I’ve been following the Boy Scouts of America’s anti-gay policy . . . and then their almost-change-in-policy . . . and then their non-decision. The BSA suggested today that, “due to the complexity of the issue,” they have decided to postpone the decision to uphold or overturn the anti-gay policy they just reaffirmed last summer. (Here’s where wordpress needs an eyeroll emoticon . . .)
Perhaps I’m slow, but I’ve just learned today that there are people who are arguing that the ban should remain in place so that the boy scouts and their leaders can continue upholding the Scout Promise, which says:
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.
. . . and they think that “morally straight” means “heterosexual.”
So tonight I got out Brent’s dusty copy of the Oxford English Dictionary that he purchased–on a careless, youthful whim after selling his graphing calculator when he changed his undergraduate major from physics to English)–and looked it up.
And lo, the heavens opened. The OED hath spoken:
“Straight” was first used to mean “heterosexual” in 1941–several decades after the Boy Scouts began using it in their oath in 1908.
So when the boy scouts promise to be “morally straight,” they are not promising to be heterosexual . . .
I have heard people say that a gay person is not morally straight but not in the sense of straight=heterosexual, rather that homosexuality is immoral, so a gay person is immoral (and thus not morally straight). I find it hard to argue with someone on this, because it’s a matter of definition. I certainly do not think that an LGBTQ person is any more likely to be of immoral character than a heterosexual person, but I do know people who believe that LGBTQ people are immoral simply because of who they are. It makes no sense to me, but it makes sense to the people who make this argument. I have family members who believe this, and I have no idea how to even have a discussion with one of them. (I would love some suggestions, though I have had to agree to not bring it up with one family member if I want to have any contact with her at all.) And the idea that “morally straight” in the boy scout oath means heterosexual is just kind of bizarre. Even if that were the case, it’s just an oath, which can be changed, as many things have changed in the boy scouts since its founding.
Apparently someone at Slate had the same thing on their mind- it’s worth a look: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2013/02/boy_scouts_gay_policy_sexuality_is_irrelevant_to_being_morally_straight.html?c=upw1
I felt so sad when my more conservative friends on FB started passing around a petition to get the BSA to stop considering the change in policy. The prejudice makes no sense to me personally, although I guess historically people inside and outside of the Church have believed homosexuality to be a condemnable sin by itself, even without any sexual immorality. Still, it’s very sad.