How NOM’s Reaction To The Boy Scouts Decision Reveals Its Anti-Gay Animus

The National Organization for Marriage has joined other anti-gay conservatives in condemning the Boy Scouts of America for voting to allow gay Scouts. The statement from Brian Brown notably does not mention the word marriage — despite the group’s mission — and also reveals how NOM buys into hackneyed stereotypes about gay people and people of faith:

BROWN: Today is a sad day for the Boy Scouts of America. They have succumbed to political pressure and abandoned their historic roots in what will prove to be a failed attempt to appease gay activists and corporate donors. Unfortunately, what they have done is said to the world that their oath no longer means much. Their decision to admit openly gay scouts will end up sexualizing the organization.

I am certain that having changed their policy on homosexuality, it’s only a matter of time before courts order them to admit homosexual scout leaders. Meanwhile, countless thousands of churches will very likely pull their sponsorship rather than endorse homosexuality, and the entire organization will begin to collapse. All of this is happening not because of a true grassroots demand of gay youth to be part of the organization but by an orchestrated political effort by gay activists who want to punish any group or organization that does not embrace homosexuality. It’s the beginning of the end for what once was one of America’s noblest organizations.

The Boy Scouts’ former policy, which remains in place for adult leaders, was such that Scouts were kicked out not for engaging in sexual activity with the same sex, but for even admitting that they are gay. NOM’s claim that ending this discrimination will “end up sexualizing the organization” reinforces the narrow views that being gay is only defined by sexual behavior and that gay men are, in fact, obsessed with sex.

Furthermore, the implication that “thousands of churches” will pull their sponsorship of Boy Scout troops suggests that those churches only supported the organization because it was anti-gay. It reduces Christianity to a one-belief religion, and that beliefs, “No gays allowed.” Such preposterous predictions are an insult to all churches who work with the Scouts, whether they supported the discriminatory policy or not, and ignores the other noncontroversial values the Scouts espouse.

NOM’s decision to engage in an issue outside their mission merely because involved the inclusion of the gay community further reflects how the group works against LGBT people, not for marriage.