I see it as a sign of respect for life. At the same time, mine would be just one vote from the pastoral side of the house. Other opinions would not be wrong just because they disagreed with mine, imho. I cannot quote scripture to you that requires one or the other, however, there is typically a period of mourning, and I would not go against that period.
A period of mourning undergirds a high regard for the lesson on the sacredness of life, and I, therefore, would have me not change my recommendation.
I also believe it puts the President in a very awkward position. The media, already unfair to the Boy Scouts, could use it to cast the President as insensitive. I will not be surprised if they do.
I do remember one other speech in which the President addressed a tragedy, and then turned to the topic otherwise at hand. I wish I could remember the occasion of that speech.
xzins, you've been in the sacramental wine again haven't you?
If the President is planning to go he should continue to do so. If nothing else to honor their memory.
The President has absolutely nothing to do with it. Other than the Jamboree taking place on Federal land, the president has no authority over the BSA. This old Eagle Scout (class of '66) says carry on. The troops affected may go home, but the others should carry on as I am sure those Scout Leaders would have wanted them to.