The Boy Scout Shift Was Inevitable, in Hindsight

I realize that the title makes it sound like I was surprised at the change in policy. Not so. I simply want to draw attention to the fact that one can predict things over longer periods of time if an effort is made to keep track of unfolding events and properly extrapolate.

For instance, consider the placement of the BSA change of policy with respect to gay youth, gay leaders, and the disregard and repeal of DOMA.

February 2011 -- Obama orders the DOJ to stop defending DOMA in court.
January 2013 -- ban on women in combat roles lifted by military leaders
May 2013 -- BSA removes ban on gay youth  (scouts)
June 2013 -- SCOTUS rules DOMA unconstitutional
July 2015 -- BSA removes ban on gay adult leaders (scouters)

What's the significance? Only that the purpose of Scouting, from its inception in the UK as well as the BSA's founding ~10 years later, was to prepare youth with outdoor survival skills so that they would transition better into military service. Scouting has always been a recruitment center, of sorts, for all branches of the US military.

So when the military now recruits homosexuals, what logic is there for the military's primary enlistment-driving organization to have restrictions on who may serve, which the military itself does not have?

It was obvious, that when the Military began to permit openly homosexual soldiers, that the BSA would follow suit. After all, because of the close relationship, many campouts and jamborees are held on or near military bases or on public land, and it's to be expected that the US GOVT would rescind their favorable treatment/sponsorship of the BSA if the organization didn't submit to the new morality.

The BSA capitulated without a fight, though, indicating that the leadership is all too keen to please. In light of the rapidity with which they changed to match popular culture, I am truly curious as to whether or not the BSA will soon become 100% coeducational. Will there be a Title IX claim coming soon? What if the girls who want to join claim to be boys (i.e. transgender)?

Hindsight is always 20/20. I'm ready...surprise me.

~ Rak Chazak

The Unfairness Trap: BSA On A Collision Course

The BSA National Council held a secret ballot vote to decide if the organization would allow openly gay boys into the organization. 757 voted for, 475 voted against. 

Timeless Values?

Albert Mohler summarizes this succinctly (link at bottom):

In 2000, the B.S.A. prevailed at the U.S. Supreme Court when the nation’s highest court ruled that the Boy Scouts had a constitutional right to exclude openly gay boys and leaders from the organization, so long as that exclusion is based in one of the organization’s core convictions — an “expressive message.” The B.S.A. won the case because that is exactly what they claimed. They argued that excluding openly homosexual boys and leaders from Scouting was necessary and required by the Scout Oath. [emphasis added]

In my previous article about the BSA policy change, I said this:

If the Boy Scouts of America lifts the ban on homosexuals, then it will be saying that its rules were not based on timeless values, but on arbitrary prejudice. Arbitrary prejudice can be arbitrarily abandoned. Timeless values cannot. If the BSA is built on values, then it cannot compromise those values. If the BSA compromises on homosexuality, it will be admitting that it does not stand on values but will give in to pressure. An interesting consequence is that the BSA will open itself up to lawsuits alleging wrongful discrimination, since lifting the ban would necessarily mean that the organization discriminated against homosexuals in the past without any reason to do so.

So now we know the answer to that. The BSA National Council has decided that its creeds are not timeless, but arbitrary. It is thereby implicitly admitting to wrongful discrimination against homosexuals for over two decades, since the policy was enacted. Let the litigation begin!

A Time to Tell

The BSA commissioned a video in the '80s which at the time I joined was required watching for all boys entering the program. This was called "A Time To Tell," and acted out 3 specific scenarios which were introduced through the context of a conversation between three friends after school. Its purpose was to educate the young boys (ages 10-12 when entering the program) to "Recognize, Resist and Report" sexual molestation. I think it might be worth introducing to the general public. It largely speaks for itself.

More info: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/boy_scouts_and_sexual_abuse_what_will_happen_to_it_happened_to_me.html

Unfairness

Now that the BSA has opened up its doors to homosexual youth, it's unfair to keep the doors shut to atheists any longer. It's actually ludicrous to allow the former and not the latter. Atheists can, at least in theory, be just as moral as any monotheist, with the only difference being their rejection of belief in a deity. Meanwhile, homosexuality is an evil in each of those religions, and so if those who break the law should be allowed in, by what standard do you aim to keep out those who do not break the law? Maybe one could suppose that even if "morally straight" has been abandoned, the BSA will still attempt to uphold "duty to God" as a point of the Scout Oath. This would exclude atheists, certainly. But isn't moral straightness part of one's duty to God? To purport that active homosexuals honor the God of any faith--Christianity, Judaism or Islam; even the Eastern religions (Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism) seem largely to oppose the notion that homosexual activity can coexist with religious piety -- to thus purport that homosexuals can honor the "duty to God" aspect of the Scout Oath is ludicrous, and therefore if they can be allowed into the program while rejecting this "timeless value," then so can atheists, by the same standard. We have thus utterly destroyed the Scout Oath. All that's left is this:

"Oh my honor, I will do my duty to my country, and to keep myself physically strong." 

Permit me to scoff derisively.

Prediction: the BSA will soon have to give in to further pressure and allow atheists to join. 

The question is, will atheist boys be allowed in first, or homosexual leaders? We could start a betting pool. Anyone interested? I'll stake my claim on homosexual adults. Any takers?

Further Reading 

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2013/05/25/BSA-and-gay-phase1
http://www.albertmohler.com/2013/05/22/boy-scouts-at-the-brink-the-moment-of-decision-arrives/
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/rip-boy-scouts-of-america/

~ Rak Chazak

Eagle Scout Perspective on the BSA Policy Change

I figure my opinion might be worth something.

I was in the Boy Scouts of America from 2001 to 2008, becoming a "heartbreak Eagle" by turning in the completed binder for my Eagle Project just two days prior to my 18th birthday. My Eagle Board of Review was a few months later and then voila! I passed and about a year later, I had a joint Eagle Ceremony with four other guys in my age range from the same troop. The senator for our district came by and everything. Now I've been out for 5 years, but as they say, you never "were" an Eagle Scout. You are an Eagle Scout, for life.

At your Board of Review, you're asked a number of questions by the adult interviewers for the purpose of determining that you didn't fake your way through the system. They typically begin by having you recite the Scout Oath:

On my honor
I will do my best
To do my duty 
To God and my country,
To obey the Scout Law,
To keep myself physically strong
mentally awake
and morally straight. 

The second most commonly recited memorized dogma of Scouting is the Law:

A Scout is:
Trustworthy
Loyal
Helpful
Friendly
Courteous
Kind
Obedient
Cheerful
Thrifty
Brave
Clean
and Reverent.

"Morally straight" does not merely refer to sexual behavior, but it includes it. This moral straightness refers to one's duty to God. A Scout is Reverent--that means that he does not merely acknowledge the existence of a higher power, but that he honors and worships God through his thoughts, words, deeds and lifestyle. I am ashamed to say that I've known several guys, some who made Eagle, who were clearly not a believer in any orthodox religion, much less Christianity, and furthermore who engaged in premarital sex and illicit drug use. Many boys join Scouts because they want the opportunity to go camping or get to explore their pyrotechnic leanings, whereas others are forced to by their parents, and don't have any internal motivation to use the experience for character development.

This is no different for homosexuals. While atheists and anybody practicing premarital sex should also be sternly rebuked and risk banishment, the fact that these sins are winked at by a tolerant leadership does not mean that homosexuality should also get a free pass. What the three have in common is that people who break the rules still want to get the benefits of being part of something without having enough integrity to abide by the established rules in order to do so. They have an entitlement mentality, where, like the doping athlete, they think they deserve to be given an award despite their unsportsmanlike behavior. 

A homosexual isn't reverent to God. If a Scout must be, then he cannot be a Scout. By definition. Changing the rules to allow rulebreakers into the organization doesn't make the rulebreakers legitimate, it makes the organization increasingly illegitimate.

It's been pointed out before, but here's the fundamental logical reason, which even nonChristians can understand, why the BSA should not lift the ban on gays, whether boys or adults, lest it destroy itself: 

If the Boy Scouts of America lifts the ban on homosexuals, then it will be saying that its rules were not based on timeless values, but on arbitrary prejudice. Arbitrary prejudice can be arbitrarily abandoned. Timeless values cannot. If the BSA is built on values, then it cannot compromise those values. If the BSA compromises on homosexuality, it will be admitting that it does not stand on values but will give in to pressure. An interesting consequence is that the BSA will open itself up to lawsuits alleging wrongful discrimination, since lifting the ban would necessarily mean that the organization discriminated against homosexuals in the past without any reason to do so.

God doesn't change. His righteous judgments endure forever (Psalm 119:160). Truth is from God, therefore truth never changes, because God never changes. Changing rules is truthless and therefore godless. If the BSA compromises its position then it might as well throw out the part of the Oath and Law that reference God and moral straightness, or honor, loyalty and bravery for that matter. In other words, the whole thing. If the BSA does this thing, it will destroy itself. Some organization may remain, but it won't be the Boy Scouts of America, any longer.

Another Scout saying which Eagle candidates may be told to recite at their Board of Review is the Motto: "Be prepared." I can hardly imagine that the national leadership was prepared to deal with the challenge posed by mob intimidation by businesses and media on behalf of a minority of society that has no part in their mission and seeks to undermine it. Being prepared means planning ahead so that you do the right thing when you come under fire, rather than scatter and rout like undisciplined cowards.

Regroup. Reorganize. Fall-in. The Boy Scouts of America needs to reaffirm its charter, which has stood for 103 years. If it does not stand the test of time and bear the burden of criticism from an increasingly godless nation, it will cease to remain a force for good in the culture.

I fear that this is the way the chips will fall. When I am old enough to put my own children through a similar program, there may no longer be an existing structure that I can tolerate committing them to. I may have to make an attempt to start my own.

Persecution isn't coming, Christian. It's here.

~ Rak Chazak