Scouting's Real Gay Policy

[tjhammer]

DD, you are the one that seems to want it both ways. I've read all of your other posts on this subject, and you are the first to link religion to the debate, now you say "religion" and "morality" aren't linked, and even suggest that the morality (set by you, set by +50% of the population, set by the national leadership of the BSA, not set by any other standard) is even MORE relevant than religious principle.

 

Of course morality is linked to religious principle... not any one specific religion, but a teaching that there is accountability outside ones self, represented in many forms.

 

Be very careful with your boastful claims that you are just following in the tradition of Baden-Powell. I suggest you need a history lesson on old B-P and his contemporaries. Scouting could have been (and was) looked upon as a fairly liberal movement (you can be liberal and believe in God) in those early days... B-P's philosophies on teaching boys were definitely "outside the box".

 

And while I won't presuppose to know how B-P himself would have leaned on the issue of gays in Scouting (and you should not either), I will suggest that you have absolutely NO BASIS for claiming that B-P, James West, ET Seton, William Boyce, Hillcourt and the others meant "no gays allowed" when they wrote that a Scout should be morally straight.

 

[Dedicated Dad]

DD, you are the one that seems to want it both ways. I've read all of your other posts on this subject, and you are the first to link religion to the debate, Lets not confuse too many things at once. If you had truly read all my posts, you would know I never link religion to morality. Reread! now you say "religion" and "morality" aren't linked, and even suggest that the morality (set by you, set by +50% of the population, set by the national leadership of the BSA, not set by any other standard) is even MORE relevant than religious principle. Nope, the standard is right and wrong. Morality didnt originate from me, +50% of the population, national or any religion, morality is intrinsically a right or wrong. Of course morality is linked to religious principle... not any one specific religion, but a teaching that there is a higher power outside ones self, represented in many forms. No, you got it backwards, religious principle is linked to morality. Morality existed before there was religion. When man first walked upright and became endowed with reason, morality existed. Lying, stealing, murder, etc was immoral before any religion ever existed or any law ever written. If morality is only linked to religious principle, then human sacrifice was once moral.

Be very careful with your boastful claims that you are just following in the tradition of Baden-Powell. I suggest you need a history lesson on old B-P and his contemporaries. Bring it on, I love history my good professor. Scouting could have been (and was) looked upon as a fairly liberal movement (you can be liberal and believe in God) in those early days... B-P's philosophies on teaching boys were definitely "outside the box". Im not sure what relevance this has to the concept of Duty to God or Morally Straight, but if your willing to expand on that premise Ill listen. I will suggest that you have absolutely NO BASIS for claiming that B-P, James West, ET Seton, William Boyce, Hillcourt and the others meant "no gays allowed" when they wrote that a Scout should be morally straight. Suggest all you want, the fact that you would think there is no basis to think BP, et al, wouldnt find the practice of perversion to be immoral is laughable. Homosexuality in that era wouldnt even have been on their radar to consider because the practice was regarded to be too repugnant to even think about much less having a position on the subject. The sexual revolution happened in the 60s not 1910 and its safe to say that post Victorian England would have found the act depraved and amoral. Who are you trying to kid?

 

 

[Rooster7]

Dedicated Dad,

 

All valid points. I'm trying to stay out of this thread. You're doing an excellent job though. I don't know what part of the country you're from...Or perhaps I just forgot. One day, I wouldn't mind meeting you and some of the other guys posting to this site. Any way, good luck with "tj"...

[Bob Russell]

We can talk about gays/lesbians in scouting forever, and not reach a consensus. But how will we actually respond when we have to make an actual decision? As a scoutmaster, I have given thought as to what approach I will take when the troop's first scout with 2 moms or 2 dads joins up. (Notice that I said when, not if). How will I and the troop respond? I personally will welcome the scout and his family to our troop, and I will encourage family participation in all activities, just as I would with every other scout family.

 

What if one of these parents wants to take a formal role in the troop? I will first talk to our Charter Organization to see if the church has a view on how it wishes it to be handled. If the church objects, and our parent committee concurs, I will do my best to explain the decision to the parent, encourage him/her to continue to participate, and hope that we do not lose a scout and his family. If the church has no objection, and I believe that our parent committee would likewise have no objection, I would welcome the parent on board, so long as the parent otherwise would be acceptable in the same role. By that, does the parent otherwise conduct himself/herself as a scout leader should? Is the parent's purpose in acting as a leader to benefit the boys and scouting? If however, the parent's goal is not to benefit scouting, but to present a gay rights agenda, making his/her involvement a public and political action, I would not accept him/her as a leader. After all, we are all here for scouting and our scouts. That should be our criteria. I suspect that my approach as outlined here is used by a number of scout troops throughout the country. I also suspect that my approach will be accepted by some here, and opposed by some, for various reasons. In responding to my post, I only hope that we all remember that a scout is courteous, and that we all love and believe in scouting, although we may disagree in the details.

[Rooster7]

WHEN vice IF - Are we optimistic or pessimistic? Sadly, you're probably right. Until then, I intend to fight that proposed policy change with all my might. Should I see the day when the policy is changed, I intend to leave Scouting. BSA would simply become another organization crushed by political correctness and moral relativism. I only hope that an organization as honorable as BSA is today, will take its place.

 

On the other hand, they have withstood the pressure this longperhaps your WHEN statement is way off the mark. That will be my prayer.

 

[Bob Russell]

Rooster, my comment re "when, not if" did not address a change of the BSA policy. It recognizes the fact that there are families with gay/lesbian parents. In my community, my children have been on sport teams and gone to school with kids with gay/lesbian parents for as long as I can remember. The purpose of my post is to recognize the reality of the world around us, and to discuss how I expect to deal with this reality.

 

I strongly support the US Supreme Court's ruling that permits the BSA to set its own standards. This is essential for any group that has values as a fundamental reason for its existence. These values must be decided upon by the membership of the organization, not by outsiders who care little if at all for the organization.

 

You and I will disagree on the morality of homosexuality. The fact that we disagree does not make either of us bad, and I believe that we both agree on the fundamental goals of scouting and its value to young men growing up. I personally would like to see BSA allow each unit to decide on gay/lesbian leaders. However, I also understand the difficulty of making such a change. Units do not operate in a vacuum, but interact at camps and other activities, and therefore the leadership of one unit impacts all other units present. The reality is that any policy has impacts. The current policy hurts in my community, yet a change in policy may hurt in your community. There is no easy answer in a diverse world. If the policy does change, it must be a change from within, not forced from outside. Only if changed from within can it be done in a way that is sensitive to all points of view, and which recognizes the impact on all units. Any change will not be easy, and will certainly be slow in coming. And whether the policy changes or not, there will be scouts and scouters who will disagree, even though we all want the best for scouting.

[tjhammer]

In responding to my post, I only hope that we all remember that a scout is courteous, and that we all love and believe in scouting, although we may disagree in the details.

 

Hear hear!

 

Bob Russell, I believe that your position and how you would handle the situation is very similar to a very large number of Scout leaders. It is certainly how I would handle the situation, and I agree with every step you would take.

 

And really this allows me once again to highlight the main point of this thread... the BSA's "policy" is confusing and not universally enforced... in fact, barely enforced. Yet we are allowing this one issue to define us. Surely no Scout leader would say that this is a major issue in their day-to-day, week-to-week roles as a volunteer in the program. None of us, if asked, would rank teaching the morality or immorality of homosexuality as among the top 10, top 100 or maybe even top 1,000 things we do as Scout leaders.

 

Gay activists have drawn much attention to this, and the liberal media has jumped on board. And while I'm just as uncomfortable with that spotlight as others, you have to ask if we aren't really deserving of it.

 

When, not if, the policy changes

 

I agree with you here to. In fact, most leaders who disagree with the policy have decided that its just a matter of time before it changes. They also believe that they wont enforce the policy when the issue comes up close to home. And, sadly, they also believe that this is not a battle in which they should publicly enter (its a good thing, because as the Supreme Court transcript I cited above clearly states, the BSA will (and has) expelled members who publicly defend the morality of gays). Even I have limited my attempt to effect change to the discourse in this forum.

 

I think the strongest sign that this is not a policy that will stand the test of time is that the difference of opinion seems to be more generational than geographical.

 

[tjhammer]

DD -- Your assertion that gays didnt exist and were unheard of before 1960 is naive at best. That line of ignorance (Im calling the thought ignorant, not you) says to the homosexual Scout "no one who has ever felt as you do has done anything worth mentioning. A quick search of the Internet yields a list much bigger than this:Alexander the Great

Macedonian Ruler, 300 B.C.

Socrates

Greek Philosopher, 400 B.C.

Richard the Lionhearted

English King, 12th c.

Francis Bacon

English statesman, author

Frederick the Great

King of Prussia

Lord Byron

English poet, 18th c.

Walt Whitman

U.S. poet, author, 19th c.

Oscar Wilde

Irish author, 19th c.

Michelangelo

Italian artist, 15th c.

Leonardo Da Vinci

Ital. Artist, scientist, 15th c.

Christopher Marlowe

Eng. Playwright, 16th c.

Aristotle

Greek philosopher, 384-322 B.C.Herman Melville

U.S. author, 19th c.

Horatio Alger, Jr.

U.S. author, 19th c.

Tchaikovsky

Russian composer, 19th c.

Julius Caesar

Roman Emperor, 100-44 B.C.

Augustus Caesar

Roman Emperor

James I

English King, 16th-17th c.

Queen Anne

English Queen, 18th c.

Marie Antoinette

French Empress, 18th c.

Montezuma II

Aztec ruler, 16th c.

Peter the Great

Russian Czar, 17th-18th c.

Hans Christian Anderson

Danish author, 19th c.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

U.S. author, 19th c.

Edward II

English King, 14th c.

 

I asked you to produce a single piece of evidence that supported your claim that B-P, Boyce, West, Hillcourt or Seton would have excluded gays from Scouting, because this is now the standard bearers that you claim to defend. Youre making a very definitive claim and speaking for people long gone, the burden of proof is upon you to provide some basis for that claim.

 

Two of the three most popular biographies of B-P even go so far as to suggest Baden-Powell himself was a closeted homosexual. In fact, both Character Factory and Tim Jeals Boy Man dedicate no less than a chapter on the very subject (and both were written outside the current American vacuum that frames this debate). The most popular biography of B-P (and the one written by someone who actually knew him), Bill Hillcourts Two-Lives of a Hero does not mention this possibility, but admittedly Hillcourts own writings on B-P reveal that his goal with the biography was "to keep the memory of B-P alive".

 

Granted, I believe all of the evidence that B-P was gay is circumstantial at best, as great care was taken by him and people close to him to discard anything from his personal notes and correspondence that didnt frame him correctly for history. But it was significant enough to warrant considerable ink in multiple major biographies.

 

It is more important to some, however, that Baden-Powell likely would not have supported the exclusion of gays and lesbians from Scouting programs. His own words at the end of his life make that clear. "[scouting's] aim is to produce healthy, happy, helpful citizens, of both sexes, to eradicate the prevailing narrow self interest, personal, political sectarian and national, and to substitute for it a broader spirit of self-sacrifice and service in the cause of humanity," Baden-Powell wrote in one of his last communications.

 

In a final letter to the general public, he wrote a sentence that suggests the dislike he had developed for useless squabbling and exclusion that seems to exist in modern Boy Scouts.

 

"Looking back on a life of over eighty years, I realize how short life is and how little worth while are anger and political warfare," he said

 

So I ask again, DD, please provide a single sentence that would support your claim that B-P (or any of the founders) would exclude gays from Scouting. (without projecting your definition of moral behavior onto them).

 

[cjmiam]

So if then what? The basic founding principles of our program have not changed since its inception here in the United States. Unfortunately some in society are trying to rewrite policies based on what is more convenient or fits with their personal beliefs at the current time. So then its all-open for interpretation? Its what ever we feel like on any given day? Then there really are no moral absolutes, because whatever the next day might throw at us may demand changing our belief system or way of living? The next time a Scout breaks the Scout Law it is open for interpretation on what he really meant by breaking it? Was it because of a poor upbringing? Did he receive a bad score on a test in school? Well, maybe he was justified then for kicking that poor old lady. After all its not his fault, hes a product of society. He wasnt sure what the meaning of kick was. He had no control over his actions. And since no one really knows what is right or wrong actions no longer have consequences. Thats fine Scout, kick her again

 

What baffles me the greatest is why someone doesnt start the Gay Scouts? Of course youd need to find a different name then Scouts, because I believe that is already taken. Lets see if I can help you come up with a name. Maybe that is whats been holding all of you back. Anyone is welcome to chime in if they like. Wait, Ive got one- Gay Boys that Might Want to Go Camping With Gay Leaders Association of America GBTMWGCWGLAA. Hmmm gonna be hard to fit that on a patch. If there is so much outpouring support for this type of organization why hasnt someone started it? Or have they? Hmmm I havent heard of it, maybe that explains how successful it is. Hi sir, Im raising money for my Gay Boy Scout Troop that Goes Camping with Gay Leaders Association Troop Number 3223. Would you like to buy a candy bar?

 

[Pioneer DC]

What baffles me the greatest is why someone doesnt start the Gay Scouts?

 

The answer to this question should be obvious. The agenda is not to have an organization that is inclusive of homosexuals. Quite the opposite. The agenda is to destroy every vestige of traditional family values, moral absolutes and personal responsibility and to replace them with moral relativism. From many of the responses and comments I see on this forum, it is working. People do not see any problem with letting our values slip away a little bit at a time, but one day we will wonder what happened to them and how the world around us got to be that way. In spite of what some of the people on this forum may say, it is still honorable to stand on principle.

[tjhammer]

Pioneer, that's just not it. Judging by what I have written, do you consider me to be an activist hell bent on destroying Scouting? Or someone who is trying to ram my own morality down everyone else's throat?

 

Granted, there is a very real thing as gay activism... it's the "in your face" crowd. I would hope that you don't classify me (and the others that have posted similar remarks as mine) as such, just because I dare to suggest that we (BSA) are wrong to take a stand on this issue.

 

Quite to the contrary, and as I said above, this is not a change in policy that should be made because of external forces, but rather an internal decision of what is the right thing to do.

 

And cjmiam, for you to suggest that those opposing this one policy of the BSA should just go start their own organization is indefensibly claiming that Scouting has no worth beyond its "no gays allowed" philosophy.

 

[cjmiam]

Tjhammer: only you yourself can truly know your sincerity of purpose. I do not propose to speculate on what your intensions are. However, throughout its 92-year history, the Boy Scouts of America has stood steadfast upon the principles to which it was founded. I care little to speculate what Lord Baden Powell meant in his hours of death. He was never a member of the Boy Scouts of America and his words are moot at any point.

 

What isnt arguable is what the Founders intended the Boy Scouts of America to be. From our First Handbook Handbook for Boys, it is clear throughout what the principles of our organization are. On Patriotism and Citizenship Theordore Roosevelt writes, If he (the Scout) doesnt treat his mother and sisters well, then he is a poor creature no matter what else he does; just as a man who doesnt treat his wife well is a poor kind of citizen no matter what his other qualities might be. This is a book about Scoutcraft, Campcraft, and Chivalry. This is a book about politeness, personal sacrifice, and the Ten Commandments. This is a book spells out word for word what it means to be a man. And oh no, Im not just saying that. This book clearly tells a boy how he is to become a man. And if more men would use this book to guide their lives, our world would be a far better place.

 

It is not for you or me to judge what from this book or our current book we are going to follow. As members of the Boy Scouts of America, we are obligated to adhere to and enforce the policies set forth by the National Executive Board. We have chosen this membership on our own free will and we are also able to leave on our own free will. However, many millions have chosen this program specifically for what it represents and for the values they hold dear.

 

If people are so awfully disgusted with a single aspect of this program, they are all provided the rights afforded to them by the Constitution of the United States of America to start an organization of their own. The Boy Scouts of America is a package deal. It was founded on Godly principles with traditional family values. Many men have sacrificed their lives so that I can be a part of an organization of my choosing, associate with people that I so choose to associate with, and to believe what I want to believe. Well, I choose Scouting the way it was, the way it is, and the way it was always meant to be.

 

[MomScouter]

tj and Bob Russell, thank you for expressing your ideas on this topic. I just wanted to say I agree with your viewpoints. Too many people presume to know what the original intent was when Scouting was begun in regards to this issue.

 

Keep talking folks! Your posts are a pleasure to read.

[slontwovvy]

With that list of famous homosexuals of old, you have to take it with a grain of salt. With most, there's no concrete proof that many of them were, just inferences drawn by their writings or the often biased writings of others.

[sctmom]

I find reading old BSA books very interesting. It's great to see what was taught and assumed at different times over the last 100 years.

 

I like the Webelos book from the late 60's that tells the boys part of their responsibility on a family camping trip is to help their mothers and sisters, because women will most likely be scared of bugs.

ROFL

I have vivid memories from that timeframe of my mother in the backyard with a jar trying to catch a black widow spider so I could take it to show and tell at Kindergarden.

 

And if it weren't for camping, my family may have never vacationed. Okay, it was car camping but it was a week of freedom for us kids. Never thought of my mother as "odd".

 

But hey, the BSA printed it 35 years ago, and we need to stick by it, right?

Oooohhh, there's a bug will somebody kill it, I'm just a helpless little female.