Follow
“For far too long, this issue has divided and distracted us. Now it’s time to unite behind our shared belief in the extraordinary power of Scouting to be a force for good.”
Robert Gates, BSA president.
In a vote of the executive committee yesterday the BSA ends the ban on gay leaders.
From a BSA press release–
“On Monday, July 27, the National Executive Board ratified a resolution that removes the national restriction on openly gay adult leaders and employees. Of those present and voting, 79 percent voted in favor of the resolution. The resolution was recommended for ratification by the Executive Committee earlier this month. The resolution is effective immediately.”
For some years the question of sexual orientation has opened a rift in our families, our communities, our nation, and the BSA. It’s not my intention to argue, we all must search our hearts and decide this issue for ourselves.
It’s difficult to separate this issue from politics. Recent Supreme Court decisions have settled many questions in law but complex political questions of how this issue relates to constitutional freedoms (the freedom of religion, freedom of association, and freedom of speech) continue to be debated. Certainly we can agree that excluding a class of people for something over which they have no choice is objectively unethical.
I will say that, although it should have been made a decade or two ago, I welcome the decision. I’m not in a particularly celebratory mood – I understand why some expressions of religion choose to discriminate on this basis I don’t share that point of view.
From a practical standpoint this decision will effect our overall membership numbers. Reportedly 70% units are chartered by religious entities, and it’s almost certain that some will find this change untenable.
I’ve openly opposed this discrimination in the BSA for fifteen or twenty years, so I understand how it feels to be on the outside looking in, and how distressing this change will be to some. I struggled with this question mightily. I chose to keep serving the young people in my community, and working to change this discriminatory policy. Something I could only accomplish by continuing to be a member of the BSA.
The quote from our national president says it all “It’s time to unite behind our shared belief in the extraordinary power of Scouting to be a force for good.”
Here’s Robert Gates speaking about the resolution –
Naturally we are not all going to agree on this. Like most of you I am weary of arguing and debating this issue.
I welcome you to leave a comment below but online discussions of debatable questions are rarely polite exchanges of ideas and quickly degrade into personal attacks – even among Scouters.
I think we can do better than that – please, please, please prove me right!
If you’d like to contact me via email feel free to do so
A WORD ABOUT COMMENT MODERATION
I always moderate comments here on the blog and in my social media outlets.
Name calling, personal attacks, needless sniping, and SHOUTING, are the reasons I remove comments.
Update 7.28 [6:30] PM
It has oft been repeated in the comments that this policy change exposes religious organizations that charter units to being sued (I assume over discrimination) or that the BSA will not defend the right of religious charters to discriminate. The new policy allows chartered organizations to decide, but does not mean that they are on their own when it comes to defending those decisions.
These sort of claims have no basis and I ask those of you who are making such statements to stop misleading people.
The BSA’s legal firm Hughes Hubbard & Reed prepared a memo addressing these concerns
“We understand that some religious organizations are concerned that if they exclude homosexuals from leadership in Scouting units that they charter after the BSA changes its policy they will be vulnerable to lawsuits from the potential leaders they exclude. Those concerns should be allayed by the legal defenses that religious organizations have under place of public accommodation statutes and the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
The risk that a homosexual activist might file a lawsuit seeking admission to a Scouting unit (e.g., a Boy Scout troop or a Cub Scout pack) of a religious chartered organization whose religious values are inconsistent with homosexual conduct cannot be eliminated. We live in a litigious society, and frivolous lawsuits are threatened and filed every day. However, any lawsuit challenging the religious requirements in a Scouting unit chartered by a religious organization would be unlikely to succeed or even make much progress.
.. the BSA would not seek to exert pressure on any religious chartered organization. Rather, the BSA will help safeguard the religious chartered organizations by defending their protected expression and religious liberties in connection with the selection of unit leaders.”
Update 7.29 [9:50] AM
The Catholic Committee on Scouting statement
“The National Catholic Committee on Scouting recognizes that differences in religious beliefs among chartered organizations and society in general have played a part in the creation of this resolution. While this fluctuating situation will be increasingly challenging, we recognize the vital importance of providing a Catholic emphasis to Catholic Scouts and Scouters seeking ways to live out their “duty to God”. We also recognize the increasing need for the Catholic Church to offer Scouting as a program of youth ministry. Chartering Scout units will ensure that youth within their faith communities are led by faith-filled role models who share the same interests in Scouting.”
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is deeply troubled by today’s vote by the Boy Scouts of America National Executive Board. In spite of a request to delay the vote, it was scheduled at a time in July when members of the Church’s governing councils are out of their offices and do not meet. When the leadership of the Church resumes its regular schedule of meetings in August, the century-long association with Scouting will need to be examined. The Church has always welcomed all boys to its Scouting units regardless of sexual orientation. However, the admission of openly gay leaders is inconsistent with the doctrines of the Church and what have traditionally been the values of the Boy Scouts of America.”
Update 8.26
In the resolution adopted on July 27, 2015, and in subsequent verbal assurances to us, BSA has reiterated that it expects those who sponsor Scouting units (such as the Church) to appoint Scout leaders according to their religious and moral values “in word and deed and who will best inculcate the organization’s values through the Scouting program.” At this time, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will go forward as a chartering organization of BSA, and as in the past, will appoint Scout leaders and volunteers who uphold and exemplify Church doctrine, values, and standards.
Thanks for writing this article. You have given perspective and ethical perspective to this topic.
It’s hard to believe that the BSA did not get prior approval from the LDS Church or at least came to an agreement. The brief from the head office made it sound like they disappointed and didn’t know it was coming. And what’s with the entire upper echelon of the church out of town this week? I’ve never known much about this church, but their internal politics have a huge impact on our future success. Most scouts are not Mormon but most Units are Mormon. The LDS Church has the most scout units; Pack, Troop or Crew. ALL of their Chartered Organizations will do what the LDS Church says. So this is kind of important. I don’t want to sound critical, I just don’t know much about it.
Thanks Tom – the whole LDS response is a mystery to me, I am sure that goodwill will win out though.
Clark you left out an important part of the LDS Churches statement. Which as an LDS Scoutmaster I feel is an important part of the puzzle that the LDS church leaders are evaluating.
“As a global organization with members in 170 countries, the Church has long been evaluating the limitations that fully one-half of its youth face where Scouting is not available. Those worldwide needs combined with this vote by the BSA National Executive Board will be carefully reviewed by the leaders of the Church in the weeks ahead.”http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-re-evaluating-scouting-program?cid=HP_MO_7-27-2015_dPAD_fMNWS_xLIDyL2-1_
I am not sure I understand this – is it saying that the BSA policies may not be acceptable in other countries? If so is it simply the idea that non LDS units may be accepting of LBGT adult volunteers is a deal breaker in another country?
Clarke,
Why do you refer to what has been done prior to this decision as “discrimination”? Do you really feel that way? In your follow up post you note that religious institutions should not worry because our constitution will protect us in choosing leaders. For me to stay in Scouting, I am counting on just that. But when people in positions such as yourself use the term “discrimination”, you are just supporting those who would seek to entangle a religious institution in a court battle. I suggest if you truly feel both sides should be able to get along with this issue, you STOP using the term “discrimination”. Use of that word is negative, inflammatory and critical.
What other word do you suggest I use? Discrimination (defined as treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit) is exactly what it is, and I think it’s antithetical to the spirit of Scouting.
I am not sure exactly who I would theoretically be supporting to “entangle a religious institution in a court battle”. Point to to me a single case where the courts have forced a religious institution to accept a volunteer or member. If someone sought my encouragement to mount such a case I would tell them they were foolish. Religious organizations have a first amendment right to discriminate, one that they have exercised and defended since the constitution was written.
Beyond that the BSA has always defended Chartered partners in making these choices, and they will continue to do so. Find me one instance where someone successfully challenged the BSA membership standards in court, or an instance where the BSA did not come to the defense of a chartered partner.
The fear that this policy change will somehow unleash a flood of litigation on Chartered partners is both unfounded and inflammatory – it is a non issue. If you believe otherwise please tell me exactly who would mount such a challenge and the legal theory they would use.
Understand, too, that I have one position in Scouting, I am a venture crew advisor – a position of very limited power and influence.
Based on this latest move, I would not suggest any religious institution count on the BSA to help defend them. That would be foolish. The BSA has shown us what they will take a stance on and what they will not.
If you need information as to what’s coming and who’s working on this, I suggest you look at the ACLU’s web site. This is a clip from their site, “Religious freedom in America means that we all have a right to our religious beliefs, but this does not give us the right to use our religion to discriminate against and impose those beliefs on others who do not share them.” You will note the term “discrimination” is also a word they feel comfortable using. The ACLU is clearly shaping through their threat of litigation the decisions of many religious institutions trying to live out their faith.
Check out their web site: https://www.aclu.org/feature/using-religion-discriminate
You keep saying the threat of litigation is “unfounded”. Stop looking at the past and look to the future. I’m not worried about what happened yesterday it’s what’s coming I’m worried about. As I said, for me to stay in Scouting, I am counting on the religious institution protection but don’t tell me I’ve got nothing to worry about. That would make me “un-prepared”.
“Based on this latest move, I would not suggest any religious institution count on the BSA to help defend them.” Even though the BSA has stated the contrary unequivocally, and have a long history of having done exactly that? How does the membership policy change alter that commitment?
“The ACLU is clearly shaping through their threat of litigation the decisions of many religious institutions trying to live out their faith.” Point this out to me specifically, where is the ALCU taking action against a religious institution? As a ACLU member I know that we have acted to defend the rights of religious organizations many times.
If you read the information you linked to on the ACLU website it supports exactly what I am saying. There is no mention of religious organizations or churches, but businesses and corporations using the guise of religious objections to discriminate just as they did when the civil rights act passed in the sixties.
The BSA (and by extension, the chartering organizations that sponsor it’s units) established it’s right to discriminate in how it defines membership standards in a Supreme Court decision – BSA v. Dale in 2000. I repeat, again, the BSA has unequivocally stated that it will defend it’s chartered organizations in applying the revised membership standards.
I don’t understand, in the face of this evidence, what there is to worry about.
Well, I think the BSA finally did the right thing in trusting their Chartered Organizations to make the decisions.
That being said, I am waiting for the call from our Chartered Organziation Rep telling us we have to leave.
So, back to putting my sales hat on and explain to them that it does not mean that we are being forced to adopt the rule, as it is up to them to decide that course. If that is good for them – then we can stay – if the media and the agenda driven win – then you can expect about a 30% drop in youth.
Think about it. One single issue is going to drive Scouting into sub millions. It is up to us to pick up the pieces and move forward. I don’t know about you – but with this coming – I believe my council budget would have been cut by 30%.
I believe the best compromise has been chosen. I know there will be those who want to keep adding fuel by debating this issue further, but to me, I feel it is time to let this fire die. As leaders we have spent far too much time discussing the rights, the wrongs, the legal and moral implications, etc. There are opinions out there that we cannot hope to change on either side of the fence. We now need to get back to serving the youth and do the tasks we have signed on for and move on.
Outstanding post Clarke!
I can tell you just as authoritatively that the discrimination based on sexual orientation has had a very direct effect on membership. I have been told this directly from perspective parents and heard many stories where others have been told exactly that.
Beyond costing us goodwill we’ve also denied our Scouts the opportunity to work with some very talented, dedicated adults.
If money was the single driving factor (no doubt it is a factor) the BSA would have reversed this discriminatory policy long ago.
This decision was not reached overnight, it has been coming for at least a decade and a half.
I can look my Scouts in the eye very clearly and happily and tell them that discrimination is not a value or ideal of Scouting, and that we have taken a giant step to realizing the promise of our oath and law in eliminating it.
I did stand for my convictions, probably not bravely enough.
In my town there are four Boy Scout units chartered by christian churches. I expect only one (LDS) will maintain the ban on gay adult leaders.
I, and many other Scouters, units and councils exerted considerable pressure to make this change happen. This was not outside groups, this was us.
they never wanted any input anyway, this was a done deal.
Which multiple lawsuits?
Show me where the “BSA has cut loose the individual Chartered Orgnizations (sic) to fend for them selves” or what lawsuits will “surly (sic) be brought on by the ACLU” based on what the ACLU (I am a card carrying member) has said.
I have shown that the BSA says exactly the opposite, you are misleading people – stop it.
Scouting is not an organization, it is a movement. It cannot be contained by an ideology or a particular point of view, it;s a lot bigger than that.
I have always been aware that I am part of a movement, and a member of an organization. These are two very different things. I appreciate and value a diversity of opinion and ways to apply Scouting.
I make no claim to having lightning in a jar, or to being right about things, I just tell folks what I understand as I understand it. Thankfully what we all hold in common is much greater than our differences.
They already can!!
Go Venturing!!!!
Yes, but girls cannot be cub scouts or scouts, and girls in venturing cannot earn the same awards as boys, that’s segregation, and it means we have a ways to go before we are co-ed.
I think it will be the end of BSA if the LDS church leaves.
I am sure the BSA may virtually disappear where folks are majority LDS but that absence would be filled with whatever program the LDS creates in it’s place. While I think the LDS departing would be tragic, and I hope it doesn’t happen I think and financial shortfall from LDS leaving would be made up pretty quickly. LDS is roughly 25% of current BSA membership a significant, but sustainable, loss considering we have lost 30% of our membership overall since 2000, and 13% in the past two years.
Objectively and frankly, in the best spirit possible, other changes I advocate (a fully co-ed program, and the inclusion of atheists and agnostics) may be also be objectionable to LDS folks. Without those changes I don’t see how the BSA stops the 15 year accelerating membership crisis (much less seeing any growth) and I think the decline will continue.
There are quite a few countries where Scouting is divided along Catholic/protestant lines, with two separate organizations. I think there’s plenty of room in the US for more than one Scouting organization. I’d think that sort of arrangement would likely see more young people getting the benefits of Scouting, and the young people won’t really care who is in what Scouting organization, just that the other person is a Scout. Youth members seem to understand Scouting as something anyone ought to be able to do, they don’t typically vilify each other over differences, they look for the common threads of brotherhood.
It’s we adults who can’t seem to get past the differences, to a young person a Scout is a Scout.
Michael LDS units have always be open to inviting individuals who are not of their faith to join their units. They go as far as paying for all registration fees and any other fees related to being a scout. We treat no one any different all we ask is they adhere to the standards of the church the same as other young men.
Robin as an LDS scout leader I don’t think it would take very long to create a program that produces the same out comes for the church as BSA does. I also do not think the “respect that being and Eagle Scout carries.” will have anything to do with the churches decision.
What attacks? Who is taking churches to court because they can’t be a member or volunteer?
What “LG community” is going to attack chartered partners? How will they do this? Why would they do this?
When has the ‘LG community” attacked a chartered partner in the past? Show me one instance.
Where does the BSA say it is “leaving those organizations alone”? How does this policy change alter their commitment?