Here’s the BSA Boy Scouts of America Pro-Sodomy Policy Change Proposal

MEDIA STATEMENT

Boy Scouts of America
Monday, Jan. 28, 2013
Attributable to: Deron Smith, Director of Public Relations

“For more than 100 years, Scouting’s focus has been on working together to deliver the nation’s foremost youth program of character development and values-based leadership training. Scouting has always been in an ongoing dialogue with the Scouting family to determine what is in the best interest of the organization and the young people we serve.

“Currently, the BSA is discussing potentially removing the national membership restriction regarding sexual orientation. This would mean there would no longer be any national policy regarding sexual orientation, and the chartered organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting would accept membership and select leaders consistent with each organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs. BSA members and parents would be able to choose a local unit that best meets the needs of their families.

“The policy change under discussion would allow the religious, civic, or educational organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting to determine how to address this issue. The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents. Under this proposed policy, the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.”

Comment: The above statement is entirely disingenuous. The site says you can leave comments here. They are no longer taking telephone calls, though some members of the board might still.

One reader of HSH had this exchange:

As soon as I said our troop was from St. *******, she said, “Oh the CATHOLIC church” (heavy sarcasm in the voice) – she had more to say about it than I did…. ”Well how will you know if they are homosexual anyways?” “Do you prefer them to be closeted or out?” “I think its better if they are out in the open.” “Well whatever, I’ll pass on the message” all whilst chewing her lunch loudly in my ear.

This present post is a follow up on two other posts from today on HSH: HERE and HERE.

One reader insisted on just having a don’t ask, don’t tell policy for Scout LEADERS. However, I think more has to be said against homosexualists taking a position of leadership. The BSA could learn something from the Catholic Church’s prohibition of admitting those identifying with a homosexual lifestyle into the seminary (There’s more to it than that, but you get the idea). There are militant homosexualists who are pushing for this change, and it will not be about anything to do with a don’t ask, don’t tell scenario. Instead, it will be extremely clear that militant homosexualism is the only way to go for homosexualist leaders.

* * *

Read this comment from a HSH reader:

I’m seriously considering sending the BSA an email informing them that if this measure passes they can expect to receive via UPS all of my official Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts uniforms, merit badges, awards, etc. as I would not wish to be associated with an organization that, as a matter of published policy, knowingly supports—and/or directly endangers young boys by allowing their congress with—men who openly practice and promote a sodomite lifestyle.

Heretofore, the BSA was a model for secular organizations. I remember several troops that I had belonged to sponsored each by Catholic, Protestant, or Jewish institutions, but all of them promoting the same moral character, patriotism, civic responsibility, and above all conservationist and survivalist outdoorsmanship.

The homosexualist agenda is antithetical to all of those propositions: an amoral, unhealthy, and unhygienic lifestyle opposed to moral character; cultural and national degradation or destruction instead of patriotism; incivility and oppression for those who disagree with them rather than civil responsibility; and an utter contempt for Nature and her varied but ordered beauty in place of a Godly conservation, stewardship, and enjoyment of the same.

And another:

I’m a Life Scout. The last thing I want to see is the admittance of homosexual men to positions of power over minor boys. Maybe, instead of calling it the BS of A, I’ll just call it BS.

And, the most incisive of all, which bears repeating, as it answers many objections to objections:

As many of you have probably heard, and has been reported in numerous newspapers, the Executive Committee of the Boy Scouts of America has suddenly and without notice, announced that it is considering eliminating the prohibition against leaders and Scouts who engage in an active homosexual lifestyle.  It should be noted that the policy has never prohibited people with a homosexual orientation on that basis alone, and thus is not an exclusion on any individual based upon an involuntary characteristic.  Rather it is a prohibition upon leaders who engage in unnatural behavior that is contrary to the Scouting value of cleanliness of life and scandalous to other Scouts.  However, almost certainly due to pressure from some corporate sponsors such as UPS and Merck, as well as some chapters of United Way, and politicians who are still threatening the Scouts, the Executive Council is going to vote next Tuesday on eliminating the policy.  It is true that the proposed altered policy would allow individual troops to continue excluding people who engage in such behavior, based upon the sponsoring organization’s religious beliefs.  However, if the proposed change goes through, it would be a concession that family values are no longer central to the principles of the Boy Scouts of America, even though they may be for sponsoring churches.  Furthermore, many Scouting events, e.g., summer camp and camporees, involve numerous different troops together; and there is no way to separate them out.  In addition, if BSA caves on this issue, it would likely not be long before other central values, such as reverence and belief in God, are soon to follow.  Catholic parishes and other religious entities (e.g. Knights of Columbus) who sponsor troops can perfectly well arrange activities on their own.  The main reason to accept the governance and oversight of BSA is because the organization stands for a united prophetic voice of values that are often challenged in the modern world.  If that prophetic voice is no longer there, the main reason for having troops under BSA is gone.

It is important that they know the opposition to such a change and the fact that it would likely lead many Catholics and others of good faith to arrange their own youth scouting programs and/or find other organizations to affiliate with instead of BSA.  In reaction to similar policy changes at Girl Scouts of America, eliminating both that policy and the requirement of reverence and belief in God, the American Heritage Girls were founded to uphold family values and reverence for girls.  I have little doubt that, if this policy alteration is implemented, a similar parallel organization, still connected to the international scouting movement and committed to family values, would be formed here.  In fact, there is the International Committee on Catholic Scouting which until now, has been working entirely with Boy Scouts of America for Catholic Scouting in this nation.  But there is no reason why a specific Catholic or Judeo-Christian Scouting group could not be formed here as an alternative if Boy Scouts of America does in fact cave to corporate and political pressure.  In fact, the Southern Baptists are already promoting groups called Royal Ambassadors and Challengers, as a possible alternative, if BSA changes its policy.  Because Boy Scout troops belong to the sponsoring organization, not to BSA, the sponsoring organization can at will transfer the assets of the troop to a group organized under different auspices.

There is no clear indication about whether the Executive committee will endorse this alteration of policy.  The way in which it was introduced, i.e., by a sudden announcement earlier this week about the vote to be taken next Tuesday, indicates that the proponents of this change are trying to ramrod it through without public discussion or reaction from the people who actually sponsor the Scouting programs.  And, in fact, it is neither the Catholic Church nor any other church or denomination, which together sponsor 70 percent of the troops was consulted about this proposed alteration of policy.  It is important that they hear from us now.  You can contact the Boy Scouts of America at myscouting@scouting.org , the National Help Desk at 877-272-1910, or the BSA National Council operator at 972-580-2000.  I hope that this proposal is simply an ill-considered idea of a few BSA higher-ups who are feeling outside pressure and that it will be rejected as a temptation to the path of ease, comfort and thus destruction that it is.