MARS HILL FORUM
The Rev. John Buehrens debates the Rev. John Rankin
First Parish in Portland, ME - October 23, 2000
 On
the evening of October 23, 2000, approximately 70 people gathered in the Meetinghouse
of the First Parish in Portland, Maine, Unitarian Universalist, as the Rev.
John Buehrens, president of the UUA, debated the Rev. John Rankin, president
of the Theological Education Institute of Hartford, CT, on the topic of the
Boy Scouts of America's ban of homosexual scouts and scout leaders.
Buehrens took the position that homosexuals can be proper role models as scout
leaders; Rankin argued that a scoutmaster must be a heterosexual man in order
to be a proper role model. The debate format included opening statements by
both speakers; an interaction period when Buehrens and Rankin posed questions
to one another; a period when the audience posed questions to the speakers;
and concluding statements by each speaker. The debate's moderator was the Rev.
William Leggett, senior minister at First Parish in Portland.
In his opening statement, Buehrens recalled his youthful participation in scouting
as a "powerful experience" that, through his attendance at a World Jamboree
in 1959 in Colorado Springs and his encounters there with scouts from all over
the world, was his introduction to being a "citizen in the global sense of the
word." Acknowledging the many benefits that scouting offers, Buehrens explained
that it was during his ministry at the Unitarian Church of All Souls in New
York City that the congregation founded the first scout troop in the country
for homeless boys and the residents of the city's welfare hotels. Buehrens recognized
the importance of taking care with choosing scout leaders, but he noted that
other youth groups do this in non-discriminatory ways through good screening,
good training, and good reporting.
Buehrens traced the origin of the present situation to the early 1990s when
the BSA's Texas headquarters
started taking away control from local scout troops and parents. The BSA,
Buehrens said, began to play "religious politics," allowing conservative groups
such as the Mormon church to impose their values upon the organization. It was
at this time that the BSA began to lose sight of its role "as a civic education
organization teaching young people how to live in a world of increasing cultural
diversity," he said. This involvement in religious politics led the BSA to expend
significant funds in its appeal to the Supreme Court "to defend its right to
discriminate." Buehrens lamented the BSA's abdication of its role as civic educator
and its refusal to allow local troops to choose their own leaders. If this were
allowed, he said, then Mormon and Catholic troops would be free to choose the
leaders they see as proper; troops opposed to the ban on homosexual scouts and
scout leaders would also be free to choose their own leaders. 
Rankin opened his presentation by acknowledging that the issue of homosexuality
and the BSA was a tough one, but he emphasized his premise that "we are all
made in the image of God, and I am no judge. Only God judges." Rankin said that
he viewed this issue of human rights and the social order as basically a search
for the truth. He asserted his belief in the goodness of the God of the Bible
and his definition of sin as a "brokenness" of our relationship with God. Rankin
said he considered truth objective rather than subjective and dismissed "malleable
definitions' of human sexuality.
Rankin based much of his argument on his understanding of Genesis 1-2. It is
here, he said, that all arguments for the "unalienable rights" of humanity must
be grounded. Rankin noted that Thomas Jefferson's reference to such rights in
the Declaration of Independence finds no support in any culture or religion
other than the Biblical statements in Genesis 1-2. This part of the Bible also
presents the social definition of order and the paradigm of marriage: the "historic
family unit" of one man and one woman.
Rankin mentioned that he, too, had been a scout when young. He said that the
BSA as a private, voluntary organization ought to be able to define its membership
rules as it sees fit: they ought to be able "to say no to homosexual scout leaders."
And Rankin asked, who is being intolerant of whom here?
Buehrens and Rankin then questioned one another on the conceptions of creation
and divinity that underlay their positions. Buehrens disagreed with what he
saw as Rankin's conception of a "static creation," a God that did not develop
or change. Buehrens saw the acceptance of gays, lesbians, bisexual, and transgender
people as a healthy evolution of society. The BSA, said Buehrens, was ghettoizing
itself by its narrow sectarianism. Rankin objected to the characterization of
the BSA as narrow and sectarian, and stated that his conception of God was not
static; rather, he believed in a God that was "bigger than space, time, and
number." Yahweh defines goodness, said Rankin, and goodness was a man and a
woman united in marriage. When Buehrens pointed out that many people in the
gay and lesbian community felt relegated to "second-class theological citizenship"
by Rankin's argument, Rankin answered that "homosexual identity is demonstrably
subjective" and civil rights should not be based upon such a subjective definition.
And while Rankin did admit that homosexuals could perhaps be proper role models
as scout leaders, he argued that the BSA still should be able to exclude gay
scouts and leaders if it so decides.
Following their presentations, both Rankin and Buehrens responded to questions
from the audience. Several questioners wore Boy Scout uniforms, and both sides
of the issue were represented. One questioner criticized both speakers for excessive
abstraction in their comments rather than specific discussion of the Boy Scouts.
Another said he used to think that the BSA accepted people "wholly" but now
feels that they do not. One questioner disagreed with the assumption that homosexuality
is a morally acceptable lifestyle. In response, Buehrens said that the BSA wants
to have it both ways: they want to ban gays, agnostics, and atheists, and they
argue that as a private organization they have the right to do so, yet they
also want to receive the benefits of a quasi-public organization, including
free use of public facilities and a Congressional charter. Buehrens called for
an end to these privileges for the BSA. Rankin suggested that those opposed
to the BSA's rules should start their own program and repeated that those opposing
the BSA were themselves being intolerant.
In his closing statement, Buehrens noted that New Englanders have often been
at the forefront in protecting and extending human rights, and he called for
a yes vote on Maine's ballot question #6 (civil rights protection for gays and
lesbians). Rankin concluded by stating that his perspective went further than
temporal politics, and he placed his trust in the justice and mercy of God.
Click here for a written transcript of the debate.
Scout
News
|
