Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/05/19 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Erasing our past only makes it easier for us to forget it. The Order of the Arrow has stood for service and brotherhood for over a hundred years, and by eliminating all the defining elements of its composition and character, we are also losing many of the morals and symbolism which the OA used to teach young men how to improve themselves and their communities. Many of these were powerfulful words and symbols and garments of Native American cultures. Adaptation and progress are inevitable; we can't fool ourselves into thinking that the Order of the Past is what the boys of today need. But we can still use that history, we can still teach from those same symbols and ceremonies and legends and costumes, finding new ways to honor their antiquity while respecting their people, to give boys that greater sense of purpose and selflessness which will strengthen them as citizens, husbands and fathers in the future. We have a duty to the rising generation of Scouts to offer them ALL the Order of the Arrow had, has, and will have to offer. Completely ignoring or eliminating the past will only wipe out possibilities for the future. So we do what we can now, where we are, to preserve those ideals and promises.
  2. 1 point
    Well, the cold facts of this case are: 1. No unit leader nor committee may add, nor take away from, the requirements, as written exactly in the Boy Scout Handbook and the Eagle Scout application. 2. There are absolutely no prohibitions on multiple projects being conducted at the same place for the same beneficiary as long as each is managed entirely and only by each respective Scout (I know this for a fact because we just had two boys do their projects on opposite sides of the same street on the same day for our city, and I read through the requirements a dozen times to be sure it was permissible). 3. If you would like to move forward as planned, which I suggest you do, simply move up to your District Advancement Chair for approval, and if not, your District Executive. Under no circumstances should you bend to any leader imposing false prohibitions on these boys' efforts. 4. In all things, be respectful and courteous, and as has been noted, inform the Scoutmaster that the situation has already been taken care of. If he complains or makes demands, simply smile and say Thank you, the situation has been taken care of. Do not give him any room to argue, and if you must, just keep repeating it, but sincerely and kindly. If it's been taken care of under the proper authorities, it's been taken care of. There is nothing the Scoutmaster can do to impede you at this point in the game. All the best to you.
  3. 1 point
    I appreciate your opinions. For me, as long as we are absolutely committed and preaching respect, I have no issues with the ceremonies. I take more objection of using names like "redskins", which is a total racial slur, or "fighting Sioux" (both the implication that NA are merely savage warriors, and that the term Sioux was appropriated from another NA group and used to refer to the Dakota/Lakota/Nakota peoples as snakes). I've been fortunate to make connections to a number of NA peoples in my lifetime, many are like me that they have exceptionally mixed ancestry, but also quite a few that are fully Native American/Native Alaskan. Generally I have found that few take offense to using true NA terms to name campsites or camps. And for those who I have explained what the OA is and what it borrows from Lenni-Lenape lore, I've never really heard anything negative about it. Many still see the BSA as wholesome and striving to do good in the world (the "what are you, some kind of Boy Scout?" type of thing), so that helps so long as we continue to stay true to that.
  4. 1 point
    Thanks for the reply. Over the past couple of years, there have been multiple instances of this SM using the phrase "our troop requires it" and I've always let it slide although I shouldn't have. I've requested that he show me in black and white where it is a BSA rule that 2 Scouts - from different troops mind you - cannot work on separate projects on the same day at the same facility. I'm going to let him hang himself, because I know he'll reply that "it's just a rule our troop made." I already have one email from him where he states "our Troop doesn't allow it" and I've just emailed him again asking him to either provide me the section and code of the BSA Guide to Advancement that states this rule explicitly or admit it's just something that he is making up. I really hate confrontation...but this guy is over the line.
  5. 0 points
    I agree its essential....what I DON'T agree with now that I know the rules is that the SM requires the Scouts to have him APPROVE the project plan.... On the project plan cover sheet, it states very clearly that plan is not "approved or signed." My oldest son, who just finished his Eagle project, went through a lengthy meeting with the SM and the previous SM where they demanded to see the Project Plan and grilled him about it for nearly 2 hours. They circled typos, and made him re-write it before they would "allow" him to start working. While I understand they are trying to be helpful.... this is way outside the rules. These guys were debating the design of the project which was a 22 foot long bridge over a creek (my son had gotten help from his grandfather who is an architect and spent several hours with a family friend who is a civil engineer). They even got into debating what color he should paint it, what kind of screws and nails should be used....