Boy Scouts to Atheist: Accept A God or Get Out

CNSNEWS.com ^ | 10/30/02 | Michael L. Betsch

[kattracks]

(CNSNews.com) - The assistant Scoutmaster of a Pacific Northwest Boy Scout troop is currently faced with the decision of professing his belief in a "supreme being" or facing banishment from the Boy Scouts of America (BSA). However, 19-year-old Darrel Lambert said he's been an atheist since the ninth grade and he's sticking to his convictions.

Lambert's track record with the Seattle-based Troop 1531 is impressive. Throughout his 10-year scouting career he earned 37 merit badges to achieve the rank of Eagle Scout; served as a quartermaster and three-time senior patrol leader; and has dedicated himself to more than 1,000 hours of community service.

But Lambert is also passionate in his rejection of the existence of any supreme being, even though the BSA's regional Chief Seattle Council informed him that expressing a reverence for Mother Earth would be an acceptable form of worship.

Although Lambert admitted to his scout troop's review board that, for years, he had intentionally neglected to demonstrate the principles of faith and reverence to God contained within the Scout Oath and Law, he was awarded the BSA's highest honor last year - Eagle Scout. Coincidentally, his mom is the Scoutmaster of that troop.

Mark Hunter, spokesman for the BSA's regional Chief Seattle Council, said he could not comment or speculate whether Trish Lambert influenced members of the Eagle Scout review board that approved her son's Eagle Scout application, which mandates all applicants must: "Demonstrate that you live by the principles of the Scout Oath and Law in your daily life."

Ironically, Lambert addressed parents Monday night in the basement of a chapel at a retirement home, the Seattle Times reported. He urged those in attendance to look beyond the issue of his atheism and support his proven dedication to the Boy Scouts.

"I think the only power higher than myself is the power of all of us combined," Lambert said.

Additionally, Lambert said he wants to see the 92-year-old BSA repeal its national membership requirements, which includes on its application a Declaration of Religious Principle. He proposed that individual troops be given the right to devise the standards by which they extend their membership to Scouts and adult leaders.

Hunter said Lambert would be permitted to continue his leadership role and interact with members of Troop 1531 while he takes some time to "search out his feelings on this."

"If they're truly what they are," Hunter said, "his membership will be terminated."

Atheism rejected in court

A similar battle erupted in 1991 when twins, Michael and William Randall, refused to recite the Boy Scout Oath's reference to God and faced expulsion from the Orange County, Calif., Boy Scouts Council, said BSA spokesman Gregg Shields.

"At the time, they were eight-years-old ... and they said they were agnostics," Shields noted. Merriam-Webster's Dictionary defines an agnostic as "a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable."

The Randall twins' father, an attorney, argued a successful seven-year case in an Orange County district court only to have it overturned by the Calif. State Supreme Court in 1998.

Shields said the twins fulfilled all of the requirements to become Eagle Scouts, but since the Calif. Supreme Court ruled that the BSA could legally refuse to accept them as members, they were never awarded with the BSA's highest honor.

Teenage rebellion normal

"We recognize that in your early teenage years you go through a formative period where you question and you prod beliefs and you think about and you explore ideas," Shields said. "That's natural and to be expected."

But Shields said Lambert is now an adult who has chosen to lead a group that requires its young members and adult leaders to believe in a supreme being. He stressed that the organization places a high importance on the spiritual development of scouts to recognize a being greater than themselves.

"We expect an adult has the ability to make their own mind up about a belief," Shields said. "If one doesn't agree with the Boy Scout belief system, then perhaps boy scouting is not for that person."

E-mail a news tip to Michael L. Betsch.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

[Zon]

The juxtaposition at this link speaks clearly and for the record. As do 239, 240 and 241.

[Stone Mountain]

Personal knowledge? Well, I've never had sex with Baden Powell so I guess I don't have personal knowledge about it. I remember reading at least a couple of articles that mentioned it though - let's see what Google has...

http://www.gayscribe.com/readingroom/scoutingfounder.htm

The available evidence points inexorably to the conclusion that Baden-Powell was a repressed homosexual [...]Among other things, it is known that he enjoyed watching young men swim naked and that he expressed disdain for seeing female nudity. Baden-Powell also had a decades-long friendship with Kenneth McLaren, with whom he served in the military and with whom he shared accommodations as often as he could.

http://gaytoday.badpuppy.com/garchive/world/040397wo.htm

However, according to Patrick Higgins' 1993 book, "A Queer Reader": "In recent years two authors have suggested that Baden-Powell may have been homosexual. Neither offered any evidence, and both based their supposition entirely upon a shared suspicion that his relationship with (his longtime friend) Kenneth McLaren might have been a physical one."

On Nov. 15, 1919, McLaren wrote in his journal: "(We) stayed with Tod. Tod's photos of naked boys and trees, etc. Excellent." Three days later, in a letter to A.H. Tod, Baden-Powell wrote, "Possibly, I might get a further look at those wonderful photographs of yours?"


Admittedly, not the best sources, but I couldn't find anything out there refuting them or any other info...

[yendu bwam]

Hm. Tell me, if a local unit couldn't recruit a male Scoutmaster, but one of the young men's mothers, or grandmother (I've seen it, or at least a woman old enough to be one) volunteered, would you think she should be rejected solely because of her gender?

No, I don't think that. But that is not a criterion for a woman to become a scoutmaster (that no suitable man is available). As a result, some women have become scoutmasters without there having been a honest and concerted effort to find a man for the position.

[yendu bwam]

Atheism may not be an organised church with a priest but it clearly is a position on a religious issue. Therefore excluding atheists is a form of religious discrimination.

That's baloney, ganesha. Religionists believe in something that atheists don't. The scouts believes that that something is essential to the message they want to impart to young men. It is certainly discrimination to ban atheists (and there is nothing wrong with that - because atheists don't believe what the scouts believe) - but it is not 'religious discrimination.' Religious discrimination is the idea that one religion is better than another. Scouts does not advance that idea.

[yendu bwam]

If atheists are correct, then both religious people and nonbelievers are using human reason alone. The only difference is that atheists admit it while the religious have convinced themselves otherwise.

Right. But scouts doesn't believe that! Not believing that, scouts believes that to impart that idea to scouts would be wrong. That's exactly why atheists are NOT permitted in scouts.

[yendu bwam]

I think atheism should be a legitmate choice.

Scouts teaches respect for all, including atheists. It just doesn't agree with them!!! Atheism is a choice anyone can make. Scouts doesn't prevent anyone from making that choice. It's just an organization for those who believe differently from atheists. I'm a devout Christian. I'm sure the atheist's club wouldn't want me as a member.

[yendu bwam]

Personally, I'm risking my eternity on the belief that if there is a supreme diety, he (or she) is indifferent as to whether I, a critter of his own creation, worships him.

You may well be right!

[yendu bwam]

What the scouts are doing is also dishonest and un-Christian.

How is it dishonest?!? Scouts is being very honest. Scouts believes that adherence to a religion (and thus to the idea that morality comes from a greater power - rather than from humans themselves) is important and an idea they want to promote to young men. Atheists do not. It was this young man who was being dishonest - in saying the scout oath (which includes 'duty to God') on a regular basis. Were he honorable and honest he would not have stayed in the organization. And as for being un-Christian - scouts is a multi-faith organization, not a Christian one.

[yendu bwam]

Even if they are legally within their rights, is it reasonable for the scouts to single out one religious position for exclusion while permitting all others?

I and the vast majority of scout parents want their sons to grow up with the idea that there is a God and that morality comes from a higher power (not from us). You may not agree with that, but that's perfectly reasonable. As a result, they (we) send their (our) sons to an organization that teaches that. If I wanted to raise my sons atheist, I would send them to an organization that promoted atheism and the idea that morality is man-made. Scouts promotes many ideas (of which this is one) that appeal to many parents. They're not asking you to agree with them. They're just asking that you not join the organization if you don't believe what they are trying to teach (and thus are muddling or contradicting their message). That's perfectly reasonable.

[RonF]

I wouldn't say that the lack of a suitable male is in and of itself sufficient to recruit a female Scoutmaster. I wouldn't want anyone, regardless of gender, to be a Scoutmaster unless they were qualified and willing to take and use the training.

I strongly suspect you're right about the "honest and concerted effort". In many units across the country, the sponsoring organization neglects their unit, and the governing body of said sponsor leaves everything to the unit committee and leadership, without accepting the reponsibility of ensuring that the Committee and leadership are running the program according to both the BSA and the sponsor's policies. They also don't accept their responsibility to ensure that the unit has active, trained leadership by engaging in a recruiting effort and maintaining ongoing supervision of the unit. Recruiting leaders is often done by the existing leaders, and by the Unit Committee, but it is the ultimate responsibility of the sponsor; they often neglect it, and the unit, entirely.

Of course, too many units reciprocate by ignoring their sponsor until they need money. I have worked on this in my unit by making sure that the unit performs service work for our sponsor (an Episcopal church) with regularity. One Eagle project put siding on the Rectory garage. Another repainted the interior of the church. We've cleared brush and burned it, which by the Vestry's own estimate saved them hundreds of dollars from having to hire a landscaper to do it. We shovel the snow and salt the walkways after every snowfall. We help run the kiddie games for the Fall Festival. The Cub Scout Pack plants flowers around the church in the spring. We supply wreaths from the Christmas Wreath sale for the church. So, when the Troop or Pack wants some help from the church, we get it. It helps, too, that the new Rector is an Eagle, Class of '65.

[Devil_Anse]

Can't have rules. Rules are bad. Rules deprive people of self-expression. Rules wreck individuality; everyone ends up like lockstep zombies.

Above is the philosophy we are expected to live by. It is clearly reflected in all our public institutions--even elections, nowadays. Since the public sector has its death-grip on the schools, of course this sort of thing is the philosophy lived by at those schools.

So we then start looking around for someplace to give our kids a clue--just a clue or two--of how to live. I mean, what does one do when one gets up? How does one obtain food? What is the best way to insure one has a roof over his head in winter? What is the best way to stay healthy so one can be strong enough to obtain his needs for living? All these questions are of interest to every human being, and their answers might provide some simple "how-to" instructions--"How To Be, And Stay, A Living Human Being." There are some differences of opinion on the answers.(Though one almost universally acceptable answer is, "you can't kill someone else and take his food, in order to feed yourself.")

Since there are differences of opinions as to the answers, we can't espouse any particular set of answers in the public schools. Dissent is discouraged there. With any public institution, it's the government's way, or the highway.

So we say, hmmm, if we can't use PUBLIC organizations to assist us in teaching our children some simple rules for living decently, maybe we could find a few PRIVATE organizations that would be a good supplement to the family teachings. Bingo! Look--there's the Boy Scouts.

But, dammit, wouldn't you know? People who do not qualify by the RULES of the Boy Scouts keep interfering and trying to run the Boy Scouts.

The truth is, certain people want power, and they will run us all into a corner in order to get it and keep it. These people who want power come from various groups and places. They are relentless in their hunting of us. They will not allow us any refuge from their imposition of power on the rest of us. So the Boy Scouts, being an organization which has set rules, is repeatedly attacked. Can't have rules. Rules are bad.

"Unless, of course, they're MY rules," says the anti-theist.

[iconoclast]

I find it boring that you assert in straw-man-like fashion that you know how I determine respect for another's opinions.

Did I "bore" you or "dog' you son? You gave yourself away when you asked for my "credentials".

[Devil_Anse]

I hear from anti-Boy Scout people that the Boy Scouts better not take one iota of any public anything--or the Constitution will end up with a fat lip bigger than Juanita Broaddrick's was.

Needless to say, in a society in which the government (worshipped as a deity by some) has its presence in every corner of even the tiniest home or institution, it's pretty hard to never take one iota of any public anything.

I feel very, very confident that there are numerous groups of which I would not approve, that routinely get part of my tax money. Gee, I wonder why it's so much more horrible when the Boy Scouts accidentally gets the use of some precious public classroom for 30 minutes?

[ganesha]

The scouts position,
1)Promotes the idea that religious belief is an obligation to society.
2)Takes the position that it is of no moral or spiritual consequence which religion is chosen.
3)Prohibits the questioning of belief, once chosen.

I have no objection to either complete freedom of belief, or advocacy of a specific belief but it is dangerous to say that religion cannot be questioned or cross-examined. The right to question a belief is ultimately the right of disbelief.

The scouts and the parents are supporting this position because they perceive religion as being conducive to moral behavior. Religion may produce moral behavior, but even if true, this is merely a beneficial side effect of religion rather than the primary purpose which is to attain salvation. If the claims of monotheistic religions such as Christianity or Islam are to be taken seriously, then a person could be well behaved and a good citizen and still go to hell. Therefore what is actually the truth matters rather than just the temporal outcome in this lifetime.

If the scouts sincerely believed in a specific religion and wanted boys to practice that faith that would be honest. What I find dishonest about combining an obligation to be religious with ecumenicalism is that they are in effect saying practice something which may not be true and then don't question it. This promotes indiffence to the truth.

[Zon]

iconoclast: I find it interesting that your respect for another's opinions is strictly correlated to the degree to which that individual has fueled the engines of industry. 139

Zon: I find it boring that you assert in straw-man-like fashion that you know how I determine respect for another's opinions. 160

Did I "bore" you or "dog' you son? 172

Your work credentials spoke best of you. Else wise you've been a bore.

You gave yourself away when you asked for my "credentials".

You're such a sleuth; what did I give away? Better yet, what do you think I didn't want to give away? You'll have to make something up -- or don't. Makes no difference to me.

[landerwy]

You spoke the truth! The Boy Scouts teaches as much charachter and values as any other public youth organization that I know of. That is what they are against, as you are well aware!

[yendu bwam]

The scouts position, 1)Promotes the idea that religious belief is an obligation to society. 2)Takes the position that it is of no moral or spiritual consequence which religion is chosen. 3)Prohibits the questioning of belief, once chosen.

OK, ganesha. Let's take these one at a time. The scouts takes NO position that religious belief is an obligation to society! (I'm not sure where you got that one! But, of course, if it did take that position, it would be the scouts' business and there would be nothing wrong with it!) It does take the position that religious belief is an important and essential element in its program to help boys grow into young men of a certain type and character - a program which is freely chosen by over a million scouts and their parents. On the second, it does not affirmatively take the position that there is no moral consequence in choosing a particular religion (i.e., it never says anything of the sort to scouts). It never gets into that. Rather, it takes the position, again, that religious belief is an important and essential element in the lives of young men. And finally, it prohibits nothing with regard to belief! (How could it do so?) Anyone can believe or disbelieve whatever they want. The Boy Scouts is not prohibiting this boy from not believing in God. That's his business. Boy Scouts is simply saying that it is not a program for people with that belief. The Knights of Columbus (a Catholic organization) wouldn't want me as a member if I were atheist either. Same with the Hillel organization. Or the Mormon Society of America. And again, no atheist club is going to want me, a devout Christian, as a member. People join organizations often to be with people who share the same beliefs. That's why I'm a member of the Catholic Church. People join scouts and have their sons join scouts because scouts has a program which reflects their beliefs. Atheism is not part of that belief.

[yendu bwam]

The scouts and the parents are supporting this position because they perceive religion as being conducive to moral behavior. Religion may produce moral behavior, but even if true, this is merely a beneficial side effect of religion rather than the primary purpose which is to attain salvation. If the claims of monotheistic religions such as Christianity or Islam are to be taken seriously, then a person could be well behaved and a good citizen and still go to hell. Therefore what is actually the truth matters rather than just the temporal outcome in this lifetime.

Scouts takes the position that religious belief is an essential element in helping boys grow into young men of a particular sort (a sort which many, many parents want their sons to grow into). And you're right in that scouts believes that a belief in God is important for helping boys lead moral lives. But it doesn't get into the particulars of the beliefs of each religion. What bothers you so much? The scouts can believe whatever it wants to believe. You (or any organization you found) can believe whatever it wants to believe. If you want, go found the atheist scouts of America. Nobody is stopping you.

[yendu bwam]

If the scouts sincerely believed in a specific religion and wanted boys to practice that faith that would be honest. What I find dishonest about combining an obligation to be religious with ecumenicalism is that they are in effect saying practice something which may not be true and then don't question it. This promotes indiffence to the truth.

Nonsense. Scouts honestly believes that a belief in God is an essential element in raising young men of a particular sort. There is absolutely nothing dishonest about that. Why? Because they state that up front, and everyone knows that's what scouts believes in. It would be dishonest to teach scouts something different from what scouts says it believes. Scouts doesn't do that. It is a very honest organization!

[WorkingClassFilth]

Nice try, but no Clintonian cigar for you. You bad, bad boy. You have my permission to get someone to spank you.