Dilemma for The Boy Scouts of America: Protect Children or Homosexuals?

Kristi Kane

On February 6, 2013, (the BSA’s 103^rd birthday), the Boy Scouts of America was to announce its decision regarding the acceptance of homosexuals into their organization both as leaders and as scouts. It was announced that the decision would be delayed until the Boy Scouts annual meeting in May 2013.

Why would the Boy Scouts of America need to decide on this? They would in effect be overturning the Supreme Court’s decision in their favor. On June 28, 2000, the United States Supreme Court (Boy Scouts of America et al. v Dale) held that the constitutional right of freedom of association allows a private organization like the Boy Scouts of America to exclude a person from membership when “the presence of that person affects in a significant way the group’s ability to advocate public or private viewpoints.”

The Scout Oath (or Promise) says:

On my honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
And to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

 The Boy Scouts of America does not believe that a homosexual lifestyle is a “morally straight” one.

Even though the Supreme Court gave its decision on this subject in 2000, many homosexuals will not rest until the Boy Scouts buckle. An opinion piece on a gay advocacy website, OpEdNews.com, reflects the depth of their disdain:

 “As a private club, the US courts have ruled that the Boy Scouts are welcome to take this last, lonely, loathing stand against civil rights. For an organization that has existed 102 years and that congratulates itself for upholding the highest moral principles, it is sad that the Boy Scouts would flaunt such an appalling ignorance of history, morality, common decency and democracy.”

The real heat has come from the withdrawal of donations from corporations like Intel, UPS, AT&T and the Merck Foundation have recently suspended funding of the Boy Scouts of America with a nod from GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation), until the ban on gay scouts and scout leaders is lifted.  Brian Grill, Merck Foundation, explains: “We cannot continue to provide support to an organization with a policy that is contrary to one of our core beliefs. We remain ready and willing to re-consider our funding position in the event that the Boy Scouts of America were to revise its policy.”

In “Lessons from Gay Scouting in Canada,” Bradlee Dean warns:

“In 1998, Canadian Scouts (CS) decided to allow females, atheists, agnostics, homosexuals, bisexuals and transsexuals to join the CS. In 1999, they approved the establishment of an all-homosexual troop, which now marches in Canada’s “gay pride” parades. Within five years, scouting membership dropped over 50 percent. Many scouting camps and offices were closed, and staff was laid off.

Boys who become scouts to receive a healthy, moral upbringing are instead becoming lifetime victims of criminals who prey on children. Even worse is the lack of justice these young boys receive. Canada’s epidemic of child sex abuse is largely swept under the rug to protect pederasts.”

Father Benedict Groeschel of Larchmont, New York is considered the Catholic Church’s expert on Catholic Priest abuse. He says that 90 percent of the child abuse by Catholic Priests is done by homosexuals, and they represent only 10 percent of the total priests. These data are confirmed by a John Jay School of Criminal Justice study. This means that homosexual priests abuse children 81 times as frequently as heterosexual priests!

The Boy Scouts of America has sufficient justification to ask homosexuals to not serve as Scoutmasters. 

 Brian Rushfeldt, president of Canada Family Action, stated, “The notion that we need to protect homosexuals more than we need to protect children…has been a disturbing trend.”

Randall Stephenson, executive board member of the Boy Scouts of America and CEO of AT&T is slated to become chairman of the BSA board in 2014. You read that correctly. One of the men responsible for pulling funding from scouting because of its “anti-gay” policy is set to become its chairman next year.

It’s not too late to let the Boy Scouts know what you think.

BSA National Council:

Phone number:    972-580-2000
Email:           nationalsupportcenter@scouting.org

 

The Scouts Stick to Their Guns

Gary Boyd

On April 26, John Seewer’s article Lesbian Scout leader ousted in Ohio; parents upset discusses the removal of a lesbian scout leader in Ohio, after a complaint was made about Ms. Jennifer Tyrell to a local scouting professional.  Tyrell, by all accounts cited, demonstrated forthrightness and honesty with local scout leaders with respect to her sexual orientation, and served well as the den mother of Pack 109.  Some parents have complained about Tyrell’s removal.  A Boy Scouts of America spokesman said of the Tyrell situation: “In this case, the policy was understood by her and her fellow volunteers but not followed.”

Why, then would the Boy Scouts wish to remove a leader of opposite sex to the scouts, who, as a lesbian, presumably would have no sexual interest in the scouts, and who has served valuably in the local Boy Scout organization?  While Seewer focuses only on parents who were upset with Tyrell’s removal, he does not indicate whether other leaders or parents supported it; there may be more to the story.  Notwithstanding, several good reasons clearly justify the Boy Scouts of America’s actions.  I will focus on two of them.

The United States Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the Boy Scouts of America was justified in banning gay male leaders.  Accepting a lesbian leader in scouting might be the first step towards the capitulation of the Boy Scouts or the judiciary in accepting homosexual leaders generally in the scouting organization.  While many homosexuals have never abused a child and would never think of it, tragic accidents have been documented wherein children have been ruined by homosexual perpetrators.  Most notably in recent days is the Penn State debacle.  The Boy Scouts have the right to make a determination and set the rules on what they think is appropriate interaction for children and what does and does not meet their values as an organization.

In addition to the protection of children, society must be protected.  Acceptance of homosexual leaders in scouting would be another step towards the societal normalization of homosexuality — a distinct departure from America’s Judeo-Christian moral standard.  General Douglas MacArthur, speaking of the devaluated morality of his time, made the observation: “History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline.”  I hasten to add that many factors contribute to America’s moral decay.  If we fail to morally revitalize our society, I predict the wide-spread acceptance of homosexuality will prove to have been a crucial turning point on the road to that decay.

The Boy Scout organization is under no obligation to affirm homosexual behavior (the ultimate goal of gay advocacy) and they make clear their position in this statement regarding the Jennifer Tyrell incident:

“Our focus is on delivering the nation’s foremost youth program of character development and values-based leadership training. Our mission does not include teaching young people about sex or sexual orientation, and we do not believe it is Scouting’s role to introduce this topic in our youth development program.”

The courage of the Boy Scouts should be admired and emulated.