On My Honor, I Will Do My Duty to God
Stephen
Dean Bohrer
“The Boy
Scouts of America maintains that no boy can grow into the best kind of
citizenship without recognizing his obligation to God.” (
Murray, 1937,
p. 499). The Chief Scout Executive
in 1912 at the second annual meeting of the BSA’s board of directors, presented
this ringing statement just two years after its founding. “This policy
established a platform upon which representatives of all faiths could stand
with full assurance and glad accord as they adopted the program of Scouting for
their boys.” (
Murray, 1937,
p. 499).
A belief in God is firmly rooted in the
history and values of Scouting and currently 2.7 million youth members (
Fowler & Campoy, 2013) pledge the oath at weekly meetings. With
nearly 70 percent (
Fowler & Campoy, 2013) of the 109,000 Cub packs and Scout troops
sponsored by faith-based
institutions it would be peculiar to redefine “morally straight.” A Scout’s family and religious leaders teach him about God and the ways he can
serve. A Scout does his duty to God by following the wisdom of those teachings
every day and by respecting and defending the rights of others to practice
their own religious beliefs, or lack thereof.
The Boy
Scouts of America’s national executive committee held a biannual meeting in
Dallas on February 4-6, 2013. A vote scheduled for the final day was to change
its policy that excludes gay Scouts and leaders was tabled until the full 1,400
member National Council meets in May. As one would imagine the issue is getting
a tremendous amount of attention and there has been much internet, press, and
magazine coverage (
Board;
Fowler &
Campoy, 2013;
Merchant, 2013;
Moore, 2013;
Press,
June 7, 2012;
Santorum, 2013;
Stanley, 2013;
Tooley, 2013;
Walker, 2013).
Try as I
might, I cannot reconcile homosexuality with “Duty to God” and “Morally
Straight” (both from the Boy Scout Oath) and the twelfth Scout Law—Reverent.
The Boy
Scouts of America (BSA) allows
Scouts to define God for themselves. This has worked well for eleven decades
and allowed devote Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, Baha’i, Buddhists, protestant Christians,
Catholics, Mormons, etc. to work together in the same national organization and
local units to achieve the aims of Scouting (growth in moral strength
and character, participating citizenship; and development in physical, mental,
and emotional fitness). To encourage members to grow stronger in their faith,
religious groups have developed the religious emblems programs. “The Boy Scouts
of America has approved of these programs and allows the emblems to be worn on
the official uniform
.” At least forty religions
and denominations offer awards to those Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, Venturers, and
adult Scouters who want to deeply learn about their religion as well as give
special service and demonstrate practice of their faith.
It would be insincere for any Scout to pledge
his “honor to do my duty to God” if an atheist. This has been another
contentious issue, and will likely be the next major confrontation to defend
against if gays are allowed into Scouting.
A majority of the world’s religions teaches
that homosexuality (including lesbianism explicitly or by extension) is an
abomination to God. Numerous
Old and New Testament verses in the Bible denounce homosexuality (e.g. 1
Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10, Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:27), as does the Quran
(e.g. 7:80-84, 4:16, 7:81). A Scout must remain tolerant of others, but his
pledge to be morally straight and to obey the Scout Law, makes the inclusion of
boys and men as members who say the words, but don’t believe their oath, a
mockery.
Some
religions (Hindu) and countries (China) have no compunction regarding
homosexuality. This religion and country account for half of the world’s
population, but that does not make homosexuality moral.
In the US Supreme Court case entitled “Boy Scouts of America et al. v. Dale
” decided on
June 28, 2000, the court found that the constitutional right to freedom of
association allows a private organization like the BSA 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." Those who don’t agree with that liberty continue to finds
ways to discriminate against Scouting by withholding United Way funding, denial
of the use of public schools or city owned properties and parks, and in
pressuring corporations to withhold financial support.
The planned
action for BSA’s executive committee to make a decision on February 6, 2013,
but postponed until May, was for the BSA to abandon its stand against gay
Scouts and leaders and leave their inclusion or exclusion up to each local
unit’s sponsor.
Leaving
decisions to individual packs and troops would quickly divide and conquer the
entire Scouting organization. A large majority of the faith-based institutions and
civic clubs that sponsor Scouting would not condone membership to those whose
beliefs and lifestyle are contrary to their religion or organization’s
principles and would pull their involvement.
The
proposed change would force the remaining sponsors of Scouting to singularly defend
their position in countless trials that would bankrupt the sponsors and permit the
sponsors and the Scouts to talk about little else.
The Boy Scouts of Canada in 1998 chose to “admit females, atheists,
agnostics, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transsexuals into troops” (
Zeiger, 2004). Despite a
33% increase in the population of Canada in the past
four decades, Scouts Canada's numbers declined from a high in 1965 of 320,000 to
130,000 members. The churches and other religious groups in America that
sponsor Scouting and the families that provide most of membership are generally
traditionalist (
Tooley, 2013). The decline that
occurred in Canada would unquestionably happen in the BSA should the
inclusion of gays be allowed.
If allowed, Scouting may indeed disappear leaving nothing, to no one. It
would be more appropriate for LGBTs that say they want to be part of Scouting
to instead create their own organization or alternatively join Boys and Girls
club, 4-H, or Camp Fire USA; organizations that have no sexual orientation
requirements (
Davis, 2013).
I believe that gay-rights activists want homosexuals to be included
in the BSA so they can share Scouting’s earned respect and
access its clout for their own benefit. It would be a powerful argument
to any other group that believes homosexuality is wrong to say, “Why don’t you
endorse us, even the Boy Scouts do?”
Two prominent members of Scouting’s executive board, Ernst & Young’s Chief
Executive, James Turley and AT&T’s Chief Executive, Randall Stephenson, in 2012 vowed
to work internally to make the Scouts more welcoming to gays (
Fowler & Campoy, 2013). Other
companies including Intel, UPS, Merck Company Foundation,
and Verizon have stopped donations, or threatened to if the BSA doesn’t change
its position (
Moore, 2013).
American
Christian apologist, author, speaker, and the
founding
pastor of
Redeemer Presbyterian Church in
New York City, Timothy Keller (
2008, p. 39) writes, “A liberal democracy is based . . . on a shared set of very
particular beliefs. Western society is based on shared commitments to reason,
rights, and justice, even though there is no universally recognized definition
of any of these” Keller goes on to say, “Every account of justice is embedded
in beliefs about the meaning of life that is not shared with everyone. The idea
of a totally inclusive community is therefore, an illusion” (
Keller, 2008, p. 40). Two examples of this circumstance might be a white person trying to
join a Black Student Union or a straight person wanting to be an officer in Gay &
Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (
www.glad.org). In either illustration the day would come when such groups would have
to say, “You must step off the board because you don’t share a common
commitment with us.” Both examples reflect groups based on common beliefs that
act as boundaries, including some and excluding others. Neither organization is
being “narrow,” they are just being communities of like-mindedness. “Any
community that did not hold its members accountable for specific beliefs and
practices would have no corporate identity and would not really be a community
at all” (
p. 40).
What Keller says is now occurring in the BSA.
Considering his logic, I appeal to BSA board members Stephenson and Turley to
do the right thing and lead a walkout from the board and take those members
that agree with their stance with them. Short of that dramatic action I suggest
that the National Council pass a resolution to remove Stephenson and Turley and
those who side with them.
It would certainly be welcomed if
corporations, foundations, and individuals become motivated to increase their
giving and replace any lost revenue from those that want BSA to change its
stance on homosexuality. If they do, and the numbers of Scouts and Scouters
hold, wonderful! On the other hand, if the National Council reverses itself on
its current position and Scouting diminishes in numbers, then a corresponding
reduction in professional staff, councils, units, and camps would be a natural
and acceptable consequence.
Achievement of the BSA’s mission
to prepare young people to make “moral choices” will be more difficult
to achieve if traditional and biblical definitions of morality are forsaken. I agree with a
columnist who said, “I hope the Scouts don’t become just one more institution
where Christians will be forced to compromise their convictions” (
Nance, 2013).
I firmly
believe the future of Scouting is seriously dimmed by the proposed action and I
expect the number of Scouts will fade now regardless of the decision reached
this May. If Scouting is to diminish though, I much prefer it to go down
standing for what is right in the eyes of God than just going down!
References
