Posted on 05/26/2013 1:56:19 PM PDT by NYer
Two groups of Catholics are directly impacted by the decision of the Boy Scouts of America to formally admit as scouts youth who profess a same-sex orientation, namely, Catholic sponsoring organizations and Catholic scouts and their families. As always (See Disclaimer no. 1 to the right), I speak only for myself in what follows.
Part One, whether Catholic organizations may sponsor Boy Scouts.
Preliminary points. First, the Church’s absolute rejection of homosexual acts and her description of same-sex attraction as objectively “disordered” (CCC 2357) is not subject to question among Catholics. Second, the Church calls on persons who experience same-sex attraction “to fulfill God’s will in their lives” (CCC 2358) and to practice chastity (CCC 2359) which, for them as for all unmarried persons, connotes complete continence (CCC 2349-2350). Third, the Church warns society to avoid “every sign of unjust discrimination” against those who experience same-sex attraction (CCC 2358).
Now, the policy adopted by the Boy Scouts states in pertinent part: “No youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.”
Immediate observations. First, the policy applies only to youth members (males aged 11 thru 17 and, I assume, single), not to adult leaders who, per the Supreme Court decision in Boy Scouts v. Dale (2000)—a case that I think was decided correctly—are excluded based on a same-sex orientation. Second, on its face the policy applies only to membership in the Boy Scouts and not necessarily to participation in all Boy Scout activities; intentionally or not, this narrow phrasing seems to leave open some questions about how a membership policy might be applied to reasonable concerns over participation in certain activities. Third, nothing in the new policy or in Boy Scout literature endorses or advocates the gay life style; in fact all members are prohibited from using the Boy Scouts to promote “any social or political position or agenda”.
These three points being noted, the revised policy may be scrutinized from a Catholic point-of-view as follows.
(1) Granted that the non-discrimination principle outlined in CCC 2358 rings platitudinously (for “unjust discrimination” is never licit!), if the principle therein means anything—and I think it does—it means that the burden of proof lies on those who would discriminate against persons experiencing same-sex attraction to justify that discrimination.
Now in some respects discrimination (e.g., refusing to recognize “same-sex marriage” or prohibiting the admission of homosexuals to seminary) can and should be defended among Catholics. But, that same-sex attraction itself (which is the only factor addressed by the policy), should bar membership (which is the only application of the policy) in a secular organization seems difficult to argue; to propose further that maintaining such a bar is a litmus test for Catholic sponsorship of an organization seems even less tenable. Consider: same-sex attraction, standing alone, does not prohibit one from being a fully initiated Catholic. To argue, therefore, that, say, a Catholic parish must hold a sponsored organization to a higher membership standard than it holds itself to is at best anomalous.
(2) An official statement accompanying the new policy “reinforces that Scouting is a youth program, and any sexual conduct, whether heterosexual or homosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting.” Such a statement, oft repeated, seems wholly in-line with sound Catholic teaching against sexual activity outside of marriage and stands in welcome contrast to the indifference toward premarital sex shown by some other youth organizations let alone to some group’s partnering with the likes of Planned Parenthood. Indeed, aside from youth programs expressly oriented toward chastity, I know of no other secular organization that so clearly declares all sexual conduct by its youth members to be contrary to its values as does the Boy Scouts.
In my opinion, these two points suffice to relieve Catholic organizations from concerns that their sponsorship of the Boy Scouts is, at least at present, incompatible with Church teaching on human sexuality.
Part Two, whether Catholic organizations or individuals may dissociate themselves from Boy Scouts without fear of giving bad example to others.
At one level, this one is easy: there is no obligation to sponsor or join Boy Scouts in the first place, so there is no objection to refraining from or cancelling sponsorship and/or membership in the Boy Scouts. But would such disassociation give “a sign” of unjust discrimination against homosexuals?
I think not.
My decade-long experience of Scouting (Eagle, 1975) was a healthy and entirely “sex-free” adventure. Part of the angst, even anger, that one sees in the wake of the recent Boy Scout decision is really, I suspect, distress over the fact that, now, the almost unique opportunity that the Boy Scouts offered—namely, space for boys to be boys (and not, as society increasingly treats them, as actual or prospective participants in sexually-tinged interactions)—seems compromised.
Scouting requires serious commitments of time, talent, and treasure. If Catholic sponsoring organizations and/or member families can’t conclude that the Boy Scouts are able (perhaps through no fault of their own) to deliver a youth program that actually operates within the parameters expressly (and I think defensibly) asserted by the Boy Scouts, then those Catholic organizations and families will likely decide that burdens of Boy Scout affiliation exceed the benefits.
But, unless and until that conclusion is demonstrated on the evidence (and not largely on predictions), and notwithstanding that some elements of the gay lobby are likely treating the Boy Scouts as pawns in their own wider projects, I think that Catholics may, and should, take the Boy Scouts at their word.
For now, at any rate.
>You cannot in good conscience remain a Catholic and support or belong to the Boy Scouts.<
.
You got it.
Also, you cannot in good conscience remain a Catholic and support, vote or be a member of the democrat party.
Edward Peters can stick this silliness where the sun don't shine
Also since when is having a healthy discrimination a bad thing.
T o discriminate is a requirement in the ability to make sound and reasonable choices. We all discriminate against certain activities and policies all the time. It is the essence of morality. The ability to discriminate between right and wrong.
I believe the Boy Scouts have been so untouchable for so long, they’ve never before, faced any real competition.
I think they will, now.
And as a former Scout myself, I say good.
BSA won’t uphold basic Judeo=Christian moral values anymore?
Best to move the kids, and donations, to other boys’ clubs that will
“Be not deceived: evil companions corrupt good morals.”
1 Cor. 15:33
The Boys Scouts just signed their death warrant as a viable organization. There is nowhere for it to go from here but down into a death spiral.
I am so old, I remember when everyone was supposed to be celibate till they were married, and few married before 17. Let’s accept that back then this was observed in the breach at older ages. Why are we talking about sexual orientation of 11 year olds?
Surrender, surrender, but don’t give yourself away.
I think we are talking about the sexual orientation of 15-17 year old boys and putting them in charge of younger kids whose gender they are sexually attracted to. It would be the same thing if the girl scouts allowed boys and put a 17 year old boy in charge of a bunch of 14-15 year old girls I suppose.
Freegards
AMEN!
I disagree completely with this Edward Peters. I was thinking along the same lines as "Ransomed" in "post 30" - would Edward Peters advocate allowing girls to join the boy scouts, and let them participate in all their activities together with the boys (like camping together, etc.)?
Would he advocate allowing boys to join the girl scouts, and let them participate in all their activities together with the girls?
Would he advocate combining the boy scouts with the girls scouts, and permit them to do all activities together as one group, with no (zero) discrimination between them (such as separating boys bathrooms from girls bathrooms, or having separate sleeping facilities (tents/cabins) based on common-sense discriminating between the sexes)?
Those would obviously be foolish choices to make, and what this "canon lawyer" is advocating is equally foolish.
It is safe to say that President Hom-o-bama would agree completely with Peters advice.
I wish someone could get that message thru to the ones in Red England...
Yes, the BSA held out for awhile. Now they are just another sodomite-infected depraved organization. I will be sure not to support them in any way. They have just given new meaning to their motto “Be Prepared”
In the Catholic Faith, we'd call that a 'near occasion of sin', and they're to be avoided.
Legalistic arguments devoid from observations of what is actually going on on the ground. The fact is that starting January 1, 2014, homosexuals will be making the Scouts their territory, and I suspect filing multiple lawsuits immediately demanding “full inclusion.” Second, from a church’s perspective, it is not what may happen in individual troops, it is that the Scouts have endorsed behavior directly in opposition to the uniform teaching of the Bible and the Church. Third, by going along with this policy, you are enabling young men entering into the homosexual lifestyle, something that will have lifetime negative consequences for these young people that are just having their sexual identities formed. The psychological and physical harm caused by male homosexuality can be easily demonstrated, everything from higher rates of depression, suicide and mental illness to AIDS, meningitis and other sexually transmitted diseases.
As a close analogy, just because a lot of people are addicted to drugs does not mean the Scouts should not only not oppose addiction, but instead, say, oh it’s perfectly fine you’re addicted to meth and face a shortened lifespan and mental and physical health problems, we accept you and say that that behavior is not problem for the Scouts.
The latest count is that 9 councils have adopted the position of ignoring the adult ban. Those 9 councils are fully open to adult homosexuals. I am sure more will also adopt this position.
RIP BSA.
Yes, that's the bottom line, and anyone with an ounce of moral Christian fiber knows this to be true, not just Catholics.
Where has he been? The ones who clamored that gay youth be allowed to join the BSA have been very clear that such a policy will not be enough. They will not stop until gay leaders are permitted as well.
He also forgets that many gays do believe it is discrimination if their sexual activity as well as orientation is not affirmed, tolerance is never enough. So be prepared for the BSA being told that letting gay youth join must be accompanied by policies that make sure that homosexual behavior is treated as being equal to heterosexual behavior. Telling them that the BSA is not about sex will be met with angry protests. Everything is about affirming their sexual choice. Any objections to such behavior will be viewed as discrimination. Especially religious based objections.
BSA has made itself obsolete with one incredibly stupid decision. I am the Charter Org Rep for my son's troop--I represent the Church to the Scouts. I'll be meeting with our pastor this week to discuss alternatives to Scouting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.