<p>The Eagle award represents the culmination of a long term commitment (a big EC). Achieving that level is placed on the App and weighed by holistic admissions. If a boy is unable to get the award after completing all the work SOLEY due to sexual orientation, why is it fair that colleges even consider the award? </p>
<p>(Note, I am NOT saying that the scouts should be forced to alter their internal requirements for granting the Eagle; I am saying that the fact that the award is not available to all boys SOLEY based upon sexual orientation means that open gay scouts who have spent a better part of their life in the scouts cannot show that they have reached the pinnacle of one of their chosen ECs. Such a result places those scouts at a disadvantage in the holistic admissions process - a result based only on their sexual orientation.)</p>
<p>I am wondering how a college should weigh the achievement where the achievements are not available to all those who completed the process. I am puzzling the fairness. </p>
<p>I also question the explanation that everything was completed but. . . . </p>
<p>First, where would someone put that in the app? The scout would need to devote precious space explaining (a) that the award’s prerequisites were satisfied and (b) the organization’s internal rules precluded awarding the Eagle. Who evaluates (a)? the adcoms? How? Perhaps the Boy Scouts can creat a document which confirms the completion of (a) and the denial of the badge due to the organization’s internal rules? (I think that would satisfy admissions.)</p>
<p>Second, a whole new level of explanations (which can overlap to excuses) would emerge from applicants who allegedly completed all the prerequisites for other prestigious awards but didn’t get the award. A further flurry of words added to a blizzard of information.</p>
<p>I think that holistic admissions value those who have overcome obstacles. In this case the obstacle cannot be overcome - regardless of desire, perseverance, passion (all things which seem to impress adcoms).</p>
<p>Becoming an Eagle Scout is an accomplishment, regardless of the Boy Scouts of America’s policies (may they soon be changed!) on gay scouts and leaders. </p>
<p>To disregard the accomplishment would unfairly hamstring boys who’ve put their time and effort into achieving it, solely because the adult leaders of the organization have a membership policy that’s controversial. In Maryland, there was a protracted lawsuit over the state’s refusal to award points for the victories of an accomplished paralympian, Tatyana McFadden, in high school track and field meets. Since she couldn’t be awarded points because of a decision made by the adults who ran the Maryland Public Secondary Schools Athletic Association, should other Maryland track champions have had their accomplishments discounted? I think not, and I think the same principle applies to Eagle Scouts.</p>
<p>I was never a particular fan of the Boy Scouts, and I have really come to disapprove of the organization as they have doubled down on their discriminatory membership practices. But for colleges to discount the accomplishments of Eagle Scouts on account of those policies would be an injustice that would compound, not correct, the unfairness of the Boy Scouts’ discriminatory membership policies.</p>
<p>Absolutely agree that it is not right to punish the innocents. But I think that an analogy of a physical disability and sexual orientation is imperfect (though I do understand that the point was why punish the kids when the rules are made by adults). </p>
<p>On the other hand, discounting the accomplishments because the playing field is openly not level may ultimately make for a level playing field.</p>
<p>It could, perhaps. But there are other ways to go about leveling the playing field, and in this case, at least, I do not think that the ends justify the means.</p>
<p>Moreover, we’re drifting from your original question, which was, is it fair for colleges to consider becoming an Eagle Scout an achievement when it is not available to all applicants? I think the answer is, absolutely. A girl can’t become an Eagle Scout, either. A Lutheran kid can’t become the national president of USY (the youth movement in Conservative Judaism). An Irish kid can’t win a Hispanic Heritage Youth Award. Not every award needs to be available to every person. Whether a college or university chooses to consider the size of the pool of possible recipients when determining the “value” of a particular award is, IMO, that college’s business.</p>
<p>Of course it’s fair! Just because an award is not open to all, doesn’t make it something that one cannot consider. Just how valuable that award is is up for discussion, but clearly some merit has been shown to obtain the award. To be eligible for the Eagle Scout rank, one must also be religious and believe in a higher power. Atheists cannot obtain that rank. But we’ve never heard complaints about that. Or that girls are not eligible for it.</p>
<p>The Boy Scouts are a private organization and as such they and they alone can decide who to confer the rank onto. Sure, adding in a lot of stipulations may devalue the award, but that’s subjective and certainly telling someone that they cannot list an award because not everyone can achieve it would result in some very short resumes…</p>
<p>stemit: a meager few colleges are examining info that students send in to determine their relative value to the college – sorry but this isn’t the proper venue for social pressure. Why should it end with BSA? Why not Young Republicans or Right to Life? Or NRA or Amnesty Intl or gay awareness groups?</p>