Scouts considering retreat from no-gays policy

The Boy Scouts of America may soon give sponsors of troops the authority to decide whether to accept gays as scouts and leaders — a potentially dramatic retreat from an exclusionary nationwide policy that has provoked relentless protests.
Associated Press
Jan 29, 2013

Under the change now being discussed, the different religious and civic groups that sponsor Scout units would be able to decide for themselves how to address the issue — either maintaining an exclusion of gays, as is now required of all units, or opening up their membership.

Monday's announcement of the possible change comes after years of protests over the no-gays policy — including petition campaigns that have prompted some corporations to suspend donations to the Boy Scouts.

Under the proposed change, said BSA spokesman Deron Smith, "the Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents."

Smith said the change could be announced as early as next week, after BSA's national board concludes a regularly scheduled meeting on Feb. 6. The meeting will be closed to the public.

The BSA, which celebrated its 100th anniversary in 2010, has long excluded both gays and atheists. Smith said a change in the policy toward atheists was not being considered, and that the BSA continued to view "Duty to God" as one of its basic principles.

Protests over the no-gays policy gained momentum in 2000, when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the BSA's right to exclude gays. Scout units lost sponsorships by public schools and other entities that adhered to nondiscrimination policies, and several local Scout councils made public their displeasure with the policy.

More recently, amid petition campaigns, shipping giant UPS Inc. and drug-manufacturer Merck announced that they were halting donations from their charitable foundations to the Boy Scouts as long as the no-gays policy was in force.

Also, local Scout officials drew widespread criticism in recent months for ousting Jennifer Tyrrell, a lesbian mom, as a den leader of her son's Cub Scout pack in Ohio and for refusing to approve an Eagle Scout application by Ryan Andresen, a California teen who came out as gay last fall.

Tyrrell said she's thrilled for parents and their children who've been excluded from scouting and "for those who are in Scouts and hiding who they are."

"For me it's not just about the Boy Scouts of America, it's about equality," she told The Associated Press. "This is a step toward equality in all aspects."

Many of the protest campaigns, including one seeking Tyrrell's reinstatement, had been waged with help from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

"The Boy Scouts of America have heard from scouts, corporations and millions of Americans that discriminating against gay scouts and scout leaders is wrong," said Herndon Graddick, GLAAD's president. "Scouting is a valuable institution, and this change will only strengthen its core principles of fairness and respect."

The Scouts had reaffirmed the no-gays policy as recently as last year, and appeared to have strong backing from conservative religious denominations — notably the Mormons, Roman Catholics and Southern Baptists — which sponsor large numbers of Scout units. Under the proposed change, they could continue excluding gays.

Prior to Monday's announcement, the BSA conferred with some leaders of these religious groups, although there were no official statements as to how they would respond.

Said Sister Mary Ann Walsh, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, "The bishops hope the Boy Scouts will continue to work under the Judeo-Christians principles upon which they were founded and under which they have served youth well."

Were the change adopted, said Deron Smith, "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," he said. "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."

The announcement came shortly after new data showed that membership in the Cub Scouts — the BSA's biggest division — dropped sharply last year, and was down nearly 30 percent over the past 14 years.

According to figures provided by the organization, Cub Scout ranks dwindled by 3.4 percent, from 1,583,166 in 2011 to 1,528,673 in 2012. That's down from 2.17 million in 1998.

The Boy Scouts attribute the decline largely to broad social changes, including the allure of video games and the proliferation of youth sports leagues and other options for after-school activities.

However, critics of the Scouts suggest that its recruitment efforts have been hampered by high-profile controversies — notably the court-ordered release of files dealing with sex abuse allegations and persistent protests over the no-gays policy.

The BSA's overall "traditional youth membership" — Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts and Venturers — totaled 2,658,794 in 2012, compared to more than 4 million in peak years of the past. There were 910,668 Boy Scouts last year, a tiny increase from 2011, while the ranks of Venturers — a program for youths 14 and older— declined by 5.5 percent.

In addition to flak over the no-gays policy, the Scouts have been buffeted by multiple court cases related to past allegations of sexual abuse by Scout leaders, including those chronicled in long-confidential records that are widely known as the "perversion files."

Through various cases, the Scouts have been forced to reveal files dating from the 1960s to 1991. They detailed numerous cases where abuse claims were made and Boy Scout officials never alerted authorities and sometimes actively sought to protect the accused.

The Scouts are now under a California court order, affirmed this month by the state Supreme Court, to turn over sex-abuse files from 1991 through 2011 to the lawyers for a former Scout who claims a leader molested him in 2007, when he was 13. It's not clear how soon the files might become public.

The BSA has apologized for past lapses and cover-ups, and has stressed the steps taken to improve youth protection policy. Since 2010, for example, it has mandated that any suspected abuse be reported to police.

 

Comments

mikel

collapse to pressure. tsk tsk.

Bluto

I don't know, the BSA held strong on the child molestations for years . Shows some real backbone wouldn't you say ?

SamAdams

It IS a collapse to pressure. What I think of gay people doesn't matter (although, for the record, I don't really care whether somebody's straight or gay). The POINT is that Scouts are a private organization which means they ought to be able to set their own criteria for membership.

*NOTE: As a private organization, I do not believe, and have NEVER believed, the Scouts should receive any government funding. But as long as taxpayer dollars aren't involved, the Scouts should be able to accept or deny membership on any criteria they like.

Just watch. Next on the "progressive" agenda? GIRLS in the Boy Scouts.

Bluto

So , Sam if the BSA wanted to exclude people of color that would be ok , just because they are a private organization ? You're on a slippery slope there .

KnuckleDragger

But they don't, and they are a protected class (not that it matters for a private organization). Sexual orientation is not a federally protected class. By the way, there are dozens of black organizations that deny membership to whites. I don't see you complaining about that.

Bluto

Actually I do complain about that . Exclusionary groups of any kind are wrong . And , by the way eventually Gays and Lesbians will be a protected class . It's just a matter of time , whether anyone likes it or not . I guess the BSA is just trying to get ahead of the curve . Or , just trying to patch up a damaged reputation .

Licorice Schtick

This thread seems to be proceeding under an absurd premiss that somehow a "private organization" is, or ought to be, exempt from anti-discrimination laws.

And it's red herring anyway, but perhaps KnuckeDragger would care to name some of the "dozens of black organizations that deny membership to whites."

mikel

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Remarks that discriminate based on age, race, religion, disability, etc..

Super Judge

I cant believe Im responding to this, but Grambling does have white students. Such a bore.

Bluto

I don't believe ANYONE should be allowed to exclude another group based on prejudice . Clear enough for ya . : )

thinkagain

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Remarks that discriminate based on age, race, religion, disability, etc..

4shizzle

lol

rickross2

I missed it! dammit!

rickross2

I love comments that discriminate against age, race, religion, disability, etc.

thinkagain

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights).

rickross2

I googled Indoctrinated. Still dont understand.

thinkagain

Sorry to hear that. But if I were incapable of understanding, I wouldn’t go around broadcasting it on a public forum. Just sayin’.

rickross2

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights) and Profane, obscene, sexual or derogatory language.

luvblues2

;)

deertracker

who does the indoctrinating?????????

thinkagain

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights), Remarks that discriminate based on age, race, religion, disability, etc., and Libel and defamation.

Licorice Schtick

You forgot Democrats, gremlins, the Devil, Communists, aliens, Unitarians, zombies, and "they."

"...no determinative physiological causal factor for homosexuality"??? Big words. Must be true. Or just the most cut-and-pasted piece of conservative blogsite poppynonsense in recent history.

thinkagain

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights).

Bluto

OUCH !!! What did the rednecks ever do to you ? ; ))))

4shizzle

:)

concernedtruth

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights), Remarks that discriminate based on age, race, religion, disability, etc., and Libel and defamation.

deertracker

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Remarks that discriminate based on age, race, religion, disability, etc. and Libel and defamation.

thinkagain

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights), Remarks that discriminate based on age, race, religion, disability, etc., and Libel and defamation.

Bluto

How about you ask that question to one of the many Gay or Lesbian veterans that have put their lives on the lines , so you can sit safely there at home and freely express yourself.

thinkagain

How about those veterans who put their lives on the line that were pedophiles or rapists or murderers. Is there behavior OK just because they served? Your logic is flawed, but I’m not surprised.

Pages