|
Turning the Boy Scouts into pariahs One organization is doing more than any other to rescue our young men from this predicament: the Boy Scouts. For 90 years, the Scouts have worked tirelessly to build character in boys and to provide the guidance of responsible older men on the rocky road to manhood. The Scouts teach virtues in short supply today: honesty, industry, self-discipline, generosity, perseverance and respect for others. Turning his back on the popular culture, a Scout vows to be "physically strong, mentally awake. and morally straight," and pledges to "do my duty to God and my country." At a time when many young people revel in alienation, the Scouts strive to make service a way of life. (Remember "Do a good turn daily"?) They put in untold hours of community service, painting bus shelters, visiting senior citizen centers and shoveling snow for shut-in neighbors. For these reasons, participation in Scouts is at the highest point in decades -- 5 million boys -- as concerned parents reach for the help of experts, and a company of like-minded peers, in rearing their sons. If the Scouts' work is important in the suburbs, it is vital in inner-city neighborhoods, where strong, honor able male models are often rare to nonexistent. The Scouts' founder, Lord Baden-Powell, created the organization to help poor and immigrant boys build character; here in America, the Scouts have heavily recruited inner-city boys since the 1960s. Ask inner-city mothers about the Boy Scouts. You'll find that the scoutmaster is often a surrogate father, sometimes the only stable adult in a child's life Mothers will tell you that he helps them with discipline, gives parenting advice, and may even be the school's contact when a boy is truant. To inner-city boys who crave order and authority, scouting provides structure and meaning. and helps keep gangs at bay. Recently, writer Heather MacDonald interviewed urban Scout troops for an article in City Journal. Former Harlem Scout Frederick Simmons told her that when he was boy, he slept with his merit-badge sash wrapped around him. "Every one of those badges represents an achievement," he explained. "No one gave them to you." Twelve-year-old Scout Dayshon Green confided, "When I see my neighbors carrying bags, I'm supposed to help them automatically." Despite scouting's extraordinary record, several Minnesota organizations have recently shown themselves prepared to toss the Scouts' 90 years of service in the trash can. Medtronic, Breck School, the Star Tribune and the United Way of Greater Duluth have washed their hands of the Boy Scouts; they are prepared to let scouting die on the vine. Why? Because the Scouts wish to continue what they've always done, and what the Supreme Court just reaffirmed they have a right, as a private association, to do. They want to choose their own Scout leaders, selecting the men they believe are best prepared to carry out their oath and law. The Scouts do not want avowed homosexuals as leaders, because they do not believe--in the respect of sexual behavior--that homosexuals can serve as models for boys and teens to emulate. Medtronic and the Star Tribune disagree, and will no longer finance the Scouts through the United Way. Who will suffer? Well, it won't be the Scouts in Minnetonka. Suburban troops tend to be self-supporting, financing their activities by selling popcorn and Christmas wreaths. Parents dash off checks for uniforms and equipment, and chauffeur boys to camp in minivans. Inner-city Scouts, however, depend on charitable donations, as they struggle to rise above the mean streets of the ghetto and barrio. What will corporate defunding mean for them? Corporate contributions pay for uniforms, handbooks and field trips, though -- in keeping with the Scouts' self-help ethic -- boys must make progress toward ranks to earn them. Corporate dollars pay for camp scholarships and volunteer training. and underwrite stipends for scoutmasters when responsible volunteers can't be found. What of Breck School? Its decision to deny meeting space to its Cub Scout pack won't seriously inconvenience its affluent young students. Things look quite different, however, in Oakland or Detroit, where a school is often the only refuge for Scouts in a blighted neighborhood. Medtronic, Breck and organizations like them appear willing to sacrifice the well-being of inner-city youngsters in the name of tolerance. They claim they are shunning the Boy Scouts because support is not consistent with their values of "diversity" and "inclusiveness." This is a strange view of tolerance, and of diversity as well. After all, tolerance means not demanding that others share your beliefs; it means refraining from condemning or ostracizing those who have different views. The Boy Scouts expect certain things of their own leaders, but they embrace a "live and let live" philosophy. The Scouts don't want to dictate to other organizations, they just want to continue quietly helping kids in a way that is consistent with their core beliefs. In contrast, activists spearheading the campaign against the Scouts want to put them out of business. They are agents of the new intolerance, which uses the language of diversity to enforce a stifling conformity. For many years, the United Way has exemplified real diversity, funding organizations from local Councils of Churches to the United Jewish Appeal. It has supported the good work of a host of private organizations, without putting them into a moral or sectarian straitjacket. Thus, the United Way has funded the Boy Scouts, though the organization excludes atheists as leaders. (The Scouts, though nonsectarian stress the importance of spiritual life.) Likewise, the United Way has funded Catholic Charities, though the Catholic Church, its sponsoring organization, does not ordain women. Today, we are witnessing a concerted attempt to make the Boy Scouts new pariahs, untouchables in the philanthropic community. Fortunately, most of corporate America is not biting, including giants like AT&T, General Electric and Chase Manhattan. Merrill Lynch, a proponent of true diversity, put it best: "We do not believe the role of our philanthropy is to reconcile all conflicting views." |