To preface, I am an Eagle Scout, have more than 20 years active Scouting experience (youth and adult) and believe sincerely in what the Scouting movement stands for.

This week, the leaders of the Boy Scouts of America are faced with choosing the lesser of two evils.

On one hand, they could possibly put an end to decades of ever-growing assault by gay rights activists, who waged multi-faceted social warfare to demonize and condemn Scouting’s membership prohibitions against homosexuals.

On the other, they will alienate a significant share of their fiercest and strongest supporters: Conservative Christians who participate in the programs and provide a significant level of membership, leadership and local financial support.

The decision pits the interests of BSA’s National Organization with that of its regional Council and local Packs and Troops. BSA National, hammered by the continued loss of corporate donors due to the outside pressures of gay activists, is also besieged by an embarrassing revisit of sexual abuse cases filed away in their archives, brought back to life and scrutiny during a related trial in Oregon last year. 

At the Council and local level, most of those actually involved in working with the Scouts, their leaders, committee members, and Council Boards of Directors, along with most of the churches sponsoring the Troops and Packs, have expressed opposition to policy changes. Judging by what I’ve seen in social media, many active leaders believe changing the policy to allow units to decide whether or not to allow for homosexual leaders and members is an abdication of the BSA’s commitment to upholding morality and virtue. Some even go so far as to plan to remove their children and direct involvement if such a plan is adopted.

Then there is President Obama. While the Presidency also carries with it the honorary head of the BSA, he hasn’t seen a need, until now, to really address the organization.

However, during a pre-Super Bowl interview with CBS, Obama clearly expressed his support for changing Scouting’s membership policy to allow for homosexuals.

As a result, if the BSA were to choose to keep the policy as it is now, expect the gay rights movement to direct their attention to Washington to open up another front against the national organization, and even the regional councils and local units.

Time is on the side of these aggressors. Four years is a little less than the average amount of time it takes for a Scout to go from joining a Troop to earning Eagle. Given how the President’s repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” seemed to change the conventional perceptions of homosexuality within a short time period, and how it will be virtually impossible to rescind it, Scouting is facing a war of attrition, and they are on the wrong end of the supply line.

If Scouting upholds its current policies, the impact to the movement will be noticeable. For the sake of example, here are a couple of things to consider:

• Many Scout Camps, including the one I attended as a youth in Middle Tennessee, are located on bodies of water (natural and man made) controlled by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. What is the President used an Executive Order to terminate, or at the least prohibit renewal of leases for property or water rights to organizations that discriminate against homosexuals? (Of course, our President doesn’t know anything about Executive Orders)
• The loss of corporate support at the national level will trickle down to the Councils.
• Gay advocacy groups within some Churches might ask their Conferences to start upholding what their published movement stands against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation state. In case you’re wondering, the United Methodist Church, whose congregations sponsor a significant percentage of Packs and Troops (including the one I was a member of), may have an issue in the future, given their own Conference.

These tactics, and more, will be applied more aggressively. Scouting will survive, but compared to its current status as a leader in developing boys into effective, skillful individuals of character, I am afraid the movement will find itself going underground, subject to constant public ridicule by an ever growing chorus who either believe they are wrong, or too afraid to say otherwise.

There is also another side to this worth mentioning. Personally, I do not like how Scouting’s hand is being forced by powers outside the movement. It is simply wrong.

On the inside, there is a need that should be at least discussed, since it deals specifically with the purpose of the movement.

What about the boys?

In this case, I am not talking about the potential for boys to face greater risks of molestation and abuse. The jury is split on that one.

Specifically, we know that same-sex families, while a minority, are growing. So far as I know, there isn’t any evidence that supports the idea children from these households are more likely to become homosexual themselves (they weren’t born that way, either).

If policies remain the same, their parents will not be able to participate in their sons’ activities with Scouting. More than likely, this will keep these boys out of the program.

Perhaps that is how it will have to be. Regardless, it deserves honest attention and courteous handling once long-term decisions on membership policy are made, one way or another.

This is only one example of how the boys will be hurt, and have been hurt, as a result of this ongoing, disgusting policy debate.

I do not know which is the right decision. I do know that neither one is a reflection of protecting self interest or reinforcing hateful ideology.

As a private organization, the BSA should be able to uphold its policies without the demagoguery of social rights advocates who would have better used the time helping youth in need by partnering with those interested in their world view.

This week, they may get their way with respect to policy. In all honesty, they really only get their way if their goal was to seriously damage Scouting, and then you have to wonder what their real motivations were.

I will remain an advocate and supporter of the BSA’s mission and its units regardless of the decision. I can understand giving units the right, if they believe it is right, to open opportunities for youth raised in same-sex households, similar to the challenge we overcame during my youth when opportunities for leadership were expanded to women.

I also believe no unit should be forced into changing the policy if it does not agree with the beliefs and teachings of their sponsor, or the membership.

This coming weekend will mark the BSA’s 102nd Anniversary. Churches with units will recognize their members during “Scout Sunday” services and events.

More than likely, they will pray for the strength and character of these boys, so they may grow into the individual doer’s and leaders our nation, states and localities desperately need.

May they also pray for the salvation of Scouting. If people see a potential change in policy as a sin, may His Will show how we cannot allow our abhorrence of evil cloud our efforts to prepare the next generation.

If the BSA holds firm, then may we pray for Scouting to retain the strength and courage to continue on, despite the likelihood for persistent defeats on many fronts.

Regardless the decision this week, the path thereafter will be the real test of Scouting’s Character, and that of its members.