research project..gays&scouts

[NJCubScouter]

VentureScout asked:

 

And in both cases if you are a member, are you asked to leave/kicked out?

 

And Bob answered:

 

No, You are told to leave, not asked. But this only happens after you are given the opportunity to decide if you want to follow the rules and responsibilities membership in the BSA or not.

 

Bob's second sentence is partially correct and partially incorrect. It is correct in the case of those who have declared themselves to be atheists. According to the material on the BSA official web site (or at least, it used to be there), it is apparently also correct in the case of youth members who have declared that they are gay. But it is not correct for openly gay ("avowedly homosexual") adult leaders. James Dale was never given such an opportunity, and in the few other cases I have read about, no such opportunity was given either. I'm not sure how it would work if there were such an opportunity; but the fact is that there is no such opportunity.

 

Oh, and there is no "rule" either, no matter how many times Bob says there is a rule. There is no rule that says an "avowed homosexual" cannot be an adult leader. There are press releases, "fact sheets," legal briefs and "resolutions," but there is no "rule." There is, however, a "rule" that says the BSA is "absolutely nonsectarian," and the BSA itself violates that rule every time they terminate a leader simply for being openly gay.

 

[Bob White]

Soory for the underlining, it was an editing flub.

 

According to Webster, nonsectarian means " not affiliated with or restricted to a particular religious group", does NJ now classify homosexuality as a religion?

 

You will find a position statement on the BSA national web site that clearly states the "rule" that NJ says does not exist.

 

I think many would like to help you Venture if we understood what you wanted. Your questions do not pertain to your subject. Your subject is flawed since it's core statement is false.

 

The Supreme Court did not ban gays. The Supreme Court (as I'm sure was shared with you in high school) rules on issues related to the Constitution. What the Supreme Court upheld was the BSA's standing as a private organization and their constitutionally protected right of free association. This substantiatied the BSA's position that they have the legal right and the authority to determine their own membership rules.

 

That is a far cry from the core statement of your study.

 

If you talk to your college registrar you will find that not everyone gets in. Your college discriminates. They look at what the colleges goals are and they look at students that apply for entry and they select who will get in and who will not based on the goals of the college.

 

The BSA does the same thing. The volunteer National Executive Board of the BSA has for decades, believed that an individual who is an avowed atheist or homosexual cannot fully develop in character according to the ideals and purpose of the BSA program.

 

Only recently has this become a political tool being used by a some to gain social acceptance, by challenging the traditional family morals that have long been represented by the name and image of the Boy Scouts of America.

 

Unlike the activists in the atheist and homosexual communities who have tried and continue to try to shut down the scouting program, the BSA has never called for any action against those who disagree with their ideals.

 

What the BSA has said is "this is who we are, you have the freedom to choose which set of values you want to follow" But you cannot follow both. The BSA cannot agree to both sides of the same coin. You cannot believe as the BSA does that belief in God is a vital part of strong character and also believe that it's ok to be atheist.

 

So the BSA says, look at both stands and choose who you want to be. If you agree and share the same values of the BSA then join us. If you do not like our values then don't join us.

 

It really is that simple.

[acco40]

YankeeVentureScout,

 

There are two research topics that would enjoy reading about and that I feel are more appropriate.

 

1) I think BW slightly skewed the recent SC decision. The issue was not if a private organization has the right ... (I don't think anyone was debating that issue); the argument was really if the BSA was (is) a private organization.

 

2) Why the BSA (i.e. the National Executive Board) believes that an individual who is an avowed atheist or homosexual cannot fully develop in character according to the ideals and purpose of the BSA program.

 

I think exploring the above topics would be much more germane to the current political and social debates surrounding the BSA today.

 

[VentureScoutNY]

Ok..this is all great info, and many thanks! I'm learning a lot from all of your replies. Today I spoke to my professor and explained that my original topic/question was incorrect on my part. So I am in the process of thinking of a new question to explore. The catch is, it has to coinside with the class "research in communications". So in his hazy explanation it must be communications releated. Which really means I just have to state my question in the correct form, and make it so this paper does not become a book report but a RESEARCH PAPER.

 

So here I am now thinking of a new topic/question..that will meet all of these demands.:

 

Has the American Publics fondness of the BSA lessened since the Supremem Court Ruling that the BSA is a private organization and can make its own rules that discriminate or not?

[Bob White]

"Why is the BSA within their rights to keep out certain members?

 

This is your favorite? It will be a very fast research. all you need to do is read the Supreme Court's majority decision. It will tell you that they determined the BSA to be a private organization. That alone gives them the right. But I still do not see how this relates to communication?

 

How does the BSA market itself and it's programs?

 

What methods are used by the local council to communicate to volunteers, and memebers and their families?

 

How does the BSA communicate program and policy information to a world wide organization?

 

What have been the drawbacks and benefits for scouting brought about by the Internet?

[VentureScoutNY]

Thanks Bob. Those are good Questions that do relate to communications, I will strongly consider them. If I do I'll throw out a new post for the one I choose.

 

The reason I chose this whole Discrimination topic, is that I felt it would have the most research out there for me to dive into. The other topics like the ones you stated I feel when it comes to hard info may be far and few between. I hope I'm wrong though. I would love to steer clear of all these discrimination issues though.

 

I will consider all those questions you stated and narrow them down. One of my deciding factors though will obviously be which topic will have good solid info for me to turn to. I don't want to back myself into writing this long paper without enough info to fill it up...I thik the first question on the BSA marketing its programs would be a good option for me...

 

Thoughts...

 

 

 

[scoutingagain]

Bob White responded to NJ: "According to Webster, nonsectarian means " not affiliated with or restricted to a particular religious group", does NJ now classify homosexuality as a religion? "

 

I don't mean to respond for NJ, but the BSA excludes, does not permit membership, discriminates against avowed homosexuals in leadership positions based on the premise that homosexuals are immoral and do not provide a proper role model for scouts. Assuming morality is part of religious beliefs or teachings I think NJ is getting at the notion that not all religions or religious leaders teach or accept that homosexuality is immoral and that by dicriminating against homosexuals based on moral issues the BSA is not acting in a "nonsectarian" way. NJ can probaly make the point better than I can.

 

In today's Boston Globe for example there are full page adds by various religious groups, Rabbis, Catholic groups, Priests, Protestants, both for and against Gay marriage. If you think the Gay debate rages on in these forums, try spending some time in Bean town this week. We have adds, print & television, thousands of demonstrators on both sides and politicians hoping the whole issue would just go away. When I said that after the Superbowl the papers would be full of the Red Sox I didn't know this was comming.

 

SA

[NJCubScouter]

SA,

 

That basically covers what my position is, and has been since I joined this forum. I have stated it many times and at many different levels of detail, and just didn't feel like typing it again in my previous post. But I believe that in our current society, where there is no longer any consensus that homosexuality is immoral, and to the contrary, the public policy in many states as expressed through their legislatures is that what is wrong is discrimination against gays, the belief that homosexuality is immoral has no other foundation than a religious one. (Gosh, that was a long sentence.) However, the religions and denominations are far from unanimous on the subject, reflecting the divisions in society. That being the case, when the BSA says that homosexuality is immoral (or words to that effect), it is also saying that the beliefs of religions A, B and C are correct, and that the beliefs of religions D, E, F are incorrect. That is being sectarian, in violation of the BSA's own Declaration of Religious Principles. And to tie up the argument, it would be different if the belief of religions D, E and F were so outlandish and unusual that it contradicted a strong societal consensus; but as stated above, there is no such consensus on the immorality of homosexuality.

[Bob White]

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Zahnada]

Hmmmm... paper ideas...

 

So it needs to do with the field of communication. You want to use a scouting topic. Your professor wants you to focus on the controversy surrounding the gay issue.

 

Although you could write a dissertation on whether it's right for the BSA to exclude gays, I don't know if that's what you want to use for your paper. And remember, as many people have already said, with that topic there are really two issues: Can the BSA choose their membership? and, Should the BSA impose those membership restrictions?

 

I think the second question is the one that's debated most in this forum and probably the more interesting topic. The Dale case centered on the first question.

 

Anyway, for some paper topics...

 

If you want a comparative content analysis paper you can research articles from journals and newspapers about the BSA from say 1999 and then look at articles from similar sources from 2003. Then compare the general tone of the articles and see if the media or academic fields have changed their tone regarding the BSA. The research question is then, "Have public/academic perceptions of the Boy Scouts changed since the Supreme Court case?" This is definitely communication oriented.

 

You may want to do more of an argumentative paper. If you look through some of the threads of the "Issues and Politics" section, you'll see some good arguments. Check out the ones started by TJHammer. Anyway, a possible idea is to look at the rhetoric used by the BSA to explain their position. Effective/ ineffective? Consistent/inconsistent?

 

Perhaps you'll want to analyze the role that the communication industry (the media) played in the entire Dale case. They really brought the issue to prominence and thus made one case into a major controversy. How are the different sides using the media to their advantage?

 

These are just some options. Good luck!

[NJCubScouter]

Zahnada, I think your "content analysis" idea for Venture Scout is a good one. If the Internet were included he would probably be overwhelmed by the amount of material. On the other hand, if local newspapers were included (as opposed to just the NY Times, USA Today, etc.) there would be a different balance. But these are all options to choose from.

 

Zahnada, I did want to just comment on this:

 

Perhaps you'll want to analyze the role that the communication industry (the media) played in the entire Dale case. They really brought the issue to prominence and thus made one case into a major controversy.

 

I sort of disagree on the role of the media in the Dale case. Obviously there was a lot of media coverage, but I don't think it was out of line for what was involved. In other words, I think the case had "prominence" on its own merits and didn't require anyone to "bring" it there. I think that any case decided by the Supreme Court, especially one decided by a 5-4 vote, is automatically "prominent" and newsworthy.

 

A lot of people don't realize, the Supreme Court issues full-fledged opinions in a fairly small number of cases each year, almost always less than 100 and often significantly less than that. (I don't have the actual numbers at hand.) If you read a paper-of-record-type-paper like the NY Times, there is at least a short paragraph about EVERY Supreme Court decision, something that couldn't even be contemplated for lower courts. Obviously many cases warrant larger stories. Many of the cases that don't are things that mainly lawyers would be interested in, like the burden of proof required for the government to fine a beef importer under Section 123 of the Mad Cow Exclusion Act. (I made that up but it's not too far off from real life.) Getting a bit more attention are "criminal rights" type cases, like when it's ok to search without a warrant and things like that. Or cases defining rights and powers among different levels of government. Take out those cases and you have a pretty small number left. Many of the remainder deal with "individual rights" (other than criminal cases), which usually means the First Amendment. Stuff like whether a religious display can be put on the courthouse lawn (and other religion-clause issues), whether the BSA has the right to exclude gays, things like that. Or, due-process issues like what conduct the government may punish (like the Texas sodomy case), regardless of the procedural aspects. The first amendment and due-process cases represent most of the cases that get the MOST attention. But I think that is because people are genuinely most interested in things like that, not just because the media tells them to be.

[scoutldr]

If you want to read the official Supreme Court decision, instead of 50 different interpretations of it, see http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/99-699.html

 

By the way, although it was a "majority" decision, it was 5-4, so be sure to read the dissenting opinions as well.

 

To see the other side of the fence, see www.scoutingforall.com

 

Perhaps you will get some more ideas there.

 

[packsaddle]

To reply to the original question:

Aside from a lot of noise regarding loss of funding, the only fallout I have seen was during my stint as cubmaster. We lost several families one evening, not as a result of the policy, but rather as a result of allowing a DE to fulminate about the issue at our Blue & Gold. I was shocked and, evidently, others were too. That was the last time a DE was invited to speak.