Follow
On April 19 the B.S.A. released the Membership Standards Study Initiative Executive Summary and the Membership Standards Resolution to be voted on in our May national meeting.
Like many people on both sides of the question my first impression of the membership standards resolution was disappointment and frustration. (My opinion of the question of inclusion is explained here). As someone who supports inclusiveness I was disappointed that the resolution did not end the policy of excluding adults based on sexual orientation but I was heartened to see that the resolution removed the ban for youth members. Obviously this resolution creates an untenable situation for a gay Scout who wishes to continue to remain involved in Scouting once they become an adult but It’s not my intention to address that particular problem now.
A careful reading of the Membership Standards Study Initiative Executive Summary helped me understand the resolution, I may not be completely happy with it but at least I understand it better. Here are some of the key reasons our national leadership arrived at the resolution they issued:
While perspectives and opinions vary significantly, parents, adults in the Scouting community, and teens alike tend to agree that youth should not be denied the benefits of Scouting.
The executive summary states a number of indicators that lead them to conclude the most workable resolution addresses youth members.
- A majority of current Boy Scouts and Venturers do not believe the current policy represents a core value of Scouting.
- Adult volunteers who support the policy tend to agree that it is not proper to remove a youth member based on orientation alone.
- The majority of parents of our Scouts do not support the present policy.
- Overwhelming majorities of all groups surveyed strongly agree it is unacceptable to deny an openly gay Scout an Eagle Scout Award solely because of his sexual orientation.
- Many religious chartered organizations stated their concern is with homosexual adult leaders and not with youth.
I have long contended that my opinion (and the opinion of the rest of the Scouting establishment) is not particularly important in comparison with the opinion of the parents of the Scouts we serve, or the Scouts themselves. It’s clear from the executive summary that if Scouts and their parents alone were making this decision we would resolve to end the ban for both youth and adult members.
Even the highest levels of B.S.A. leadership are split on this question:
- Slightly more members of the Board and Advisory Council initially supported the current policy, but Board members reversed themselves to slightly opposing the current rules after responding to the scenarios.
- A majority of the Board does not consider the current policy to be core to Scouting’s values, while a majority of the Advisory Council does.
- A large majority of the respondents believe they can find a way to continue in Scouting whether or not the BSA’s decision agrees with their own views.
A key part of the summary dismisses two persistent myths about sexual orientation as it relates to youth protection;
Youth Protection
Youth safety and role modeling are two of the biggest concerns mentioned by members who oppose a change in the policy. In addressing issues related to youth protection for the membership standards study, the Boy Scouts of America tasked its director of Youth Protection, Michael V. Johnson, to consult with leading experts in the field of youth protection and child sexual abuse prevention that the BSA has consulted in the past in formulating the BSA’s Youth Protection policies and curriculum:
David Finkelhor, Ph.D.
W. Walter Menninger, M.D., psychiatry
Charol Shakeshaft, Ph.D.
Victor Vieth, J.D.All four experts were consistent in their findings and recommendations, including:
• “The nearly universal opinion among sexual abuse authorities is that same-sex sexual interest or same-sex sexual experience, either in adults or youth, is NOT a risk factor for sexually abusing children.”
• In regard to role modeling: “Most of the research on the effect on children of associating with self-identified homosexual adults has been done about homosexual parents. The clear conclusion from this research is that there appear to be no effects on children’s adjustment, mental health or sexual orientation.
Our national leadership has drafted a resolution that I am reluctant to support because I don’t think it goes far enough, but it is a definite step in the right direction and I think I understand the reasoning behind this resolution better after reading the executive summary a couple of times. Until the rest of us; adult volunteers at all levels, our chartered partners and other stakeholders in Scouting, catch up with the families and the youth we serve this half measure will have to do.
I note that this issue is tends to be discussed in more emotional than logical terms. In the interest of focusing the discussion in the comments I ask you to review the Membership Standards Study Initiative Executive Summary and the Membership Standards Resolution before commenting.
Noting that the internet is a big place with lots of opportunities to express your opinion we won’t be discussing the biology, origins, or politics of sexual orientation. If you have questions about these issues see this page. We also won’t be discussing specific sectarian religious views on the matter. If you have questions about the place of religion in the B.S.A. see these resources.
If you have a question or comment on the subject you can contact me directly or submit a comment for moderation below.
Thanks for your writeup. I am glad they are heading in a better direction. I think having Scouting push a moral issue is difficult unless it has universal acceptance. When chartering organizations can no longer discriminate or take an opposing stance, the waters become muddied. Think of a PTA or school as a chartering organization.
I do support the rights of a chartering organization to determine the moral character of their adult leaders. They should be involved in the approval process and Scouting should support whatever decision they decide. We wouldn’t expect one religion to be forced to have leaders from another teaching their youth. While I consider myself an excellent leader, I do not consider myself an appropriate leader for some religious organizations.
I know ,just would like to have seen something positive that could be promoted this summer ,before the jamboree so no politics for that event .
Hi Clarke, I’m with most comenters here that half a rule change is not the best sloution .I do like 2 things about this proposal ,All boys are able to join and stay in Scouts ,period .there is no exception for units that still want to exclude .Those units will have to learn to be fair to boys .I do hope that this will break down barriers ,and sterotypes to a point that a next rule change for adults won’t be far behind. I chuckle a little because your always stressing to read carfully Scouting rules ,advancement policys etc. that is very important here. the only thing I object to specificly here is the efictive date ,Jan. ? why not asap!
Why Not ASAP?
It’s been the habit of the BSA to announce changes to policies and advancement requirements far in advance of their effective date to allow for a period of adjustment and to make sure (I assume) that any policies these changes may effect are reviewed and changed as well.
Yes. My assumption on them waiting till the end of the year is to give some of the more Conservative units the time to figure out if they’d like to stay involved with the BSA. If those charters drop their units, it gives their units time to find a new sponsor.
Clarke
As an outsider from the other side of the pond looking in to this policy I find one thing amazing.
Putting aside a sexuality, religion, discrimination and look at scouting I remember a very long time hearing the phrase “once a scout always a scout” and I first heard it from an American.
I am not sure about in the US but in the UK leader retention is extremely difficult and we have the young leader programme to try and get young people to make the transition at 18 form young person to leader. we have over 40,000 young people on waiting list waiting for places primarily because there are not enough adult leaders.
Now maybe in the US there is not the issue and you have and abundance of adults ready to take up the rains of leadership. However if not you have just created an instant barrier to a group of young people giving back to the movement.
I personally think it is better to have the scouting programme run than to worry about the faith gender or sexuality of the person running it.
YiS
K
After reading some of the comments and analysis elsewhere, I have a bigger concern: if, as seems very possible, even this half-measure fails to pass in May, it may be years, even a decade or longer, before the BSA considers changing its policies again. That will be catastrophic and could cause wholesale departures by leaders, families, and chartering organizations that have advocated for change. The BSA may end up as a fringe movement, with no possible chance at recovery. The next time the BSA votes on change, it will fail again, because only the bigots will be left.
The proposed membership resolution is most definitely a step in the right direction but IMHO it still doesn’t go as far as I would like. I personally support full-inclusiveness but the evidence presented obviously shows that we, the BSA, just aren’t ready to make the step to full inclusiveness.
The proposed resolution while designed to appease both sides, sends a very mixed message to members and to the public at large.
I too find this new proposed policy change a step in the right direction but incomplete and lacking in logic. Discrimination in any form is wrong and is a violation of the core values and principles of Scouting, pure and simple. The fact that the majority of Scouts and parents believe this policy is wrong is very important. This quote is in the statement about this proposed change in policy: “The Boy Scouts of America does not have an agenda on the matter of sexual orientation, and resolving this complex issue is not the role of the organization, nor may any member use scouting to promote or advance any social or political position or agenda”. This statement makes it clear that scouting should not be used to “promote or advance any social or political position or agenda”. This is an excellent statement of principle. Keeping gay leaders out of scouting is the social agenda of some of the church groups who are charter organizations. Thus, allowing scouting to be used to promote the social agenda of these church groups is a violation of one of the basic principles of scouting. The majority of both scouts and scout parents agree that this discrimination should not continue. The governing body of scouting risks the organization by allowing such a continued violation of its principles and by not being in step with its members.
Scoutmaster Chris
Thanks Chris – I appreciate the clarity of that perspective. That’s what makes sense of this mess and would have prevented a great deal of it to begin with. There’s little chance that any two of us are going to completely agree on a specific moral interpretation of each and every aspect of humanity – therefore the broadest definition ought to be promoted so we can share some point of agreement.
Clarke,
I too share your disappointment with this decision. Condoning discrimination in any form is wrong and it sends a mixed message to the boys we serve. It simply makes no sense to say it’s ok to be gay as a Scout but the day you turn 18 you’re no longer allowed to participate.
However, my wife, as per her usual thoughtful way, calmed me down. She said “change isn’t usually instant, change takes time. This is a first step in a long journey”
Change must come from within. As Laozi said “the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step”!
I found this “new” approach both interesting and disappointing, and not because it did not go far enough or that it goes to far to resolve this question, but that this now raises more questions, let me explain why and maybe you can fill in what I may be missing.
Summary of the proposal is that a youth cannot be denied membership in the scouting program based on sexual orientation, but an adult leader will be prohibited from membership. So I raise the question of the definition of Youth vs Adult membership beyond the difference in application forms. If you take a 19 year old young man (or woman), he (she) may apply for membership in the BSA as a youth application for a Venturing Crew and/or as an adult with an adult application in a Troop as a ASM (U92), both be registered as both.
Except now with the wording of the proposed “new” rule, he is able to only complete one application (Youth) if his/her sexual orientation does not meet the requirements outlined. So this young man/woman as a member of a Venturing Crew is encourage to mentor youth in other units like troops or packs, but as an adult leader is prohibited from the same activity.
I am a crew adviser to a Venturing Crew and this type of issue will be a topic I can come across as my youth membership continue to come of age and find their identity in society.
My focus as a volunteer with youth in our crew is on the age group of 14 to 21 years of age, and I plan to try to retain as many of these young people when they reach the 18 to 21 age range (if I do not lose out to college life) as they are often great role models to their younger peers. We are seeing this more as many youth plan to attend our local community colleges instead of the big move out of town to the big four year schools. We have also strongly encourage our crew members to be involved on the Troop level as mentors, with several cross registered as ASMs in the troop. So where do we go from here when I discover that one member who has a lifestyle that does not meet the BSA membership question . . . . The month of May will be a very interesting month for scouting in the US.
I would say fight for your scout. Fill out the adult application for them and include a note that you refuse to participate in discrimination by kicking out a valued member of your Crew. If they are refused then take your issue for review in your district, then your council, and then the media.
If brave people had not stood up then we would still have segregated bathrooms, schools & drinking faucets.
Clarke, you and I talked at length about this, and I’ve reached a similar conclusion that you have. It’s a start.
Ultimately this comes down to the charter organizations and what they are comfortable with. I can’t see any further movement on the issues until the charters move, but it is important to note that many Scouts and their parents are far ahead of the curve.
It’s nice to see that the BSA is affirming that it doesn’t believe homosexuals are evil.
Today, I’m proud that the BSA is moving in the direction of tolerance and inclusion.
While a half measure is frustrating to many it represents an important first step. I have had conversations with many that opposed changes. For them this is a huge change. It may take some time for them to become comfortable with this move. At the point when they are reconsidering the adult policy, the number of folks comfortable with the change will have expanded because this step wise process has given those having little contact with LBGT community time to broaden their horizons. This is not to say all will take that step, but many will.
Clarke-
I share your frustration with this “half measure.” What I find most vexing is the fact that the BSA had a clear chance to make a complete break with their policy of discrimination, and chose not to do so. And their reasons for not doing so are based, seemlingly, solely on the results of a survey in which a slim majority of adult leaders favor discrimination against gay adults. That seems like the only explanation, given that the BSA admits that gay adult leaders are not “modeling” gay behavior, and are not more likely to be pedophiles than straight adults.
The new policy creates a terrible double standard. Yes, there will be gay Eagle Scouts. But these boys will be forced to resign from their troops the minute they turn 18. What does that say to a boy who upholds Scouting’s highest standards? What would it say to someone like me, who completed work on his Eagle days before his 18th birthday, and had a Court of Honor after turning 18? Would I be allowed to do this under the new rules if I were 18? What about the bizarre discrepancy this creates between Scouts and Venturers? At 18, a gay Scout will have to resign — or join a Venturing crew and remain as a youth member for another three years.
Ultimately, the most encouraging thing about the proposed new policy is that it’s clear that the barn door has been opened, and can’t be shut again. No longer is the BSA saying that a gay Scout (or adult) isn’t “morally straight.” No longer is the BSA insisting that discrimination is a core value of Scouting. The BSA has admitted that most members and parents want the organization to stop discriminating altogether. The next time the BSA takes this up — or the next time it goes through the courts — the BSA will have to end all discrimination. This half-measure cannot stand for long.
Thank you for articulating pretty accurately how I feel about the resolution, too. It’s frustrating, but at least it’s a step in the right direction.