The Irreverent Reverend

Whenever my boat, Genesis, leaves port she flies the American flag off the stern rail.  It’s a Coast Guard regulation and I have never thought much about it.  I just do it. But as the fourth of July rolled around this year I wasn’t feeling terribly patriotic. Being proud of America is not high on my list right now. And as I mused on that, I got to thinking about what it means to fly the flag.

When I fly the flag I am not applauding the country, I am protesting.  I am protesting the policies of the current administration and the general direction in which our country is moving.  I am protesting the rising tide of nationalism that holds a philosophy of “my country right or wrong”.  I am protesting the cuts (proposed and enacted) to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, SNAP benefits and more.  I am protesting the potential appointment of a conservative judge that may put Roe v. Wade on the chopping block.  I am protesting a government that is waging war on the poor.  I am protesting the anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies that separate children from their parents.  I am protesting the gerrymandering of voting districts in ways that benefit political parties and undermine the voting system of our nation.  I am protesting a president whose primary agenda is undoing everything his predecessor did out of spite.

When I fly the flag I am re-framing the dominant cultural message and seeking a pathway of patriotism that loves my country and doesn’t take its crap lying down. I am mindful of the first commandment to have no other gods and I am trying to keep my priorities and my allegiances in proper order.

This means the prophetic task is crucial for our time.  It is about speaking truth to power.  It is about bringing basic human decency to bear on the most vulnerable members of society and assuring they are cared for.  It is about the rights of all people and the need for justice in a system that increasingly marginalizes people of color.  It is about the wholesale slaughter of innocent bystanders and children because our legislators can’t get out of the NRA’s pocket long enough to pass meaningful gun legislation. It is about this country going off the rails and needing voices of reason, compassion and accountability to get it back on track before it is too late.

I am seeking a way to speak truth to power, to find others who are of similar mind and to raise our voices as one in opposition to growing tyranny.  The White House occupant is a dangerous man who is playing fast and loose with our country, its people and its resources. 

I fly the flag in part because I have to, but mostly because I am protesting and reframing what it means to be a patriot in times of growing nationalism. I won’t be silenced; I won’t be bullied; I will not stop loving my country; and because I love my country, I will not stop criticizing and speaking against what is wrong.

In celebration of the Fourth of July here are some forgotten or little known historic facts.

The pledge of allegiance was written by socialist minister  Francis Bellamy (1855-1931).  In its original form it read,

“I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

In 1923 the words, “the Flag of the United States of America” were added. In 1954, the words “under God,” were added by President Eisenhower.

The United States has a history of suppressing free speech and separating families for political purposes.  The Alien and Sedition Act of 1798 was a series of four laws passed by Federalists who believed that Democratic-Republican criticism of Federalist policies was disloyal.  They feared “aliens” living in the US would sympathize with the French during a war.  It was one of the first tests of freedom of speech.  It permitted the deportation, fine, or imprisonment of anyone deemed a threat or publishing “false, scandalous, or malicious writing” against the government of the United States.  Makes me wonder how Fox news as a whole hasn’t ended up in prison.

The Mexican war of 1846-1848 was an illegal act of aggression (not unlike Russia and the Ukraine) in which a militarily unprepared Mexico was pitted against the expansionist administration of James Polk.  When the war was over, Mexico had lost the territory that is now California, Utah, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico.

During the Civil War Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus citing national security.  The writ was a first line of defense against tyranny. It stated that any judge or court may compel those holding a prisoner to produce that prisoner and prove that the individual was legally incarcerated.  The suspension was invoked against John Merryman, a Maryland state legislator, arrested for attempting to hinder Union troops from moving from Baltimore to Washington.  He was held at Fort McHenry by Union military officials.

The Palmer Raids of 1919-1920 were fueled by anti-immigrant hysteria and fears that “foreigners” would start a worker’s revolution.  No doubt this revolution would be for things like living wages, humane working conditions and the abolition of child labor.

During World War II, 120,000 Japanese American citizens were held in internment camps as a reaction to the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor.  It was widely recognized as the most atrocious human rights violation ever committed by our government.  Until now.

The US has a history of taking what it wants and suppressing what it doesn’t like, all in the name of national security.  Then we wrap it all up in the flag, call it patriotism and celebrate our freedom of speech.  At least until we say something that annoys the government.

I love my country but I am ashamed and embarrassed to be an American at this moment in time.  The amoral  occupant of the White House is systematically dismantling much of what has made this country great and replacing it with fear and hatred. He is alienating our allies with his “America First” rhetoric. All the while tax cuts to the rich are spurring record profits for corporations, manufacturing jobs are moving overseas for cheap labor and the national debt is skyrocketing. History is repeated with anti-immigrant rhetoric and all-out war on human rights, women’s rights and civil rights.  He is polarizing political camps and feeding the gridlock that happens all too easily when party loyalty comes before loyalty to country.

The lines between patriotism and nationalism are dangerously thin. This is a time for true patriotism. It is a time for those who truly love our country to not be afraid to stand up to tyranny and the rule of the rich by the rich and for the rich. Sydney J. Harris clearly differentiated patriotism and nationalism:

“The patriot is proud of his country for what it does.  The nationalist is proud of his country no matter what it does.  The first attitude creates a feeling of responsibility, but the second a feeling of blind arrogance that leads to war.”

It is clear that the Administration has no moral compass.  Despite being the party that claims to have an affinity to (white) Evangelical Christians, it is painfully clear that no biblical faith-based foundation is anywhere to be found.  So I continue my primer in basic biblical tenets of the Judeo-Christian faith.  Much of what you will read doubles as simply being a human being and having some compassion and common sense.  Y’all might want to try it sometime. 

 The First Lady thought it would be too difficult for her son to make the move to Washington in the middle of the school year. How is it that there is no consideration for the lifelong trauma caused to immigrant children by separating them from their parents?  To make this mess worse, there is no plan to reunite children with their parents.  

Scripture repeatedly gives us a choice to respond to God’s initiative. The ways of life and death are set before us and we are invited to choose life. When we say no, it doesn’t change God; it breaks God’s heart. Hearts that are bound by greed and power deny justice to God’s people. The command of scripture is to love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength and our neighbor as ourselves. It is a central theme of both testaments.

The basic thing that you continue to miss is that God has an eternal love affair with creation and humanity.  God’s love for all God made is unconditional, eternal and unfailing.  I suggest you read the book of Psalms and see how many times the phrase, “steadfast love,” appears as a description of God.  You can get back to me with your answer.  And yes, Mr. Sessions that love extends to you too.  We are all created in divine image for holy purpose. To say this administration breaks God’s heart is an understatement.

There’s another part that you miss by a country mile. When God’s love is deeply internalized, life is lived in obedience and gratitude. As God’s workers in the world, we embody the love that God has for creation and for all people. Obedience to God’s dream for creation is our first and final vocation. As the ­old hymn goes, “Love so amazing so divine, demands my soul my life my all.”  (Listen here) Perhaps you know it, even though it was penned by a congregational minister (the tradition I proudly claim as my own).

Another central biblical theme is hospitality to strangers, aliens and travelers. We are admonished to care for them as we care for our own families.  Perhaps you might like to send your children/grandchildren to the great “summer camp” tent city. They can join several thousand children sitting in blistering heat detained in cages and separated from their families.  Sounds like a rocking good time, eh?

This leads to another central theme of Scripture: grace and mercy.  In a nutshell it means that we don’t get what we deserve.  I think that should come as mighty good news to you.  More importantly, the families that came here for refuge and safety don’t deserve what they are getting either.  They were described by the Occupant as “invading our country” making them sound like vermin.  They were called animals.  While you are studying scripture you might also want to look at a few history books.  Dehumanizing an entire population is a dangerous step toward fascism, one that was taken early on by the Nazis as they began their pogrom against the Jews.

To faithfully interpret scripture, it must be read as a whole.  Cherry picking verses that fit a point of view skew the biblical message of love, justice, mercy and grace.  There is nothing biblically justifiable about doing what this administration’s treatment of immigrants.

Mr. Sessions, I admonish you to read the book you claim as holy and seek the guidance found there. My offer to you for private bible study lessons stands. Call me when you’re ready.

In the mean time I offer a verse from a great hymn of the church: “Christian rise and act your creed. Let your prayer be in your deed. Seek the right, perform the true. Raise your work and life anew.” (Listen Here)

PS: Be sure to check the “Photo of the Moment” It is said that everyone has a double; this photo shows yours.

It seems your knowledge of Scripture is limited. Please call me. I can help. Using Romans 13 to justify the abusive policy of separating parents and children shows a completely misguided understanding of the text.

The early church was oppressed by Roman Occupation and fledgling communities needed to keep a low profile or risk becoming snacks for hungry lions. The counsel to obey the law was a practical piece of advice to believers in order to avoid imprisonment and certain death. Using it to justify imprisonment is just plain wrong. Please go back and read all of Romans 13. Cherry picking Scripture to justify this outrageous behavior is insulting to people of faith everywhere who have a working knowledge of Scripture. It is insulting to God and all that is holy. You should be ashamed of yourself.

In the future, if you must quote Scripture (which is totally inappropriate anyway), I recommend you thoroughly study the text and read the surrounding verses and chapters. A good commentary is helpful.

When the Bible is read as a whole book there are several themes that are evident throughout. I suggest you read the Bible until you see and begin to understand these themes. Then you can go to your prayer closet and confess your misuse of the sacred text.

The Bible clearly states that we are to care for the poor, the orphan, the alien in our land, the widow and the oppressed. It is part of the covenant we share with God, a covenant that began in Genesis and runs throughout the Second Testament. Scripture always points toward a preferential option for the poor.

A second theme is God’s relentless Justice. God has an agenda for the creation pronounced “good”. Live in right relationship with God, others and all of creation. This country is on a dangerous path of isolationism. Alienating our allies has, throughout history, brought ruin. A study of the fall of Israel and Judah could be quite informative for you. History does repeat itself.

The call to right relationship is essentially a call to discipleship. It is impossible to be a follower of Jesus and ignore the teachings of Jesus. Being Christian means seeing the face of Christ in the children and parents being wrenched apart.

It is wholly appropriate to quote:

“And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you? And the king will tell them, ‘Truly I say to yo, just as you did it to one of the least of those who are members of my family (and this means all people) you did it to me.’ Then he will say to those at his left hand ‘You that are accursed depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, I was naked and you did not give me clothing, and in prison and you did not visit me.’ ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison and did not take care of you?’ Then he will answer them, ‘truly I tell you, JUST AS YOU DID NOT DO IT TO THE LEAST OF THESE, YOU DID NOT DO IT TO ME.” ( Matthew 25:39-46)

Mr. Sessions, I suggest you read this passage until you get it. I remind you that you are not a servant of the administration or your political party, you are a servant of the people.

And lots of your people are outraged. This country has a long history of ripping parents and children apart and it is not a partisan issue. I get that. There is plenty of blame to go around. There is also plenty of opportunity here to do something different; something just, something compassionate. Just because it is legal does not mean it is moral.

Please return to my blog next week as I continue with central themes of Scripture including love, grace and the prophetic task. Mr. Sessions, if you are interested in private Bible Study lessons call me.

I am troubled and I am angry.  “Christians” are using their notoriety (or infamy) to spew a message of hate, oppression and judgement toward blacks, gays, women, immigrants and the disabled.  Franklin Graham has me hopping mad as he spewed his hate filled rhetoric to influence the California elections.

Here’s the bottom line: if you are hating or oppressing any group of people you are outside the way of God teachings. The name by which you call God is irrelevant.  It’s just that simple.

We all harbor prejudice.  We all have some fear of the other. We all place blame on those whom we perceive to be the “problem”. If we are white, we have privilege whether we recognize it or not. We are all outside of love in some way. 

Jesus hated no one. He worked to free those who were oppressed by a predatory Roman economy. He reached out to those who were socially outcast and rejected because of disease or disability.

In stopping a woman’s twelve-year flow of blood (Luke 8:43-48) he did more than cure her disease.  He restored her to her community by removing the ritual uncleanness caused by the issue of blood.

Jesus healed a leper (Mark 1:40-45) and restored him to his community because he was no longer a danger to those around him.

Jesus refused to let a woman caught in adultery be stoned, saying the one who had no sin could toss the first one (John 8:1-11).  Funny how the man was nowhere to be found, but even if he was he wouldn’t have been stoned either.

The only people Jesus ever called out were the religious leaders colluding with the Roman occupation.  It was an unjust and predatory economy in cahoots with religious leaders and it hurt the poor.  Jesus didn’t hate them, he called them to accountability.

Claiming the name of Jesus means claiming the way of Jesus.  The very people Jesus would be calling out are the ones Franklin Graham is trying to get elected in California.

Our economy and indeed the global economy has created a permanent underclass of poverty.  There is less and less tolerance for dissenting voices, either religious or political. The public narrative increasingly co-opts religious language in a way supports an unjust political and social agenda.

At the heart of every great religious tradition is love. It is time we harnessed the love that unites us to let us unite us. 

As protestants it means we put the protest back in Protestant.  Protestants have a strong history of standing against oppression and hatred, working for the poor and the outcast, and putting forward loving justice that excludes no one. 

The Catholic worker movement brought justice and relief to marginalized populations in rural areas around the country in the war torn 1930’s.

Muslims for Social Justice and other organizations like it are working to put forward the true message of Islam which is love, justice and human rights for all.  It commits to fighting racism, white supremacy and sexism within as well as beyond the Muslim community. 

We are in need of a public social narrative that acts as a corrective to the thinly veiled hatred in much of the religious speech in our day.  It begins simply:  if you are outside of love, you are outside the way of God.

I believe that words have power. I believe that what we say and how we say it matters.  It is partly because I have been a preacher all my life. I count on words to have some effect on people for better or worse. It’s also partly because I hear my mother’s words in my ears, “It’s not just what you said, it’s the way you said it”.

At a deep level we all know that words matter. So, I listen as words come out of someone’s mouth.  Usually the FIRST words are the real message regardless of what comes next.  Here are some first words spoken recently:

• I was embarrassed and ashamed (Starbucks founder Howard Schultz in an interview about the arrest of two black men in a Pennsylvania Starbucks).
• I’m sorry you feel that way (Sarah Sanders in response to a young boy’s comment that he didn’t feel safe in school and wondered what the administration was doing about gun control).
• I am angry, hurt and unmoored from what I thought would be the final passage of my life and career (Tom Brokaw responding to allegations of sexual misconduct from a former colleague).
• I would like to sincerely apologize to Ivanka Trump and to my viewers for using an expletive on my show to describe her last night (Samantha Bee in a tweet aired on May 31, 2018).
• I apologize to Valerie Jarrett and to all Americans (Roseanne Barr in a tweet aired on May 29, 2018).

So, Howard Schultz is embarrassed, Sarah Sanders feels the need to apologize FOR someone else’s feelings, Tom Brokaw is concerned about his legacy, Samantha Bee “sincerely” apologizes and Roseanne Barr apologizes to all Americans for making a “bad joke”.  Is there some common denominator of BS and self interest here or am I mistaken?

Someone should tell Mr. Schultz that embarrassment is not an appropriate response to racism. Embarrassment seems more like it’s all about him. I would much rather have heard, “We have fired that store manager and will continue to replace staff who embody racist actions toward our customers.  We are taking small first steps toward addressing racism and will continue to educate our staff.” Or something like that.

Someone should tell Ms. Sanders’ that one does not apologize for another’s feelings; they are another’s feelings. I would much rather have heard, “Gun control legislation is a priority for our administration even though half our elected officials are in the pocket of the NRA.  We will make every effort to act with some integrity though our track record so far is pretty bad.” Or something to that effect.

Mr. Brokaw’s response of being concerned about his legacy before anything else is pretty shallow. He later calls her a character assassin and essentially a failure in her career.  Like many men, he insists he is the real victim.  Men hate it when they lose their privilege and are called to account for past behavior.  He may well be a man of integrity now and act out of his better self.  It doesn’t mean the allegations of three women from an earlier time in his career are necessarily false. I am more inclined to believe the women because of his denial.

 Ms. Bee’s “sincere” apology makes me wonder if there is any other kind? It makes the whole apology seem disingenuous. Is she sorry she said it or sorry she got called to account? Name calling is juvenile and it isn’t funny. As women we need to stand together against such sexist, insulting and belittling name calling. There are many ways to be funny and political without resorting to name calling. 

Ms. Barr did not make a bad joke.  It was racist, insulting and not even remotely funny.  Instead of apologizing for one comment, maybe she could work at not being a racist. Then these names and so-called jokes wouldn’t even enter her mind, let alone come out of her mouth.

Words matter.  First words matter most.  They are the unguarded revealing of priority and perspective. 

The late Dr. Maya Angelou said, “When someone shows you who they are believe them; the first time.”

The NFL’s decision to mandate the behavior of its players during the national anthem is not about the first amendment. It’s about the right of employers to determine appropriate behavior of their employees. They are within their rights with this action. I do not like it one bit, but that’s the law. It was an economic decision based on decreasing revenues at games as the controversy heated up. The god worshipped by the NFL is money.

The First Amendment does not apply to the NFL because it is not a governmentally funded agency. The First Amendment (which you can read here talks about what the government can and can’t do. It’s an important distinction.

However, there is a precedent that makes more sense in this conversation about what is and what is not appropriate in this debate about NFL players kneeling during the anthem.

In 1943 a new Supreme Court Justice, Robert Jackson, wrote the decision on a case involving West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. It is a complicated case which you can read about here in an article by Jeffrey Toobin in the New Yorker.

In a stunning opinion Justice Jackson wrote: “Struggles to coerce uniformity of sentiment in support of some end thought essential to their time and country have been waged by good, as well as by evil men. Those who begin coercive elimination of dissent soon find themselves exterminating dissenters.”

The Occupant came close as he suggested the players be expelled from the United States.

Justice Jackson continued: “Compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard. It seems trite but necessary to say that the First Amendment of our Constitution was designed to avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings.”

Summarizing another part of his opinion, Jackson condemns forced patriotic ceremonies as disingenuous to independent thought processes. He wrote, “The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.”

The upshot of his opinion is that “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no office, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism religion or other matters of opinion….”

Typically, in times of increased nationalism uniformity of the message increases in importance. It was evident in Jesus’ time as his message of love and justice and hope was hijacked into a narrative about dissidence and threat to the Roman occupation. Systems and governments regularly distort messages of dissent that threaten the status quo.

Football is big business. It has some odd connection to patriotism and all things God and country. Mostly it has to do with the bottom line of making money. Fans on both sides of the issue boycotted games and revenues dropped. That’s the issue; they don’t care about the reasons the players are kneeling.

True patriots are those who have the courage of their convictions. They kneel because the flag symbolizes so much of what is not true for large groups of the population–liberty and justice for all.

I’m trying hard to follow my own advice.  My success rate is low.  I yell at the TV a lot, especially during the news.  I yell at my Facebook friends when they post things that are dramatically opposed to my point of view.  I spend too much time judging people with differing social and political views.  I’m not proud of it, but it’s the truth.

I’m trying to change.  This is not easy for me.  I can be as self-righteous and obnoxious as the people I am calling self-righteous and obnoxious.  I think Jesus said something about the plank in your own eye and the speck in your neighbor’s eye (check out Luke 6:42).  Yup, that’s me sometimes, forests growing out of my eyeballs.  It colors my relationships with people I care about even if I never say the words to their face.

So, here’s my self-discipline improvement plan for talking to people with whom I disagree.  I think if we all try a few of these suggestions the world will be a better place.  Wish me luck, I need all the help I can get.

• Ask open ended questions about sensitive issues (avoid questions like, “are your out of your &%^$& mind?).
• Really listen: It’s hard to know what someone is saying if you are thinking up your next smart-ass retort.
• Affirm the relationship you share (avoid “I love you even though you are a jerk).
• Remember you are not trying to change their mind (this is a hard one because deep down you really are trying to change their mind).
• Avoid lumping large groups of people together (“All YOU people are the same” is not helpful).
• Remember that while snarky is fun, it doesn’t get you anywhere (this is really hard for me because I’m so good at it).
• Say things like “help me understand” (and don’t reply “how can you be so stupid?).
• Use non-inflammatory language (“listen you moron” is not conducive to ongoing conversation.
• Break complex issues into manageable parts: on gun control, talk about assault rifles, licensing, mental health and privacy, Second Amendment etc.
• Try to find common ground. For example, I assume all our families and friends think children being slaughtered in their classroom is a bad thing.  If not, we need new friends and long-term family therapy.
• Don’t be afraid to end of the conversation if it goes badly. “I don’t want to say something I will regret” is better than saying something you will regret.
• Remember you are talking to a person, not a position. Avoid demonizing, dehumanizing and shaming someone.

The capacity for civil discourse in the midst of disagreement is crucial for healthy relationships and for a healthy society.  It is at an all time low in the current maelstrom of our culture.  I’d like to blame the Occupant at the White House, but I think he has just given tacit permission for people to do what they want to do anyway.  He sets a poor example that some people willingly follow.  When I am at my worst I want to follow as well.  Name calling and blaming and shaming are lower parts of the self that can be easily called forward in an environment that normalizes the behavior.

It’s just another thing to #resist.

So, it turns out I had some wrong facts when I wrote last week’s blog post.  Thanks to local Scout leaders I have an opportunity to correct my errors.  Here are the facts.

First, the Boy Scouts of America is not changing their name.  It will remain the Boy Scouts of America.  The program name will change in February 2019 and become “Scouts BSA” and will begin serving girls as well as boys.

Second, boys and girls will not be in the same troops.  Each will have their own single gender troop.  Girls as well as boys, age 11-17, will be able to work toward the Eagle Scout rank.

Third, boys and girls will be referred to as Scouts following the program name change.  Good to know, I would hate to see girls called Boy Scouts.

Fourth, Cub Scout troops will continue to be called Cub Scouts and will have all girl and all boy troops.

Those are the facts.

This seems like bs from the BS.  Changing the program name without changing the organizational name keeps it a male dominated organization that adds girls on as an afterthought. I believe Girl Scouts are undercut by this action and the value of Girl Scouts is diminished in the public eye.

Girl Scouts has specific goals that are geared toward girls becoming strong, independent and self-confident young women. Young girls learn what it means to be female in a male dominated culture. Is the curriculum for the Boy Scouts going to change?  Or are girls going to learn to have male focused character building? To think that young men and women do not face different issues in growing into mature adults is pure nonsense.

The Boy Scouts of America says on its website, “Our priority is to bring the benefits of Scouting to more youth while remaining true to our mission”.  The BSA mission is (in part) “…to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and the Scout Law.

It seems this is an effort on the part of the Boy Scouts of America to shore up dwindling participation. Given the number of Boy Scouts who have exited the organization since the announcement, it just may backfire.  It’s still a lose/lose for Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts

When the Boy Scouts of America opted to include girls and changed their name to Scouts of America/BSA, a few tectonic cultural plates shifted.  The Boy Scout movement began in the United States in 1909 and was incorporated in 1910. The movement soon spread throughout the country. The Girl Scout movement began in 1911 with a group of 19 girls.  It also spread quickly throughout the country.

Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts helped generations of girls and boys define and redefine what it means to grow up with integrity, courage and character.  Each organization has a (mostly) noble history.  Recent sex abuse scandals and leadership conflicts about homosexual participants and leaders in the Boy Scouts has rocked that history.

I can’t help but wonder if some of the decision to admit girls is connected.  Boy Scouts suffered a pretty severe black eye in the public eye as these scandals came to light. Might this be a hopeful action to increase membership, a way of redeeming themselves in the eyes of the public?

Both Scouting organizations have dwindling memberships because of competition from other organizations, school sports, theme-based camps for just about everything, and a host of other things.   Still, it’s not clear that making the Boy Scouts into Scouts of America  and going co-ed is the answer.

Where it really goes off the rails is at the intersection of contemporary gender roles and missed opportunities.  Boys need places where they can be formed into young men with character and integrity.  Historically, Scouting has been such a place.  The Eagle Scouts I know are fine young men who do not follow mainstream culture and live by the Scout’s code.

Similarly, girls need places where they can be formed into strong young women with integrity. In a culture that objectifies women’s bodies, girls need a safe place to develop strength of character in order to not buy into that culture.  The Silver Bar, the Girls Scout equivalent of the Eagle Scout award celebrates young girls who become strong young women who are self-assured, self-identified and resistant to our often morally bankrupt culture.

When girls and boys are put together in scouting, some of the same gender roles they face in school are reinforced.  The “cute” girls and “cute” boys may well act out of their awakening hormones while socially awkward or differently-abled boys and girls are left on the same sidelines they are at school. 

Finally, the perspective of a friend who has been involved with Girl Scouts her whole life, sees the loss of gender-based scouting as the loss of a safe place for boys and girls to fail.  With the addition of gender dynamics failure takes on a new meaning, as does competition. It undercuts the spirit of collaboration and cooperation that includes everyone, even the socially awkward, differently-abled girls and boys.  Being together, girls with girls and boys with boys, levels the playing field and takes gender-based competition out of the equation.

In a time when gender specificity in youth organizations can be a great aid to development of self, androgenic Scouting is a lose/lose.