I DISSENT

"Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense."

--Chapman Cohen

It seems that I am not the only person having fun arguing with religious people on Facebook. A friend of mine, who has also left Mormonism, recently posted his thoughts on the current debacle between the Mormon Church and the Boy Scouts of America (BSA), the fallout of which has devout Mormons squirming.

For years the BSA has been wrestling with its policies which discriminate against gays. Some revisions came down the pike a year or so ago, thus allowing openly gays kids to participate in the program without being kicked out. This caused a bit of a stir among Mormons at the time, but now, apparently, they are claiming that they were in support of this revision all along. I have some gay ex-Mormon friends who might challenge this claim...

At any rate, the question now is whether or not openly gay men can be leaders in the organization. In typical religious fashion--standing in opposition to facts and reason--Mormons are upset that the BSA has recently reversed their outdated discriminatory policy, which will allow gay men to be scout leaders.

Their objection, which they hold to be doctrinal, and therefore, a form of religious liberty, is that it is inappropriate for gay men to be leaders of youth groups. Apparently Mormons still think that gays try to "recruit" teens and that homosexuality is closely linked to pedophilia--both of these misconceptions are dispelled by science.

As my friend points out, Mormons have no problem with straight men overseeing Girl's Camp (the lesser-funded female version of Scout Camp). Nor do they object that these same men ask male and female teens--behind closed doors--intimate questions about their sex lives. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

Although I have huge problems with religious-based bigotry, I do agree that the Mormon Church has the right to exclude gays from their organization (for the same reasons that the KKK can refuse to allow black people in their group). Unfortunately for Mormons, however, the BSA is not justified in their discrimination since they are a multicultural organization which receives government kickbacks, and financial stipends.

For instance, the BSA is allowed free access to hundreds of military personnel and millions of dollars of equipment--paid for with tax dollars--for their annual national jamboree. Also, many of the Boy Scout facilities and camps are on government-owned property and the BSA is charged a lowly $1 a year for rent.

These are major perks which other youth programs and nonprofits are not afforded by the government. This kind of support is the reason so many people are calling for a revision in the BSA's discriminatory policies. The Mormon Church is free to discriminate, but the government is not.

In response to all the hubbaballoo, the Mormon Church has issued a statement that, should the BSA go through with this change (allowing gay Scout leaders), then the Church will withdraw from the BSA and start their own scouting program. This will be a major blow to the BSA since the Mormon Church is their single largest supporter (approximately 25-30% of all scout troops are Mormon-run). This has been one major reason why the BSA has been so reluctant to change their policy.

The magnitude of the Mormon-BSA relationship is precisely what the Mormon Church relies upon when making the threat to withdraw from the BSA. Mormons are known for many things (some less favorable than others), one of which is sticking with their principles. They are also known for managing money well.

Should the Mormon Church withdraw all support and sever all ties with the BSA (a relationship about 100 years old, by the way), then whatever scouting substitute the Church devises will NOT receive the same government support as the BSA. This means that Mormons will spend significantly more money to run their scouting program.

It is because of this unavoidable monetary spike that I think the Mormon Church is bluffing. I think they will not pull the trigger on their threats of disassociation. I think they are trying to create a power play to strong-arm the BSA. Should the BSA go through with their policy change, I strongly doubt the Mormon Church will make good on their promise to withdraw--the financial stakes are too high. But, only time will tell.

In the post my ex-Mormon friend wrote on his Facebook page he mentioned that he had left the Church. And from out of the woodwork crawled some of his devout Mormon friends, hellbent on defending Mormonism and, if possible, saving my friend in the process.

One Mormon devotee wrote an especially pretentious and closed-minded response to my friend, [N]:

Sam:

"I know that somewhere deep down inside of you, [N], that you remember why you "used" to believe. I know that you remember feelings and promptings that you had, I remember perfectly hearing you talk about them. I remember listening to you testify of the very things that you try to tear down with logic. I know that you know, however buried that may be by emotions, pain, or whatever else it could be that God does exist. The bottom line is something convinced you that there was a God and that everything you taught as a missionary was true. You had a testimony and still do. If you choose to bury those memories than that is fine. But just as you desire to point out your opinion so do I. I cannot deny the very real feelings that I have had in my life. The confirmations that there is a God and he loves us. No matter what information someone provides. I will always know. I love you [N], and I hope that you know that I always have your best interest in mind."

I have never heard a more condescending, presumptive, or closed-minded testimony. Not only does this person claim to "know" that there is a god and that my unbelieving friend likewise "knows" this, but this person states that "No matter what information someone provides," he will always know that god exists.

This is the definition of closed-minded. But in Mormon culture this phrasing is seen as admirably strong conviction. Too bad he doesn't support his claim that his super strong feelings are indicative of god. Too bad no one ever has.

Another Mormon friend of my friend wrote a rather wordy response, so I won't post it here. In his word-salad, he made an interesting point I have not heard in a while. He related the struggle for gay rights to the 1978 change which allowed black Mormons to attain the priesthood.

He said that a possible reason why blacks were not allowed to have the priesthood before 1978 is because members were not yet ready for such a drastic change. To him this is more plausible than the common criticism that the Church only made the change because of societal pressures, as they seem to have done on the issue of polygamy (polygamy was endorsed by the Church for decades; it was not until the Mormons sought to make Utah a state that they abolished the practice; also, the US government threatened to confiscate millions of dollars of Mormon assets should they continue polygamy, much like they currently threaten Fundamentalist Mormons who still practice polygamy). 

The idea that Mormons were "not ready" to allow blacks to have the priesthood before 1978 does not speak favorably of Mormons at the time. The civil rights movement picked up a lot of steam in the 50s and 60s. What does it say about Mormons if they were behind the times by over a decade? Now that gay marriage is legal, how long will it take for the Church to catch up and once again claim moral superiority and exclusive access to divine revelation and prophecy?

Aron Ra was right; god moves in mysterious and delirious ways...

BONUS MATERIAL:

Coheed and Cambria performing Supreme Court Justice Scalia's "dissent" on gay marriage:

MORALLY STRAIGHT

"Tolerance is a virtue, but like all virtues, when exaggerated, it transforms itself into a vice. We need to be careful of the “tolerance trap” so that we are not swallowed up in it. The permissiveness afforded by the weakening of the laws of the land to tolerate legalized acts of immorality does not reduce the serious spiritual consequence that is the result of the violation of God’s law of chastity."
--Boyd K Packer (Mormon Apostle)





I'm not really a political person, yet people often think that I am. I freely acknowledge my own ignorance on most political issues, and I generally withhold commenting on things I know little about. But there are a few issues which can really stir me, such as gay marriage.

A couple of weeks ago Right-wing nut job Glenn Beck released a concession that "they" have won the gay marriage battle because "they" made it about freedom:

As much as I want to believe that the tides are turning for political conservatives, this concession seems all too opportunistic. Maybe I'm being cynical. Maybe Beck, a self-proclaimed libertarian, really has had a change of heart and really does see that conservatives have no legal basis to deny gay people the right to marry, no matter how icky or immoral they may find it. I just have to ask "Why, Mr Beck, has it taken you so long to look at this issue through the libertarian lens of freedom? Why the change of heart?"

I suppose that even if Beck is a hypocritical opportunist, this is still a sign of progress. If he is merely appealing to his constituencies, then this means his constituencies are changing their minds. This would be very good news.

Similarly, the Boy Scouts of America have recently changed their policy on gays in their organization. While the change is not as inclusive as some had hoped (gay adults are still not allowed), and it seems to be the result of monetary pressures from donors rather than doing the right thing on moral grounds (like the organization professes), it is still a step in the right direction.

With all the recent advances in gay rights, many are making predictions that gay marriage will be allowed in most states in X number of years, etc. A while back, I made a similar prediction that eventually even the Mormon Church will soften its policies on gay members, just as they did with black members in 1978. So, today I will reiterate that, like Glenn Beck, the BSA and the Mormon Church in 1978, all of whom changed their minds to reflect the social and political climate at the time, one day the Mormon Church will allow gay civil marriage in their churches, and gay men in openly gay relationships will hold priesthood offices in the church. All we have to do is wait for Mr Packer to die.



BONUS MATERIAL:

Here is Bryan Fischer chastising Glenn Beck for changing his mind on gay marriage:

THE CAKE IS A LIE

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe."
--Carl Sagan





So, it looks like the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) is now considering letting gays into their organization (or rather, allowing them to be open about it), which I predicted would happen as more companies and organizations which help fund the BSA continue to tell them they will stop giving the BSA money unless they change their policy on homosexuals. Also, kudos to the BSA for finally standing up against the Mormon Church's threat to secede from the program should the BSA allow gays in. But how inclusive and far-reaching will this change really be?

Here is the official press release:

MEDIA STATEMENT

Boy Scouts of America Monday, Jan. 28, 2013Attributable to: Deron Smith, Director of Public Relations

 

“For more than 100 years, Scouting’s focus has been on working together to deliver the nation’s foremost youth program of character development and values-based leadership training. Scouting has always been in an ongoing dialogue with the Scouting family to determine what is in the best interest of the organization and the young people we serve.

“Currently, the BSA is discussing potentially removing the national membership restriction regarding sexual orientation. This would mean 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. 
 
“The policy change under discussion would allow the religious, civic, or educational organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting to determine how to address this issue. The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents. 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.” [emphasis added]



In other words, "We are tired of being pulled back and forth on this divisive issue, so we are just going to let individual local troops figure out how inclusive or exclusive they want to be. Hopefully, progressives and bigots alike will continue to give us money. Pretty, pretty please."

Fine, I'll admit that this is progress for an organization with a fine tradition of "more than 100 years" of intolerance and bigotry and discrimination, but only marginally. It seems that the changes proposed are barely enough to appease people on either side. But whatever. It's their business. It's not like my tax money goes to fund their discrimination, right? ... 

The thing that I find most interesting about all this was a lesser known debacle a couple of months ago, which I think may very well have led to this proclamation being issued at this particular time.

As the Friendly Atheist points out, in September a troop in Maryland issued the following Non-Discrimination Policy:

It is a great policy. The very policy which the BSA should adopt nationally. But it was short lived as pressure from BSA higher-ups forced the troop to abandon their all-inclusive policy for this one:

This passive-aggressive left-hook caused somewhat of a stir at the time, but not so much at the national level. But as events have been developing lately, it seems to fit the timeline quite well to say this thorn in the BSA's side--coupled with increasingly shaky funding--is perhaps partially responsible for the change.

There is another issue in addition to the recent policy change concerning homosexuals: are atheists welcome, too? Well, if you read the last line of the press release you might get the impression that they are:

"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.” [emphasis added]

But all this means is that individual troops will not be forced to go against their religious beliefs (not the other way around), which in this context is speaking of whether or not they allow gays to join their specific local troop. The Scouting program itself, however, is still very much a religously and spiritually-centered organization as indicated by their oath:

"On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight." [emphasis added]

They elaborate further on how central religion is to their program on their page on faith and religion:

"Young people need faith. There is abundant evidence that children benefit from the moral compass provided by religious tradition. We acknowledge that faith can become an important part of a child's identity. Each of the major faiths breeds hope, optimism, compassion, and a belief in a better tomorrow. Scouting encourages each young person to begin a spiritual journey through the practice of his or her faith tradition. One of the key tenets of Scouting is "duty to God." While Scouting does not define religious belief for its members, it has been adopted by and works with youth programs of all major faiths." [emphasis added]

So, it seems to me that even if atheists were welcome to participate in Scouting, it would either make atheists cringe with all the "god talk", or they would constantly be proselytized and preached to by other scouts. But again, there is no indication that the policy change includes atheists at this point. A friend of mine put it this way:

"This is what I hear, "Since we are loosing funding left and right for being so close minded, we may let some gay people participate in Scouts. But Atheists, we still hate you."

So much hate and discrimination based on something which people have chosen to accept on faith rather than evidence...



BONUS MATERIAL:

Here is Christopher Hitchens on a slightly different "tradition of intolerance":

GET A LIFE

"At the end of 2010, the [Mormon] Church’s use of Scouting included: 142,085 Cub Scouts in 10,345 packs; 205,990 Boy Scouts in 19,285 troops; 64,645 Venturers in 8,298 crews."
--Boy Scouts of America





I was as much into the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) as the next Mormon teenage boy, but I never got around to earning the rank of Eagle Scout. I got to the rank of Life (one step under Eagle) fairly early on in my scouting career and just coasted to the end. To me scouting was about having fun and learning some cool, albeit essentially useless skills. In this sense, I was a successful scout.

By the standard imposed upon me by the 1st counselor of the Stake Presidency (part of the local Mormon clergy), I had failed the day I turned 18 as anything less than an Eagle Scout. Just weeks before my 18th birthday, he told me that if I didn't make the rank of Eagle in time, I would regret it for the rest of my life. In a way, he was right.

At about the same time, my quasi-girlfriend told me that she wasn't interested in dating someone who wasn't of proper scouting rank. Coincidentally, she married a guy who made it to Eagle at the age of 13. Throughout much of my mission and while attending BYU, where I was surrounded by Eagle Scouts, I felt as though I was constantly having to defend my rank. In the long run, though, I have found that most people outside of Mormonism don't really care about Eagle Scouts, so I have stopped worrying about it. It is nothing more than an elitist club where grown men teach teenage boys how to tie knots, build camp fires, and segregate themselves from people with differing opinions...

The Boy Scout program was hijacked by the Mormon Church decades ago. Every teenage boy in the Church is automatically registered in the Boy Scouts of America. This comprises about 15% of the scouting program, making the Mormon Church the single largest supporter of the BSA, both financially and in the number of boys actively participating in the program.

As of right now, atheists and homosexuals cannot join the BSA as leaders or even scouts. This has become an increasingly hot topic as more and more states are legalizing gay marriage and the general social climate is much more in favor of gay rights than ever before. Here is where it gets interesting, however, as the Mormon Church has often vocally declared that if the BSA were to allow gays among their ranks (see what I did there?), the church would pull all of their boys from the program and stop funding events. The Mormon Church is so serious about this, that they have a program already set up and ready for immediate implementation to replace the BSA, should they decide to let in gay scouts and scout masters (like, say, the Girl Scouts).

Now, from a legal stand point, things get a little fuzzy. On the one hand, the BSA and the Mormon Church are private organizations and as such have the right to exclude whomever they want (not unlike the KKK having the right to exclude black people). But the BSA receives government subsidies and various perks, which means the government is using tax money to support a discriminatory organization. The legal precedent is a little unclear here, but some people are fighting the legal battle to remove government support of the BSA unless they revise their policies to be more inclusive. Honestly, I don't think legal battles will be as effective as other methods which seem to be turning the tide for the Scouts.

According to this article, Intel will be ceasing any donations to the BSA due to their policy on gay members. This may not pinch their pocket books quite as much as it would if the Mormon Church left the program, but I have a feeling as more private businesses voice their support for (or against) gay marriage, we will see this kind of monetary withholding more often.

Ultimately, I think the BSA will eventually have to accept gays (and probably atheists, too), as their funds begin to shift. Then they will finally be rid of the yoke of Mormon scouting.





BONUS MATERIAL:


Here is Penn and Teller: Bullsh!t on the Boy Scouts of America (explicit)