The Boy Scouts recent announcement that they are abandoning their policy against admitting open homosexuals as Scouts. Fortunately, most local Scout leaders understand what they are for, but their leaders, like those in many other cultural conservative institutions, are largely worthless when it comes to standing up for anything. Apparently Boy Scout leaders mistook the admonition "Quit yourselves like men" for "Quit like men." Now that they've taken a giant leap toward becoming (as Anthony Esolen remarks) the "Unisex Scouts," it is becoming very much less clear exactly what their justification is.
Here's Esolen, pointing out obvious things that pretty much everyone knows to be true, but which we all now have to pretend are not true because the gods of Tolerance and Diversity must be propitiated with cant and justified with sophistry:
I see a boy: ... vir futurus, a going-to-be man. Meaning: He will join other men, brothers fighting to attain or defend the common good. Greater meaning: He is made for a self-giving that is categorically impossible among his male friends. He is made for a woman. It is the orientation of his body, in its sexual form. It is the orientation of his masculine being, developing in a natural and healthy way.
None of this should be controversial, no more than claiming that the noonday sky is blue. Should someone protest, “It isn’t so! I saw it green once, when a tornado was coming,” we’d look askance, and wonder whether he had lost the capacity for normal communication. A boy is not a girl. A boy grows up to be a man. A man marries a woman, for love and for a family: That goal is stamped upon his body. Even savages without a doctorate in philosophy can figure it out.Read the rest here.