Is Local Option An Illusion?

[fred johnson]

What I can't really get my mind around is the fact that, according to BSA a policy, a religious charter organization cannot discriminate on sexual orientation alone in regard to youth, but can discriminate in regard to adults. It seems like a big hole in the way local option should work.

A gay kid who grows up in a pack/troop is suddenly shown the door when he turns 18? That seems like a situation that would create a great deal of unwelcome noise for the church.

 

 

 

Where does it say that?  At any age charter partners can remove members.  Ignore the specific conflict.  Generally, a charter organization can remove any member who shows conflict with the charter organization teachings and goals.  Most would never do it.  But it is absolutely within the rules.  For example, if a baptist church chartered unit had a scout who constantly and vocally mocked the teachings of the church, he'd be shown the door ... even if he was 12 years old.  LDS units can require scout unit members to be LDS church members too.  Any church can require that.  

 

He would still be a BSA member.  It is BSA membership that won't discriminate based on sex or orientation.

Edited August 6, 2015 by fred johnson

[perdidochas]

The folks who founded Trail Life would agree.

Yet Trail Life allows gay youth, just like BSA.

http://www.traillifeusa.com/whoweare

[CalicoPenn]

Yet Trail Life allows gay youth, just like BSA.

http://www.traillifeusa.com/whoweare

 

I'm confused - Trail Life accepts gay youth?  Wasn't Trail Life founded as a reaction to the BSA admitting gay youth?  Barely 2 years old and they're alreadt compromising their message?

[00Eagle]

I'm confused - Trail Life accepts gay youth?  Wasn't Trail Life founded as a reaction to the BSA admitting gay youth?  Barely 2 years old and they're alreadt compromising their message?

Yes it was formed as a reaction and accepts gay youth.  What's the difference? Trail Life allows you to "pray away the gay."  OK what they really say is leaders are allowed to minister to these "troubled" youth.  BSA has more of a hands off policy to gay youth.

[Stosh]

I would also assume that TLUSA feels that homosexual leadership may minister these same troubled youth away from the faith standards they are maintaining.  Parents thus would have no say in the mentoring of their youth in the BSA program, but would in the TLUSA program.

[walk in the woods]

We are chartered by an Civic Organization American Legion/VFW type of group..  

I don't know the criteria for VFW membership, but, Legion membership is open to anybody who honorably served on active duty during the official conflict date windows, regardless of where they served.  The current membership window has been open since Desert Shield/Storm.  I don't know how hard you'd want to push but you might remind my brother that openly gay service members are eligible for membership in their post.  Now, that doesn't mean they'd have to appoint them scoutmaster but it is curious.  If this post is like most of them I'm familiar with the membership is heavily weighted towards WWII/Korea vets and few if any DS/OEF/OIF vets.

[walk in the woods]

I'm confused - Trail Life accepts gay youth?  Wasn't Trail Life founded as a reaction to the BSA admitting gay youth?  Barely 2 years old and they're alreadt compromising their message?

Well, I suppose the seeds were actually planted when National attempted to backdoor the local option in 2013 but got burned in the process.  The way I read their FAQs they also accept atheist youth and gay adults that are willing to stipulate to the statements of faith and values. 

[CalicoPenn]

Well, I suppose the seeds were actually planted when National attempted to backdoor the local option in 2013 but got burned in the process.  The way I read their FAQs they also accept atheist youth and gay adults that are willing to stipulate to the statements of faith and values. 

 

I think the point is being missed.  Everything I've read about Trail Life and it's founding points specifically to the Boy Scouts of America accepting gay youth - Trail Life was founded after the Boy Scouts of America agreed to start accepting gay youth (or started talking about doing so) as a very specific reaction to the Boy Scouts of America's new policy.  Trail Life was founded as an alternative for folks who did not like the BSA's new policy towards gay youth - that's why it seems odd to me that not much more than 2 years later, Trail Life now accepts gay youth, gay leaders and athiests too???  Are we sure the interpretation of Trail Life's FAQs and policies supports the statement that they accept gay youth and leaders and athiest youth? 

[walk in the woods]

Here's an article from March 2013, after it became public the board was looking at local option but before the grand compromise of 2013:

 

http://mynews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2013/3/23/boy_scouts_launching.html

 

Stemberger is quoted as saying:

"We're gathered here for one simple reason and that is we do not think that sex and politics should be injected into the Boy Scouts of America," said Florida Family Policy Council President John Stemberger.

The Boy Scouts are not banning homosexuals, he added, because homosexuals are currently members. Stemberger said he's okay with homosexual members as long as they are discreet and private.

 

 

Here's one from May 2013, http://www.citizenlink.com/2013/05/16/onmyhonor-net-announces-nationwide-rally-for-scouting-to-oppose-openly-gay-boy-scout-resolution/.  The description at the end of onmyhonor.net is:

OnMyHonor.Net is the nationwide coalition of concerned parents, Scout Leaders, Scouting Donors, Eagle Scouts and other members of the BSA who are united in their support of Scouting’s timeless values and in their opposition to open homosexuality in the Boy Scouts. More information at www.OnMyHonor.net.

 

And here's one from November of 2013, http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/lgbt/Former-Defense-Secretary-Gates-to-lead-Boy-Scouts/45199.html, referencing Stemberger from a July interview with NBC:

More than 1,200 people gathered in Nashville, Tennessee for two days in early September to jump-start the new group. Co-founder John Stemberger told NBC News in July that Trail Life would allow gay boys to join, but they would not be permitted to "flaunt" their sexual orientation.

 

"We're going to focus on sexual purity, not sexual orientation," he said.

 

Stemberger of Orlando, Fla., is also a founder of OnMyHonor.net, an online coalition opposed to the BSA's vote in late May to change its membership policy to permit gay Scouts.

 

So I think it's fair to say the founders of TLUSA have been consistent since the start and that these previous statements match up directly with their current values stated at http://www.traillifeusa.com/whoweare/.

 

As for atheists, I'll take TLUSA at their word, http://www.traillifeusa.com/generalfaqs.  Scroll down a bit and you'll find this Q&A:

 

Are non-Christian youth permitted to join a Trail Life USA Troop?

Our Member policy allows for boys of any faith (or no faith at all) to participate in the program of Trail Life USA.

Local Charter Organizations satisfy the specific ministry goals of their church or organization. In some cases, that may be as an outreach ministry to boys in the community. In other cases, that may be as an in-reach ministry specifically to minister to the families or members of the local church or organization. Therefore, individual Charter Organizations may have more specific membership requirements that limit Troop membership to boys of a certain faith or membership in a certain organization.

 

 

Edited August 7, 2015 by walk in the woods

[CalicoPenn]

So that means that Trail Life was founded because they were upset that the BSA was not going to continue to make youths lie about who they are?  That Trail Life will accept gay youth as long as they stay in the closet and keep lying to people?  Hmmm - that sounds even worse than changing their minds. 

[Rick_in_CA]

I think the point is being missed.  Everything I've read about Trail Life and it's founding points specifically to the Boy Scouts of America accepting gay youth - Trail Life was founded after the Boy Scouts of America agreed to start accepting gay youth (or started talking about doing so) as a very specific reaction to the Boy Scouts of America's new policy.  Trail Life was founded as an alternative for folks who did not like the BSA's new policy towards gay youth - that's why it seems odd to me that not much more than 2 years later, Trail Life now accepts gay youth, gay leaders and athiests too???  Are we sure the interpretation of Trail Life's FAQs and policies supports the statement that they accept gay youth and leaders and athiest youth? 

The fact that Trail Life started with a policy on sexual matters that was almost identical too the new one that the BSA chose when they split is interesting. The primary difference is that Trail Life limits it's leaders to Christians only (and only the "right kind").

 

My personal opinion is that shows the disagreement wasn't really about gays, but about religious pluralism. The gay fight was actually a proxy fight over whether the BSA would favor one group of religions (conservative Christians) over all others. The result of the vote showed that they were beginning to fail in their efforts to enforce their religious orthodoxy on the BSA, so they left to form their Christians only group.

Edited August 7, 2015 by Rick_in_CA

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

So that means that Trail Life was founded because they were upset that the BSA was not going to continue to make youths lie about who they are?  That Trail Life will accept gay youth as long as they stay in the closet and keep lying to people?  Hmmm - that sounds even worse than changing their minds. 

 

Atheists, too.  Maybe they could conduct excursions to Potemkin villages.

[00Eagle]

The fact that Trail Life started with a policy on sexual matters that was almost identical too the new one that the BSA chose when they split is interesting. The primary difference is that Trail Life limits it's leaders to Christians only (and only the "right kind").

 

My personal opinion is that shows the disagreement wasn't really about gays, but about religious pluralism. The gay fight was actually a proxy fight over whether the BSA would favor one group of religions (conservative Christians) over all others. The result of the vote showed that they were beginning to fail in their efforts to enforce their religious orthodoxy on the BSA, so they left to form their Christians only group.

I've heard similar statements that Trail Life's formation was really a result of losing the conservative Christian dominance on BSA.

[walk in the woods]

Regardless of their motivation, the folks that founded TLUSA have moved on.  Why are BSA members still talking about them?  Is it going to change anything?  Even if you think they are totally hypocritical does that change the situation on the ground for the BSA?  Why do you care?

 

The BSA has now finished the process started in 2013.  The people and organizations who leave as a result will have their own motivations and reasons.  They may or may not join TLUSA or another organization.  No amount of handwringing as to the whys or wherefores is going to change that either. 

 

Ultimately, the folks who have pushed for this change now have the most difficult transition to make, from protestor to leader.  My charge to the liberal wing of the BSA is to worry less about TLUSA and worry more about leading the new BSA.

[NJCubScouter]

I actually agree with walkinthewoods on one point. Why worry about Trail Life or try to figure out what they are doing and why? I don't. Let them do their thing and we do ours, and try to make this new policy work for the benefit of the BSA. In real life the "transition" is kind of simple for me. Our troop's CO (a church) has made clear for years that they do not exclude gay people, and they do not want us to do so either. The BSA policy has now caught up with them. There have not even been any recent discussions about this issue with the CO, because nobody has any doubt about what their "policy" is.