decisions by a relatively secret process to which we are not admitted. It's the "they" thing.

I sometimes think that almost no one knows what "freedom of speech" means. As for not understanding about consequences of behavior, that seems to be another common failing. The diapers I changed as a kid were not "disposed of." They were rinsed out in the toilet bowl and, when enough had accumulated, washed, run through the ringer, and dried on the "clothes line."

It would probably be as well not to discuss whether one interpretation of one religion controls all behavior in Boy Scouting - controls over the clear description of the program a CO promises to offer.- when it's clear, as it is here. if not, one might refer to how to deal with moneychangers and how those moneychangers just wished He would go away. As there is a rule about rolling out comparison's to Nazis, there should be a rule about invoking Jesus to defend the indefensible. Do they "have" to follow the rules they promised to follow? As a practical matter, they probably do not have to keep their promises. Again with the advocacy of strict adherence to rules that clearly violate the applicable rules. And I would still take by kids to another until so they could see adults following Scouting's value of honor, integrity, and servant leadership.

"No. 2: Boy-to-Boy Recruiting The most effective recruiter is an excited, enthusiastic Scout who has just completed the challenge of his lifetime (so far!) with his troop. Scouts should be encouraged to invite their friends to join the troop and become a member of their patrol. A First Class rank requirement states that a Scout must invite a friend to a troop activity. To help the Scout meet this requirement, a fun, easy-to-use e-card tool is available at http://www.thescoutzone.org. Click on "Tell a Friend" and follow the instructions to select images and music, then send! Consider having a recruitment campaign within the troop. Offer incentives to each Scout who brings in a friend, as well as an overall prize for the top recruiter."

Relying on technicalities? Signing up to be a CO for a unit as an "act of pure kindness" is not very honest because that is not what the CO says in writing or promises in writing. Such attitudes are one reason why we have so many indifferent COs. At recharter time, we have several COs in my oldest district who are reluctant to, or will not, sign the rechartering papers. They see their role as providing space of meetings - period. We are moving these units to community spaces and finding engaged COs. To my knowledge, we have never lost membership due to lack of a CO in the thirty-five years that I have been active in this district Lack of volunteers? THAT is a serious matter. Maybe it's obsolete slang, but does anyone recall "Don't do me no favors" ?

Recruiter Strip http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Awards_Central/RecruiterStrip.aspx http://www.scouting.org/filestore/Recruitment/Badge_of_Honor/English/peertopeer/310-395_BoyScout_PeerCards.pdf No reason Scouts could not lead at least some of these activities: http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Membership/Youth_Recruitment/Events.aspx http://seattlebsa.org/Membership/Troop-Recruiting-Efforts Don't you find that a troop and patrol program that is truly exciting for boys is the best recruiting tool for troops?

"Generally speakin', I think a Patrol-Method, youth-led troop needs a lot more time spent on Patrol Leader / Youth Leader training than what da modern BSA materials call for. " Amen ! Officially speaking ("speakin' ") B.S.A. offers troop-level training by the SM (average tenure 9 mos.) - the horribly titled "Introduction to leadership Skills for Troops" (IT'S THE PATROL METHOD, LESS-THAN-KNOWLEDGEABLE PERSON.). Other than that weak reed, B.S.A. offers only N.Y.L.T. or even more expensive and seldom used courses (NAYLE for example). The district-level training went away fifteen years ago, and the promised "new" district-level syllabus ceased to be promised at least nine years ago. This paucity of youth training materials is no problem for the savvy SM. They will access the training of decades past, but such critters are a distinct minority. I mentioned Bill Hillcourt in the course of a session at BPI in March and a SM's hand shot up: "Bill who?" B.S.A. sometimes says training youth leaders is Job One - second only to safety, but the training support from National belies that claimed priority. But, then, someone(s) at B.S.A. thinks: "Patrols are one component of what we call youth-run, or youth-led, troop." Yup. The good ol' Youth-run troop method.

The "Index" of the Handbook is once again an exercise is using the Word Search feature, rather than an index.

Advocacy for COs is very appropriate since they are often ignored - treated like part of the background scenery. Unfortunately, many COs are happy with that role. How many COR's attend council meetings? Your argument that "consistent" can mean "not in adherence to" was that of the unit that admitted Gays prior to B.S.A's policy change: letting them in was consistent with Scouting - kind, friendly, friendly etc.. I again suggest that the extent to which B.S.A. enforces its rules is situational. The extent of "wiggle room" allowed varies. That is hardly an uncommon situation when it comes to rules. That reality has been the basis of the practical advice given in this thread.

Oh I do so try to read, oh sharp-toothed one. Noting again our mutual lack of first-hand knowledge, here is what I read about the facts of the situation. "The SM replied to my son’s e-mail four days later and he told my son in his very brief e-mail that he would need to complete a double digit number of additional nights of camping this year in order for him to be eligible for Eagle within the troop." "That was the first time, since September 2015, that the SM had ever made any mention to my son whatsoever that he needed to complete additional nights of camping." "Again, my son had already completed his six months of active participation, long before the new camping-participation-scout spirit requirement was put in place. Yet, the SM and the troop committee are applying this after the fact." "The troop committee imposed new, and more demanding, scout spirit/active participation requirements, however, my son had already completed his camping trips and six months of active participation, many months prior to the new requirements being put in place." "His announcement to my older son just a few days ago that he was adamantly refusing to sign anything or grant a SM conference, marked the first time in the past year that he had made any mention of the additional nights of camping." I also read the following from B.S.A. regarding the requirements for Eagle Scout: "EAGLE SCOUT REQUIREMENTS 1. Be active in your troop, team, crew, or ship for a period of at least six months after you have achieved the rank of Life Scout." . http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/BoyScouts/AdvancementandAwards/eagle.aspx(2016) I believe the requirement does not state when "after you have achieved the rank of Life Scout" the six months of active membership must be achieved or that it must be continuous. B.S.A. seems to read the requirement as I do because the Guide to Advancement states: "Time counted as "active" need not be consecutive. A boy may piece together any times he has been active and still qualify." Boy Scouts of America, Guide to Advancement (2015) 4.3.3.1 (3) at p. 25 I also seem to read: "If, for the time period required, a Scout or qualifying Venturer or Sea Scout meets those aspects of his unit’s pre-established expectations that refer to a level of activity, then he is considered active and the requirement is met." Boy Scouts of America, Guide to Advancement (2015) (3) at p. 25 [emphasis added] So on the facts presented, the candidate here has met the then-established expectations for six months active membership. If we imagine different facts, the result may change - or not, as will be discussed below. I also read that the rules provide that neither the Scoutmaster nor any other individual decides if the Candidate has met the active membership requirement "The concepts of “reasonable†and “within reason†will help unit leadership and boards of review gauge the fairness of expectations for considering whether a Scout is “active†or has fulfilled positions of responsibility. A unit is allowed, of course, to establish expectations acceptable to its chartered organization and unit committee. But for advancement purposes, Scouts must not be held to those which are so demanding as to be impractical for today’s youth (and families) to achieve. In doing so, the board members must use common sense and must take into account that youth should be allowed to balance their lives with positive activities outside of Scouting." Boy Scouts of America, Guide to Advancement (2015) at p. 24 [emphasis added] Additionally, the Guide to Advancement provides at some length that the Council Eagle Board of Review may excuse failure to comply with a troop's pre-established expectations for activity "A Scout in this case is still considered "active" if a board of review can agree that Scouting values have already taken hold and have been exhibited. This might be evidenced, for example, in how he lives his life and relates to others in his community, at school, in his religious life, or in Scouting. It is also acceptable to consider and "count" positive activities outside Scouting when they, too, contribute to his growth in character, citizenship, or personal fitness. Remember: It is not so much about what a Scout has done. It is about what he is able to do and how he has grown. . . . In considering the third test, it is appropriate for units to set reasonable expectations for attendance and participation. Then it is simple: Those who meet them are "active." But those who do not must be given the opportunity to qualify under the third-test alternative above. To do so, they must first offer an acceptable explanation. Certainly, there are medical, educational, family, and other issues that for practical purposes prevent higher levels of participation. These must be considered. Would the Scout have been more active if he could have been? If so, for purposes of advancement, he is deemed "active." We must also recognize the many worthwhile opportunities beyond Scouting. Taking advantage of these opportunities and participating in them may be used to explain why unit participation falls short. Examples might include involvement in religious activities, school, sports, or clubs that also develop character, citizenship, or personal fitness. The additional learning and growth experiences these provide can reinforce the lessons of Scouting and also give young men the opportunity to put them into practice in a different setting. It is reasonable to accept that competition for a Scout’s time will become intense, especially as he grows older and wants to take advantage of positive "outside" opportunities. This can make full-time dedication to his unit difficult to balance. A fair leader therefore, will seek ways to empower a young man to plan his growth opportunities both inside and outside Scouting, and consider them part of the overall positive life experience for which the Boy Scouts of America is a driving force. A board of review can accept an explanation if it can be reasonably sure there have been sufficient influences in the Scout’s life that he is meeting our aims and can be awarded the rank regardless of his current or most recent level of activity in Scouting. The board members must satisfy themselves that he presents himself, and behaves, according to the expectations of the rank for which he is a candidate. Simply put: Is he the sort of person who, based on present behavior, will contribute to the Boy Scouts of America’s mission? Note that it may be more difficult, though not impossible, for a younger member to pass through the third-test alternative than for one more experienced in our lessons. Id. Guidance from B.S.A. continues: These must be considered. Would the Scout have been more active if he could have been? If so, for purposes of advancement, he is deemed “active.†We must also recognize the many worthwhile opportunities beyond Scouting. Taking advantage of these opportunities and participating in them may be used to explain why unit participation falls short. Examples might include involvement in religious activities, school, sports, or clubs that also develop character, citizenship, or personal fitness. The additional learning and growth experiences these provide can reinforce the lessons of Scouting and also give young men the opportunity to put them into practice in a different setting. It is reasonable to accept that competition for a Scout’s time will become intense, especially as he grows older and wants to take advantage of positive “outside†opportunities. This can make full-time dedication to his unit difficult to balance. A fair leader therefore, will seek ways to empower a young man to plan his growth opportunities both inside and outside Scouting, and consider them part of the overall positive life experience for which the Boy Scouts of America is a driving force. A board of review can accept an explanation if it can be reasonably sure there have been sufficient influences in the Scout’s life that he is meeting our aims and can be awarded the rank regardless of his current or most recent level of activity in Scouting. The board members must satisfy themselves that he presents himself, and behaves, according to the expectations of the rank for which he is a candidate. Simply put: Is he the sort of person who, based on present behavior, will contribute to the Boy Scouts of America’s mission? Note that it may be more difficult, though not impossible, for a younger member to pass through the third-test alternative than for one more experienced in our lessons. http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/GuideToAdvancement/MechanicsofAdvancement/BoyandVarsity.aspx(2016) Now some have argued on this forum over the years that one should not be held to rigid compliance with B.S.A.'s rules and policies even when they are clear. It seems odd to both decry rigid adherence to B.S.A. rules in the course of defending rigid adherence to unit rules that violate B.S.A. rules. But this is just how I read things.

As the oldest of six, I got those classes at home, along with burping, and rocking. (That would be "rockin'," Beav.)

"Materials by committee, with limited editing. " ​Too true. Often the "committees" never meet and the "editor" is basically clueless. Hence the internal contradictions in the same B.S.A. publication or with other official publications - and no interest in resolving those conflicts over yeasr of thier being brought to the "attention" of Corporate. It's as if the quality of the program is regarded as irrelevant to the success of "sales." And if we get frustrated, imagine what it's like to be a dedicated and competent person in that organization. And those merit badge mills! Yeech!