Esposito 1
Lewis Esposito
Dr. Haspel
Rhetoric and Civic Life II
31 March 2013
The Despicable Ban
On March 16, 2013, pop star and gay-rights activist Madonna attended the 26th Annual
GLAAD Awards dressed as a boy scout. The purpose of her odd attire choice was to draw
attention to a recent issue in the news: the Boy Scouts of America’s current refusal to allow
openly gay boys and men to join its ranks. Other pop stars utilized their celebrity status to reveal
their opposition to the ban as well; Carly Rae Jepsen and Train, both after having agreed to
perform at a Jamboree event for the organization, have publicly revealed their disapproval of the
organization’s stance and are now refusing to perform unless the ban is lifted. Overall, I believe
the overwhelming opposition simply reveals the antiquatedness of the Boy Scouts of America
(BSA); society has progressed in its acceptance of gays, while the Boy Scouts has still failed to
reach modernity. In any case, my ultimate goal is not to deny the merit of the Boy Scouts of
America; indeed, it is truly a positive association that influences the lives of many young boys
for the better. Yet its ban on gay members is archaic, backward, and inconsistent with the values
of the United States of America. Thus, my goal is to persuade the reader that the Boy Scouts of
America should utterly demolish its prejudiced ban.
Perhaps most obviously, the ban is extremely discriminatory, as it negatively singles out
an entire demographic. I cannot help but relate this current offense to past prejudices against
African Americans. Truly, in both cases, both groups were and are treated unfairly for illogical
reasons. The Boy Scouts of America cannot even explain its current stance. The organization
Esposito 2
stated, “We believe that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the requirement in the Scout
Oath that a Scout be morally straight and in the Scout Law that a Scout be clean in word and
deed, and that homosexuals do not provide a desirable role model for Scouts.” No logical
rationale is provided for the ban; the Boy Scouts, for whatever reason, seem simply to believe
that homosexuals represent immorality! Is same sex attraction the cause of this immortality,
perhaps? Indeed, it must be, because other than sexual preference, no difference exists between
homosexuals and “straight” individuals. Similar logic applies to the discrimination against
African American: Caucasians and African Americans merely differ in skin tone! Overall, then, I
believe banning homosexuals from the BSA would be equivalent to banning African Americans.
Scientists are, in fact, beginning to discover that sexual orientation, like skin color, is at
least partially genetically determined. In one study, William Reiner, a psychiatrist at the
University of Oklahoma Health and Sciences Center followed a group of males who were born
with genital malformations. Surgeons ultimately determined to perform a gender shifting surgery
on the boys shortly after birth; as a result, the boys’ parents decided to raise them as girls. The
surgically altered females matured normally and were never informed of their true biological
gender. Dr. Reiner ultimately found that all were attracted to women (Abrams). Thus, if societal
and environmental factors determine one’s sexual preference, some of these females should have
been attracted to men. Yet none were: perhaps their biological male genes contributed to their
steadfast attraction to females. More recently, scientists are believe that perhaps gene expression
causes homosexuality. “Epi-marks,” which function as hormonal regulators for fetuses, are
usually eliminated when the child is born. If the “epi-marks” remain, however, and are passed
down to a child whose gender is opposite the parent’s, the fetus may be subjected to hormonal
imbalances, which could result in homosexuality (Roberts). Thus, if scientists are correct and
Esposito 3
homosexuality is at least partially genetically determined, banning gays from the Boy Scouts
would be equivalent to banning from African Americans, Asians, or Hispanics from the
organization! Indeed, neither race nor sexual orientation would be alterable. In this case, then, if
it is illegal to discriminate against ethnicity, why should it be illegal to discriminate against
sexual orientation?
The Boy Scouts ban on gay members is not merely discriminatory, biased, and bigoted; it
also violates individuals’ rights. When reciting the Scout Oath, a young boy will assert “On my
honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country.” (“Scouting Values”). Truly, by
upholding this ban, the scouts are certainly not honoring their country; in fact, they are
besmirching it. Indeed, they are ultimately rejecting the philosophy that our founding fathers so
proudly embedded in the Declaration of Independence: “all men are created equal.” If all
individuals are indeed “equal” in importance, should not everyone possess the same “equal”
rights? Unfortunately, though, because gays do not possess the same rights as straights in this
instance, the BSA cannot claim to consider them “equal.” The BSA high-ranking officials must
certainly believe straight individuals are superior, as it only wishes for them to compose the
organization and to lead the scouts in their activities and endeavors. In any case, BSA is denying
gays the equal rights that the Declaration of Independence promises; the ban must be uplifted.
Perhaps the BSA established the ban originally due to a misconception of gay men.
Indeed, maybe the organization believed and still believes that gay men who serve as scout
leaders will prey on the scouts. This belief could not be further from the truth, however. Just
because the leaders may be attracted to the men does not mean they will be interested in their
younger counterparts! Pedophilia is a psychological condition that can manifest itself in
heterosexuals and homosexuals males alike; it is rarely evident in women (Zarembo). Yet if the
Esposito 4
BSA wishes to adopt this logic nonetheless, shouldn’t straight male teachers be banned from
teaching younger female students, since they are just as likely to exhibit a pedophilic disposition
as gays? Yet the reason that teaching the opposite sex is legal, however, is that instructors are
often not attracted to their students, and in the off chance that they are, they often possess enough
restrain not to pursue their interest. Certainly, instances have arisen in the past where teachers
illegally engaged in sexual relations with minors, but this depravity could occur with any gender
and sexual orientation: it is not limited to gay pedophiles. Additionally, if one considers the issue
logically, openly gay men are probably not the individuals who will ultimately dabble in
pedophilia. First, research has shown that men with pedophilic tendencies are more often
attracted to females than males (Zarembo). Second, pedophiles realize their sexual interests
remain stigmatized and thus endeavor to conceal them (Zarembo). A pedophilic homosexual, for
example, would not likely openly reveal his homosexuality. Thus, the BSA’s ban on openly gay
will prove futile, as the individuals who are most likely to molest the boys will indeed be the
ones who are not direct in the revelation of sexual identity. Overall, then, the BSA’s gay ban will
prove rather ineffective in discerning possible pedophiles among men applying for leadership
positions.
If the BSA eliminates its ban on gays, individuals may begin to view LGBT people more
positively. While the acceptance of gays and their alternate lifestyles is becoming increasingly
more pervasive in our nation, some individuals still do not support their differences. Because the
BSA often represents a manifestation of virtuous American values for some, the organization’s
acceptance of the LGBT community could encourage others’ support for it as well. They may
believe supporting gays is “the American thing to do.” As a result, gay rights may proliferate,
and at some point, gay marriage may attain legality in all fifty US states. Thus, if the BSA uplifts
Esposito 5
its ban, the overall well being of the community could improve, as well as that of political
parties, since gay marriage will no longer remain an issue of debate! Additionally, young gay
adolescents themselves could even benefit from the ban elimination. Some may still feel
uncomfortable with their identities, while others may belong to intolerant families. Because of
the constant interaction with other scouts and leaders, strong bonds would most certainly
develop, and the Boy Scouts could serve as a support system for the youths. While the BSA
should not alter its purpose to provide counseling or assistive services, I believe the overall
community emphasis and familial nature of the organization could prove a positive influence in
the adolescents’ lives. If the ban is uplifted, the BSA will truly be adhering to the Scout Oath,
which states scouts “help people at all times” (Scout Values).
In fact, the removal of the ban would not merely benefit the gays; it could even prove
beneficial for the BSA! First, the number of scouts across the country would likely increase, as
gay youth may decide to join, and those who previously boycotted the organization because of its
stance may join as well. The BSA could then become an even more all-encompassing American
association. Additionally, the organization would likely procure more supporters if the ban were
abolished. For example, scouts are currently missing the opportunity to experience Train and the
Carly Rae Jepsen in a concert because of the organization’s values. If the BSA ultimately reveals
its acceptance of gays, however, celebrities, as well as other organizations, would be more likely
to collaborate with the BSA, which could result in more resources for a more enjoyable Boy
Scout experience. Last, the admittance of gay members into the organization would increase its
diversity. Colleges and universities particularly values diverse student bodies because they allow
for the exchange of different perspectives and experiences among students. If everyone belongs
to the same race, socioeconomic demographic, and sexual orientation, youths will likely not gain
Esposito 6
much from interactions with one another. Our differences, however, allow for discussions about
our past experiences, which can lead to a deeper understanding of ourselves as well as those
around us. Diversity ultimately fosters communal insight.
If the BSA lifts the ban, the youths themselves will be positively influenced as well.
Currently, social tolerance and acceptance of the LGBT people are flourishing. The BSA’s
rejection of the community by means of the ban, however, stands in stark contrast to these strides
being made. Unfortunately, the youth scouts, because of their immense time commitment with
the organization, may begin to believe discrimination of gays is acceptance. Thus, when they
eventually grow older and leave the organization, they could either stunt the progression of the
gay rights’ movement, or individuals may ostracize them for possessing such archaic ideals; in
either case, the boys will experience future societal barriers. Yet if the BSA removes the ban, the
boys will learn to accept others and their differences – a valuable life lesson. In this situation, the
boys will proceed into adulthood with an open-mind, which will prove beneficial in all facets of
life.
Overall, the BSA’s refusal to allow openly gay youths and men from joining the
organization must be altered. The ban is absolutely discriminatory, as it deprives gay youths of
the opportunity to participate in a valuable leadership and community driven organization that is
available to their straight counterparts. Why should they be punished for something they possess
no power over? Indeed, scientists are beginning to realize that sexual orientation is genetic. But
nonetheless, we are essentially reliving our nation’s past discriminatory acts against ethnic
minority groups with the preservation of this ban. Indeed, it is entirely useless in its purpose, and
both parties – the gays and the BSA – would only realize positive benefits from its elimination.
Esposito 7
Above all, the ban is hurting our nation more than it is helping: it is slowing the race toward full
equality amongst all Americans. Its ultimate demolition must ensue.