posttrib
HISTORIC 
Weather Updates

Jerry Davich: Is honesty part of ‘Boy Scout Law’?

Jerry Davich. | Jeffrey D. Nicholls~Sun-Times Media

Jerry Davich. | Jeffrey D. Nicholls~Sun-Times Media

storyidforme: 43804330
tmspicid: 10558654
fileheaderid: 4850507

Updated: September 4, 2013 2:37PM



“Be prepared.”

Isn’t that the century-old motto of the Boy Scouts of America?

However, it seems the organization’s leadership was not very prepared when it boldly announced last summer that it would stand firm on its ban against gays as scouts and leaders.

Its 19th century, discriminatory, and controversial stance was praised by conservatives, parents in denial, and many church groups because homosexuality is a sin. And a serious sin at that, as noted in the good book.

But the organization’s defiant stance was blasted by many parents, gay-rights supporters and, oh yeah, a few of their deep-pocketed charitable donors. (This is where the real sin takes place, which I will address in a minute.)

On Monday, the organization did an about face on this issue, signaling that it might lift its national prohibition and allow locally chartered groups to make their own decisions on who’s allowed in and who’s kept out.

According to a Boy Scouts spokesman, there was no particular impetus for the sudden, out-of-the-blue reversal in attitude. No, it was merely the result of a “long standing dialogue,” the spokesman insisted.

Bull, I say.

The Scouts would like nothing more than keeping its backward, head-in-the-sand attitudes well into this century, where gay boys and men remained invisible, as if there were none of them already in their ranks.

How stupid. How amusing. How wrong.

Last summer, the Boy Scouts’ brass said the ban was upheld in the “best interests of the scouts themselves.”

Really?

According to “Boy Scout Law,” a Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. And obviously gays can’t attain such a standard, huh?

“If the board capitulates to the bullying of homosexual activists, the Boy Scouts’ legacy of producing great leaders will become yet another casualty of moral compromise,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, in a statement. “The Boy Scouts should stand firm.”

Stand firm on what, hypocrisy?

I understand that our country is polarized on this issue, reflecting our division regarding homosexuality in general, but the tide is turning, folks. Get used to it or drown in your own prejudices, biblical-based or not.

The real sin here is not homosexuality, but the hypocrisy of the Boy Scouts of America.

The organization’s not-so-surprising change of attitude on this issue is not about principles and morality, but dollars and cents.

Long-time corporate sponsors and charitable donors such as UPS Inc., Intel, and Merck have stated via petitions that they would halt future donations if the Scouts stood by its no-gays policy.

As we all know, money talks and so-called morality walks in this country.

But will the Scouts come out of its corporate-camouflaged closet and admit the truth about its change of mind? Of course not.

Instead, they are on full spin control while thinking we’re buying this steaming pile of public relations propaganda.

Then again, according to the high doctrine of “Boy Scout Law,” I don’t see anything about honesty.

Is Charlie hustling us?

Did anyone else watch Pete Rose’s new reality TV show, “Hits and Mrs.” on TLC?

I came away not very impressed – with the show, its false premise, or with Pete himself, who comes across as a sports-lovin’ and big boobs-lovin’ primate who is used to being a beloved celebrity – gambling curse be damned – in the best darned city to do it, Las Vegas.

But Pete IS believable, I’ll give him that, a fresh twist on the reality TV scene, which is typically so overly produced that it is anything but reality.

It’s obvious that Pete, aka Charlie Hustle, is hustling this show to foster sympathy for his baseball reinstatement (Bud Selig, are you watching? Hello?).

It also looks obvious why his fiancé, a top-heavy Korean model much younger than Pete, is in their relationship: To springboard her career to fame, or so it seems.

Either way, the show will probably reflect Pete’s hitting style during his long, respectable, record-setting but forever-tainted career.

He’ll drag a bunt down the third base line, slide head-first into first base, steal second, reach third on an overthrow, and then score on a sacrifice fly.

This show may score with viewers, but it will take a manufactured run on TV to do so.

‘Old is as old does’

My Monday column on “age stereotypes” attracted a lot of reader feedback, mostly from senior citizens. But none was more candid and inspiring than this email from Jack Tonk.

“Com’n man. Old at 61 and 65? No way,” he wrote.

“Even at 74 I don’t feel or think old. Yes, there are days when the aches and pains may be a little stronger, but they tend to go away. And when the golf ball doesn’t seem to go as far as it used to, well, let’s just say it’s because of the weather.

“My wife and I still run our 5K each morning, still do yoga and lift some weights, eat sensibly, wine at every dinner, seems to be working for us.

“To paraphrase Forrest Gump, old is as old does.”

Wanted: Super Bowl predictions

Hey Super Bowl fans, are you interested in winning a $25 gift card and other prizes?

This week’s “Casual Fridays” radio show will be our second annual Super Duper Super Bowl preview show, with related trivia, myths, and call-in predictions of this Sunday’s big game.

I predict the San Francisco 49ers will beat the Baltimore Ravens on Sunday by a score of 27-17.

Agree? Disagree? If you can predict a score that’s closer than mine to the game’s final outcome, you could win the $25 gift card and other prizes.

Tune in this Friday at noon at WLPR, 89.1-FM, and call in at 769-9577. Good luck.



© 2014 Sun-Times Media, LLC. All rights reserved. This material may not be copied or distributed without permission. For more information about reprints and permissions, visit www.suntimesreprints.com. To order a reprint of this article, click here.