The Boy Scouts of America

Remove all ads!

This is driving me crazy.

First a little background. I am the committee chair for my son's Boy Scout Troop. A little over a year ago the national organization decided to reaffirm their position that homosexuals were not welcome in scouting. This of course set off a shitstorm like you couldn't believe.

Here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts we legalized gay marriage quite some time ago. As a state I'm sure we land in the top ten for "most liberal" areas of the country. As you can imagine this did not go over well at all. I can't speak for other troops, but our troop always kind of followed a don't ask don't tell type of policy. We always considered who someone wanted to **** to be a personal issue and not any of our business.

Now we were being put under the microscope. If a troop protested the policy, they had the threat of being disbanded which would not be a good thing for the boys. If we did nothing it upset a lot of the parents and some of the kids (most don't care).

I don't have any stats to back this up, I only have observational evidence. For some reason in my area the vast majority of gay married couples tend to be lesbian couples (If I had to guess it is at least 3 to 1). Now many of these couples either had children or adopted. Many of these children ended up being boys. Living in a household with two women, many of these women enrolled their sons in scouting so they could get some male experience.

Now national basically comes out and calls them abominations and then is surprised when this doesn't go over well. Many people quit scouting and some of the larger charities stopped contributing to Scouting. A key example was the United Way cancelled a $30K donation to our council. While this doesn't really hurt the individual troops directly, it does indirectly as council is the group that maintains the camps and campgrounds that we use.

So a lot of troops/councils/districts complained and for once the liberal media actually reported on something and National started to crumble from the backlash. It took them over a year and last week they modified their stance.

Of course what they did is even more idiotic than what they did the first time. They amended their policy to allow gay scouts, but still don't allow gay adults to be leaders. So this means a scout can be gay, can get their Eagle scout, but once they turn 18 they have to sever their relationship with scouting and can't become "adult leaders" and help with the next generation. Even worse is for the kids who turn 18 in their senior year of high school. Once they turn 18 they aren't allowed to participate in Troop activities anymore with their friends of the last ten years.

So, where do we stand now. The Democrats/liberals are beating up on the Scouts for their policy against Gay adult leaders and continuing to call for people to withdraw from Scouting. The Republicans/conservatives, are furious about the inclusion of any gay people in scouting and are calling for people to withdraw from Scouting.

Everyone seems to be missing the point that this is supposed to be about the boys.

Now to go slightly off topic, here is where I'm screwed. I almost exclusively vote Republican. That is because all I really care about is the economy and taxes. I am very liberal when it comes to social issues, but if I have to vote on money vs. social issues, money will always win. I am used to liberals thinking I'm an ******* and a big meanie. Now, I'm also getting blasted by conservatives who in my opinion pay "lip service" to caring about the economy, but clearly are more interested in social issues. I've always known that I'm a "man without a party", but for some reason this time it is really bugging me.

EDIT: In hindsight I probably should have posted this as a blog, but I didn't think of that at the time.

 

I for one applaud you for posting this the way you did. It's one thing to voice an opinion on issues that don't really effect you directly - which we all do - but the way you've framed it gives a much more personal context.

I'm in complete agreement with you here. I don't understand the point of saying a Scout can be gay so long as he's a minor, as if it's some youthful indiscretion they're bound to grow out of.

I think it's very unfortunate that this is causing such turmoil. I was in scouting myself and it was a great experience for me (most of my fellow troop members were mean little d-bags, but hey - I learned to shoot a mean longbow, clean a fish, and camp like a champ). While I agree with the spirit of the new policy and think it's long overdue, I wonder if there could have been a better approach. I don't know if it would have even been workable to, say, give individual troops across the country time to adopt the policy on their own, but with a deadline on it (say, by 2018) so there's less of an abrubt shock. Not perfect, but it's an idea.

Scouting will certainly see an uptick in membership among more liberal/progressive families, but this will hurt in conservative parts of the country. Part of the problem is the majority of scout troops are interwoven with local churches. When I was a kid, my scout troop was run entirely by my Mormon stake, and you'd be hardpressed to find more fervently anti-gay people in the US than Mormons (generally lovely people otherwise, though). The next troop over was a different stake, and so on. This new decree flat out WON'T fly in Utah, I'm here to tell you. It's not the reddest state in the union for nothing. The leaders of the troop I came from would sooner disband than tolerate a gay kid.

It's messy, and you're right – it's supposed to be about the kids. I don't think this will be the end of the BSA, but it's going to be bumpy for a while. I don't envy the position you're in, but I hope it works out for your troop.

 

Is there any particular reason why homosexuality is a big deal in the US? I also wouldn't call accepting homosexuality as 'liberal', more just 'tolerant' and 'kind'.

If you don't like homosexuals, there's a pretty simple solution in my eyes: don't sleep with someone the same sex as you.

For this thread, I would say just do as your heart tells you and screw the powers that be. Peoples natures and desires are as they are, and provided two people are consensual, just leave them be. I'm surprised that needs to be explained to anyone in this day and age.

 

I agree with both of you - WOW! That is likely the first time I've ever written that in a post when the people are TGS and DR!

But that was my first thought when I saw the announcement last week on the news - that it makes little sense to allow gay minors, but not gay adults. (I have never been a scout, but I imagine in a group that has been around for about 100 years now that most scout leaders were scouts themselves as children, so it definitely will reduce the number of scout leaders moving forward, and the points raised concerning Eagle Scouts are definitely true.

The other thing I find strange is that from my experience growing up, most boy scouts were boy scouts at a time in their life when they didn't even know what gay was, nevermind if they were themselves gay. I knew exactly one person in my graduating class of about 250 that was a eagle scout. I knew dozens of scouts in elementary school, but it seems like by the time people got to be teens most of them dropped out. And when you're in elementary school, you probably don't know if you're gay or not.

Actually, of the gay people I know, they all say they realize they were gay even in elementary school, but that this realization was came to them in hindsight. They didn't really know what gay was when they were 10, and so they couldn't realize at the time that they were gay.

A couple of ancillary points:

Strangely, this is my experience as well. I personally know three lesbian couples, they all have kids, and they all have boys. I don't know any gay male couples. Gay marriage is now legal in Maryland, and all three of these couple are planning on getting married in the next year or so.

Yes, there is quite a bit of irony here. I know this probably won't make you feel any better, but you have always struck me as an 80s Republican, and someone who came of age during the Reagan administration. The only solace I can offer is this - when it comes to social issues, I feel that it isn't you who moved away from the Republican party, but that it was the Republican Party that moved away from you.

 

True, but this really isn't an issue as all Adult leaders have to be participate in training and one of the core parts of that training is that no one under any circumstances is allowed to be alone with one of the boys. It is called "Two Deep Leadership". Even if it wasn't a sensible policy, it makes sense to most adults in this litigious society.

 

I was watching a debate between a scout leader for allowing it and... I think a lawyer representing a group that was arguing for the other side, but I missed the start of it (and figured it was a for vs against gay scouts debate). Anyway strangely they were both arguing the same point (that the proposed compromise was terrible) but wouldn't admit that they were... I couldn't make much sense of how they could both be so mad with each other and agreeing with each other at the same time, and not realising it... so I gave up. Now that I know about that 18 years of age rule/attempted compromise I can at least understand why both sides were so mad.

 

Unless your point here is to be devil's advocate - and forgive my quibbling if it is - I don't understand the point you're trying to make here. Pedophilia and homosexuality are mutually exclusive conditions. One is perfectly healthy while the other is unavoidably predatory.

I understand that some see that as a valid point. And by continuing to ban gay scout leaders, the BSA is essentially saying that they consider gay men to be likely pedophiles; or at best are saying gay men aren't suitable role models for boys, straight or otherwise. It's intellectually insulting for them to argue that an Eagle Scout, for example, can exemplify the ideals of scouting up to and including 17 years and 364 days, and yet on midnight of that day he becomes unworthy of leadership. That just doesn't compute, hence the uproar from those who support lifting the ban. It's a half-measure, and kind of a cowardly one.

EDIT: Wow, slow typing today. Couple of people beat me here...

 

In that case you should be wary of teachers, toy shop staff, sweet shop staff, paediatricians, paediatric nurses, Disney land cast members, clowns, magicians, social workers, charity workers, children's TV presenters....I could go on

 

So everyone here is in violent agreement with each other on this topic?

 

Yep. It's a serious case of aggressive reasonableness!

 

Screw you, man! You're so goddamn right about that I hate you for it.

 

I imagine that the LDS church is going to sever its ties with Scouting, at least in the States (though they might do a complete severing of ties worldwide just for the purpose of avoiding a domino effect as other countries follow America's lead.) If they do, such is their right to be involved or not involved. They will come up with a home made youth program for the boys, similar to the one they use for the girls (which has been very successful, to my knowledge.)

I, for one, don't give a hoot*. I hated Cubs, Scouts and Venturers with a passion. My parents forced me to go and associate with the other Mormon kids because it was supposed to strengthen my connection to the church. It did the opposite, in fact, as a good number of those "great Mormon kids" were actually grade A douchenozzles who had moral standards far below those of my non-Mormon friends. I have chosen to stay a Mormon** in spite of my Scouting experiences, not because of them, because I actually believe the theology -- the Mormon friends I have made and still have had no connection to Scouting.

If a kid wants to camp, sing stupid songs, and pursue a bunch of patches for their sash or whatever***, more power to them. If I had a boy who wanted to attend I'd support his choice, but I'd never force my kid into a program that held zilch, zero, zip interest for him. FRACK, I used to HATE Wednesday nights. School sucked badly enough for the torment that occurred there, and I had the joy of getting even more on one of my weekday evenings.

Sorry for the rant.

*My feelings toward the whole idea of youth groups in general are somewhat negative, as you will come to see.

**Any criticism of my faith can be kept to the criticizer, thank you very much. I know what the critics have to say and don't have any interest in hearing it.

***As an amusing addendum to the gay issue, in Canada, we don't have Eagle Scouts, we have Queen's Scouts. Har dee Har har har!

 

AWARD ACHIEVED!
LKD
Footnote Assassin

 

Any adult working with kids is in charge in the eyes of the kid. They have authority as far as the kid is concerned regardless of the actuality.

LKD, are the scouts a Mormon thing over there?

 

@ BTA,

You're right - misspoke when I said "mutually exclusive," as a person can certainly be both, even though they are two separate ideas. I guess I meant something along the lines that correlation is not causation, i.e., if a gay man turns out to be a pedophile, it has nothing to do with his being gay, since homosexuals are no more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals.

Your "perhaps more than is necessary" notwithstanding, you do see the contradiction here, right? If homosexuals aren't more likely to be pedophiles, then what is there to be cautious about? Taking this position at all implies that BSA is actually worried a gay man is more likely to be a sexual predator than a straight man. Either that, or this is merely a half-measure intended to placate those who oppose gay scout leaders under any circumstances and for a variety of reasons - not the least of which are those who genuinely are worried that gay men are potential pedophiles. Or even worse - that they consider the terms interchangeable.

 

Well I think the rule is just silly considering how gay scouting is in general.

I doubt the Finnish scouts have such limitations but I really don't know nor could I care less. Scouting is certainly not my thing and I can't imagine me putting my children through it if I ever have any.

EDIT: Yeah checked it out and apparently homosexuality does not disqualify anyone from any duties within the scouts. Not sure if such discrimination would even be legal with the current legislation.