The Assault on the Boy Scouts of America (May Imprimis)

Imprimis | May02 | Midge Decter

[wwjdn]

Homosexuals are entitled to their own way of life and beliefs. They can start their own scouting organization anytime they want.

They can call themselves the Bum Scouts!!!

[Republic]

From one who homosexuals like to refer to as a BREEDER (gish), I hope the homosexual movement falls as flat as the sad and dysfunctional suxual appetites homosexuals possess does.

[EdReform]

Bump

[wwjdn]

Amen to that sentiment.

[RonF]

No: Buddhists don't believe in a Deity. They do believe in a supernatural world, but there is no personification of a Godhead. Take a look on any Buddhist web site.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Buddhists don't believe in a Deity. They do believe in a supernatural world, but there is no personification of a Godhead.

This would seem to be in direct conflict with this.

One important point, however, about them is tht they all involved worship of the same God. There is but one leader, although many ways of following Him.

[RonF]

True. Which is why I'm saying that the Boy Scouts do not consider "Him" to refer to the God of Abraham. I certainly agree that when the BSA came into existence, that's very likely what was in everyone's mind, but it is not the way that the BSA has executed their policy. In fact, I am not aware that any religiously-based sponsor, or member, has ever been denied the right to sponsor a BSA unit or join the BSA due to a lack of belief in the God of Abraham. And, to the point of the topic a bit back, I don't think that this is a recent development. Especially when you look at that quote I had from my 3rd Edition handbook that says that sun-worshipping Central Americans and the religion of the indigenous Native Americans of the USA is part of our American heritage. That's probably not what James E. West, and the YMCA that he was working closely with, had in mind, but that's the way it's been applied.

[RonF]

I got called a "breeder" on line, and promptly proudly adopted it. Being a "breeder", and doing it right, requires facing up to a lot of responsibility. I consider it an honorable title.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Which is why I'm saying that the Boy Scouts do not consider "Him" to refer to the God of Abraham.

That would be silly because capitalized Him and God specifically refers to the God of Abraham. If it didn’t the Oath should say “duty to god”. This is a point of contention National would rather choose to ignore. It’s presumed that the Native Americans were worshiping the same God as their creator. This still leaves the Budists as atheistic.

[ohioman]

"Would James Dale have been kicked out if, instead of being homosexual, he had been living with a girlfriend at college? Or would he still be considered 'morally straight'?:

Who F-in cares.

[ohioman]

Who cares if the BSA made the headlines. There is a time when someone should stand up for what is right. All the detractors of the BSA can go to hell.

[RonF]

Well, again, I'm perfectly willing to accept that at it's creation, the founders of the BSA meant the Judeo-Christian God. However, starting when the Mormon Church started sponsoring BSA units in either 1912 or 1916 (I forget ...), they've accepted non-Judeo/Christian faiths as well. So National got away from accepting solely believers in the God of Abraham very early.

It’s presumed that the Native Americans were worshiping the same God as their creator.

Are you saying that it's presumed that the Native Americans were worshipping the Judeo-Christian God? By whom?

This still leaves the Buddhists as atheistic.

I'm not knowledgable enough about the Buddhist doctrine to be able to say whether or not they are atheistic. I will say that I had not thought that non-belief in a mono- or polytheistic Godhead made one an atheist. I thought that as long as you believed yourself accountable to some kind of supernatural system wherein your soul had existence past the purely material plane, you weren't an atheist. But I'm no theologian, and don't want to debate the point. You could be right, Buddhists may well be definable as atheists, I don't know.

But that bolsters my point, actually. I do know that Hindus, Buddhists, Mormons, etc., are all considered Scouts in good standing, and they are eligible to wear the religious education awards given out by their faiths on the BSA uniform. In fact, Scouts in units sponsored by Judeo-Christian religious sponsors form a minority of the BSA. Mormons are about 1 out of every 8 Scouts (about equal to the Lutherans), and Scouts in secularly sponsored units (VFW, Lions Clubs, etc.) form about 45% to 50% of Scouts. That's a majority even before you throw in the units sponsored by the Buddhists, Hindus, Moslems, etc.

It would be interesting to challenge National and tell them that they have betrayed the ideals of the BSA's founders by accepting anyone but Jews and Christians. I wonder what they'd say?

[RonF]

Well, it is important, and it gives you an idea of how the BSA works and why this issue continues to be contentious even inside the BSA, not just from outside activists.

Dale was all about whether or not the BSA had the right to set the criteria for it's leaders, independent of civil rights laws of various jurisdictions (sp?). It was freedom of expression and freedom of association vs. local civil rights laws. Freedom of expression and freedom of association won. As, in my opinion, they should have. So, the BSA gets to define "morally straight". Now, the question is, what's morally straight?

And the answer is, "that depends". It depends on how first the sponsor, then the local Council, and then National each interpret that question. National has their own criteria, but they are not actually all that exclusive. If you are not "avowedly" homosexual, are 21, and (I think) don't have any felony convictions, National leaves the rest for the local Council and the sponsor. They do no background checks. Now, a sponsor is actually quite free to select homosexual leaders. What happens next is how the local Council decides to interpret "avowedly". To my knowledge, National hasn't issued any clear guidelines on the matter. If a homosexual lives what I'll call a "quiet" life, staying out of the papers and not giving his significant other a kiss in the parking lot in front of the kids, he or she will probably slide by in a lot of Councils, especially the urban ones. What National has said is that they don't seek out any information on leaders; thus, they won't check out rumors or do investigations. Think about what would happen if any time someone got mad at a leader, they could stir up problems for them by calling up the Scout Executive and telling them that Scoutmaster Jones was gay.

National knows very well that there are homosexual leaders and members in the BSA. That's why they qualify their policy as banning "avowedly homosexual" leaders, not just "homosexual" leaders. Dale got busted because a few copies of a newspaper interview he gave landed on the desk of the local Scout Executive. The SE then initiated the process of de-registering James Dale. Other SE's might have thrown them in the wastebasket, thinking that as long as Dale hadn't said anything at a Scout function, he didn't care. I'm not going to say that's right or wrong, I'm saying that it could happen.

It's worthwhile to note that apparently the unit's sponsor didn't see a problem with this; the sponsor has the first opportunity to de-register a leader, and apparently chose not to do so.

Now, if James Dale was hetero, and lived with his girlfriend in an un-married state, his sponsor would have the option of tossing him. A Mormon Church would probably do so. A VFW might not care. What the local Council might do if they got wind of the situation would vary from Council to Council, especially considering the circumstances; i.e., was it on the front page of the newspaper, or did they get an anonymous call?

The point being raised by "would Dale have gotten bounced if he'd been living with a woman" is that almost all issues where "morally straight" are involved are left up to the discretion of first the sponsor and then the local Council. National has picked out just this one issue to make a nation-wide edict on. If you are an abortion provider, or operate a video store where half the tapes available are porno tapes, National has no position on the matter.