It’s a simple issue. One of the simplest.
We’ve already established that the Scouts offer an awful lot to kids. Lets go a little further and expect that 10% of the children will end up developing ‘teh gay’. (Yes, I’m being obtuse here).
If there is no other organization that provides what Scouting does, and as a concerned parent, I want to assist those kids…at what point do I tell them: Sorry, you can’t be here, you’re too swishy?
OR Do you make the kids aware of this patently stupid policy, and move on to the other beneficial things?
PLUS, If I stand up and bang the drum and criticize the leadership and am asked to leave for doing so, how am I helping the kids by being anything other than a two week soundbite? I can stay, and assist by example, or I can protest and be showed out.
I certainly don’t disagree with that, but I’m not sure I agree that the fact that you have to deal with someone who’s willing to commit a larger immoral act excuses you for committing a smaller immoral act. (Barring extreme circumstances like being physically assaulted, disowned by parents, loss of employment, and so forth.) The guy who wants to throw the atheist scout out of the organization is a bad guy. A Scout shouldn’t just be a less bad guy - he should be a good guy. Particularly an Eagle Scout. If it’s okay to lie about major personal beliefs in order to make Eagle, doesn’t that diminish the whole point of being an Eagle Scout? If you’re willing to lie to make Eagle, shouldn’t that fact alone be a bar to being an Eagle Scout, even (or, perhaps, especially) if he’s lying about something that shouldn’t be an issue in the first place?
I respect that I’m only getting a tiny piece of the relationship you have with your Scouts, and I don’t mean to give you a hard time over this. I am, however, a little concerned that you might be doing some of your scouts a disservice, if you’re counseling them to lie about their sexuality for personal advancement. Visibility is central both to the success of the gay rights movement as a whole, and to the individual happiness of gay people. While I certainly wouldn’t suggest that a teenager or pre-teen has a responsibility to be open about their sexuality, you are, explicitly, training them how to be moral and ethical adults. As such, telling them that it’s okay to lie about their sexuality in a context where they aren’t in some sort of immediate physical danger or enormous financial difficulty is a very poor lesson.
Of course, simply not mentioning it is a different matter. If the review board doesn’t ask about an applicant’s sexuality, I don’t see a reason they should volunteer it.
I think you’re an example in both situations. The question is, are you a good example, or a bad example?
Serious question:
Should a 12yr old, from your troop, hang himself, for beginning to identify as gay, (perhaps you’ve even spoken openly of your own personal pro gay stance to him!), in a confusing and polarized world, would you feel any differently about your willingness to participate in the organization?
I should think it would leave me shattered. Have you ever considered such a thing?
I was addressing the comment about the statue on top of the temple. You do recall that’s where he said it was in the post I initially quoted, do you not?
Looked like he was saying that he didn’t recall who it was on top of the temple, not where it was. On top of the temple is a pretty non-general location.
Thanks. Hopefully we’re both clear on this tangent now.
nm
No problem. Lots of people have difficulty reading. So, what do you think about BSA’s policies regarding gay and atheist scouts and volunteers?
No, the comparison is not absurd. The bigotry of both organizations is disgusting and completely indefensible.
In fact, the bigotry displayed by the Scouts may be worse than that of the Klan. To have an organization that exists, as you claim, “to develop boys into men” be so openly and disgustingly bigoted is to not only embrace that bigotry, but to claim that it is a worthy ideal.
You can attempt to wash you hands of it by saying that you don’t support the bigotry and refuse to apply an ideological purity test to the groups you support, but you are not making yourself out any better for it. This is not some quibble about what level of taxation is proper, or how much society should support the arts, or the like. This is an issue of basic human dignity and worth. That is, or ought to be, a bright line issue, especially when it comes to an organization that you look to to develop and impart wisdom to children.
This is an absurd comparison.
Ah - I haven’t been in a situation where sexuality was the issue, it has only been those boys who need an answer to the question “how do you practice the Law of Reverent.”
I have never had a boy come out to me.
I have not considered it, and I have been fortunate so far not to have to deal with suicide within my unit for whatever reason.
It would hurt far worse if the boy had never had the knowledge that I am not anti-gay. If a boy killed himself, and part of the reason was that he thought that I would look down on him for his sexuality - THAT is what would hurt.
However, if I left the BSA due to this and then a boy killed himself from my old Troop - I would wonder if I would have made a difference if I had been around instead of quitting.
This is why I stay - to be another voice. Interesting post from George Takei today on this subject:
As close as they must be, with their scout leaders, especially kids from homes of divorce, etc, it’s a shame to think they probably just don’t feel they can.
This is an excellent point, and a great way to look at it!
If such a child faced expulsion, how far would you go to support his fight to stay in?
Well you just used it as a slur. At least I’m not a hypocrite about it.
I was in at the same time. I think it never came up back then because if someone came out, being kicked out of the Scouts would be the least of their problems. The scouts were mainstream then, today they are more like the last segregated lunch counter in town.
If they became clearly an organization consisting only of Mormons and other religious bigots, the problem might become obvious enough for them to lose the support of governments and good organizations, and perhaps some parallel organizations for boys would emerge. So I agree. Perhaps the leadership would do something. If the Mormons have their way by threatening to pull out, why shouldn’t the tolerant try the same tack?
(I’m not sure if it’s clear or not, but this is giving me a lot of food for thought.)
I think at the point in time the scout approaches the committee, you should already have had the following conversation:
“It’s important to note that you are not a badge or medal. If you tell these people that you’re gay, you may not get a badge, but that doesn’t make me less proud of you. You’ve earned the rank, even if they arbitrarily withhold the chunk of ribbon, metal, and wallet card.”
Do you have a blood test at 6 to determine if the boy is gay? Do you line them up each year with the Sorting Hat and say “Bzzt, too gay, you’re out”. I don’t think anybody on this thread, on either side, doesn’t think it’s hypocritical.
If the BSA removes someone from the list, nothing I can do about it. I would still welcome the boy to attend every event, every meeting, etc. However - the boy would never be able to “officially” be a Scout.
Did I misunderstand you? Were you insulting the BSA, making a statement of fact, or complimenting them when you said Scouting was gay?
Because in just about every other time I have heard someone call someone or something gay - it has been meant as an insult. Care to clarify?
I have no idea what you’re trying to say, here.