Scouting letter carries 'wrong' message

I am writing in response to the article entitled "In defense of scouting: why protests are wrong." While I applaud the writer's spirit to move people beyond the issue and to work within the confines of the system that is available, I feel that overall his message is wrong.

This issue cuts very close to home, as I have been involved with scouting right up until college. The Boy Scouts is a program that has shaped the way I grew up, and has provided an experience that I will treasure. I have been involved in just about every aspect of Scouting, from Cub Scouts to Eagle Scout to the Order of the Arrow. I have been a patrol leader and a junior leader in the Webelos. I have always desired to go back and become an assistant scoutleader. This of course cannot happen now, as I am gay.

The author suggested that the policy is very similar to the now infamous "don't ask, don't tell" policy of the military. He suggested we should protest that institution first before going after such a harmless private institution. Well, there has been protest to that policy, but while it is a public institution it is also funded through our taxes, which are distributed by the very people who created the policy. With the BSA we are much more in control of the funding, so we fight where we can.

The author said that the end result of this form of protest would do nothing more than hurt the individual troops. I am sorry to say that in this area he is correct. With more and more school systems denying all forms of association with the Boy Scouts they are losing valuable recruiting channels. With organizations pulling funding, they are losing the capitol to continue to function. The protesters do understand this but are in a sense saying that if the BSA chooses to function in a manner that goes against society's moral fiber of what is right and wrong, then they shouldn't exist at all. This is a battle fought by adults, but the true victims are the boys in scouting.

The author also asked why was this latest discrimination being protested when the BSA still is against atheists. There is a key (albeit slight) difference here, the Scout Law states in its final characteristic that a scout is Reverent. That is a clear membership requirement and it has been upheld because they do not discriminate on why type of organized religion you follow, be it Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, or Hindu. With homosexuality they are using a section of the Scout Oath to back them up. The particular section states that a scout will be "morally straight." With this defense they are in effect saying gay men are morally inferior and deviant. What does this say to the unfortunate young boys struggling with coming out while in scouts? If they come out not only do they get ejected from a group they are involved in, but they are in effect told they are different from "normal" boys and that there is something wrong with them. There are enough barriers to accepting yourself as a homosexual with out adding this to the pile.

The final point was that those protesting should get involved on the local level. This is very hard to do seeing that many that feel the policy is unjust are gay themselves, and so are barred from any form of adult leadership. I think that if I went back to help out in my old scout troop I would not be turned away, but what happens when National finds out? I will not play the "don't tell" game because I spent 20 long years hiding this secret and I will not do that again. What does it teach the kids when a long respected adult leader is forced to leave for reasons they barely comprehend? No, gays cannot be involved in troop leadership until the national policy changes.

Protests like this will continue with any group with policies such as the BSA's until it is understood that homosexual's are not a morally deviant sub-section of society.