House nixes effort to revoke Scouts' charter

On September 13, by a vote of 12 to 362, the House rejected a bill (HR 4892) that would have repealed the Boy Scouts' federal charter because the group does not accept homosexual scoutmasters. (Only one Republican, Rep. James Greenwood of Pennsylvania, voted for the measure.) The Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 this June that such a policy is valid and protected by the 1st Amendment's guarantee of the right of free assembly.

Since the Boy Scouts are a private group receiving no federal funds, revoking the group's charter would be largely a symbolic move. This effort comes in the midst of some-but overreportedprivate-sector and local government actions against the scouts (see story, cover box).

Most Democrats were hesitant to defend the bill, but instead complained about the politicking of the Republicans. Although a Democrat, Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California, sponsored the legislation, Republican Rep. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas brought the bill to the floor before it had ever been approved by a committee. Because it did not come out of a committee but was considered under suspension of the rules, the measure required a two-thirds majority to pass. Democrats complained that the debate was just an election-year political ploy.

While most Republicans opposed the legislation on grounds of "tolerance," but stopped short of agreeing with the homosexual ban, Rep. Steve Buyer (R:Ind.) explicitly defended the Scouts' policy. "Our youth today face a daily onslaught from some parts of our culture that promote self-gratification and alternative lifestyles. As one of the few counters to this, the Boy Scouts keep such, l guess, out-of-fashion values as duly to God and country, honor, respect, self-sacrifice, and community service."

Woolsey was one of few congressmen to defend her legislation. "Repealing the Boy Scouts' federal charter is a sensible and reasonable way for this Congress to take a stand against intolerance and not have it look as if our nation supported intolerance. A charter is an honorary title that Congress awards to organizations that serve a charitable, patriotic, and educational purpose. But to me, there is nothing charitable, there is nothing patriotic, and it certainly is not a value we want our children to learn." Although the polls show the opposite, she claimed to have the majority of the populace on her side in condemning the Scouts' policy.

Rep. Ron Paul (R: Tex.) quoted columnist Charley Reese who wrote: "I think that it's time for all patriotic organizations that have these federal charters to surrender those documents. It is impossible for a dishonorable organization to honor anyone. And these charters are, practically speaking, worthless. If the federal government believes that mindless nondiscrimination trumps morality, then it's time to disassociate from such bad company."

A "yes" vote was a vote to revoke the Boy Scouts' federal charter because the group does not allow homosexual scoutmasters. A "no" vote was a vote against the bill.

Copyright Human Events Publishing, Inc. Sep 22, 2000
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved