By: Mary Mostert, Analyst, Original Sources (www.originalsources.com)
September 18, 2000
It would appear, from the news over the week-end, that the Gore campaign needs all the help it can muster from a supportive media, to beat George W. Bush in November. And, there are a couple of issues that the media seems to be trying to bury to help their man.
One of those issues is the spiraling price of oil and the low reserves, especially oil for heating this winter. The other is an issue that some members of the left wish members of their own group had just not brought up until AFTER the election, when Al Gore was safely in office - the Boy Scout situation.
Either, or both, of these issues could be bad news for Al Gore. The oil situation, which already has Europe in an uproar, could easily spiral out of control, especially if the sharp rise in the cost of heating our homes with $36 a barrel oil, three times the price of oil a year ago, becomes a focused issue by election day.
And, the backlash against those who have vowed to punish or destroy the Boy Scouts of America for daring to stand up for the Scout Oath and Law, in spite of lawsuits and media pressure to give in to feminists, atheists and homosexuals, clearly has the radical left in temporary (until after the election) retreat.
A mere two weeks ago the media were reporting what appeared to be victory after victory for the anti-Scout forces. For example, the Miami Herald, only nine days ago, reported what certainly appeared to be a resounding victory for those seeking to drive the Boy Scouts out of schools and the very public parks that Scouts have long helped clean up with their service projects. In an article entitled "Dade Superintendent Blocks Scouts' Drive," the paper announced that "Miami-Dade schools Superintendent Roger Cuevas has indefinitely postponed the Boy Scouts' annual recruitment drive at county schools next week while attorneys examine whether the group's exclusion of gays violates School Board rules."
In the same article, Jeremy Liebbe, the Southern Regional Director for "Scouting for All," said: ``Every time a school district kicks out the Scouts from its schools or when Levi Strauss stops their funding, I take comfort that messages like that will get the national policy changed. But it really hurts to see that the program is getting hurt like this. We want to see [the national leadership] change its policy before the program gets destroyed.'' Scouting for all claims on its website that its determined goal of either forcing the Scouts to abandon its "duty to God" and "morally straight" stance for Scoutmaster is a "501C-3 nonprofit charitable organization recognized by the state of California and the United States of America's federal government. So you can deduct your donation from your taxes."
Scouting for All has collected 53616 names on a petition in the past two years stating:
"We want the Boy Scouts of America to change its policy of excluding gay youth and adults from scouting."
It also wants the Scouts to allow atheists and girls in the organization.
On September 1, Gavin Grooms of Provo, Utah, put up his Save Our Scouts website (http://www.saveourscouts.com) which says:
"I support the National Council of the Boy Scouts of America for their defense of our First Amendment right peaceably to assemble in order to teach boys to do their duty to God and country, obey the Scout Law, help other people and keep physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight. I urge the leadership of the Boy Scouts of America to resist all efforts being made today, through lawsuits and financial and social intimidation, to modify the meaning or to abandon these time-tested precepts of responsible manhood.
The response to Save Our Scouts was immediate and overwhelming. In two weeks, over 20,000 people have signed the petition and those 20,000 people have sent the petition to an additional 34,000 friends and relatives. All the sudden, in an effort to keep the Boy Scouts from becoming a campaign issue, we began to see articles like that of Donald W. Meyers, editor of the Provo Herald opinion page, a Pulitzer paper, entitled: "Boy Scouts in no danger from controversies" in which he ridiculed the notion that anyone should do anything to counteract the entrenched and well financed Scouting for All effort to either force the Boy Scouts to abandon its standards or be destroyed. His comment about the Eagle Scouts who were presenting the colors at the Democratic National Convention was:
"Is booing children a polite thing to do? No, but the First Amendment does protect impolite speech. Maybe the Scouts should work on their thick-skin merit badges. …It's fairly safe to say that the Boy Scouts will survive these protests and be none worse for the wear. It's just sad that Scouting's supporters are using the Boy Scouts for political purposes. The message seems to be that the fate of the Boy Scouts rides on the result of an election."Maybe the Scout Law should be modified to include this line: A Scout will not play to hysteria in order to save his group's hide or to make opponents look bad."
Another liberal, radio talk show host Tom Barberi, invited Grooms on his show, at first pretending to ask "innocent" questions about why he organized Save Our Scouts. Grooms mentioned the years of litigation, leading up to the Supreme Court decision which fully supported the Scouts position and the booing of the Eagle Scouts at the Democratic Convention, that to this day no one has apologized for. Barberi asked what the objection to a homosexual scoutmaster was and Grooms talked about the "inappropriateness" of having a counselor physically attracted to his or her charges in such an intimate situation as a tent on a camping trip.
Barberi apparently was not prepared for a common sense answer. Grooms attempted to patiently explain that, if the scout was, for example, a girl scout, that the girl would probably feel uncomfortable sleeping in a tent in the woods with a heterosexual male like himself. Barberi liked that response even less and demanded to know what "Girl Scouts have to do with the issue."
Grooms pointed out that young boys should not be put into an awkward position of having a person in their tent that they might feel uncomfortable undressing in front of - a female or a homosexual. Barberi then asked if he was saying that lesbians should not be Girl Scout leaders.
Should lesbians, who say they are physically attracted to girls, not boys, be alone in a tent in the woods with a group of girls? Is that an appropriate role model for womanhood, especially since most lesbians seem to have a real problem relating to, or even LIKING heterosexual men? Would it be appropriate for a heterosexual male to be alone in a tent in the woods with a group of girls? Barberi, and others, including a couple of computer camp counselors, have simply refused to respond to that question, when Grooms has asked it.
Barberi ended up hanging up on Grooms while shouting into the microphone that Save Our Scouts was a "scam" because 20% of the money contributed would go to maintain the website, travel expenses, getting the word out and the petitions delivered to the Scout headquarters. Of course, Barberi didn't seem to think that Scouting for All, which charges $20 for membership, is a "scam" in its efforts to destroy the Scouts.
However, Barberi notwithstanding, the Girl Scout angle will undoubtedly come up again and again. In fact, the Miami Herald brought it up in yesterday's paper in an article sub-titled: "Homosexuals allowed in other agencies"
"The Boy Scouts of America's policy banning homosexuals from joining its ranks is a rare stance among the largest nationwide organizations that run programs for children."The Girl Scouts, 4-H, Boys and Girls Club of America, Big Brothers, Big Sisters, Jewish Community Centers and the YMCA, which helped the Boy Scouts organize in the early 1900s, all allow gay adults to serve as leaders and welcome gay children as members.
"Many of these agencies go a step further and have nondiscrimination policies that include sexual orientation as a protected category.
"``The Girl Scout organization does not discriminate,'' said Kim Sundy, a spokeswoman at the Girl Scouts' national headquarters in New York City. 'Anyone can be a leader or a member as long as they pay their dues and uphold the Girl Scout oath. That oath doesn't say anything about sexuality. We feel those are private matters between girls and their families.'
Somehow learning that "anyone can be a leader…as long as they pay their dues" doesn't sound comforting to this mother and grandmother. Does Sundy mean by that that any ex-convict, male or female, pedophile or rapist who says they will uphold the Girl Scout oath, and has the money, can be a Girl Scout leader?
I checked out a couple of Girl Scout websites. The San Francisco Girl Scouts website says:
"Girl Scout Troop Leader is one of the most important roles you can play. You may offer to become the sole leader of a troop, or you may share leadership with two or three responsible people. Another option is a co-op troop, where every parent is a leader. Men may be troop leaders in cooperation with a female co-leader because female role models are important in Girl Scouting."
The Girl Scout Oath, as written, sounds suspiciously like the Boy Scout Oath. It says:
On my honor, I will try:
To serve God and my country,
To help people at all times,
And to live by the Girl Scout Law.
Only, the Michigan Girl Scout Council says that it's not an oath, it's a promise, and, besides, it's flexible:
"The Girl Scouts provide flexibility in speaking the Girl Scout Promise. An individual member may use the word or words for "God" that best reflect her own spiritual beliefs. The Girl Scouts believe that freedom of religion is a fundamental American right. While we believe the motivating force in Girl Scouting is a spiritual one, we do not attempt to dictate the form or style of a member's worship."
It then hastens to add, however, that "In the event that a girl chooses what appears to be inappropriate wording for "God," the Girl Scout troop leader, in conjunction with the girl's family, will help the girl find a substitute word or words."
I would presume that means that if a girl substitutes, for example, "Satan" for "God" that the troop leader might possibly be allowed to suggest a different word be used, provided, of course, the parents agree. On the other hand, the Girl Scouts might be on shaky ground by discriminating against a Satan worshipper, in view of the "non-discrimination" policy which prohibits discrimination based on religion. After all, if the "motivating force in Girl Scouting" is a "spiritual" force, Satan is a "spiritual force" too - just a different kind of spiritual force from God.
The moral to this story, folks, is simply this: If you have a child, beware of any group that wants to take your money and your child unless you know EXACTLY just how morally "flexible" they have become and how they select counselors and advisors.
To comment: mmostert@originalsources.com
To sign the Save Our Scouts petition: http://www.saveourscouts.com/petition.html
To Subscribe to the Reagan Monitor, the newsletter that gives you news FACTS you can USE to make your life, and the world, better go to:
Start Your Subscription
