A way that seems right to a man

What a crazy time for pro-family Americans. First, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced that women would, over the next three years, be allowed to apply for combat postings currently closed to them in the U.S. military current. The most reasonable rationale offered during the discussion surrounding the decision was that the careers of servicewomen are unfairly hindered by denying them combat commands. High-sounding statements about military readiness were completely unconvincing. This week, the leadership of Boy Scouts of America tipped their hand that next week’s board meeting would consider dropping the ban on openly homosexual Scout leaders. The earthshaking reversal seems mostly about money—the threats of big corporate donors, who in turn are responding to the threats and opinions of an increasingly confused mob of American consumers.

My title quotes Proverbs 14:12; the remainder of that verse indicates that the way that seems right to a man ends in “death” or “destruction.” I take the proverb literally in its primary meaning that the blindness of man leads to spiritual and often even physical death. For two highly respected institutions like the U.S. military and the Boy Scouts of America, I think the proverb could also hold true in a figurative though disastrous sense.

Such big policy reversals have to be seen as successful to accomplish their public relations purpose. That means that women will be in the infantry regardless of if they conform to current qualifications or not. Loudly homosexual Scout leaders will hold press conferences and turn their new role into an advertisement for the “new normal.” Neither result will be in service of the time-honored missions of those institutions. Those missions will be degraded by the placing of people in inappropriate roles.

Another thing will happen and will accelerate the damagedone to these masculine institutions. People most appropriate to military service and families formerly supportive of Scouting will flee. That’s understandable and is perhaps a consequence unforeseen by those at the top. It’s an incredible blindness that those whose sons experienced Scouting or combat do not suffer.

Our dialog on both these issues has been mostly pragmatic. Those who favor the decisions point to the desires of individuals, the opinions of the masses, or the support of influential leaders. We who argue against both of these decisions talk about the complications of women in combat, the physical differences between men and women, or the risks of placing Boy Scouts under the care of those who may find them sexually attractive. Although we won’t win either argument in the near future, we’re wrong to stress merely pragmatic arguments.

These are moral issues. There is an “ought” to these decisions that is simply disregarded at the highest levels. It is wrong and destructive to ask our young men to view a woman as merely “one of the troops.” The respect young men give to young women may be cultural but it is the best kind of enculturation. Our nation’s moral slide is seen far more clearly in the lack of consideration men give women than in any unreasonable exalting of the fair sex. It is wrong and destructive to break down walls of modesty or to ask service wives to face the added stress of knowing that their husbands are living intimately with other women. It’s a social experiment that will have victims at home and abroad. Our nation is immoral to do this thing to our children.

The Scout decision seems more obviously a moral decision though not one imposed on an institution of our government. Scouting has been a tradition that adds much positive to our society. Values and responsibility we taught in our home were strengthened by leaders of two different Scout troops during the 1990s. Our confidence in Scouting as a friendly institution would have been severely damaged if we doubted the morality being overtly taught at meetings, campouts and week-long camps involving several troops. This bending to the breeze of public opinion and the blasting threats of wealthy men is a moral loss to our families.

Part of the tragedy is that some of our best people will abandon these honorable institutions. Perhaps they should but regardless it is a loss to our nation. These are two very different decisions with a moral aspect in common. And in both institutions top leadership seems set on a way that leads to destruction.