Rooster7

An atheist is a human being like the rest of us, as is the homosexual. We all have the potential to do good or bad. Are homosexuals bad? No more than anyone else who refuses to recognize his sin. No more than the adulterer who thinks he's justified. Is homosexuality bad? In mind, it is definitely bad. In fact, I must assume that BSA feels the same way since they describe homosexuals as inappropriate role models. Likewise, I have serious reservations about any individual who refuses to recognize God. If that's extreme, then the world has decayed a lot faster than I thought possible.

What is more impotant to me is the persons character, which is not dependent on their belief in God. I definitely disagree with that statement. By the world's standards of what is "good character", I suppose few folks would argue with you. However, to me, a man of good character knows and loves God.

Or did he say... Very wise, Old Grey Eagle IS.

Merlyn, but Rooster has avoided even criticizing Schmidt's statement. Look at my post on page 9 of this thread (it's addressed in a response to kwc57). It may not be what you want to hear, but I did criticize the statement. However, I have no good reason to believe that Mr. Schmidt ever said it. I only have the word of a man who stakes claim to a value system created by man and based on the relative morality of the day. To be honest, I'm not sure what to believe, about you or the hypothetical man in Mr. Schmidt's statement. You and he maybe the most honest people in the world, or not. What do I know about you or he to formulate an opinion? The only things that I do know are this - you both think God is a figment of people's imagination. And apparently, you both feel that mankind can define right and wrong without any insight from God (since he doesn't exist). That's a pretty strange combination of beliefs. So, collectively, the same people who put their faith in an imaginary being are able to work with others to determine a moral code that is righteous. Interesting concept. The "Scouting For All" websiteyeah right, now that's an unbiased source that you can trust (yes, my tongue is not only in my cheek, I may have caused a puncture wound). Tjhammer, When did Scouting become a "faith-based organization"? The day BSA stated that boy scouts had a "Duty to God". I guess that was about 92 years ago. The phrase "faith-based" can be treated generically. It doesn't mean one faith rules the day. It simply means that the organization encourages it members to drawn up their faith. Bob correctly notes several BSA references where the phrase "value-based" is used. That's all fine and well, but the BSA position statement uses the term "faith-based". Either way, what's the point? If it is "faith-based", how would it change anything, within or outside of Scouting?

Acco40, I believe Merlyn's position is that you can't have it both ways. You can't claim the BSA is a private organization and can set its own membership rules AND receive government support As Bob has noted already, that's a false premise. Hundreds of private organizations receive support from the government. Do you consider Planned Parenthood to be a public organization? Rooster, if Merlyn thinks he is right, he has every right to post. The fact that the majority feel one way or the other does not matter. I never said he didn't have a right to post here. I questioned his motives. This seems to be a pointless exercise. It particularly seems pointless for Merlyn since he's not changing the opinion of anyone on this board. kwc57, Let's be honest and clear here. This statement was an opinion made by one Scouter to another during a training course. People need to quit giving the impression that this is an official policy from BSA headquarters. Excellent point. Furthermore, "high ranking" or not, the ramblings of one person does not define an organization like BSA. If this quote can be attributed to Mr. Schmidt, then I agree that it is at best, unfair. At worst, it is bigoted. Yet, if true, beyond criticizing this man personally, there's not much one can or should say. You can stomp your feet and point out the man's flawed character. But to accuse BSA of promoting his views, is just as unfair and/or bigoted. DeLukas, Who in this thread indicated that we should hate anyone? That accusation seems to be out of left field. I can reject people's beliefsin fact I can reject the company of other people, without hating them. When a Christian church teaches that it is a sin to ignore God, is that preaching hate? If a pastor points to Bible verses, which condemns atheists and homosexuals, is that preaching hate? God passes judgment not man. Now, you may not like the idea that God passes judgment, but that does not make Him any less real or righteous. Some people think love and righteousness (or God's wrath) are mutually exclusive concepts. I beg to differ. God is righteous. We need to approach Him as the Holy God that He is. But He is love as well. That love (personified by Christ's sacrifice on the cross) enables us to approach Him despite our sin. When one is on his deathbed, there will be no more intellectual debates. There will be no one to impress with our quick wit or finely tuned rebuttals. There will only be truth. We will all know that truth eventually. Unfortunately, we will not be able to go back change anything. Now is the time to think about that day. Now is the time to think about whether or not we want to know and serve God. Merlyn, apparently has made up his mind. I pray you don't following his path.

Merlyn, Just for the sake of argument, let's say you're right. What's the point of posting here? You're obviously spitting into the wind. The vast majority of posters on this forum not only disagree, but they passionately disagree. What do you think the end result of your postings will be? Do you honestly think you'll change enough minds that you'll bring about change within BSA? Or, do you simply want to irritate people who disagree with you? I must say I have drawn the conclusion that it's the latter. If you think you're exposing us as a bunch of bigots, then so be it (people can believe whatever they want). Regardless, may I suggest that you move on to something else - perhaps something more productive and nobler?

Bigotry against people who refuse to believe in and/or recognize God? Hmmm. So, if a group or individual does not want to associate with another group or individual that believes in and/or does something distasteful to them, we must label that bigotry? So, for example, if I don't won't to associate with people who organize and participate in orgies, I am guilty of bigotry? How about Satan worshipers? Do we have to let them in too? I'm sorry. Your argument doesn't hold water in a free society. BSA is free to associate with whoever they deem to be appropriate. They want faith in God to be a part of the program. If others fail to see how not recognizing God is wrong, the fault lies within them, not the BSA requirement.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

DeLukas, Your last response was intelligently and politely stated. I felt your original argument was poorly presented and slightly vindictive. Upon further review, my opinion of you has gone up several notches. Regardless, I am in strong disagreement with your stance. BSA was created as a character building organization. It's founders, and in all likeliness a vast majority of its members, feel that a faith in God is extremely vital to developing and maintaining that character. You may disagree. But, as an Eagle Scout, you should not be surprised when Scouters and Scouts are dismayed and put off by your stance. And, please remember, BSA is a private organization. The government did not create us. Our charter is not to serve all of America's citizens. Volunteers with strong principles created BSA. The majority may not always be right, but in this case, I am certain that they are. Do not take this as an insult...only an observation. For some reason, I get the impression that you are very young, perhaps 19 or 20, like Mr. Lambert. If so, that doesn't take away anything from your opinion. I have a son that age and I respect his views. However, if you are that age, let me suggest that you hang around some older guys as a fellow Scouter and truly get to know them. You may find that we're not as legalistic as you have suggested. Furthermore, I discovered that when you have children of your own, those old self-righteous farts suddenly become a lot wiser (not that I'm one of them). I guess what I'm trying to say is - Keep an open mind to more than just contemporary wisdom. Sometimes the things we rebel against are the very things we should be embracing. This is what I have found to be true in life.

acco40, Okay - I'm guilty (of using the "Get over it" phrase). I must admit it does have a certain degree of disdain. So, I offer my ap... apol... apolo... apogolies (sorry, that was a little hard to get out). However, let me reuse another phrase that's very appropriate for your follow-on comments. Let's be real. Are you really trying to compare Jim Crow laws to having a faith in God? Let's do a quick review here. Jim Crow laws encouraged discrimination and bigotry. Faith in God means acknowledging and respecting the creator of the universe. Yeah, I can see how you could get confused. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to see a surgeon about removing my tongue from the side of my cheek - It may be stuck there for life. Seriously, your comparison is beyond comprehension.

DeLukas, Unless you are going to say the Boy Scouts should be a Christian only organization. That was a huge leap. So basically, you're saying that BSA's "belief in God" requirement is really some sort of covert policy for Christians? That doesn't seem to be an intelligent reading of the policy. It seems more like something one would say when they have no real response. In other words, when you don't have a substantive argument, accuse your opponent of bigotry or demean his character in some other way. In reference to the Judeo-Christian pretence or debate, what exactly are the accusers saying here? Is someone implying that some folks want BSA to hang a sign that says "Christians and Jews Only"? You know, since BSA has millions of members, it's a little difficult to defend that accusation. If you're suggesting that a large group exists that is wielding it's clout in order to obtain such a goal, then whoever is making the accusation should provide some concrete evidence. On the other hand, if someone is implying that the Judeo-Christian value system has permeated the BSA ranks, I say, "So what?" Which of those specific values would cause anyone harm? Very few of the world's faiths, if any, would argue with such a value system. No doubt, someone - probably Merlyn will make a case that a religious value system is the same as forced religion. I strongly disagree. Regardless, if someone wants to make the case, please tell me how a specific Judeo-Christian value might cause a non-Jew or a non-Christian some heartburn. Is it the "Thou shall not murder" or the "Thou shall not covet" thing that creates such a conflict? Please, let's be real. Lastly, to those who stubbornly refuse to recognize reality, I just want to reiterate - The BSA "belief in God" requirement exists. BSA has maintained its stance for decades. It's not going to change. Get over it. You make the assumption that I am not a Christian. Never said you weren't, unless you're trying to tell me that you have no sins and/or have no desire to be repentant. Judging by this comment and others, it is obvious to me that you like to take people's words and twist them to your advantage. Let me warn you, the posters on this board are pretty bright and they're not going to fall prey to those kinds of silly games.

I value all human life. However... I don't value all Eagle Scouts any more than I value all Christians or all [fill in the blank]. I value what an Eagle Scout is supposed to be. Just like I value what it means to be a Christian. If someone is awarded the Eagle rank, but that person does not represent the values of Scouting, then the honor has no meaning. If someone claims to be a Christian, but does not show repentance for a sinful lifestyle, then one must wonder about his self-professed faith. The Eagle Scout award is not presented for accomplishments done in the past. It's supposed to be a proclamation of that Scout's character and ability. So, when Mr. Lambert or Mr. Kelly demeans a fundamental principle of Scouting - "Duty to God", I doubt that they can truly call themselves Eagle Scouts. They have as much claim to that honor, as a non-repentant Christian has for salvation.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

Ed, OGE, ScoutParent, Compass, and ASM7 - I agree with your posts too. Hopefully, there will always be more Scouts and Scouters that embrace BSA's values (boys only, heterosexual role models, belief in God, etc.) then reject them. If the vocal minority is given their way, BSA will not be the organization that we love today. If you're passionate about your beliefs, and BSA as a faith based organization, then we need to stand strong and defend our position upon every encroachment. If not, they (those that oppose our values) will eventually win control of BSA as an organization. Sadly, and even more disturbing, this has already happen to many churches. The Church (the body of believers that hold up Christ as their Lord and Savior) was once fairly united. 40 years ago, even Catholics and Protestants, agreed on many fundamental points - the Holy Trinity, Christ as Lord and Savior, etc. At that time, Christians would never have debated the immorality of homosexuality. It would have been an absurd exercise. My point is, if you don't defend what you believe, others will take advantage of that passivity and corrupt people and organizations that may be dear to you. So thanks for being one of the defenders of truth. As corny as that last comment may sound, I mean it from the bottom of my heart. Merlyn, I knew it wasn't going to be too long before you jumped in here. Can't say I'm happy to hear from you. I pray God opens your eyes. If he does, you could be a powerful witness. You are relentless, if nothing else. Perhaps one day, you will share a bond and find company with the Apostle Paul. Grace and Peace to you.

Le Voyageur, With BSA membership requirements being explicit the issue is really black and white, and simple to decide. I agree. What we are not hearing is the full story. Consider that in all of our lives we hit crossroads on the road to enlightenment, whatever that may be. I don't think that this is niether an accident or a fluke. I'm not sure of your meaning behind these words. If you're saying, we do not know what the future holds. This young man may come to a different conclusion one day. I prayerfully agree again. If you believe in an all powerful and knowing God, then we have to ask ourselves that all important question of why didn't He (or She) provide us with perfect insight, as well as perfect wisdom from the start. I use to ponder this questionI use to ask myself why. Then I realized God is the Father, and his wisdom is beyond our comprehension. I think Romans 9:19-21 says it best: One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? It is my feelings that we are placed in a position of constant questioning; and a constant requirement to make choices to how we should live our lives which will determine the type of person we become. If we make good, and wise choices, then we become more enlightened and move ahead to greater understandings. If we don't then we're fated to make the same bad decisions again and again. I disagree. This seems to imply that we undergoing some kind of spiritual evolution. We can make wise choices and still have corrupt hearts. In fact, I'm convinced that our hearts will remain corrupt until we, as individuals, recognize our need for a Savior. Established religions guide most believers through periods of doubt, but the basic truth is this, we come in alone, and we go out alone. This is not true if you know Jesus. Christ sent His Holy Spirit to dwell in us. Our only constant is our own personal relationship with our Creator. If belonging to a church or temple, or whatever offers you solace, then that's great. But the fact that any of us levy questions about the religions (or lack of religion) that we tend to is not a bad thing. Perhaps the questioning is in fact the crossroad. Some people feel guilty about questioning their faith, I'm not one of them. My Creator gave me a brain, and the ability to decide my own destiny, and that is exactly what I have endeavored to do. I agree. I believe God wants us to examine our faith regularly. I don't think we have to doubt what we've already examined and found to be true. If we had been meant to march in lock step, then we would not of been given the ability to question the marching orders. I agree. But I don't necessarily agree with your conclusion. Perhaps God just wants us to come to Him as individuals. He wants to have a personal relationship with each one of us. If we all thought the same way, and acted the same way, what would be the point? He created us as individuals and he wants us to come Him as individuals. Yet, each of us can come to the same conclusion (or the same God) and still be individuals. I think that it is healthy to look deeply into our core beliefs from time to time, and cast out those beliefs that are contrary to what we want to be. It's the power of one. Rather than "cast out those beliefs that are contrary to what we want", I think we should cast out those beliefs that we know are contrary to what God wants. If we don't use God as a guidepost, then it opens the door to all sorts of immoral thinking. I.e., a racist can justify his beliefs by using the "what we want to be" litmus test. Each of us has to be self truthful, self determining, then use that as a building block as to how we will be embraced by others on our road of becoming. Yes, I think we need to keep our minds open for the truth. But, the truth is external to us. In the end we are, and will be our choices.... I agree, with a caveat. I believe God gave us free will and we are all invited to come to Him. But ultimately, His grace will enable us to make the right choices.

aneaglemom, I have a suggestion for your slide show music. Ask your son. No sarcasm intended. For my sons' Eagle ceremony (I have two sons who will get this honor next year), we're planning to use some Christian music that we feel reflects our boys lives and their attitude. "Let Mercy Lead" by Rich Mullins and "Shine" by Newsboys. One song that Camp Rodney (North East, MD) uses for their end of camp slide show is - Good Riddance by Greenday. I like this as opposed to the Boy Scout songs because its more personalized (plus a lot more upbeat). Listen to some music with your kid and see if you can find something special (just for your son). Just a thought...

What if Mr. Lambert practiced a faith that required virgin sacrifices? Would you respect his beliefs then? Exactly where do you draw the line? I know you want to demonstrate how open-minded you are, but let's not get ridiculous. We are not required to respect every person or even every faith. If you define respect for every person as respecting his or her legal rights to exist, I can agree. If you define respect for every faith as respecting the right of others to embrace it, I can agree. However, beyond that, I'm not sure how much I'm going to respect someone or their beliefs. I trust that reasonable people understand BSA's intentions. If you want to parse every phrase that BSA puts forth, that's your right, but I'm convinced that I understand their intent and it's not as you purport it to be. In short, to avoid confusion, BSA could serve itself and others well if they substituted the word respect with tolerate. It may not be as warm and friendly, but I'm convinced, it accurately reflects their true intent.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

To me, if you do not respect an atheist's beliefs, you do not follow the Boy Scout Oath. If I'm guilty of anything, it's - not respecting the "unbelief" of others. Classifying atheism as a religion or as some kind of faith is a classic Orwellian misuse of the language. The truth is I respect many people despite what they believe (whether we're talking about religion, politics, or anything else). So what does respect mean? Does it mean I have to show approval of other people's religious beliefs and practices? No. Does it mean, when others are around, we have to avoid demonstrations of our own religious beliefs and practices? No. It simply means we tolerate one another. At least, that's all it should mean. If BSA wants it to mean more than that, then they are asking folks to ignore their own faith in order to make others feel more welcomed. I don't think that's what they're asking us to do. Nevertheless, BSA has made it plain to all its members and potential new members that taking the Scout Oath means you believe in God, and reciting the Scout Law means you are reverent. No, quietly omitting those parts is NOT staying true to the oath or your beliefs. It IS hiding who you are and what you really believe in. Mr. Lambert should be embarrassed by his actions. The fact that he waited to make his stand when he was no longer a Scout, and more telling - after his Eagle award, also says a lot about his character, or lack thereof. (This message has been edited by Rooster7)

To be more blunt, I don't respect atheists. I respect their right to live, breath, and enjoy God's world like the rest of us. Yet, I don't respect their rebelliousness, against what's plain to see. God does exist. If they want to form a club, so be it, but don't force that rebellion on the rest of us.

Try this one instead http://www.thesunlink.com/news/2002/october/1029eaglescout.html ASM7 had a dot on the end which invalidates the URL acco40, I am familiar with the "good works" verses "faith" debate, but I fail to see how it has anything to do with this boy. I also fail to see how "not respecting this boy's aims or methods" cheapens my belief in the Scout Oath. You have not drawn a valid correlation here.

eisely, Do you really miss Merlyn that much? Another example where Bob White and I agree (not that he cares - I know Bob wants that qualifier made clear. )... Interestingly, Mr. Lambert refused to lie because it wasn't Scout-like. Yet, he must have lived a lie for six or seven years. Furthermore, he "glossed over" the religious principle section of his adult application. Where I come from, that's a form of lying too. I stand by BSA and the belief (the same belief that BSA has held for more than 90 years) that a Scout must believe in God to become a true man of character. I'm just sad that it's become so watered down over the years that belief in "Mother Nature" qualifies. As far as I'm concerned, if his entire troop dropped out in protest (as it appears that they are threatening to do), I say it's probably for the betterment of their council. BSA doesn't need troops or individuals among its ranks that are opposed to their goals. So Bob, is the article right? Mr. Lambert cannot lose his Eagle status? Duty to God, Country, and FamilyI pray BSA will remain firm in its stance. (This message has been edited by Rooster7)

Actually, what I said was, the merit badge counselor should, "verify his work more than anything else." That does not mean he doesn't do anything else. And a major part of verifying would be to review areas where the Scout has demonstrated a weakness. I agree with your example. A Scout should understand the ramifications for overdrawing a checking account and/or how easy it is to lose track of your money if you're careless about ATM withdraws. However, I contend that the Scout should have a pretty good education in this area before he comes to you to have his blue card signed. That is to say, he is responsible for knowing the material in the merit badge booklet. Also, one of his requirements is to visit a financial institution or bank. Furthermore, he should be consulting his parents about how to save, etc. My point being, the merit badge counselor's job is to ensure that the boy understands the material. While he may need to provide some instruction or lecture, the Scout has other resources available and should be using them.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

I'll tell you what Bob...I'll stop posting to this thread if you stop posting to this thread. Judging by your last, I have to assume you've run out of things to say.

Bob White, I never claimed to know more about the program, just an uncanny ability to read the materials and follow the methods, a skill shared by tens of thousands of other scouters. Some of who responded to this string before I did and whose input I agreed with, and yet, you chose to single me out for your sarcasm. You really know how to turn something on its head. My initial response to this thread was directed toward a post by sst3rd, not you. In fact, it did not address a single comment that you had made. Only after you made a post, which countered several my statements, did I direct any comments your way. Im sorry if you feel singled out, but I was merely defending my position. I find it rather ironic (if not hypocritical) that you would accuse me of singling you out when in fact you were the first to do so to me. But why can't you leave the personal comments about me out of it and still make your point? Bob, Bob, BobAre you looking into a mirror? Please. If Im guilty of making personal comments or innuendo, then the powers-to-be can give me 20 years to life, but theyd have to give you the electric chair.

Bob, you may well know the program better than me. In fact, you probably know it better than Baden-Powell. I never said you didn't...But I don't think daks68 was asking, "Who knows BSA better?" Yet, that's a little difficult to tell given your response. As for my advice, I stand by my first response. daks68, you're not ruining the program. Many troops practice this. It's matter of moderation and some common sense. By the way, just for clarification, I'm not alone in my opinion, despite Bob White's claim.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

The troop meeting serves multiple functions using a series of short segments and following a monthly theme. The troop meeting provides a catalyst for all other activities. It is where scouts learn and teach skills as a patrol, practice leadership, plan campouts and activities, compete against other patrols, meet people from the community, and learn to run their own program through adult guidance and self-evaluation. An occasional merit badge session on the side, or even as the focal point does not have to prevent any of the aforementioned activities. It may delay them, but it doesn't have to preclude those things from ever happening. One reason that troop meetings being used for merit badge programs not a supported method of scouting is that it breaks up the patrol. What if the patrol leaders spend "several weeks" in merit badge classes, who leads the patrol? That's a problem most PLC's could figure out. But off the top of my head, how about utilizing your Assistant Patrol leader as a fill in. What if it's half the patrol that takes the merit badge classes? Bob, I thought you disliked folks asking "What if" all the time. Didn't you claim those hypothetical scenarios to be unrealistic and/or contrived to counter reasonable arguments? Regardless, the answer is the same as it was before. Present these problems to the PLC. If they can't find a good solution, then maybe the answer is to scrub the idea. On the other hand, maybe they find a good alternative. How does a scout learn to lead or how does the patrol involve everyone in decisions? You lost me on this one. If the PL is in a merit badge session, then for this period of time he would not be leading. However, he will have plenty of other opportunities. As for the second half of the question, the patrol can be involved at patrol meetingsAgain, I'm not sure what you're asking. In addition, group classes diminish a major growth experience that the MB program is designed to do. That is the character development that evolves from the scout having to contact the counselor, set and keep appointments and learn from an expert on a one-on-one basis (with an adult or youth buddy nearby). With a hundred or so merit badges to chose from, I doubt that any Scout will miss out on this opportunity. Most troops that offer group merit badges, only offer about two or three a year. A Scout only has to have this experience so many times (i.e., contacting the counselor, set and keep appointments, etc.). It's not rocket science. As for learning from an expert, the Scout should be learning most of the material on his own. The expert (merit badge counselor) is there to verify his work more than anything else. A very small part of completing a MB has to do with the related skill. Much of it is learning about career opportunities, the importance of continuing education, and making contacts in the community. These things can be accomplished in small groups as easily as individually. Even though the scouts in the PLC decided to do this, it is the responsibility of the scoutmaster to guide their activities along the program guidelines. The Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures manual as well as the SM Handbook, and all levels of Scoutmaster training advise against this type of program because it focuses only on advancement to the exclusion of many other equally important program methods and elements. I'm sure an explanation of the purpose and methods of the troop meeting and the merit badge program would have allowed the scouts to make a more informed decision. Note to Bob... When BSA advises one thing, and a troop decides to do another, it does NOT mean the program is ruined. It means the troop made a decision that worked best for them. No one is focusing on advancement to the exclusion of "important program methods and elements". This is a false assumption. They are simply offering some boys the opportunity to earn a merit badge. Our troop presents a well-rounded program. A few merit badge sessions held at some troop meetings is not going to hurt the program. I'd be willing to bet that those folks who answer the phones in Irving or at your local council would agree. NOT every piece of advice put out by BSA has to be followed to the letter. In many cases "advice" is simply that That's probably difficult for some folks to grasp. BSA recommendations do not have to be interpreted as if they're the Ten Commandments. May seem harsh to some, but more important is it's correct. That's just a wee bit arrogant for me.

Group teaching waters down the effectiveness of learning from the merit badge program. It entirely depends on the approach taken by the merit badge counselor. By providing the appropriate merit badge program, the worksheet problem simply doesn't exist. Scouts are encouraged at the right time to start earning merit badges. They start, because they "want" to. In our troop, the PLC asked if the troop leadership could arrange to work on two Eagle badges per year. We mutually agreed. The plan was agreed to as follows. The appropriate counselor or counselors will run merit badge sessions during the Troop meeting. These sessions will be open to those Scouts who signed up and agreed that they were interested in pursuing the badge. For the several week period that a badge is being offered, the troop leadership will provide an alternative program (non-merit badge related) to those Scouts not interested in pursing the slated merit badge. This year we worked on Emergency Preparedness and Personal Fitness. The Scout is making the effort. He won't lose his worksheet. But, when a bunch of Scouts are grouped together for some sort of merit badge, they have no vested interest, thus, they don't care if they lose a worksheet. Because the sessions were for those who signed up (i.e., no one was required to take the sessions), only those boys who "wanted" to do the work were there. If your troop had a similar arrangement, I would simply give the said Scouts a warning. Take home the worksheets and do them, or you will not be allowed to participate in the sessions. Change your Troop meetings and run the right program. A little harsh I think. If the boys are participating voluntarily, and an alternative exist for others, then I think the program is being run "right".