EmberMike

Ryan has said in the media that he believes in God. Where did you get the idea that he's doesn't? And even if he did say that he didn't "believe in God", that's not grounds for dismissal from the BSA. There are a lot of accepted beliefs that qualify for scouting membership, some of which don't include the belief in God. The word "God" in the oath is used to represent spirituality and faith of many kinds.

There is a lot to this story, probably much more than we know right now. Like how this guy lived to entirely different lives, one that his friends and family saw and in which he was loving, compassionate, caring, charitable, pretty much everything a scout should embody. And then there was the other life, his Silk Road persona in which he was capable of anything, including murder-for-hire. Certainly the evidence against him is significant. But I'd wait to judge this whole story before we know more. I suspect we'll be finding out that this all goes far deeper than we could imagine right now.

I actually really like the new book cover designs. Were kids ever into the cartoonish mascots? I suspect not much. These wood-burned badge images are much better, and they reinforce the idea of scouting being an adventure.

I hate to nitpick but there is a difference between athiest and agnostic, so I doubt that kid is both. Technically, agnosticism can still still be interpreted as falling within the requirements of Scouting, at least by some definitions of it which can vary from person to person and what they believe. Some agnostics believe in a higher power, they just have doubts about the specifics of that power or that the organized religions have the story right. This is where I think kids unintentionally run into trouble. They may think they're athiest if they don't believe in, for example, the biblical definition of God. But they may still believe in something, be it a higher power that is defined in another religion or something that they can't quite put their finger on. It could even be just a general sense of spirituality, a closeness with nature, or a belief in some general essence greater than ourselves. None of which defines them as being athiest. But they'll go and tell their friends or fellow scouts that they don't believe in God and yet no one is sure of what they really mean when they say that. Often the scout himself doesn't know what he means. Tough to deny anyone advancement or membership based on what could very often be just teenage confusion and questioning.

Question for those using the square neckers: Under or over collar? If you're using the square neckers out of tradition, traditionally they'd be work over the collar, a look that is pretty uncommon in the BSA today.

I think it depends on your definitions of "practical" and "useful." Also depends on exactly what you think a square necker might be useful for. It has some first-aid uses and other emergency situation applications. But for the most part the usefulness of it compared to a triangle necker is based in unusual circumstances. When, by comparison, the example you use of pockets being sewn shut, that's an issue of usefulness that I think could play out on a daily basis. As a scout or as a leader, those pockets are very useful for various flat objects, papers, Totin cards, blue cards, etc. I think the utility of pockets is far greater and far more frequently used than that of a square necker. So in this case, I have to stick with my opinion that I'd prefer everyone look a little neater in uniform vs. having a slightly more useful (in fairly unlikely situations) neckerchief.

Whoa... some of these stories seem like the plot of a soap opera episode! Cheating scandals, above-the-law SMs, stealing money, crazy stuff. The rule violations and youth protection violations drive me crazy hearing about stuff like that. Especially now, coming off a year of some bad press about past abuses. We can do a heck of a lot to protect kids, but not unless everyone is following the rules. Such a waste to see leaders or entire troops go down just because someone didn't want to do it by the book, when "by the book" isn't hard to do anyway.

Do a lot of units do Camp Cards? I keep hearing about them but have yet to see one in person myself. Is it a popular fundraiser?

Just wondering if there is any data on this or any opinions. From the perspective of the individual scout, is there anything to suggest that kids do better in scouting (or stick with it more often) based on whether their parent(s) is/are participatory parents, unit leaders, non-involved parents, etc.? I'm thinking about this more in terms of kids with at least one parent/guardian in their unit serving as a leader in some capacity. Are those kids at all more inclined than others to want out of scouting because they are around a parent more often than they'd probably want to be, especially in their teen years? Or does this not make a difference in scouting since adult leaders are supposed to back off whenever possible and let the patrol method work? Anyone have any info or experiences on how kids feel about their parents' level of involvement, and how it impacts them?

What always perplexes me about the religion component is that the BSA actually makes it really easy to pass this requirement even if you don't believe in God. "God" in the BSA is a pretty loose term, and it encompasses all sorts of spiritual entities and belief systems, including some that don't recognize a particular god. Sadly I don't think a lot of kids fully believe what they say when they renounce God or religion, or likewise there are plenty of leaders who will not explore such a statement to determine exactly what it is that a kid believes. There are a lot of options between believing in God and believing in nothing that still meet the BSA requirements. Over 38 different faiths are included in the religious awards, and I'm sure far more belief systems would at least qualify for the religious/spiritual requirements of membership and advancement.

Regardless of how anyone feels about the core issue of gays in scouting, I think we can all agree that it's pretty messed up that he was allowed to finish all of the requirements before finally being denied at the end. As I understand it, he came out before he was done. So this SM watched him go through the rest of the process, the service project, etc., and then refused to sign off. I agree with Basementdweller, the SM should have grown a back bone and stopped this earlier, if they were so opposed to him reaching Eagle. Not sure what they were thinking, maybe that he'd fail on his own or just quit or something.

I thought that even under the old rules Ryan would have still been eligible for a Board of Review even though he turned 18 a few years ago, but upon closer reading it would appear not. From the 2013 Guide to Advancement: "It is possible for those who completed the requirements for the Eagle Scout rank in their youth, but never received it, to obtain credentials necessary for acquiring it. If a board of review was not held, and the individual met the BSA membership eligibility rules in effect at the time, then a board of review may be requested. In any case, all requirements must have been completed before age 18." So even though he did complete the requirements and could still have been eligible for a Board of Review even years later, the fact that he did not meet the membership eligibility rules in place at the time would prevent him from ever getting the Eagle rank. Guess I could have answered my own question, but thanks everyone for the comments anyway.

Ryan had all of the requirements done. Isn't there something in the rules about the Board of Review being possible after the 18th birthday if all of the other reqs are already completed prior to turning 18?

Now that the new policy is in effect, has anyone heard anything about the kids who were denied rank advancement? Are those ranks being honored now that the policy has changed? I did a search on Ryan Andresen (finished Eagle reqs but SM wouldn't sign off) but couldn't find any news updates. I remember reading about a few others, also. Just wondering what has happened with them.

Square neckers are definitely more useful, but they can also be more difficult to wear neatly. The BPSA uses them, but from group photos it looks like a lot of kids (especially younger ones) have a hard time with them. It's twice the amount of fabric, so it is harder to get it all neat and tidy. I have one, but I'm personally not a fan. Despite the more limited uses of the triangle one, I still prefer it.

In our pack we present them to to the boys at the Den meeting, they are announced at the pack meeting. But it is a more personal presentation at the den level.. If you follow the requirements for the pins they should be much harder to earn. I'm the CC so I do my best to make sure that they are earning pins for actually doing the requirements. I think the pins help the boys transition to the Boy Scouts where they have to prove they know the material to earn the Merit Badge. I also think that the Tigers and Wolfs really enjoy getting bling, the webelos are too cool for loops :-) Webelos should be too cool for loops, especially the Webelo 2s. I would hope that at that point they are focusing more on skills they'll need to transition into the Troop and get the Scout rank.

What a ridiculous comment. No one is saying that all things taught in Scouting need not be represented in the program because they can be learned elsewhere. Like I said above, things that have nothing to do with the intent and purpose of scouting should possibly be removed from the program. Baden Powell has had to be turning in his grave over the years as we've introduced new awards for things like video games and frisbee.

JoeBob it doesn't help the boys to teach them that some kids' parents aren't worthy leaders just because they're gay.

I'm not a fan of making knives seem like anything more than what they are: Simple tools. I worry that these fake knives make the real ones seem far more dangerous and far more intriguing than they should be. If kids are introduced to knives with guided supervision and instruction, there is no need to use fake stuff. I actually wish we were going the other way with this. Instead of teaching kids on fake knives, we should be using real fixed blade knives, stuff that is designed for carving and outdoor activities. They're actually safer for the kinds of things scouts use knives for.

Glad to see the belt loops go. They largely seem way too far outside of the scope of what scouting should be about. Video Games? Skateboarding? Kickball? Ultimate Frisbee? Those are things kids do outside of scouting, and there is nothing wrong with keeping those things where they belong, as extra curricular activities, academic activities, and sports. They don't need to be focusing on that stuff in the program, at least not to the extent that they have been where they are rewarded for participation. No one gets a Scouting award from the soccer team, the math club, etc. We don't need to reward kids for doing things that have nothing to do with the intent and purpose of scouting.

Glad to see companies still view the BSA policies as discriminatory. I was worried that lifting the ban on gay kids might be viewed as enough of a change to renew financial support. But the fact is that discrimination still exists, and it is good to see that companies like Lockeed still see that.

Hardly. At the very least this thread puts to rest the fear-mongering idea that was floating around that many units would lose sponsors and not be able to survive. It turns out that there are plenty of sponsoring opportunities for units that need them, and units that lost them have been able to recover quickly. Sure this doesn't tell the whole story, but it's an interesting bit of information from one area that speaks to how the policy is and isn't affecting units.

Well this isn't over for a lot of folks. Gay parents still can't be leaders in their own kids' units because the BSA still openly discriminates against gay adults. I'm not satisfied with this yet, and I hope others feel the same way. We are not at a point yet where we can move on.