BDPT00

It's very likely that this thread will soon have 100 hits. Strong opinions will flourish, and we'll lose sight of the Scout.

The difficulty with issues like this is that we readers have limited information, and therefore only opinions, and opinions about other people's opinions.

I think most people question their own and others' religions. That's fine. This Scout is trying to put a label on what he believes or does not believe. The difficulty I have with this is how vocal he might be about it (this is a private issue), and the alarm raised by those around him (which might be why he's vocal). If this remains a private and thought-provoking issue for him, then I'm on his side. So far, no harm ... no foul. If he's enjoying the ride and the attention gained by his comments, then we don't need him. Yes, he may need us, but we don't need the negative press associated with this kind of thing.

Counsel him to keep this to his close friends and family. Seeking the truth is what youth and education are all about. Wish him well in his journey, and give him your support.

BDPT00

Some churches are in favor or this, and others are not. Each church and synod has the option of whether or not they wish to offer a call to a gay pastor. Putting all of the ELCA churches in the same pool isn't anywhere near to being accurate. Some churches are in or near gay communities, and this might make sense for them. Now they have that option.

I agree with Calico... The correct current stance of the BSA should be to do nothing. There are no fires to put out, and we could easily overreact. No point in doing that.

BDPT00

The age requirements as you state them are perfectly clear, and thank you.

The reason I brought it up is because I've read in this forum about alleged Scouts under the age of 10.5, and I consistantly see 14 as the age for Venturing (not "14 and completed 8th grade").

I think the Handbook could have been written more clearly.

As for Varsity ... What can a Varsity Scout do that a Boy Scout or Venturer can't?

BDPT00

Again, I agree with that interpretation.

For Venturing, the age is 15, or ...

(most automatically say 14)

Varsity is a totally different subject. The handbook implies that Varsity somehow offers more adventure than Boy Scouting, and I don't agree.

BDPT00

"If you don't like it, tough."

"Ridiculous technicality."

"lol"

I guess that solves that.

I obviously have no idea what I'm talking about.

BDPT00

prairie,

I read it the same way, although the 11 year old and the AOL are redundant (it's been a while, but didn't one need to be 10.5 to earn an AOL?)

The punchline for me is that the 5th grader needs to be 10. That's buried in the rest of the sentence (with the "ands" and "ors" and no commas). I can see a 9 year old 5th grader thinking that he's eligible. Is he? I don't think so, but it's not perfectly clear.

BDPT00

I know what I read, thank you.

All of the adults in the lodge and the SE don't have the right to approve an exception.

Allow me to quote: The national OA Committee does not authorize any form of honorary membership in the Order.

BDPT00

In some other threads, we've been discussing things that might be "gray."

I see the Joining Requirements (page 17) that way: "Be a boy who is 11 years old, or one who has completed the fifth grade or earned the Arrow of Light Award and is at least 10 years old, but is not yet 18 years old."

My question regards 5th grade and 10 years old. I don't find the statement clear. I think I know what it's saying, but I don't think it's written well.

Then we look at page 15 regarding Venturing age requirements: "for young men and women who are about 14 through 20 years of age." I know what the requirments are, but most people don't, and this doesn't help. (most people think its age 14)

And then there's Varsity. Clear as mud.

BDPT00

Arranging the book by skills is pretty good. The knots and lashing section won't win any awards for clarity. If someone tried to learn the "alternative method" for the bowline by looking at the book, they'd be totally lost. The rest of the knots are pretty good (although the picture from #1 to #2 for the square knot won't help anybody either. The twisting of the loose end for the beginning of lashing isn't explained, nor is it necessary, and the diagonal lashing is demonstrated on a 90 degree angle.

I suppose we could be critical of little things all day long (and I'll start another thread in that regard), but overall, I think the new book is terrific. Using illustrations from old Handbooks adds a great deal to this one. It's a good book, and it feels more "adventurous." I think the kids will like it.

BDPT00

What is MM?

I see no "gray" in eligibilty, so the induction of a 19 year old non-First Class Scouter is totally inappropriate. The reaction or justification to this gray area would be no different than allowing a non-citizen (although very award of the issues ... more aware than most eligible voters) to vote in a political election.

This has nothing to do with being worthy or capable. It has everything to do with eligibilty, which happens to be black and white.

BDPT00

"Can she be in the OA, IMHO she should be but it really does not matter since females have been part of the OA for years"

OK, so I've read this several times, and it still makes no sense. But even if it did, she's not eligible. Moot point.

BDPT00

Irsap,

I like your congratulations line.

The individual has to make a decision in this regard. New adult leaders are just as excited as the boys to receive some recognition. That first knot is an important one. After a while, maturity sets in for most, but not all. I'm sure it's those certain people that BadenP and others are referring to. As we age, we learn that many times "less is more." Compare two well-know generals: Patton and Eisenhower. One played it up, and the other played it down. We have the same in Scouting. Was either one wrong? No. Personal preference. Both looked good in a uniform ... as do we, when we wear it properly.

BDPT00

"Regarding OA eligibility, as I understand the requirements she simply could not be put on the ballot with other youth members."

*** Correct. Doesn't meet rank requirement.

"She could later be nominated by the troop committe as an adult candidate where the rank requirement does not apply."

*** Also correct, if "later" means 21 years old.

"I personally have never had to deal with the question of someone between 18 and 21, of either gender, regarding OA eligibility. Regardless of gender, I would consult with the OA lodge advisor."

*** Non-First Class Scouts between 18 and 21 are eligible to vote, but cannot be on the ballot. ASMs of that age who meet the requirements are eligible as youth.

BDPT00

Troop Guide wouldn't be appropriate. I'm guessing you meant an ASM advisor for a patrol.

OA? Not eligible until 21.

ASM at 18? Yes.

BDPT00

Give the uniform police a break. There's no foul. If someone chooses to tell you you're uniform is incorrect, pay not attention. You won't find anything in the Insignia Guide telling you you're wrong, and neither would they (we), so whoever might say such a thing is not part of the uniform police. Don't kid yourself. Your knots are fine ... just don't wear them backwards.

BDPT00

BadenP,

I'm in disagreement with your position. You're claiming that someone who wears a uniform is bragging or being just plain silly. I would assert that someone wearing a uniform is exercising one of our methods as well as setting an example.

You state that one would obviously be primarily registered in the position of "highest rank." Where did that notion come from? If there is a "rank" structure for positions, please put these in order for me: Scoutmaster, Den Leader, Assistant Scoutmaster, Pack Committee Chair, Unit Commissioner, District Commissioner, Council Committee, National Committee, District Chair, Troop Advancement Chair, Charter Rep, OA Chapter Adviser, Venturing Advisor. I'd be very curious how you would think this is obvious, and how you would "rank" them.

BDPT00

Reading the last few postings makes me think of Wood Badge beads for NYLT. There seems to be pretty strong feelings about the Eagle badge. Just for the sake of argument in relation to the Eagle... why not allow Gold Award Girl Scouts to wear the Eagle knot if they join BSA? Similarly, let's allow Venturers to achieve that knot up to age 21.

Why not? Tradition.

Why isn't "tradition" a good enough answer regarding the beads?

Not to start a new argument. Just something that occured to me as I was reading.

BDPT00

Two posters said "public humiliation."

Some imply that there's a line to cross somewhere before it's called hazing.

Not long ago we had postings about drinking urine.

I'd really like to know where that line is. I think that when it involves our Scouts, "public humiliation" has already crossed it. Drinking urine is public humiliation, too, but that's obviously crossed that line.

Is announcing delinquent dues public humiliation? I wasn't there, so I don't know, but it sounds like it might have been. Doesn't sound "Friendly" and "Courteous" to me.

Sorry to be such a wimp, but how does a little good-old-fashioned public humiliation become a good thing in Scouting?

BDPT00

The crew will continue their trek, and the funeral will await their return.

BDPT00

Eagle92,

Your point is well taken, but with an outfit this big there has to be a standard somewhere. Fact is, this guy hasn't been trained to be an ASM. When I was a Wood Badge trained Scoutmaster, and I went back to Cubbing to be with my younger son, there is no way that I should be considered trained to be a Den Leader (I wasn't). Same thing when I became a Commissioner. Being an Eagle Scout is irrelevant. So is Wood Badge training. One more common example... when an NYLT staffer turns 18 and becomes an ASM, he's untrained. He's got plenty of training, and it's troop-related, but the fact is he's had no adult leader training. Time to change patches, and learn how this program is run from an adult perspective. BSA emphasizes leader-specific training, and that makes sense to me.

BDPT00

Thanks, Ideadoc.

Your comment regarding youth staff being present or not raises some interesting questions. This is exactly why I'm asking, and I'm wondering if anyone has done this yet. Personally, I think presenting Wood Badge beads is the wrong recognition. Wood Badge beads have meant the same thing for many decades, and now they'll mean something else. It wasn't my decision, and my opinion wasn't sought. We work with the hand we're dealt, so I'm trying to find out the best way to handle it.

I appreciate your input.

Let's see more. Anybody done this yet?

Thanks, BDPT00

"This piece "(and dare I say not enough concern to get fully trained?)" says everything.

Elitism. And you wonder why many of us just shake our heads at your little religion you call WB."

I went back to reread what I wrote, too, and I recall the mood I was in when I wrote it. I asked a simple question (which nobody has yet tried to answer), and people took it as an opportunity to attack Wood Badge beads. That annoyed me, so I responded. Sorry if that sounded elite. I was writing to those who take great pride in not attending Wood Badge. There are obvious extremes on both ends of the spectrum. This wasn't intended to create an argument on critter-sploitation (how's that for a word?). I know where you're coming from, and it annoys me, too.

That being said, can we get back to the subject of awarding Wood Badge beads for a non-Wood Badge activity, and how they should be presented? The decision to do so is not mine. I just want to know how it should be done. Has it been done, and how?

Thank you, BDPT00

OK, so let me try again...

I'm wondering if anyone has presented beads yet. How was it done, and in front of whom?

I'm seeking suggestions.

It's interesting. Last year, most of the comments were favorable. Now that the time is here, there are negative feelings about it. The comments so far seem to state that beads are the wrong recognition item, or that any recognition at all is just fluff, so who cares? I dismiss comments from non-Wood Badgers. There's no vested interest in beads (and dare I say not enough concern to get fully trained?), and therefore no real understanding of their significance or tradition.

At any rate, my question has to do with ceremony. There's always some sort of ceremony when presenting beads. How would you handle presenting beads for NYLT?

Thanks, BDPT00

OK, so here we are a year later. Has anyone done this yet? I'm looking for suggestions regarding how to do it. We have a few adults who are close, and we're trying to figure out the best way to present the beads (Who is the audience? When and where?).

It doesn't seem that there's a specific sequence to the requirements. Some need to attend EDGE. Two need to attend the CD conference. One will be a TG at the next WB. Any thoughts on that as well?

Thanks, BDPT00

Somehow, I'm not surprised.

BDPT00