I doubt that many news consumers who do a quick read of the recent Associated Press news feature<\/a> about the growth of Trail Life USA \u2014 a small, explicitly Christian alternative to the Boy Scouts \u2014 will hear loud warning sirens. <\/p>\n But the main photo that accompanied that story? That\u2019s another matter. <\/p>\n You simply must CLICK HERE to see it.<\/a><\/p>\n This is a hot-button topic, of course, because it involves centuries of Christian doctrine and America\u2019s growing acceptance of homosexuality, both in terms of orientation and sexual behavior. The Boy Scouts voted to accept openly gay Scouts, but not openly gay leaders, a tricky stance that angered both conservative religious groups and the cultural left. Boy Scout executives stressed that they still expect Scouts to keep sex out of their lives as scouts.<\/p>\n The AP report by Nomaan Merchant does have a bit of that neo-National Geographic<\/em> tone to it as readers are introduced to this strange tribe of Christians who dare to enroll their sons in a voluntary association that teaches the doctrines affirmed in their homes and churches. But these believers get to defend their beliefs in their own words, which is good. <\/p>\n Let it be noted, however, that this story \u2014 for some strange reason \u2014 gives zero attention to the views of those who criticize Trail Life USA. Why not include the secular and Christian left in this picture? The story does give a small amount of space to BSA leaders who defend the evolution in their membership guidelines. And there is this concise summary of the conflict at the heart of this story:<\/p>\n Trail Life promotes itself on its website as the \u201cpremier national character development organization for young men which produces Godly and responsible husbands, fathers and citizens.\u201d Its official membership standards policy welcomes all boys, but adds, \u201cWe grant membership to adults and youth who do not engage in or promote sexual immorality of any kind, or engage in behavior that would become a distraction to the mission of the program.\u201d<\/p>\n For over a century, Scouting banned openly gay youth and leaders, fighting all the way to the Supreme Court to defend its right to do so. Leaders who were revealed to be gay were excluded, and some boys were denied Eagle Scout awards by regional councils that were notified of their sexual orientation.<\/p>\n But the Scouts eventually began to face pressure from sponsors and CEOs who serve in Scouting leadership but lead companies with anti-discrimination policies. BSA surveys also showed that youths and parents of Scouting-age children were supportive of allowing openly gay Scouts. Scouting leadership proposed a compromise: Accept openly gay youth, but exclude gay adult volunteers. BSA\u2019s National Council voted in May to enact it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Readers who have closely followed this story will note, of course, that Trail Life stresses that if will not admit those who \u201cpromote sexual immorality of any kind\u201d \u2014 note the loaded word \u201cpromote.\u201d The Boy Scouts now allow \u201copenly\u201d gay Scouts, while local leaders struggle with the precise meaning of that term.<\/p>\n The story also includes this telling detail:<\/p>\n The boys and their parents are still getting used to a world of new names, new ranks and new uniforms that haven\u2019t arrived yet. They hold up five fingers while reciting their oath, instead of three. Scouts are now \u201cTrailmen,\u201d and troops are now units. There is a new handshake and a new salute.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This brings us to that troubling Associated Press photo that ran with this story. Those who follow Twitter may have noted this tweet (which now appears to have been deleted):<\/p>\n New Trail Life scouting group excludes gay kids & they do a \"Sieg Heil!\" style salute, too. http:\/\/t.co\/c3UDn1Vfry<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/Vhvlr3wbyY<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Cathy Lynn Grossman (@CLGrossman) March 3, 2014<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n